TrueHoop: Kevin Martin
Dwight Howard: Superman, Darwin finch
December, 27, 2011
12/27/11
3:19
PM ET
Five minutes into last night’s Rockets-Magic game.
Dwight Howard caught the pass, jabbed left, dribbled right, spun right, ended up right in Samuel Dalembert’s teeth. The bastard child of a dunk and layup split the net above staggering Samuel’s head. Houston tried to immediately counter with a mad dash down the floor. Kevin Martin might have seen Dwight coming because he hoisted the layup so high above the rim. Howard viciously punched the offering as it hovered parallel to the top of the backboard square. He did this while in a 45 degree lean, looking something like a zooming Superman indeed.
In that moment, “Superman” made so much more sense as Dwight’s moniker than it ever did as Shaq’s. Superman is brawny, but also ubiquitously mobile. When I think, “Faster than a speeding bullet,” Shaquille O’Neal does not come to mind. But Dwight Howard moves as though asked by gun powder.
I especially enjoyed this loud end-to-end sequence because Howard can seem like a hidden superstar. People are naturally keyed on watching the ball, and Dwight gets rid of it in the time it takes a fuzzy camera shot to focus crisply. He sometimes shoots instantly upon catching an entry pass. Occasionally, he takes a dribble or two, but it is a true event to see Dwight exceed three floor thumps. This man can easily burn more clock doing his post-rebound elbow shimmy than he might on traditional post-ups.
Despite his ball brevity, he is the best center. And it isn’t even close. Howard’s nearest challenger may be Andrew Bynum, whom the Lakers would gladly swap for Dwight in a trade your fantasy commissioner (or real commissioner?) would veto. If you consider Tim Duncan a center, then Timmy provides nearly half of Dwight’s estimated wins. If you consider Al Horford a center, then he trails Howard 26.13 to 20.79 in last year’s PER rankings, while blocking only one shot per game. And if you consider Brook Lopez, your consideration is another overworked party in this compressed NBA season.
Howard obliterated would-be peers while standing only 6’ 9’’ in socks. Since he hails from the Shaq-Robinson-Chamberlain cannon of big man dominance, it is often forgotten that Dwight is average center height. Howard is the same height as Kevin Durant, and a full inch shorter than LaMarcus Aldridge. But D12 carries shoulder pads under his skin -- he’s a three-headed monster when I take my glasses off. Dwight’s imposing physique helps fuel a “dominance” aura, but quick-twitch athleticism does more to fuel his actual dominance. Faster than a speeding bullet.
While it is difficult to envision most NBA big men sprinting -- at least in scenarios where torch-bearing villagers aren’t chasing them -- Howard runs fluidly. While his predecessors would camp out and own a large swath of space, Dwight Howard rents timeshares all over the court. Though his ancestor is Shaquille O’Neal, Howard’s defensive game is just as close to Josh Smith’s.
The Magic center is superior, but few seem impressed. To some, Dwight Howard's success signifies how far the center position has fallen. DH lacks touch from anywhere he can't dunk from and he plays with mine-shaft court vision. It is easy to glance at Howard’s still rough offensive game and dismiss him as Wilt, the Stilted.
There is truth to the notion that big men aren't what they used to be. Compared to '90s centers, Howard is less visibly involved in his team’s offense. Below, I’ve listed some career-best usage percentage (percentage of a team's plays used by one player) years from notable bigs:
Patrick Ewing: 31.5, 95-96
David Robinson: 32.0, 93-94
Shaquille O’Neal: 32.9, 97-98
Hakeem Olajuwon: 31.9, 95-96
Rik Smits: 29.2, 97-98
Dwight Howard: 27.2, 10-11
So the best center of this generation, the one teams are ready to gut their rosters for, is less involved offensively than a healthy Rik Smits was. I think some would look at this and lament how we’ve lost our centers, how we’ve stopped making them like we stopped making quality cars, football stadiums, and every other pride signifier in this handbasket-to-hell nation.
I’ll disagree -- respectfully. We never stopped producing quality centers -- we just changed their environment. Back in the '90s, illegal defense rules allowed big men to work with some freedom. Re-appropriating from a piece I wrote on illegal defense’s impact:
These days, it’s commonly said that defenders should be connected “on a string,” their movements inextricably linked. A little over one decade ago, this wasn’t the case. Perimeter defenders were bound to whomever they guarded, and guard-defender units would orbit a dribbling post player like single electrons an atom’s periphery. If there was a “string,” then it connected man to marker.
Occasionally, the defender could break off to double-team this dribbling post player, but, that defensive player could only return to his original mark. Picture Reggie Miller racing over to harmlessly flail at a posting Patrick Ewing, then sprinting back to the three point line so as to cover an open John Starks. The lack of team-defense rotation made it relatively easy for post players to spot an open man (Hint: He’s from whence the double team came).
The allowance of zones shrunk a center’s offensive work space while expanding his defensive work space. Rules that “opened up the game” for current perimeter players, closed it for scoring bigs.
In these new environs, Dwight Howard represents the adaptability of Darwin's island finches. Offense Island made it dangerous for big men to get their points from plodding post play. So Dwight moves swiftly and treats the ball like a hand grenade. Defense Island implored big men to move on a string, mirroring the choreography of smaller, quicker players. So Dwight does this with aplomb while maintaining integrity as a shot blocker and rebounder.
Would it be nice if Dwight Howard added a feathery jumper or intricate post game? Sure, but those skills are ancillary to what makes him great in this particular environment. In the past, big men were defined by skills Dwight lacks. In the past, teams would have far rather had someone like Brook Lopez than someone like Joakim Noah or Tyson Chandler. If centers aren't what they used to be, it's because they're being what they need to be.
In today's NBA: If you're faster than a speeding bullet, more powerful than a locomotive, and able to leap tall buildings in a single bound...who cares if your fadeaway reeks?
Follow @SherwoodStrauss
Dwight Howard caught the pass, jabbed left, dribbled right, spun right, ended up right in Samuel Dalembert’s teeth. The bastard child of a dunk and layup split the net above staggering Samuel’s head. Houston tried to immediately counter with a mad dash down the floor. Kevin Martin might have seen Dwight coming because he hoisted the layup so high above the rim. Howard viciously punched the offering as it hovered parallel to the top of the backboard square. He did this while in a 45 degree lean, looking something like a zooming Superman indeed.
In that moment, “Superman” made so much more sense as Dwight’s moniker than it ever did as Shaq’s. Superman is brawny, but also ubiquitously mobile. When I think, “Faster than a speeding bullet,” Shaquille O’Neal does not come to mind. But Dwight Howard moves as though asked by gun powder.
I especially enjoyed this loud end-to-end sequence because Howard can seem like a hidden superstar. People are naturally keyed on watching the ball, and Dwight gets rid of it in the time it takes a fuzzy camera shot to focus crisply. He sometimes shoots instantly upon catching an entry pass. Occasionally, he takes a dribble or two, but it is a true event to see Dwight exceed three floor thumps. This man can easily burn more clock doing his post-rebound elbow shimmy than he might on traditional post-ups.
Despite his ball brevity, he is the best center. And it isn’t even close. Howard’s nearest challenger may be Andrew Bynum, whom the Lakers would gladly swap for Dwight in a trade your fantasy commissioner (or real commissioner?) would veto. If you consider Tim Duncan a center, then Timmy provides nearly half of Dwight’s estimated wins. If you consider Al Horford a center, then he trails Howard 26.13 to 20.79 in last year’s PER rankings, while blocking only one shot per game. And if you consider Brook Lopez, your consideration is another overworked party in this compressed NBA season.
Howard obliterated would-be peers while standing only 6’ 9’’ in socks. Since he hails from the Shaq-Robinson-Chamberlain cannon of big man dominance, it is often forgotten that Dwight is average center height. Howard is the same height as Kevin Durant, and a full inch shorter than LaMarcus Aldridge. But D12 carries shoulder pads under his skin -- he’s a three-headed monster when I take my glasses off. Dwight’s imposing physique helps fuel a “dominance” aura, but quick-twitch athleticism does more to fuel his actual dominance. Faster than a speeding bullet.
While it is difficult to envision most NBA big men sprinting -- at least in scenarios where torch-bearing villagers aren’t chasing them -- Howard runs fluidly. While his predecessors would camp out and own a large swath of space, Dwight Howard rents timeshares all over the court. Though his ancestor is Shaquille O’Neal, Howard’s defensive game is just as close to Josh Smith’s.
The Magic center is superior, but few seem impressed. To some, Dwight Howard's success signifies how far the center position has fallen. DH lacks touch from anywhere he can't dunk from and he plays with mine-shaft court vision. It is easy to glance at Howard’s still rough offensive game and dismiss him as Wilt, the Stilted.
There is truth to the notion that big men aren't what they used to be. Compared to '90s centers, Howard is less visibly involved in his team’s offense. Below, I’ve listed some career-best usage percentage (percentage of a team's plays used by one player) years from notable bigs:
Patrick Ewing: 31.5, 95-96
David Robinson: 32.0, 93-94
Shaquille O’Neal: 32.9, 97-98
Hakeem Olajuwon: 31.9, 95-96
Rik Smits: 29.2, 97-98
Dwight Howard: 27.2, 10-11
So the best center of this generation, the one teams are ready to gut their rosters for, is less involved offensively than a healthy Rik Smits was. I think some would look at this and lament how we’ve lost our centers, how we’ve stopped making them like we stopped making quality cars, football stadiums, and every other pride signifier in this handbasket-to-hell nation.
I’ll disagree -- respectfully. We never stopped producing quality centers -- we just changed their environment. Back in the '90s, illegal defense rules allowed big men to work with some freedom. Re-appropriating from a piece I wrote on illegal defense’s impact:
These days, it’s commonly said that defenders should be connected “on a string,” their movements inextricably linked. A little over one decade ago, this wasn’t the case. Perimeter defenders were bound to whomever they guarded, and guard-defender units would orbit a dribbling post player like single electrons an atom’s periphery. If there was a “string,” then it connected man to marker.
Occasionally, the defender could break off to double-team this dribbling post player, but, that defensive player could only return to his original mark. Picture Reggie Miller racing over to harmlessly flail at a posting Patrick Ewing, then sprinting back to the three point line so as to cover an open John Starks. The lack of team-defense rotation made it relatively easy for post players to spot an open man (Hint: He’s from whence the double team came).
The allowance of zones shrunk a center’s offensive work space while expanding his defensive work space. Rules that “opened up the game” for current perimeter players, closed it for scoring bigs.
In these new environs, Dwight Howard represents the adaptability of Darwin's island finches. Offense Island made it dangerous for big men to get their points from plodding post play. So Dwight moves swiftly and treats the ball like a hand grenade. Defense Island implored big men to move on a string, mirroring the choreography of smaller, quicker players. So Dwight does this with aplomb while maintaining integrity as a shot blocker and rebounder.
Would it be nice if Dwight Howard added a feathery jumper or intricate post game? Sure, but those skills are ancillary to what makes him great in this particular environment. In the past, big men were defined by skills Dwight lacks. In the past, teams would have far rather had someone like Brook Lopez than someone like Joakim Noah or Tyson Chandler. If centers aren't what they used to be, it's because they're being what they need to be.
In today's NBA: If you're faster than a speeding bullet, more powerful than a locomotive, and able to leap tall buildings in a single bound...who cares if your fadeaway reeks?
Follow @SherwoodStrauss
The unknown factors in the Chris Paul trade saga remain a mystery. Smart people are still asking the right questions, but we still don't know what governed the decision to veto a three-way trade between the Hornets, Lakers and Rockets, then sign off on a package from the Clippers.
We don't know to what extent that first deal was agreed upon by front office principals in New Orleans, Houston and Los Angeles. We don't know whether the subsequent rejection of that trade for "basketball reasons" was just that -- a statement about the contents of the package, or whether the league had ulterior motives like throwing a bone to a segment of owners or listening to the wishes of a potential buyer.
What few have asked is why the Hornets felt the dire need to trade Chris Paul in the first place, a question Mavericks owner Mark Cuban addressed over the weekend in an interview with TMZ:
Cuban argues that a team owned by the NBA should've been faithful to the spirit of a collective bargaining agreement that makes superstars choose between destination and treasure. Had Chris Paul opted out of the final year of his contract with New Orleans and chosen the Lakers, then so be it. Paul would've had to settle for only $75.8 million over four seasons rather than the $100.2 million over five seasons he could've earned only with the Hornets.
Critics of Cuban's argument would say that an unwillingness to trade Paul could mean the Hornets would be stuck with nothing in return.
But is nothing really so bad?
Wasn't the initial proposal -- which would've netted the Hornets Kevin Martin, Luis Scola, Lamar Odom and Goran Dragic -- rejected because it would've made the Hornets too competitive? The Hornets would've been consigned to the NBA's middle class, not competitive enough to win anything meaningful, but not bad enough to secure a future superstar with a high draft pick. While treading water, the Hornets would be on the hook for tens of millions of dollars, even if those contracts are of relatively fair value, which they are.
In contrast, the Clippers delivered a likely Top 10 pick, along with an expiring deal for an All-Star center, a prolific young scorer and a forward prospect. Nevermind that the center won't be around next season, the scorer might not want to stick around and the prospect may or may not amount to anything. In fact, for teams in rebuilding mode, success presents serious problems. As Ethan Sherwood Strauss wrote last week at HoopSpeak, why pay to be competitive if you can tank for less?
This is why Orlando shouldn't worry too much about getting nothing in return for Howard -- and why New Orleans should flip Eric Gordon as soon as possible, lest he help them win 28 games and finish with the No. 9 or 10 pick.
Nuggets general manager Masai Ujiri deserves praise for engineering a strong deal when Carmelo Anthony declared he wanted out of Denver, but pull back for a second and consider what the future looks like for the Nuggets. Those nice assets accumulated in Anthony trade should, along with Nene, sentence the Nuggets to respectability. The team will be fun, likeable and utterly irrelevant on May 25, if not sooner. While the dregs of the league scout all the coveted incoming big men at the top of the draft board, Denver will troll the middle ranks of the first round.
It will be years before we can fairly judge whether the Nuggets would've been better off letting Anthony leave "for nothing," but if your goal is June basketball in Denver at the earliest possible moment, Top 5 picks and swaths of cap space for the foreseeable future might be preferable to Danilo Gallinari and a highly-compensated Nene, who is approaching 30. Nuggets fans won't have to cover their eyes, but they can probably forget about seeing tickets with holograms on them anytime soon.
When we learned last week of a Howard trade proposal that had Brook Lopez, Gerald Wallace, Jordan Farmar and a pick to Orlando, the early takeaway was that Orlando was getting the shaft. But the problem for Orlando wasn't that the deal was bad -- it's that it wasn't bad enough! The NBA is governed by a system that reserves its greatest rewards for abject failure, but tells teams striving to put a competitive product on the floor that it's wasting its time.
Think about the Houston Rockets for a second. While they had $40 million of annual salary tied up in two injured superstars, they continued to make wily deals, like offloading Rafer Alston for the Grizzlies' backup point guard, and stealing an Argentinian power forward from the Spurs for Vassilis Spanoulis. Kyle Lowry and Luis Scola have allowed the Rockets to remain competitive on a nightly basis -- and forever relegated to the middle of the first round of the NBA draft, where superstars are a once in a generation occurrence.
What do you do if you're the Rockets or the Hawks and have the talent in place to hang around the 45-win mark for the foreseeable future? Are you deluding yourself in a system with screwy disincentives and maddening inefficiencies? Are you better off conducting a fire sale and putting a sign at the arena gate apologizing for the mess while you remodel?
Mark Cuban is half right-half wrong. If the Hornets and/or the NBA made a mistake by dealing away Chris Paul, it isn't because they betrayed any tacit promise they owed to small-market owners (You want a promise? Get it in the form of a hard cap). It's because they acquired a player who has the potential to win basketball games and cost them lots of money next summer, two things that will work in opposition to getting atop the NBA draft board.
Orlando now finds itself in a similar situation with Howard. The two most desirable outcomes for the Magic are (1) figuring out how to retain Howard for the long term (2) putting themselves in the same position they were when they drafted Howard in 2004 -- 40 games under .500.
Offering him the most years at the most money is the only way to achieve No. 1. "Getting nothing in return for Howard" is the easiest way to get to No. 2.
But trading Howard for productive players is the sure-fire way to thwart both plans.
We don't know to what extent that first deal was agreed upon by front office principals in New Orleans, Houston and Los Angeles. We don't know whether the subsequent rejection of that trade for "basketball reasons" was just that -- a statement about the contents of the package, or whether the league had ulterior motives like throwing a bone to a segment of owners or listening to the wishes of a potential buyer.
What few have asked is why the Hornets felt the dire need to trade Chris Paul in the first place, a question Mavericks owner Mark Cuban addressed over the weekend in an interview with TMZ:
[W]e went through a long lockout, and one of the things we were trying to gain was that small-market teams could have confidence they could keep their star players ... There would be enough financial incentives for them to stay with the incumbent team. And within two weeks of the new collective bargaining agreement, the smallest-market team, which is owned by the NBA, threw up their hands and said, ‘We can’t keep our star player.’ So it’s not about Chris Paul. It’s more about the fact that the NBA kind of gave up on the CBA before giving it a chance. And to me, that made them kind of hypocritical -- or very hypocritical -- which didn’t sit too well with me...
... We had a lockout. What was the purpose of the lockout? One of the goals of the lockout was to have more parity. With free agency, players are always allowed to choose wherever they want to go, but they have to make a decision. Do they want to stay with their existing teams and make the most money, or leave on their own terms to wherever they want to go with cap room and take less money? My personal belief is 90 percent of the time players are going to take the greater money, which meant that Chris Paul could've, would've -- or any star player could've, would've -- wanted to stay in the smaller market. And you’ve got other teams that are making that conscious decision to stick it out like Orlando is doing. But of all the teams not sticking it out, you would think the team owned by the NBA and run by the commissioner would be the first to stick it out, and they weren’t. And to me, it’s hypocritical, and threw a lot of us under the bus.
Cuban argues that a team owned by the NBA should've been faithful to the spirit of a collective bargaining agreement that makes superstars choose between destination and treasure. Had Chris Paul opted out of the final year of his contract with New Orleans and chosen the Lakers, then so be it. Paul would've had to settle for only $75.8 million over four seasons rather than the $100.2 million over five seasons he could've earned only with the Hornets.
Critics of Cuban's argument would say that an unwillingness to trade Paul could mean the Hornets would be stuck with nothing in return.
But is nothing really so bad?
Wasn't the initial proposal -- which would've netted the Hornets Kevin Martin, Luis Scola, Lamar Odom and Goran Dragic -- rejected because it would've made the Hornets too competitive? The Hornets would've been consigned to the NBA's middle class, not competitive enough to win anything meaningful, but not bad enough to secure a future superstar with a high draft pick. While treading water, the Hornets would be on the hook for tens of millions of dollars, even if those contracts are of relatively fair value, which they are.
In contrast, the Clippers delivered a likely Top 10 pick, along with an expiring deal for an All-Star center, a prolific young scorer and a forward prospect. Nevermind that the center won't be around next season, the scorer might not want to stick around and the prospect may or may not amount to anything. In fact, for teams in rebuilding mode, success presents serious problems. As Ethan Sherwood Strauss wrote last week at HoopSpeak, why pay to be competitive if you can tank for less?
Much of the appeal in this Clippers-Hornets trade is derived from how it makes the Hornets immediately, well, bad ... Obviously, Eric Gordon is a key get, but few observers believe he’ll take New Orleans to next year’s playoffs. And that’s the point. The Hornets will receive a high lottery selection to pair with Minnesota’s 2011 draft pick. A gutted team plus lotto hope makes for a more enticing situation than the playoff contention troika of Luis Scola, Lamar Odom, and Kevin Martin.
By shepherding this particular trade through, the commissioner is tacitly–maybe even overtly–singing a grand, bellowing ode to the glories of tanking. And he is quite correct, because ping pong balls determine so much.
This is why Orlando shouldn't worry too much about getting nothing in return for Howard -- and why New Orleans should flip Eric Gordon as soon as possible, lest he help them win 28 games and finish with the No. 9 or 10 pick.
Nuggets general manager Masai Ujiri deserves praise for engineering a strong deal when Carmelo Anthony declared he wanted out of Denver, but pull back for a second and consider what the future looks like for the Nuggets. Those nice assets accumulated in Anthony trade should, along with Nene, sentence the Nuggets to respectability. The team will be fun, likeable and utterly irrelevant on May 25, if not sooner. While the dregs of the league scout all the coveted incoming big men at the top of the draft board, Denver will troll the middle ranks of the first round.
It will be years before we can fairly judge whether the Nuggets would've been better off letting Anthony leave "for nothing," but if your goal is June basketball in Denver at the earliest possible moment, Top 5 picks and swaths of cap space for the foreseeable future might be preferable to Danilo Gallinari and a highly-compensated Nene, who is approaching 30. Nuggets fans won't have to cover their eyes, but they can probably forget about seeing tickets with holograms on them anytime soon.
When we learned last week of a Howard trade proposal that had Brook Lopez, Gerald Wallace, Jordan Farmar and a pick to Orlando, the early takeaway was that Orlando was getting the shaft. But the problem for Orlando wasn't that the deal was bad -- it's that it wasn't bad enough! The NBA is governed by a system that reserves its greatest rewards for abject failure, but tells teams striving to put a competitive product on the floor that it's wasting its time.
Think about the Houston Rockets for a second. While they had $40 million of annual salary tied up in two injured superstars, they continued to make wily deals, like offloading Rafer Alston for the Grizzlies' backup point guard, and stealing an Argentinian power forward from the Spurs for Vassilis Spanoulis. Kyle Lowry and Luis Scola have allowed the Rockets to remain competitive on a nightly basis -- and forever relegated to the middle of the first round of the NBA draft, where superstars are a once in a generation occurrence.
What do you do if you're the Rockets or the Hawks and have the talent in place to hang around the 45-win mark for the foreseeable future? Are you deluding yourself in a system with screwy disincentives and maddening inefficiencies? Are you better off conducting a fire sale and putting a sign at the arena gate apologizing for the mess while you remodel?
Mark Cuban is half right-half wrong. If the Hornets and/or the NBA made a mistake by dealing away Chris Paul, it isn't because they betrayed any tacit promise they owed to small-market owners (You want a promise? Get it in the form of a hard cap). It's because they acquired a player who has the potential to win basketball games and cost them lots of money next summer, two things that will work in opposition to getting atop the NBA draft board.
Orlando now finds itself in a similar situation with Howard. The two most desirable outcomes for the Magic are (1) figuring out how to retain Howard for the long term (2) putting themselves in the same position they were when they drafted Howard in 2004 -- 40 games under .500.
Offering him the most years at the most money is the only way to achieve No. 1. "Getting nothing in return for Howard" is the easiest way to get to No. 2.
But trading Howard for productive players is the sure-fire way to thwart both plans.
- Classmates of Kim Jong Il's son, Kim Jong-un, testify that the presumed successor in North Korea wasn't all that interested in politics when he was at school in Switzerland. What really got him going was basketball. "He worshipped basketball players in the NBA. A friend who visited his apartment at #10, Kirchstrasse, Liebefeld, recalls that Kim had a room filled with NBA-memorabilia. 'He proudly showed off photographs of himself standing with Toni Kukoc of the Chicago Bulls and Kobe Bryant of the Los Angeles Lakers. It is unclear where the pictures were taken. On at least one occasion, a car from the North Korean Embassy drove Pak Un to Paris to watch an NBA exhibition game,' the [Washington Post] said. In class, Pak Un was generally shy and awkward with girls, but he became a different person on basketball court, according to his classmates. 'A fiercely competitive player,' said classmate Nikola Kovacevic. 'He was very explosive. He could make things happen. He was the playmaker.'"
- Michael Pina of Red94 composes a stellar post on the psyche of trade bait. There are those, like Kevin Martin and Chauncey Billups, who take it a little personally. Others, like Lamar Odom, are driven to tears. Then there are Luis Scola, Rajon Rondo and Pau Gasol, who are able to convey detachment -- at least publicly.
- The Heat have pledged to switch up their offense this season by incorporating more fast-break attacks and putting more of a premium on spacing. Beckley Mason of HoopSpeak exchanges with a reader who explains what "the Invert" offense in lacrosse can teach us about defending the Heat.
- Charlie Widdoes of ClipperBlog feels the Clippers gave up too much for Chris Paul, and that staying the course with Eric Gordon and the salary flexibility that would've come with Chris Kaman's expiring contract was the right call.
- Aaron McGuire of Gothic Ginobili on the composition of the reigning champions in Dallas: "So where does that leave you? A short stint with a lineup where Lamar Odom is the primary ballhandler, employing Dirk and Marion as roll men with Delonte and Carter in the wings if the play goes sour? Does the team manage a point-by-committee sort of strategy? And who defends what? Dirk’s defense has gotten better over the years, but at this point Odom is essentially the best defensive talent in the Mavs’ big rotation. Do you cross-match Odom on the opposing center and hope he can draw them out of the paint? Do you keep Dirk at center and live with the terrifying defensive results? I really don’t know, and I’m not sure anyone else does either. And that’s part of what makes this Mavs team so interesting."
- Kris Humphries chalks up impressive numbers on the Wins Produced metric, prompting Andres Alvarez of Wages of Win to ask why the power forward remains unsigned.
- When Boris Diaw was growing up in France, his mom -- a former player -- ordered him not to join the throng of kids who'd storm the scorebook immediately after the game to tally their point totals.
- Watching Al Jefferson's deliberate but effective post game drives Zach Harper to thumbing through periodicals during live play, but Ricky Rubio and Derrick Williams are shiny!
- The amnesty deadline passed and Rashard Lewis is still a Wizard. Lewis is setting up house in Washington, where his daughter has enrolled at nearby Sidwell Friends, where the Obama girls attend school.
- Who would you rather be -- the Lakers or the Clippers?
- Kevin Durant's fans will scour North America for his backpack like it's an afikoman.
Martin, Lowry Rocket-ing toward playoffs
March, 21, 2011
3/21/11
1:47
AM ET
According to the Elias Sports Bureau, it’s the eighth time in Martin’s career that he shot 15-for-15 or better from the foul line, tying Dolph Schayes for the second-most such games in NBA history. Oscar Robertson did it 11 times.
Martin’s teammate Kyle Lowry chipped in 28 points, a career-high 11 rebounds, and 10 assists for his first career triple-double. It’s the fifth-highest point total in a triple-double in the NBA this season.
Lowry has scored in double figures in 12 straight games, which is double his previous career-long streak. Lowry had just one turnover; he entered the day ninth in the league in assist-to-turnover ratio (minimum 125 assists).
The Rockets have won 11 of their past 14 games, moving from 12th to ninth in the Western Conference standings, and have cut their deficit in half in that span.
Speaking of the playoffs, the Los Angeles Lakers clinched a playoff spot when the Utah Jazz lost Sunday, then clinched the Pacific Division crown with their win over the Portland Trail Blazers. The Lakers remain in second place in the Western Conference, a game in front of the Dallas Mavericks, who clinched their 11th straight playoff appearance with a win over the Golden State Warriors.
The Mavericks allowed a season-low 73 points in their 28-point victory, and held the Warriors to 10 points in the fourth quarter (previous low: 12). Elias tells us that Dallas had been one of only three teams without a 20-point win this season, along with the New Jersey Nets (22-46) and the Cleveland Cavaliers (13-55).
The Boston Celtics, having clinched a playoff spot days earlier, clinched the Atlantic Division title when the New York Knicks lost to the Milwaukee Bucks on Sunday. Milwaukee outscored the Knicks 32-9 in the first quarter. The nine points were the fewest scored by the Knicks in any quarter under head coach Mike D’Antoni.
Not a Hollywood ending
February, 3, 2011
2/03/11
7:18
PM ET
David Sherman/NBAE/Getty Images
The Suns' dreary record will keep Steve Nash from an eighth career All-Star berth.
Editor's note: Updated late Friday to reflect David Stern's choice of Kevin Love as Yao Ming's injury replacement.
The 2010-11 West All-Stars
Starters
Kevin Durant
Carmelo Anthony
Kobe Bryant
Chris Paul
Yao Ming* (injured)
Reserves
Tim Duncan
Pau Gasol
Manu Ginobili
Blake Griffin
Kevin Love*
Dirk Nowitzki
Russell Westbrook
Deron Williams
(* Love replaces injured Yao)
So, who is missing from that list? Let's look at some of the players who will be most chapped to learn they won't be headed to Los Angeles to strut their stuff on Presidents Day weekend.
Kevin Martin
If Yao Ming were healthy and productive, there's a chance the Chinese audience would have voted this guy a starter like it did in the past for Tracy McGrady. To say he scores efficiently is a vast understatement. He shoots 3s as well as any heavy-volume shooter and leads the league in free throws made. And while he has the reputation of a standstill shooter, his game winner last night -- an athletic and-1 over Al Jefferson -- is an integral part of his game, too. Were he more selfish, his scoring totals would make him an obvious pick, but he wouldn't be as helpful to his team.
LaMarcus Aldridge
How amazing is ex-Blazers GM Kevin Pritchard? The team's two best players go down, and a third emerges as a double-double monster and leader of a playoff-caliber team. On sheer production, Aldridge is on the bubble, especially when you factor in how he started the season (and, for that matter, his career). And it sure doesn't help that his team is middling and plays games that start incredibly late for a lot of voters. However, here's what you're missing: All-Star games are about stellar plays, a good hunk of which are lobs. Not sure anybody finishes more lobs than this long, fast leaper. It would have been pretty.
Monta Ellis
Turn off your inner critic for a moment. Speak not of efficiency, nor wins and losses. Take a deep breath. Go to your happy place. Listen to the airy music. And just watch what this guy does: He takes big piles of nothing and turns them into and-1s. He takes your lazy passes and makes them steals and dunks. He takes double-teams and splits them. He takes your slow defender and makes him fall over. He takes your outstretched arms, and, little though he is, shoots over them and hits every time. At least, that's how it goes in the highlight reel. He'd be fun to watch in Los Angeles. (And Commissioner Stern, think how much cheaper the travel would be, sending a guy who lives a tad farther up the coast.)
Steve Nash
The two-time MVP is doing just about everything as well as he ever did. Now the supporting cast and the W-L record are far less impressive. Should that matter? Yes, of course, in some ways. The challenge to every NBA player is to win. On the other hand, if not an All-Star berth, what way is there to honor the otherworldly play of an aging hero doomed by his owner's questionable leadership? Hollinger: "What we're basically saying is that Nash was responsible for having Amare Stoudemire and Shawn Marion on his team, and now it's his fault that they're gone."
David West
In addition to being the featured big man in Chris Paul's multifaceted attack, West is now the starting forward for a title-quality defense. If the Hornets could upgrade their wing players, Paul, West and Okafor would be a force in the West, and West would be an All-Star.
Zach Randolph
Has anyone noticed that Memphis has been turning it on lately? The Grizzlies have long been a popular pick to be terrible, but ever since getting Randolph, he has been putting up huge numbers and they have been better than expected. At the moment, the Grizzlies have a winning record and are on track to make the playoffs. Surely somebody deserves recognition for exceeding expectations like that. You could do worse than to pick the guy averaging a cool 20 points and 13 rebounds per game.
The 2010-11 East All-Stars
Starters
LeBron James
Amare Stoudemire
Dwyane Wade
Derrick Rose
Dwight Howard
Reserves
Ray Allen
Chris Bosh
Kevin Garnett
Al Horford
Joe Johnson
Paul Pierce
Rajon Rondo
Andrew Bogut
One of Andrew Bogut's problems is that he's in the Eastern Conference with Dwight Howard, who is unlikely to ever miss this game, and, now, Al Horford, who is proving to be quite the stud. As an extra annoyance, players like Joakim Noah (whose Bulls are 14 games ahead of the Bucks in the standings) and Brook Lopez also vie for the title of conference's third-best center. Last year when Bogut was on the All-Star bubble, he offered to switch positions. He can play center, but he swears he can also bring the ball up and zing behind-the-back passes. So, maybe that's something to consider next time.
Carlos Boozer
It was 2004 -- a half-century ago in dog years -- that Carlos Boozer offended the NBA by taking the biggest contract he could get. Sometimes it feels like he gets punished anew for that every year. He's a 20 and 10 guy (and the highest-paid player) on a 34-14 Bulls team that is shattering the assumption that the Celtics, Magic and Heat are the East's three candidates to make the Finals.
Joakim Noah
Charles Barkley's favorite NBA player is beautiful to watch, even if you're not captivated by the flowing curls. He has infinite love -- for the game, for winning, for his teammates, for hustle, for the big moments. It's no coincidence he was part of special teams in college and again in the pros. The man plays his heart out, and any league would be wise to reward that. Meanwhile, his team has been as exciting as any in the league this season. The only real drawback to his candidacy: Thanks to injury, he has played just 24 games, and a lot of Chicago's best ball has come with Noah in funky street clothes.
Kobe in the giving mood on Tuesday
February, 2, 2011
2/02/11
5:57
AM ET
The Los Angeles Lakers earned their first overtime win of the season in large part to Kobe Bryant who finished with 32 points and 11 assists. Bryant joins Deron Williams and Russell Westbrook as the only players this season with multiple games with at least 30 points and 10 assists.
Bryant
This was Bryant’s fourth 10-assist game of the season and in doing so he recorded his 5,005th career assist. He becomes the third player in Lakers history to eclipse the 5,000 assist mark with the team, joining Magic Johnson and Jerry West. Bryant also became the seventh player in NBA history to register 25,000 points, 5,000 rebounds and 5,000 assists.
Bryant’s teammates didn’t do too bad Tuesday night either as Lamar Odom finished with 20 points and a season-high 20 rebounds. It was Odom's second career 20-20 game. Pau Gasol added 26 points and pulled down 16 rebounds.
The Elias Sports Bureau tells us that it had been exactly 38 years since two Lakers had at least 20 points and 16 rebounds in a game. On February 1, 1973, Wilt Chamberlain had 25/19 (points/rebounds) and Bill Bridges went 20/16 in a win at the Phoenix Suns.
The most interesting note of the day came from the Lakers opposition, the Houston Rockets.
Guard Kevin Martin, who leads the NBA in free throws made, was 10-11 from the free throw line. He attempted AND made every single free throw for the Rockets. The last player to attempt all his team's free throws in a single game (min. 10 attempts) was Steve Francis on April 8, 2002 at the Orlando Magic (went 7-11). The last player to make all his team's free throws in a single game (min. 10 attempts) was Bill Cartwright on November 13, 1979 vs the Washington Bullets. Cartwright was 11-11 while the New York Knicks as a whole went 11-13.
Elsewhere around the league, two hoopers notched career highs of their own.
LaMarcus Aldridge scored a career-high 40 points and grabbed 11 rebounds. According to the Elias Sports Bureau, only two other Portland Trail Blazers starting forwards ever had 40/10 (points/rebounds) in a game. Maurice Lucas went 46/17 at the Boston Celtics in January 1979, and Zach Randolph had two such games in 2007: 42/12 in January and 43/17 in March, both against the Memphis Grizzlies.
Jason Smith, making his first NBA start at center, shot 9-11 (81.8 percent) while playing just 25:12 in the New Orleans Hornets win over the Washington Wizards. Only one other starting center in Hornets' history has ever shot 80 percent or better in a game while attempting at least 10 field goals and playing fewer than 26 minutes. Kenny Gattison was 10-12 (83.3 percent) in 20 minutes in a Hornets' 141-134 loss at the Cleveland Cavaliers on April 9, 1992.
This was Bryant’s fourth 10-assist game of the season and in doing so he recorded his 5,005th career assist. He becomes the third player in Lakers history to eclipse the 5,000 assist mark with the team, joining Magic Johnson and Jerry West. Bryant also became the seventh player in NBA history to register 25,000 points, 5,000 rebounds and 5,000 assists.
Bryant’s teammates didn’t do too bad Tuesday night either as Lamar Odom finished with 20 points and a season-high 20 rebounds. It was Odom's second career 20-20 game. Pau Gasol added 26 points and pulled down 16 rebounds.
The Elias Sports Bureau tells us that it had been exactly 38 years since two Lakers had at least 20 points and 16 rebounds in a game. On February 1, 1973, Wilt Chamberlain had 25/19 (points/rebounds) and Bill Bridges went 20/16 in a win at the Phoenix Suns.
The most interesting note of the day came from the Lakers opposition, the Houston Rockets.
Guard Kevin Martin, who leads the NBA in free throws made, was 10-11 from the free throw line. He attempted AND made every single free throw for the Rockets. The last player to attempt all his team's free throws in a single game (min. 10 attempts) was Steve Francis on April 8, 2002 at the Orlando Magic (went 7-11). The last player to make all his team's free throws in a single game (min. 10 attempts) was Bill Cartwright on November 13, 1979 vs the Washington Bullets. Cartwright was 11-11 while the New York Knicks as a whole went 11-13.
Elsewhere around the league, two hoopers notched career highs of their own.
LaMarcus Aldridge scored a career-high 40 points and grabbed 11 rebounds. According to the Elias Sports Bureau, only two other Portland Trail Blazers starting forwards ever had 40/10 (points/rebounds) in a game. Maurice Lucas went 46/17 at the Boston Celtics in January 1979, and Zach Randolph had two such games in 2007: 42/12 in January and 43/17 in March, both against the Memphis Grizzlies.
Jason Smith, making his first NBA start at center, shot 9-11 (81.8 percent) while playing just 25:12 in the New Orleans Hornets win over the Washington Wizards. Only one other starting center in Hornets' history has ever shot 80 percent or better in a game while attempting at least 10 field goals and playing fewer than 26 minutes. Kenny Gattison was 10-12 (83.3 percent) in 20 minutes in a Hornets' 141-134 loss at the Cleveland Cavaliers on April 9, 1992.
Hawks soar as Smith puts up 34
December, 8, 2010
12/08/10
4:08
AM ET
Although there were only seven games in the NBA Tuesday night, there was no shortage of great notes.
Take Josh Smith, for example, who scored a season-high 34 points in the Atlanta Hawks' 116-101 victory over the New Jersey Nets.
Smith shot 14-16 from the floor, and over the last four seasons, only three other players have scored at least 34 points on at least 14-16 shooting: Amar'e Stoudemire (this season), Chris Bosh (2007-08) and Kevin Martin (2007-08).
The Hawks shot 60.3 percent from the floor in the win, just the fourth team in the NBA to do so this season.
Atlanta also continues to get it done despite the absence of Joe Johnson, improving to 4-1 without their star. Both Smith and Jamal Crawford had season highs in scoring.
FROM THE ELIAS SPORTS BUREAU: Smith became the first Hawks player with a game of that many points (34) and that high a FG pct (87.5 pct) in more than 55 years, since Hall-of-Famer Bob Pettit scored 34 points while making 12 of 13 shots (92.3 percent) on March 14, 1955.
Pettit’s performance came in a 99-84 win over the Philadelphia Warriors, in a neutral-site game played in Albany, New York. What made the game especially noteworthy is that it was the final game played by the Hawks while representing Milwaukee.
Less than 2 months later, it was announced that the team would move from Milwaukee to St. Louis for the 1955-56 season; it then moved to Atlanta in 1968.
Texas Ten-Step
Meanwhile, the Dallas Mavericks' 105-100 win over the Golden State Warriors gave them 10 straight wins.
It’s the eighth time dating back to the 2001-02 season that the Mavericks have had a 10-game win streak, tied with the San Antonio Spurs for the most in the NBA over that span.
That 10-game win streak was enough to move the Mavericks from fifth to second place in the Western Conference.
Miller time ends
Finally, Andre Miller was suspended for the Portland Trail Blazers’ 106-99 win over the Phoenix Suns after his hit on Blake Griffin in Portland’s last game.
That’s important because it snapped Miller’s streak of 632 consecutive games played, which was the longest active streak in the NBA.
Derek Fisher is now the NBA’s new iron man, having played in his 434th consecutive game in Tuesday night’s Los Angeles Lakers' win. The New Orleans Hornets' Jarrett Jack moves to second, with 309 straight games played.
Kevin Martin has no complaints
August, 30, 2010
8/30/10
10:13
AM ET
Bill Baptist/NBAE/Getty Images
Kevin Martin is reunited with Rick Adelman and Brad Miller -- and couldn't be happier about it
There might not be a player in the league with a more confounding game than Kevin Martin. Take a look at the odd, left-leaning release on his jumper and you can imagine a nation of high school basketball coaches cringing. Martin's field-goal percentage and defensive game have never been all that impressive on the surface. But once you get past traditional measures -- both aesthetic and statistical -- you'll find a uniquely efficient perimeter player who thrives in systems that take advantage of those gifts.
Rick Adelman's read-and-react offense in Houston is one such system. Although Martin is a capable one-on-one player, he's always been most effective running off screens, cutting, curling or fading to the arc when the defense sags. Martin harbors an appreciation for his days in Sacramento, where he went from an obscure late first-rounder out of Western Carolina to the first option in the offense. But he's thrilled to be back with his first NBA coach, whom Martin credits with helping him become that marquee player.
We caught up by phone with Martin in Houston last week, and talked about the change in culture he's experienced since the trade that sent him from Sacramento to Houston, the limitations of his game and the influence of Brad Miller:
So what's your summer day like?
I decided to get a place in Tampa so I could do some extensive training.
What are you working on in specific?
The basics. Getting my form back because I had surgery on my left wrist last year, so we wanted to get my 3-point shot back. There were a couple of minor mechanical things. Also, defenses load up on me, so I'm working on a lot of counter-moves for when the defense stops that first move.
When you're not in the gym, what do you do in your down time? You a beach guy?
I'm more of a city guy. I like to roam around, maybe check out a restaurant. I also like playing with my electronics -- like the new iPad.
So you're a proud member of the Apple cult?
Yeah!
Sacramento to Houston -- the perception is that's a huge cultural move for you. "Culture" is a term that sportswriters -- and front office people when they're talking to sportswriters -- throw around a lot, but does "team culture" really exist from a player's standpoint?
There definitely is such a thing as team culture. It starts with the organization, what kind of veteran players they have. Here in Houston, Shane [Battier] and Yao [Ming] are the veterans. They set the tone for us on how to be professionals. They've been around the community a lot. They set a big example for young fellas and are just two great leaders with what they do.
So if someone were to drop you in a random locker room of some team you didn't know, you could totally tell whether it was a winning or a losing locker room?
Unfortunately, yes. I've been on both sides of it. We're all paid to play this sport we love. If you're on a team like that as a team leader, you wish it didn't happen and you try to minimize it, but you can only control so much. It's up to the players to be professional about it. But you can definitely tell the difference.
How do they do things differently in Houston?
First, it's a veteran ball club with guys who just want to win. We all made names for ourselves in the league and the only legacy we're trying to leave now is winning. We can all put up nice numbers and things like that. You have to give credit to [general manager] Daryl [Morey] for bringing in those kind of people -- players with a lot of class and who are motivated. Of all the guys on our roster, there's really only one player who came into the league with big expectations, and that's Yao. The rest of us -- we've been the hard workers. I was like the 15th player on the roster my rookie year and had to work my way up. Then I was the No. 1 player for three years. This isn't to disrespect guys, but it's not about hype in Houston. These are guys who have worked their way up the ladder. I'm definitely happy to be in an organization like this. You know what you need to do and you just go out there and get it done. You don't need anyone on your throat all the time.
With Trevor Ariza on the move, what does the situation look like at the small forward on the court for the Rockets?
It shows how much faith Daryl has put in our other 3s -- in Shane and Chase [Budinger]. With the starting lineup we have now, Shane is the defensive stopper, and that helps us a lot there. Those guys will have to pick up Trevor's production on both ends of the court. I think we have a great system that allows other guys to do that.
How do you rate yourself as a defensive player?
Great question. I've never had anyone ask me that. I get judged a lot on it. I try to work hard, but the last three years I was a guy who had to put up 25 points a game just to not lose by 10. But my first two years under Rick Adelman, that's how I stayed on the court. It was because of defense. And I could because I had four offensive players around me. I know I have to get back to that, but I also think Houston is a better place to allow me to get back to that because I won't have to be the No. 1 option every night. Now I can do other things on the court.
So it's true that guys conserve energy on the defensive end because so much is asked of them offensively? That means their defense is less intense.
For some players that's true. Everyone has their roles.
Stat-heads love you because your true shooting percentage -- which takes into account 3-pointers and free throws -- is always impressive. You have this knack for drawing contact and getting to the line, or just draining the 3. But one thing I've never completely understood is how a player like you makes decisions. When you have the ball in your hands out on the perimeter, are you looking to either shoot or draw contact? I'm either going to get a clean shot or I'm drawing a foul? Are you looking to do both? How do you decide in the moment?
There are always different scouting reports on how to guard me. Guys know my first step is so quick so they might back up off me. Right there, I'm just going to take the open shot because I'd rather do that then try to go in there against all those big guys and get hammered on the floor. Then other nights, guys are like, "He's such a great shooter," and they try to get up on me. That's when I use my quickness. Once I get by you, I just know the rules -- you can't bump a guy off his path. If I'm going to the hole, and I've gotten past you, you can't get back in my path. That's how I get a lot of those calls. It's tricky and you have to have a lot of moves in your arsenal and trust your game. As the No. 1 guy the last three years, I've gotten knowledgeable about knowing how the defense plays me.
You didn't pass the ball a lot in Sacramento. Was that a function of the system or is that just not your game?
If you watched those games, when I'm making a move, I'm going to make that move and try to score. Also, there's time where my assists weren't there because maybe I'm not the greatest playmaker, but I will pass the ball and give other guys chances. That's how that went. Over my three years in Sactown, they got rid of (Ron) Artest and I was playing with a lot of guys who were trying to make names for themselves in the league. They were young guys and just learning the game. Once Artest was gone, I was playing with four starters who had never started before. But I also think that's what made me the player I am today because I had all the attention of opposing teams.
So we should expect your assist totals to go up this year, just by virtue of Rick Adelman's system?
Yes.
When we say that a perimeter player knows how "to play off a big man," what does that mean?
I've always wanted to play with a guy like Yao. I think the trick is to keep them happy. You give them the ball when they're in great scoring position and you make the right plays when they give you the ball -- like me and Brad [Miller]. My offensive game is where it is today because of Brad Miller. The way he and Rick taught me how to cut and things like that made me so much better. The last three years in Sacramento, it was all, like, one-on-one. Now I'm back in a system where I can cut. Playing with big guys like Yao who get rebounds for you, you feed them back. Keep them happy.
Let's talk more about Brad Miller and Rick's system.
Rick's system is all about read-and-react. When you're young and watching film, you like to watch a couple of guys who you're modeling your game after, and mine was always Rip Hamilton. I always looked at how he came off screens. That's where my shooting and curling evolved. That was my bread and butter my first three years. Then I moved on to other things. Playing with Brad, he's the one who taught me how to cut at the right time -- not cut too early. When I started doing more iso stuff, I watched film of [Dwyane] Wade iso situations. You put all this together and that's how you become a more complete player.
So Brad was like Yoda Big Man? How did he impart this knowledge to you?
With Brad and me, it was always on the court. And I also got a chance to watch him and Peja [Stojakovic] play a lot my first year because I didn't really play too much. He and Peja had a great connection. I knew I was a lot quicker and had a lot more agility than Peja. So at the beginning, I would always do everything so fast. I'd be too fast before the cut, during the cut, after the cut. Brad would say, "Slow down! You're faster than everybody out here, but you have to read it!" He showed me the ins and outs of making those cuts and reads -- when to come around. Like when a guy plays under you, come around and take the jumper. And when a guy is playing you tight, you just go back door. Brad taught me how to play.
Breaking down the four-team trade
August, 11, 2010
8/11/10
3:44
PM ET
Every acquisition has a cost, which is one of the bedrock principles of bartering. Unless you're purchasing Manhattan or annexing the Sudetenland, it's virtually impossible to get something for nothing. The NBA's trade market has three primary currencies in circulation: talent, cap relief and flexibility -- with the latter two linked to some extent. On Wednesday, Houston, New Orleans, Indiana and New Jersey cooperated on a blockbuster trade that saw each team forfeit assets in service of a larger goal.
Going: Trevor Ariza
On the surface, the deal for the Rockets appears to be a cost-cutting measure. Houston re-upped Luis Scola and Kyle Lowry this summer, while signing Brad Miller to a free-agent contract. Deep into luxury tax territory, the Rockets unloaded the remaining four years and $28 million on Ariza's deal in exchange for Nets guard Courtney Lee.
The Rockets' front office deeply believes the best value contracts in basketball are max deals granted to transcendent superstars, and rookie scale contracts belonging to productive young players. In Lee, the Rockets get a young wing who will earn only $1.35 million in 2010-11. In addition, the Rockets hold a team option on Lee for $2.23 million in 2011-12. That's real value for a 24-year-old with the talent to start. A $6.3 million trade exception doesn't hurt either.
Lee and Rockets starting shooting guard Kevin Martin train together in the offseason -- the latter regarded as an older brother to the third-year guard. Although Lee might not be the stopper Ariza is, he is capable of covering either guard position and can certainly tread water against some of the league's less dynamic 3-and-D small forwards. Lee will find strong organizational dynamics in Houston, similar to what he encountered during his rookie season in Orlando, where he succeeded. With Ariza's departure, the Rockets will have to figure out who picks up his minutes beyond Lee and whether that means experimenting selectively with Martin at the 3 spot.
Going: Darren Collison and James Posey
The wing has been an enduring problem for the Hornets dating back to Desmond Mason, Bostjan Nachbar and J.R. Smith. Ariza might not rank on Chris Paul's list of the top 25 guys he most wants to play with, but the second Ariza puts on the teal, he'll instantly become the most athletic and versatile wing New Orleans has seen in recent years -- but at an enormous cost.
Collison has one of the best value contracts in basketball. He'll earn $1.3 million this season and carries team options for $1.46 million and $2.31 respectively over the subsequent two seasons. As a rookie, Collison played more than 2,000 minutes and compiled an impressive player efficiency rating of 16.55.
There's no guarantee Chris Paul will be sticking around New Orleans after his contract expires in the summer of 2012, and Collison's presence was a healthy -- and cheap -- insurance policy against that departure and any injury. Removing the remaining $13.4 million of James Posey's contract and the addition of Ariza's gifted -- but limited -- game seem to be an expensive bounty for a player with the potential to be very special and who is already contributing on a nightly basis.
Going: Troy Murphy
"Point guard, Indiana Pacers" has been the NBA equivalent of "Drummer, Spinal Tap." The Pacers haven't been able to buy a break at the top of the floor for several seasons. Jamaal Tinsley, Anthony Johnson, Sarunas Jasikevicius, Jarrett Jack and, most recently, T.J. Ford and Earl Watson have all walked through the revolving door in Indianapolis.
A.J. Price, picked in the second round of the 2009 draft, showed some promise in his rookie campaign. But the acquisition of Collison finally locks down the point for the Pacers for the foreseeable future.
Normally, a salary like Posey's would be an onerous burden, but the Pacers have one of the cleanest spreadsheets in the league going forward -- only $18.8 million committed in 2011-12 before you tack on Posey's deal. The addition of Collison gives the Pacers the freedom to buy out Ford and not overpay for the services of Watson.
Going: Courtney Lee
There's a pleasing symmetry to this deal, and it ends in Newark where Murphy arrives in exchange for the departing Lee. Murphy offers a lot of appeal for the Nets. First, he's in the final year of his contract, which will pay him a hair under $12 million in 2010-11. Second, he gives the Nets a stretch 4 who can crash the defensive glass and deliver smart interior passes, assets the Nets want alongside Brook Lopez's more traditional skill set.
What about No. 3 overall pick Derrick Favors? The power forward out of Georgia Tech turned 19 the week following Orlando summer league. With Yi Jianlian moving down I-95 to Washington, there will be plenty of minutes for Favors in the Nets' frontcourt rotation.
The Nets will presumably fill the void left by Lee with a platoon of Terrence Williams, Anthony Morrow and Quinton Ross -- three players who share absolutely nothing in common. Williams' versatility and range of talents span the board. Meanwhile, Morrow could beat Ross in a shooting contest wearing a blindfold, but few players in the NBA can torment perimeter scorers the way Ross can.
Bill Baptist/NBAE/Getty ImagesCourtney Lee will pick up some of Trevor Ariza's minutes in Houston.
Houston Rockets
Coming: Courtney LeeGoing: Trevor Ariza
On the surface, the deal for the Rockets appears to be a cost-cutting measure. Houston re-upped Luis Scola and Kyle Lowry this summer, while signing Brad Miller to a free-agent contract. Deep into luxury tax territory, the Rockets unloaded the remaining four years and $28 million on Ariza's deal in exchange for Nets guard Courtney Lee.
The Rockets' front office deeply believes the best value contracts in basketball are max deals granted to transcendent superstars, and rookie scale contracts belonging to productive young players. In Lee, the Rockets get a young wing who will earn only $1.35 million in 2010-11. In addition, the Rockets hold a team option on Lee for $2.23 million in 2011-12. That's real value for a 24-year-old with the talent to start. A $6.3 million trade exception doesn't hurt either.
Lee and Rockets starting shooting guard Kevin Martin train together in the offseason -- the latter regarded as an older brother to the third-year guard. Although Lee might not be the stopper Ariza is, he is capable of covering either guard position and can certainly tread water against some of the league's less dynamic 3-and-D small forwards. Lee will find strong organizational dynamics in Houston, similar to what he encountered during his rookie season in Orlando, where he succeeded. With Ariza's departure, the Rockets will have to figure out who picks up his minutes beyond Lee and whether that means experimenting selectively with Martin at the 3 spot.
New Orleans Hornets
Coming: Trevor ArizaGoing: Darren Collison and James Posey
The wing has been an enduring problem for the Hornets dating back to Desmond Mason, Bostjan Nachbar and J.R. Smith. Ariza might not rank on Chris Paul's list of the top 25 guys he most wants to play with, but the second Ariza puts on the teal, he'll instantly become the most athletic and versatile wing New Orleans has seen in recent years -- but at an enormous cost.
Collison has one of the best value contracts in basketball. He'll earn $1.3 million this season and carries team options for $1.46 million and $2.31 respectively over the subsequent two seasons. As a rookie, Collison played more than 2,000 minutes and compiled an impressive player efficiency rating of 16.55.
There's no guarantee Chris Paul will be sticking around New Orleans after his contract expires in the summer of 2012, and Collison's presence was a healthy -- and cheap -- insurance policy against that departure and any injury. Removing the remaining $13.4 million of James Posey's contract and the addition of Ariza's gifted -- but limited -- game seem to be an expensive bounty for a player with the potential to be very special and who is already contributing on a nightly basis.
Indiana Pacers
Coming: Darren Collison and James PoseyGoing: Troy Murphy
"Point guard, Indiana Pacers" has been the NBA equivalent of "Drummer, Spinal Tap." The Pacers haven't been able to buy a break at the top of the floor for several seasons. Jamaal Tinsley, Anthony Johnson, Sarunas Jasikevicius, Jarrett Jack and, most recently, T.J. Ford and Earl Watson have all walked through the revolving door in Indianapolis.
A.J. Price, picked in the second round of the 2009 draft, showed some promise in his rookie campaign. But the acquisition of Collison finally locks down the point for the Pacers for the foreseeable future.
Normally, a salary like Posey's would be an onerous burden, but the Pacers have one of the cleanest spreadsheets in the league going forward -- only $18.8 million committed in 2011-12 before you tack on Posey's deal. The addition of Collison gives the Pacers the freedom to buy out Ford and not overpay for the services of Watson.
New Jersey Nets
Coming: Troy MurphyGoing: Courtney Lee
There's a pleasing symmetry to this deal, and it ends in Newark where Murphy arrives in exchange for the departing Lee. Murphy offers a lot of appeal for the Nets. First, he's in the final year of his contract, which will pay him a hair under $12 million in 2010-11. Second, he gives the Nets a stretch 4 who can crash the defensive glass and deliver smart interior passes, assets the Nets want alongside Brook Lopez's more traditional skill set.
What about No. 3 overall pick Derrick Favors? The power forward out of Georgia Tech turned 19 the week following Orlando summer league. With Yi Jianlian moving down I-95 to Washington, there will be plenty of minutes for Favors in the Nets' frontcourt rotation.
The Nets will presumably fill the void left by Lee with a platoon of Terrence Williams, Anthony Morrow and Quinton Ross -- three players who share absolutely nothing in common. Williams' versatility and range of talents span the board. Meanwhile, Morrow could beat Ross in a shooting contest wearing a blindfold, but few players in the NBA can torment perimeter scorers the way Ross can.
- Poland lost its head of state and several other top government officials in a plane crash over the weekend. Prior to the Magic's game at Cleveland on Sunday afternoon, Marcin Gortat wrote Polish President Lech Kaczynski’s name on the tape around his wrist, and the flight number on his shoes.
- A smart recap of Sunday's Lakers-Portland game from Andrew R. Tonry and Portland Roundball Society. You'll find plenty of video reaction from key players -- including a Brandon Roy interview from the training room.
- Kevin Pelton's has posted his picks for NBA All-Defensive team at Basketball Prospectus. Pelton implores you not to laugh at his selection of Brandon Jennings as his choice for second team at the point guard position, and offers up a solid defense of Jennings.
- Some interesting data from Zach Lowe of Celtics Hub about Milwaukee's offense since Andrew Bogut went down: "The Bucks inside game has vanished without Bogut. The missing shot attempts have to go somewhere, and, to the surprise of no one reading this, they’ve gone out further from the rim."
- The Thunder's offense has a tendency to cramp up in the closing minutes. Last night, Oklahoma City trailed Golden State by one point inside of three minutes. NBA Playbook demonstrates how Russell Westbrook was unable to get Kevin Durant the ball, even though Durant was being guarded by Monta Ellis.
- Durant's "sit back and chill" musical selection.
- Scott Schroeder of Ridiculous Upside catalogs the NBA players currently averaging a double-double. Which of these names is not like the others?
- John Calipari: Not a fan of NBA eligibility rules: "I think that one, kids should be able to go directly to the league if that’s what they choose to do and if they go to college, they should stay two years or maybe three."
- Phoenix has been one of the standout teams in the league after the All-Star break, but there are a couple of red flags for Alvin Gentry's squad headed into the postseason. Kelly Dwyer watched the Suns-Rockets game last night and notes: "Houston was able to walk all over Phoenix's interior, and though the Rockets lost, it's clear that whoever the Suns meet in the playoffs is going to have a field day in the paint as long as Amar'e Stoudemire and Channing Frye are patrolling things."
- The NBA has become a mojito league.
- Matt McHale of By the Horns: "I’m here to tell you Joakim Noah is a winner. He goes full tilt every night. He wants it as bad as anybody. The dude is like a lightning storm on the court. Noah has limitations, and there are facets of his game that still need to be improved and polished. But honesty, every team would like to have a player like Noah on their roster. Heck, probably a whole team of Noahs (which is a scary notion, now that I think about it). Somebody who will sacrifice their body for the good of the team and would walk face-first through a Kraken attack to win."
- Mark Ginocchio of Nets are Scorching recounts some of his favorite Meadowlands memories, including Drazen Petrovic's inside-out exploits and Kenyon Martin being called a fugazi.
- John Krolik appreciates that mummifying LeBron James in bubble wrap until next weekend might be the smart way to go for Cleveland, but he's about ready for some meaningful basketball.
- Where do Aaron Brooks and Kevin Martin rank historically among Rocket backcourt tandems?
- NBA player and NBA dad enjoy lunch at ... The Cheesecake Factory.
- The Rockets made out like bandits in yesterday's three-team trade with Sacramento and New York. Jason Friedman gets to the heart of what Daryl Morey & Company were able to accomplish: "In Martin, the Rockets have filled a glaring void at the 2-guard spot. And this isn’t simply some band-aid, stop-gap solution. Martin is one of the NBA’s most efficient scoring weapons, a player who drains 3s and draws fouls in bunches, which has allowed him to post a True Shooting Percentage above 60% for four consecutive seasons. In other words, he’s the perfect fit for a team which treats efficiency like it’s the Holy Grail ... Then there are those draft picks. Oh, those wonderful draft picks ... the Rockets now own a pair of first round picks in 2011 and 2012 which gives Morey more of an opportunity to weave his magic, be it through savvy selections or additional wheeling and dealing. We’re talking about laying down this franchise’s foundation of the future here, people; one which suddenly looks so very bright not just for the rest of this year and (especially) the next – but for the years to come as well."
- At Hardwood Paroxysm, Wyn Douglas takes a historical look at the success and failure of teams after the trade deadline. Also at Hardwood Paroxysm, Jared Wade isn't ready to bury Tracy McGrady just yet. He wonders if McGrady can revive his career as a Grant Hill-like facilitator, and runs through the list of other superstar journeymen who have played for multiple teams.
- Lots of fun with player comps in a two-parter from Neil Paine at Basketball Reference. Fascinating stuff: Paine's project makes Andrei Kirilenko the modern equivalent of Marques Johnson.
- At the deadline, the Chicago Bulls acquired four ... gremlins?
- Byron Scott and Mychal Thompson engaged in a real-life boxing match. There's some disagreement about which former Laker won on points. In the same interview, Scott says that the Clippers head coaching job is intriguing: "I do think the Clipper job is a pretty good job for me. They have got some young talent.Obviously they are going to have a lot of cap room and another lottery pick coming in."
- The worst thing about blogging the Cavs, according to John Krolik of Cavs: the Blog.
- Jeremy Wagner of Roundball Mining Company looks at Carmelo Anthony's big shot against LeBron James.
- Michael Schwartz of Valley of the Suns delves into the host of questions surrounding Amare Stoudemire's staying put in Phoenix.
- "Shake" -- not just a liquified dessert, but a way to measure a player's consistency.
- You know that remixed "Defense" NBA spot? The most amusing clip in the ad is the unintentional irony of Eddie House in the Celtics huddle yelling, "Keep playing defense!" House was dealt from Boston to New York yesterday. At Celtics Hub, Zach Lowe bids farewell to the C's inveterate shooter, focusing on his favorite House moment, which occurred in the fourth quarter of Game 4 of the 2008 NBA Finals.
- Matthew Bunch of Hot Hot Hoops says sometimes the best move at the deadline is no move at all.
- The best thing about the Bucks' deal for John Salmons? Milwaukee hung onto its picks and got some draft considerations from Chicago.
- Knickerblogger draws up an extensive report card on New York's deadline moves.
David Thorpe on the trading of Kevin Martin
February, 18, 2010
2/18/10
5:26
PM ET
Layne Murdoch/NBAE via Getty Images
The Rockets have been needing a scorer; Kevin Martin is one of the most efficient in NBA history.
David Thorpe has been training Kevin Martin every summer in person, and on the phone day in and day out, since Martin was a little-known guard at Western Carolina. You could argue that they essentially "made it" (Martin as a player, and Thorpe as a trainer) together. In the hours after learning that Martin had been traded to the Rockets, Thorpe shared his views about why things didn't work out in Sacramento, how Martin will fit in Houston and why he thinks Martin can be a solid NBA defender.
Were you as surprised as the rest of us to learn late Wednesday night that Kevin Martin had been traded?
Yes, only because it seemed that no one really had an appetite to trade him. There were certainly teams that were making inquiries, and I get privy to some of those because teams will often call me first to get insight on what Kevin's mindset is. So I knew teams were interested. But it always seemed like the Kings would hold off until the summer, and I understood why they would do that. I can't say I was too surprised, when the team has been struggling, and has such a need for inside help, getting an offer like Carl Landry, I understand why they'd want to do that.
You're a basketball expert, but you're also someone who knows Kevin Martin very well and considers him almost like a family member. For you in that role, how do you feel?
I feel amazing.
There's a little touch of sadness. If I take off my basketball analyst and basketball trainer hats ... Kevin has a very special connection to the city of Sacramento and to the Kings. I was a nobody, and only had one or two players who were just barely in the NBA when the Kings took Kevin in the draft. And the Kings decided to take him in the first round and ultimately decided to stay with him long enough to learn how to be an NBA player. He became a pretty good one and they paid him a great contract. Kevin and I talked a lot about retiring as a King one day, and having his jersey hanging in the rafters with a couple of championship banners. And, obviously that failed. That didn't happen. Doesn't really matter who's to blame. The end result is it failed. That's sad.
On the other hand, that's a team that, over the last four years has gotten younger and younger. Kevin should be entering his prime. He was playing for a coaching staff that didn't really know him or his game all that well, and had a bunch of 23-and-younger guys, for the most part, next to him, who were far from their potential. They're going to be good players one day, but how long is it going to be? Now Kevin gets to go to a storied franchise that's got multiple championships, in a city that's basketball-crazy like Sacramento is.
The great thing about this is that in some respect he's going back in time, to a head coach and two or three assistants who coached Kevin when he was just starting out. So that's exciting. And the idea of playing with the talent that Houston has, they've got some talented veterans, I think will be a better complement to what he brings, and hopefully he'll be a better complement to what they have.
Houston, without Landry and with an injured Yao Ming, is pretty thin in the frontcourt. But Rick Adelman's an innovative coach. How is this Houston team going to play, now?
There's a short-term and a long-term approach. The short-term approach will be: This is our team without Yao Ming. Let's try to manufacture wins. I think one of Adelman's real strengths has been that he's a very pragmatic guy. When he's got slashers and passers, they run more of this open-floor Princeton stuff. And when he doesn't then they'll feature the great, dynamic dribble-drive game of Aaron Brooks. And obviously, they did a lot with Carl Landry.
So I think they'll get back to utilizing Kevin, and Trevor Ariza. Now he has two wings who are really athletic and can move without the ball -- Trevor really learned that in that triangle system in L.A. There'll be some adjustments, because they obviously haven't been doing that a bunch because of what Aaron does. They'll feature Scola more. But Kevin's going to have to carry a big scoring load, because Carl was one of their two best offensive players.
And then when Yao comes in, that's really the game-changer. Kevin, historically, has been one of more efficient shooting guards ever to play the game, based on the stats we use now, and he's never really had a low-post player that commanded a double-team. The idea of dumping it into Yao Ming and running two-man stuff off him, running some of Adelman's Princeton stuff off Yao, with his shooting abilities, and Kevin's ability to move without the ball ... it's pretty exciting.
I also think the Jordan Hill component is interesting, because they've had some success in finding ways that guys like that can really be productive. Look at the production they've gotten out of maligned big men: Scola, Hayes, Landry ... Hill is an interesting component. And they're going to get a number one pick from New York at some point in the next couple of years. You've got that great mix of veterans and youth, where Kevin was coming from a program that was almost all young guys.
There's a lot that we can do because veteran experience allows you to do a lot more.
There has been this idea that Houston needs a superstar, or at least a go-to crunch-time scorer. I don't even know if you believe that, but if you do, is Kevin Martin that guy?
I never really believed that. With some exceptions. Wade and Kobe and LeBron are at the highest level of that. But two years ago the champions were the guys who had three great players. Go back and watch Celtic tape and I think you'll see Eddie House hit some pretty big shots, too.
I really believe that if you've got a super special featured scorer, then great. But it's good to have more than one guy.
And I don't know if Kevin's good enough to be a "give him the ball and get out of the way" kind of guy. I don't think that's really playing to his strengths. I think you can run sets for him late in games. The other night in overtime he scored nine straight points for the Kings, because they actually ran some stuff for him and it worked out well.
I think, though that Houston's going to have some really dynamic actions with a number of guys. You're talking about a starting five of Brooks, Ariza, Martin, Scola and ultimatley Yao. All five guys can get 25 points in a game. Not a lot of teams have that.
I think Kevin can be an important fourth-quarter player for them. Obviously, he's got to get to the free throw line a lot, and typically he makes 80-plus percent. And that's important too.
Seven questions for 2010
December, 30, 2009
12/30/09
7:50
PM ET
One of the simple ways of experiencing basketball is by talking about it with people who share your love of the game. One of the people I enjoy rapping with is John Krolik of Cavs the Blog and SLAM Online. The best conversations are the ones that produce interesting questions, then aim to answer them. Here are some of those questions about the NBA John and I have been bouncing around in our last couple of conversations:
As guys get freakier and more athletic, are we witnessing an end to positional orthodoxy?
JK: We're definitely seeing a lot of blurring in positional lines, particularly outside of the center position. One thing in particular I like is the rise of the true combo guard. Early in the decade, we got a lot of alleged "combo guards" who were really just superpowered bench gunners given control of teams with mixed results; Stephon Marbury, Steve Francis, et cetera. (Iverson is Iverson.)
But now we're really starting to see effective players who are a cross between the one and the two in a good way, and they're being complimented with other multi-skilled guards rather than going with a strict point guard/shooting guard backcourt. In San Antonio, they put Tony Parker, who's a great scorer for a point, next to Manu, who's a great playmaker for a shooting guard, and things went well. The double-combo backcourt of Mo Williams and Delonte West turned Cleveland's backcourt from a disaster area to a huge strength last season. Even Jason Kidd, the truest of points, is playing with JET and JJ Barea, and has even become adept at knocking down catch-and-shoot 3s off of other people's assists. Phil Jackson's won only 10 championships using an offense that doesn't require a traditional point. And so many young combo guards are coming in with tons of talent: Tyreke Evans, Russell Westbrook, Brandon Jennings and even John Wall, who should definitely be put next to a guy who can pass and shoot when he comes into the league so that he can spend some time in each game going on guilt-free scoring rampages. Wall might be the combo-guard messiah.
KA: This is a beautiful trend because it's created a much more diverse range of basketball styles. Very few teams around the league look alike, even though many of them run much of the same stuff. The fact that so many players can do so many different things on the floor creates an exponentially greater number of things a team can do schematically. On many teams, shots on the floor can be drawn up for almost any player at any spot! Part of this can be attributed to athleticism. One the things that made a power forward or a center a big men was his ability to perform big men tasks -- rebounding, shot-blocking, the ability to routinely get high-percentage shots close to the rim. Today's NBA perimeter players have the athleticism to do a lot of that -- and many of the bigger guys in the league have perimeter skills, as well.
This seems like a nice segue to ...
Do traditional big men have a future?
KA: Whether you chalk it up to the prohibition of hand-checking or the stylings of Mike D'Antoni's Phoenix Suns teams (I'd argue that former rendered the latter), the professional game has undergone a seismic shift over the past decade. Perimeter play has taken over. Today's power forwards have big guard games and two of the top three players in 3-point attempts are 6-foot-10. It's a world gone mad, but you can't complain about the product on the court. The NBA has never been more fun to watch, and we're just getting started...
...or are we?
Trends have a way of feeling permanent while they're being experienced, but they rarely last forever. At some point, laws of macroeconomics take over. Right now, there aren't more than a handful of big men in basketball who have refined post moves and can drain a running right-handed hook with consistency. Teams don't value those attributes as much as speed and 3-point shooting. But as more and more players have the ability to drain 100-200 3-pointers per season at a 40 percent clip, the demand will shift. Kids who arrive on the NBA's doorstep with the ability to dominate the game inside with uncanny efficiency will be shopping skills that few teams will be able to defend.
JK: I'd say the hand-check rules imposed an artificial set of circumstances that forced a change, so I don't think we'll see the pendulum swing all the way back to where it was. But I think guys are finding out that even though big men need to be faster and more skilled than they used to be and can't count on getting minutes just because they can score with their backs to the basket and do nothing else (i.e. Eddy Curry), the post-up game is still a valuable weapon. Look at the Lakers. Andrew Bynum, when he's engaged, defends the rim, gets rebounds and is quick enough to find room and finish off of others, but also posts up. Pau Gasol plays the high-post, runs the floor, gets rebounds, passes beautifully and can knock down the mid-range jumper, but also has a wonderful post game. And of course Kobe can and does do just about anything that's possible for a basketball player to do, but also utilizes the post game.
I'd say that the post-up specialist won't be in vogue again in the foreseeable future, but more and more bigs and wings who can do what's demanded of them in the post hand-check NBA are going to find that the actual post game is still a hugely valuable weapon, especially as fewer and fewer teams know how to defend it.
Of the current young up-and-coming teams, which ones are for real and which ones will provide an entertaining illusion of success?
KA: When sizing up a team's future prospects, the first thing I ask myself is, "Can I imagine this team ranking in the top half of the league defensively?"
Oklahoma City is the quintessential upstart squad. They're fun, charismatic, dynamic, athletic ... and not all that impressive as an offensive unit. It's the Thunder's defense that's led them to a 17-14 record this season. So long as tough, lanky defenders like Russell Westbrook and Thabo Sefolosha are patrolling the perimeter (and James Harden too), opponents are going to have a tough time scoring against them. With that Kevin Durant angle pick-and-roll as the anchor of their offense, they're a good bet to win a playoff series sometime soon.
Brandon Jennings has sparked any and all attention the Bucks have received this season, but Milwaukee's frontcourt of Andrew Bogut, Ersan Ilyasova and Luc Mbah a Moute have put up gritty defensive numbers. Mbah a Moute comes as no surprise, but I was shocked by Bogut's stats, until I looked at his figures under Scott Skiles last season -- also really, really good. Once they get a (healthy) shooting guard who can play drive-and-kick off the Jennings-Bogut pick-and-roll, the Bucks could be dangerous under a coach who was booted from his last gig in Chicago after assembling the league's top-ranked defense and the Eastern Conference's 3rd best record the previous season.
Sacramento's lousy defensive numbers don't concern me right now. They strike me as a team that's going to experience a major overhaul over the next 18 months, and a big part of that metamorphosis will be acquiring some pieces around Tyreke Evans who can defend. I have less faith in Memphis, Minnesota, Golden State and, to a slightly lesser extent, Philadelphia, who all have rosters riddled with defensive ciphers.
JK: I think Oklahoma City wins a playoff series when their backcourt clicks into place, and that's close to happening. I love Westbrook's game and think he has a ton of potential, but he just needs to be more disciplined. He pushes the ball, plays great defense, and does all these little things, but then he'll throw up a bad jumper, brick a full-speed reverse layup, or make a silly pass, and his true shooting percentage and turnover rates are way off of where they need to be because of that. It'll be interesting to see if the answer there is Harden maturing to the point where he can play 30-35 minutes a game and cover some of Westbrook's weaknesses with his shooting, playmaking and ability to create off the drive. (Combo guards!) But I think that young frontcourt is the envy of a lot of teams in the league, Sam Presti keeps getting valuable pieces without giving up much, and I'd call the future very bright there.
For Sacramento, the short-term question is how Tyreke is going to work with Kevin Martin. They might cancel each other out or become absolutely unstoppable together, although they might need to do the latter to make up for Martin's suspect defense. But Thompson, Hawes, Casspi, and even Brockman all look like keepers, and Tyreke has given every indication that he can be built around.
In Milwaukee, I think they should be having serious brainstorms on how they can hide Mbah a Moute on offense so they can keep him on the floor longer, maybe even looking for a stretch four so they can put Mbah a Moute closer to the basket offensively and use him like Detroit used Ben Wallace. He's that good defensively.
I agree with you about the rest of the teams, although I give Memphis some upside because I think it's a bit too early to completely give up on Hasheem Thabeet as an impact player defensively; if Orlando could build a defense around Howard and four perimeter guys, there's a chance Memphis can as well. (A chance, mind you.)
What is it about Stan Van Gundy that we like so much?
JK: I think we've got a pretty narrow view of how to evaluate coaches, because we don't see the vast majority of what they do and we're trained to look for their failures and not their successes. Coaches almost exist to be fired, and every time they make a mistake with their play-call or substitution, it'll get talked about the next day.
I think the biggest job of a coach isn't to call timeouts strategically or be a genius with his in game substitutions. (Although both are definitely important, especially the latter.) I think the job of an NBA coach is to set up a system that best utilizes the talents he has available to him, and that's where Stan Van Gundy comes in, especially last season. Of his five starters, he had three guys with below-average defensive reputations, Dwight Howard, and a rookie.
Instead of trying to have everyone play straight-up or stick Rashard Lewis at the three, he evaluated what he had -- the best shot-blocker in the league and more quickness on the perimeter than most other teams had. So he stuck Lewis at the 4 and never looked back, and built a defense around running other teams off threes and keeping Howard at home under the basket. What happened? The Magic gave up the second fewest made baskets at the rim, the second fewest made 3s per game, and more shots from 10-15 feet and 16-23 feet than any other team in the league. They also had one of the league's three best defenses in terms of efficiency.
Offensively, he had Dwight Howard, who can catch and finish with the best of them but isn't a great post player, more shooting and playmaking at the forward spots than most anyone, and a bunch of guys who can shoot threes. So he had Howard look for catches at the rim, ran 3/4 screen-rolls, and had his players shoot a bunch of threes rather than try to do what everyone else was doing. Van Gundy's failures last season were there for the world to see, but what he did extremely well was more subtle.
KA: I like his press conferences, too. The irony of Van Gundy is that popular perception sometimes paints him as inflexible. But as you said, no coach sculpted a more sensible system for his personnel last season than Van Gundy. He did a full appraisal of his talent, saw where he had edges over his opponents at each position (ballhanding at the 3, shooting at the 4, mobility at the 5) and designed his offense to exploit those advantages.
This isn't to say there's anything wrong with building an elite team by first implementing the system, then by populating that system with players whose talents most conform to it. Whatever works, by all means. Just win. But the ability to create a system around a disparate collection of talent that was brought together randomly is in many ways even more impressive.
Should LeBron James be playing more power forward?
KA: Despite James’ size, strength and efficiency on the glass, Mike Brown has him firmly situated at the small forward slot. In fact, you have to go pretty far down the list of Cleveland’s 5-man lineups to find units in which James is playing power forward. But in the six lineups that feature James surrounded by one traditional big man and three smaller players for at least 10 minutes, the Cavs outscore their opponents 96-83 (prorated for 48 minutes).
Those numbers are enough for me, but let’s think about it in practical terms. We’ve already discussed how positional dogma is a thing of the past in an NBA that’s much smaller than it was 10 years ago. When thinking about how to best maximize LeBron in the half-court, wouldn't you prefer that he drag a bigger defender out to him in order to create more space on the floor for your offense? And defensively, wouldn’t a team like Cleveland, whose primary weakness has been its plodding frontcourt, be better served by having LeBron cover Rashard Lewis on Orlando’s pick-and-pop or Boston’s bigs on the Celtics’ rotating screen-and-rolls? Doesn’t it make more sense to challenge Stan Van Gundy and Doc Rivers to match up with a more athletic lineup? And wouldn’t Cleveland benefit from more transition opportunities?
Would team rebounding suffer? When you look at those aforementioned six lineups with LeBron at the 4, the answer is no. Apart from the political stickiness of limiting the minutes of the Cavs' veteran big men, I have trouble seeing how making the Cavs a more athletic team around LeBron comes with much downside.
JK: The short answer is that I'm extremely confused as to why LeBron doesn't get more time at the 4 position, at least for around 10 minutes of his time on the floor. I understand some of the reasoning behind not giving him significant minutes down there. The Cavs show hard on every perimeter screen, which would require LeBron expending more energy on the defensive end than the Cavs are comfortable with, especially in the first three quarters. And of course, the Cavs don't want LeBron in foul trouble under any circumstances. And generally speaking, the Cavs' big men are better players than Jamario Moon, who typically plays the 3 in the Cavs' small-ball lineup. But LeBron getting the ball in the 10-15 foot range and making his move from down there is absolutely deadly, and that small-ball lineup should definitely be something used more often to keep opposing teams on their toes.
What confuses me more than anything is that while the Shaq/Varejao frontcourt has some offensive issues and the Shaq/Hickson frontcourt has some serious defensive issues, a Shaq/LeBron frontcourt hasn't been tried at all this season, and I mean at all. I suppose the reasoning is that LeBron would be forced to expend way too much energy on the perimeter defensively as Shaq sags to the paint on pick-and-rolls (LeBron's never gotten minutes at the four alongside Z either), but with the Cavs supposedly looking for a "stretch 4" at the deadline to make life easier for Shaq, it's odd that they haven't at least tried using LeBron in that role.
How Real is Dallas?
KA: Little known fact: Of the 50 5-man units that have played together the most this season, two of the top three in overall efficiency belong to the Dallas Mavericks. Whether it's Jason Terry or J.J. Barea at the shooting guard, the Mavs' big names are absolutely crushing their opponents on both ends of the floor. Dallas is a Top 5 defensive squad and features one of the game's great shotmakers in Dirk Nowitzki. They also have tremendous flexibility to match up with opponents on either end. They can play old-school or new-school. Want to tease the Mavs with small ball? That's fine, because they're perfectly good going with three guards and moving Shawn Marion and Nowitzki into the frontcourt. Want to try to outmuscle them? Erick Dampier may have an outsized contract, but he's also one of the better basket protectors and garbage collectors in the league. Opponents shoot a measly 57.4 percent at the rim against the Mavs -- only Boston, Cleveland and San Antonio are better.
More than anything, the Mavs strike me as a team composed of professionals. These are serious basketball players led by a serious coach. Is it possible that a squad with so many thirtysomethings breaks down physically over the course of an 82-game season? Perhaps. But where some see brittleness, I see experience. In fact, I see shades of the best San Antonio Spurs squads. I see a team that truly understands its collective talents and limitations and puts a premium on execution.
Can they compete with the Lakers in late May? I'm not sure anyone in the Western Conference can, but Dallas -- with its length, smarts, and perimeter prowess -- might just be the toughest competition the Lakers encounter.
JK: Dallas has a ton of talent, Dirk is right up there with the best players in the league, and the team defends. My caveat would be that they're thinner than people think, and much more dependent on Dirk. As of December 26th, Dallas was +11.6 points per 100 possessions with Dirk on the floor and a stunning -16.5 points per 100 with Dirk on the bench. As bad as LeBron and Kobe's benches are, their teams are only -8 when they sit, to offer some perspective.
A lot of that has to do with Drew Gooden; Gooden's plus-minus is -23.1, and as someone who's watched a good deal of Gooden in his life, I can tell you that's not random noise. Drew Gooden is the anti-Battier. I'm also not a huge J.J. Barea fan. He's fun to watch and works fairly well with Kidd offensively, but I believe you were the one who said he plays defense "like a man frantically searching for his car keys," and the plus-minus numbers support the theory that Barea's somewhat of a defensive liability. Dallas can play with anyone, especially when Dirk's on the floor, and if they do something to get a better backup for Dirk than Gooden and hide Barea's defense a little better (maybe play more Beaubois, who's gone through growing pains and will probably continue to do so, but has lockdown defensive potential), I'd call them a true force to be reckoned with in the West. If not, I'd say they have a solid puncher's chance of knocking the Lakers off their Western Conference throne.
How do we begin to make sense of adjusted plus-minus?
JK: Outside of the obvious conclusion, which is "no one stat or metric, no matter how advanced or intricate, is ever going to come close to saying everything about one player," I have two thoughts on adjusted plus-minus.
The first is that I get how the basic +/- you see in box scores and 82games.com's version of plus-minus work, but I still don't totally understand how advanced plus-minus works, and that's a problem. I mean, I get the theory, that it adjusts for having good or bad teammates or playing against good and bad opponents, but how exactly does it define "good" and "bad"? Is "good" based on the other guy's adjusted plus-minus, or is the value of others derived from something like Player Efficiency Rating? Aren't both approaches problematic? Right now, adjusted plus-minus is sort of "He's good. Trust me," which I have trouble swallowing as a fan and certainly can't use to convince friends or readers of a guy's value.
The second problem is one that will get fixed over time, which is that we still don't really know how to read plus-minus type stats yet. We know with a stat like field goal percentage that a shooting guard is going to have a lower field goal percentage than a center, but we also know that the guard is probably shooting more 3s, shooting his free throws better and taking tougher shots than the center. We know how to read that stat.
But because plus-minus is one number and so nebulous, we don't know which plus-minus numbers to take with a grain of salt and which ones not to. I'll bring up the semi-infamous Durant example here. Durant had terrible +/- ratings for his first two seasons, but has been incredible in year three. Was the Durant phenomenon ever even real, or did Durant actually improve this year in ways the stats didn't see? If we want plus-minus metrics to be as legitimate as the box score ones, we have to stress-test it like we have the conventional numbers that came before them.
KA: I'm drawn to adjusted plus-minus because I'm desperate to find any metric that will approximate a player's defensive value, something we just don't have the tools to do right now. I'm more faithful than I probably should be given the lack of stress tests you talk about. Your point is well-taken and I'd add that stats like these are only valuable to the extent that they're predictive. There will always be players who make colossal jumps or experience unusual crashes in productivity, but apart from outliers, a stat must be dependable enough to offer a clear -- if general -- estimation of what that player is worth in the past, present and likely future. I've begun to spend more time examining the adjusted plus-minus numbers of 5-man units rather than individuals, in part because it seems more practical.
I suspect we'll know a lot more in three to five years than we do now. The metric's practitioners (and the people who trust them) will have a better sense of where the numbers skews, what those number might miss and the kind of noise those numbers create. In the meantime, I'll continue to watch the 2-year figures (and eventually 3-year, and 4-year). Any system that values Dwyane Wade, LeBron James, Chris Paul, Steve Nash and Kobe Bryant as the five best players in the NBA has to be on to something, right?
D. Clarke Evans/NBAE/Getty Images
Combo Plate: A ball-handling scorer ... and a scoring ball-handler.
Combo Plate: A ball-handling scorer ... and a scoring ball-handler.
JK: We're definitely seeing a lot of blurring in positional lines, particularly outside of the center position. One thing in particular I like is the rise of the true combo guard. Early in the decade, we got a lot of alleged "combo guards" who were really just superpowered bench gunners given control of teams with mixed results; Stephon Marbury, Steve Francis, et cetera. (Iverson is Iverson.)
But now we're really starting to see effective players who are a cross between the one and the two in a good way, and they're being complimented with other multi-skilled guards rather than going with a strict point guard/shooting guard backcourt. In San Antonio, they put Tony Parker, who's a great scorer for a point, next to Manu, who's a great playmaker for a shooting guard, and things went well. The double-combo backcourt of Mo Williams and Delonte West turned Cleveland's backcourt from a disaster area to a huge strength last season. Even Jason Kidd, the truest of points, is playing with JET and JJ Barea, and has even become adept at knocking down catch-and-shoot 3s off of other people's assists. Phil Jackson's won only 10 championships using an offense that doesn't require a traditional point. And so many young combo guards are coming in with tons of talent: Tyreke Evans, Russell Westbrook, Brandon Jennings and even John Wall, who should definitely be put next to a guy who can pass and shoot when he comes into the league so that he can spend some time in each game going on guilt-free scoring rampages. Wall might be the combo-guard messiah.
KA: This is a beautiful trend because it's created a much more diverse range of basketball styles. Very few teams around the league look alike, even though many of them run much of the same stuff. The fact that so many players can do so many different things on the floor creates an exponentially greater number of things a team can do schematically. On many teams, shots on the floor can be drawn up for almost any player at any spot! Part of this can be attributed to athleticism. One the things that made a power forward or a center a big men was his ability to perform big men tasks -- rebounding, shot-blocking, the ability to routinely get high-percentage shots close to the rim. Today's NBA perimeter players have the athleticism to do a lot of that -- and many of the bigger guys in the league have perimeter skills, as well.
This seems like a nice segue to ...
Do traditional big men have a future?
KA: Whether you chalk it up to the prohibition of hand-checking or the stylings of Mike D'Antoni's Phoenix Suns teams (I'd argue that former rendered the latter), the professional game has undergone a seismic shift over the past decade. Perimeter play has taken over. Today's power forwards have big guard games and two of the top three players in 3-point attempts are 6-foot-10. It's a world gone mad, but you can't complain about the product on the court. The NBA has never been more fun to watch, and we're just getting started...
...or are we?
Trends have a way of feeling permanent while they're being experienced, but they rarely last forever. At some point, laws of macroeconomics take over. Right now, there aren't more than a handful of big men in basketball who have refined post moves and can drain a running right-handed hook with consistency. Teams don't value those attributes as much as speed and 3-point shooting. But as more and more players have the ability to drain 100-200 3-pointers per season at a 40 percent clip, the demand will shift. Kids who arrive on the NBA's doorstep with the ability to dominate the game inside with uncanny efficiency will be shopping skills that few teams will be able to defend.
JK: I'd say the hand-check rules imposed an artificial set of circumstances that forced a change, so I don't think we'll see the pendulum swing all the way back to where it was. But I think guys are finding out that even though big men need to be faster and more skilled than they used to be and can't count on getting minutes just because they can score with their backs to the basket and do nothing else (i.e. Eddy Curry), the post-up game is still a valuable weapon. Look at the Lakers. Andrew Bynum, when he's engaged, defends the rim, gets rebounds and is quick enough to find room and finish off of others, but also posts up. Pau Gasol plays the high-post, runs the floor, gets rebounds, passes beautifully and can knock down the mid-range jumper, but also has a wonderful post game. And of course Kobe can and does do just about anything that's possible for a basketball player to do, but also utilizes the post game.
I'd say that the post-up specialist won't be in vogue again in the foreseeable future, but more and more bigs and wings who can do what's demanded of them in the post hand-check NBA are going to find that the actual post game is still a hugely valuable weapon, especially as fewer and fewer teams know how to defend it.
Of the current young up-and-coming teams, which ones are for real and which ones will provide an entertaining illusion of success?
KA: When sizing up a team's future prospects, the first thing I ask myself is, "Can I imagine this team ranking in the top half of the league defensively?"
Oklahoma City is the quintessential upstart squad. They're fun, charismatic, dynamic, athletic ... and not all that impressive as an offensive unit. It's the Thunder's defense that's led them to a 17-14 record this season. So long as tough, lanky defenders like Russell Westbrook and Thabo Sefolosha are patrolling the perimeter (and James Harden too), opponents are going to have a tough time scoring against them. With that Kevin Durant angle pick-and-roll as the anchor of their offense, they're a good bet to win a playoff series sometime soon.
Brandon Jennings has sparked any and all attention the Bucks have received this season, but Milwaukee's frontcourt of Andrew Bogut, Ersan Ilyasova and Luc Mbah a Moute have put up gritty defensive numbers. Mbah a Moute comes as no surprise, but I was shocked by Bogut's stats, until I looked at his figures under Scott Skiles last season -- also really, really good. Once they get a (healthy) shooting guard who can play drive-and-kick off the Jennings-Bogut pick-and-roll, the Bucks could be dangerous under a coach who was booted from his last gig in Chicago after assembling the league's top-ranked defense and the Eastern Conference's 3rd best record the previous season.
Sacramento's lousy defensive numbers don't concern me right now. They strike me as a team that's going to experience a major overhaul over the next 18 months, and a big part of that metamorphosis will be acquiring some pieces around Tyreke Evans who can defend. I have less faith in Memphis, Minnesota, Golden State and, to a slightly lesser extent, Philadelphia, who all have rosters riddled with defensive ciphers.
JK: I think Oklahoma City wins a playoff series when their backcourt clicks into place, and that's close to happening. I love Westbrook's game and think he has a ton of potential, but he just needs to be more disciplined. He pushes the ball, plays great defense, and does all these little things, but then he'll throw up a bad jumper, brick a full-speed reverse layup, or make a silly pass, and his true shooting percentage and turnover rates are way off of where they need to be because of that. It'll be interesting to see if the answer there is Harden maturing to the point where he can play 30-35 minutes a game and cover some of Westbrook's weaknesses with his shooting, playmaking and ability to create off the drive. (Combo guards!) But I think that young frontcourt is the envy of a lot of teams in the league, Sam Presti keeps getting valuable pieces without giving up much, and I'd call the future very bright there.
For Sacramento, the short-term question is how Tyreke is going to work with Kevin Martin. They might cancel each other out or become absolutely unstoppable together, although they might need to do the latter to make up for Martin's suspect defense. But Thompson, Hawes, Casspi, and even Brockman all look like keepers, and Tyreke has given every indication that he can be built around.
In Milwaukee, I think they should be having serious brainstorms on how they can hide Mbah a Moute on offense so they can keep him on the floor longer, maybe even looking for a stretch four so they can put Mbah a Moute closer to the basket offensively and use him like Detroit used Ben Wallace. He's that good defensively.
I agree with you about the rest of the teams, although I give Memphis some upside because I think it's a bit too early to completely give up on Hasheem Thabeet as an impact player defensively; if Orlando could build a defense around Howard and four perimeter guys, there's a chance Memphis can as well. (A chance, mind you.)
What is it about Stan Van Gundy that we like so much?
JK: I think we've got a pretty narrow view of how to evaluate coaches, because we don't see the vast majority of what they do and we're trained to look for their failures and not their successes. Coaches almost exist to be fired, and every time they make a mistake with their play-call or substitution, it'll get talked about the next day.
I think the biggest job of a coach isn't to call timeouts strategically or be a genius with his in game substitutions. (Although both are definitely important, especially the latter.) I think the job of an NBA coach is to set up a system that best utilizes the talents he has available to him, and that's where Stan Van Gundy comes in, especially last season. Of his five starters, he had three guys with below-average defensive reputations, Dwight Howard, and a rookie.
Instead of trying to have everyone play straight-up or stick Rashard Lewis at the three, he evaluated what he had -- the best shot-blocker in the league and more quickness on the perimeter than most other teams had. So he stuck Lewis at the 4 and never looked back, and built a defense around running other teams off threes and keeping Howard at home under the basket. What happened? The Magic gave up the second fewest made baskets at the rim, the second fewest made 3s per game, and more shots from 10-15 feet and 16-23 feet than any other team in the league. They also had one of the league's three best defenses in terms of efficiency.
Offensively, he had Dwight Howard, who can catch and finish with the best of them but isn't a great post player, more shooting and playmaking at the forward spots than most anyone, and a bunch of guys who can shoot threes. So he had Howard look for catches at the rim, ran 3/4 screen-rolls, and had his players shoot a bunch of threes rather than try to do what everyone else was doing. Van Gundy's failures last season were there for the world to see, but what he did extremely well was more subtle.
KA: I like his press conferences, too. The irony of Van Gundy is that popular perception sometimes paints him as inflexible. But as you said, no coach sculpted a more sensible system for his personnel last season than Van Gundy. He did a full appraisal of his talent, saw where he had edges over his opponents at each position (ballhanding at the 3, shooting at the 4, mobility at the 5) and designed his offense to exploit those advantages.
This isn't to say there's anything wrong with building an elite team by first implementing the system, then by populating that system with players whose talents most conform to it. Whatever works, by all means. Just win. But the ability to create a system around a disparate collection of talent that was brought together randomly is in many ways even more impressive.
Should LeBron James be playing more power forward?
KA: Despite James’ size, strength and efficiency on the glass, Mike Brown has him firmly situated at the small forward slot. In fact, you have to go pretty far down the list of Cleveland’s 5-man lineups to find units in which James is playing power forward. But in the six lineups that feature James surrounded by one traditional big man and three smaller players for at least 10 minutes, the Cavs outscore their opponents 96-83 (prorated for 48 minutes).
Those numbers are enough for me, but let’s think about it in practical terms. We’ve already discussed how positional dogma is a thing of the past in an NBA that’s much smaller than it was 10 years ago. When thinking about how to best maximize LeBron in the half-court, wouldn't you prefer that he drag a bigger defender out to him in order to create more space on the floor for your offense? And defensively, wouldn’t a team like Cleveland, whose primary weakness has been its plodding frontcourt, be better served by having LeBron cover Rashard Lewis on Orlando’s pick-and-pop or Boston’s bigs on the Celtics’ rotating screen-and-rolls? Doesn’t it make more sense to challenge Stan Van Gundy and Doc Rivers to match up with a more athletic lineup? And wouldn’t Cleveland benefit from more transition opportunities?
Would team rebounding suffer? When you look at those aforementioned six lineups with LeBron at the 4, the answer is no. Apart from the political stickiness of limiting the minutes of the Cavs' veteran big men, I have trouble seeing how making the Cavs a more athletic team around LeBron comes with much downside.
JK: The short answer is that I'm extremely confused as to why LeBron doesn't get more time at the 4 position, at least for around 10 minutes of his time on the floor. I understand some of the reasoning behind not giving him significant minutes down there. The Cavs show hard on every perimeter screen, which would require LeBron expending more energy on the defensive end than the Cavs are comfortable with, especially in the first three quarters. And of course, the Cavs don't want LeBron in foul trouble under any circumstances. And generally speaking, the Cavs' big men are better players than Jamario Moon, who typically plays the 3 in the Cavs' small-ball lineup. But LeBron getting the ball in the 10-15 foot range and making his move from down there is absolutely deadly, and that small-ball lineup should definitely be something used more often to keep opposing teams on their toes.
What confuses me more than anything is that while the Shaq/Varejao frontcourt has some offensive issues and the Shaq/Hickson frontcourt has some serious defensive issues, a Shaq/LeBron frontcourt hasn't been tried at all this season, and I mean at all. I suppose the reasoning is that LeBron would be forced to expend way too much energy on the perimeter defensively as Shaq sags to the paint on pick-and-rolls (LeBron's never gotten minutes at the four alongside Z either), but with the Cavs supposedly looking for a "stretch 4" at the deadline to make life easier for Shaq, it's odd that they haven't at least tried using LeBron in that role.
Danny Bollinger/NBAE/Getty Images
There are nights when the Mavericks look deadly serious.
There are nights when the Mavericks look deadly serious.
KA: Little known fact: Of the 50 5-man units that have played together the most this season, two of the top three in overall efficiency belong to the Dallas Mavericks. Whether it's Jason Terry or J.J. Barea at the shooting guard, the Mavs' big names are absolutely crushing their opponents on both ends of the floor. Dallas is a Top 5 defensive squad and features one of the game's great shotmakers in Dirk Nowitzki. They also have tremendous flexibility to match up with opponents on either end. They can play old-school or new-school. Want to tease the Mavs with small ball? That's fine, because they're perfectly good going with three guards and moving Shawn Marion and Nowitzki into the frontcourt. Want to try to outmuscle them? Erick Dampier may have an outsized contract, but he's also one of the better basket protectors and garbage collectors in the league. Opponents shoot a measly 57.4 percent at the rim against the Mavs -- only Boston, Cleveland and San Antonio are better.
More than anything, the Mavs strike me as a team composed of professionals. These are serious basketball players led by a serious coach. Is it possible that a squad with so many thirtysomethings breaks down physically over the course of an 82-game season? Perhaps. But where some see brittleness, I see experience. In fact, I see shades of the best San Antonio Spurs squads. I see a team that truly understands its collective talents and limitations and puts a premium on execution.
Can they compete with the Lakers in late May? I'm not sure anyone in the Western Conference can, but Dallas -- with its length, smarts, and perimeter prowess -- might just be the toughest competition the Lakers encounter.
JK: Dallas has a ton of talent, Dirk is right up there with the best players in the league, and the team defends. My caveat would be that they're thinner than people think, and much more dependent on Dirk. As of December 26th, Dallas was +11.6 points per 100 possessions with Dirk on the floor and a stunning -16.5 points per 100 with Dirk on the bench. As bad as LeBron and Kobe's benches are, their teams are only -8 when they sit, to offer some perspective.
A lot of that has to do with Drew Gooden; Gooden's plus-minus is -23.1, and as someone who's watched a good deal of Gooden in his life, I can tell you that's not random noise. Drew Gooden is the anti-Battier. I'm also not a huge J.J. Barea fan. He's fun to watch and works fairly well with Kidd offensively, but I believe you were the one who said he plays defense "like a man frantically searching for his car keys," and the plus-minus numbers support the theory that Barea's somewhat of a defensive liability. Dallas can play with anyone, especially when Dirk's on the floor, and if they do something to get a better backup for Dirk than Gooden and hide Barea's defense a little better (maybe play more Beaubois, who's gone through growing pains and will probably continue to do so, but has lockdown defensive potential), I'd call them a true force to be reckoned with in the West. If not, I'd say they have a solid puncher's chance of knocking the Lakers off their Western Conference throne.
How do we begin to make sense of adjusted plus-minus?
JK: Outside of the obvious conclusion, which is "no one stat or metric, no matter how advanced or intricate, is ever going to come close to saying everything about one player," I have two thoughts on adjusted plus-minus.
The first is that I get how the basic +/- you see in box scores and 82games.com's version of plus-minus work, but I still don't totally understand how advanced plus-minus works, and that's a problem. I mean, I get the theory, that it adjusts for having good or bad teammates or playing against good and bad opponents, but how exactly does it define "good" and "bad"? Is "good" based on the other guy's adjusted plus-minus, or is the value of others derived from something like Player Efficiency Rating? Aren't both approaches problematic? Right now, adjusted plus-minus is sort of "He's good. Trust me," which I have trouble swallowing as a fan and certainly can't use to convince friends or readers of a guy's value.
The second problem is one that will get fixed over time, which is that we still don't really know how to read plus-minus type stats yet. We know with a stat like field goal percentage that a shooting guard is going to have a lower field goal percentage than a center, but we also know that the guard is probably shooting more 3s, shooting his free throws better and taking tougher shots than the center. We know how to read that stat.
But because plus-minus is one number and so nebulous, we don't know which plus-minus numbers to take with a grain of salt and which ones not to. I'll bring up the semi-infamous Durant example here. Durant had terrible +/- ratings for his first two seasons, but has been incredible in year three. Was the Durant phenomenon ever even real, or did Durant actually improve this year in ways the stats didn't see? If we want plus-minus metrics to be as legitimate as the box score ones, we have to stress-test it like we have the conventional numbers that came before them.
KA: I'm drawn to adjusted plus-minus because I'm desperate to find any metric that will approximate a player's defensive value, something we just don't have the tools to do right now. I'm more faithful than I probably should be given the lack of stress tests you talk about. Your point is well-taken and I'd add that stats like these are only valuable to the extent that they're predictive. There will always be players who make colossal jumps or experience unusual crashes in productivity, but apart from outliers, a stat must be dependable enough to offer a clear -- if general -- estimation of what that player is worth in the past, present and likely future. I've begun to spend more time examining the adjusted plus-minus numbers of 5-man units rather than individuals, in part because it seems more practical.
I suspect we'll know a lot more in three to five years than we do now. The metric's practitioners (and the people who trust them) will have a better sense of where the numbers skews, what those number might miss and the kind of noise those numbers create. In the meantime, I'll continue to watch the 2-year figures (and eventually 3-year, and 4-year). Any system that values Dwyane Wade, LeBron James, Chris Paul, Steve Nash and Kobe Bryant as the five best players in the NBA has to be on to something, right?
Posted by Kevin Arnovitz
There probably isn't a slugger in Major League Baseball more polarizing than Adam Dunn. It's not that Dunn is a troublemaker or malcontent. Rather, it's his stats that divide baseball fans into one camp or the other.
Dunn's detractors think of him as a latter-day Rob Deer -- a .251 career batter and strikeout machine who can hit the ball out of the park, but do little else. In contrast, sabermetricians love Dunn's efficient .385 career on-base percentage and don't regard his strikeout totals or shaky fielding to be all that detrimental to his overall game. A batter who gets on base 3/8 of the time and slugs over .500? That's an All-Star caliber player, whether you're talking about Mark Teixiera, Miguel Cabrera, or Dunn.
Basketball's statistical revolution is still in its formative stages, but if you're looking for a guy whose traditional stats -- like Dunn's -- don't properly approximate his true offensive value, that man is Kevin Martin.
John Krolik, writing for SLAM, explains:
By and large, on-base percentage has now been accepted by most baseball observers as a better measurement than batting average when sizing up a player. But True Shooting Percentage still has a long way to go. You don't see the stat on any NBA broadcast or spoken about on studio shows. Skeptics might point out that any stat that regards Erick Dampier and Solomon Jones as the league's two most efficient players has limited usefulness. Yet you would agree that "average points scored when a player goes up for a shot" is a far more precise stat than "percentage of shots made ... except let's leave out free throws and count 2-point baskets the same as 3-point baskets," wouldn't you?
UPDATE: Kevin Pelton of Basketball Prospectus e-mails:
Kevin Martin & Adam Dunn: What do these two guys have in common? (Rocky Widner, Mitchell Layton/NBAE/Getty Images) |
There probably isn't a slugger in Major League Baseball more polarizing than Adam Dunn. It's not that Dunn is a troublemaker or malcontent. Rather, it's his stats that divide baseball fans into one camp or the other.
Dunn's detractors think of him as a latter-day Rob Deer -- a .251 career batter and strikeout machine who can hit the ball out of the park, but do little else. In contrast, sabermetricians love Dunn's efficient .385 career on-base percentage and don't regard his strikeout totals or shaky fielding to be all that detrimental to his overall game. A batter who gets on base 3/8 of the time and slugs over .500? That's an All-Star caliber player, whether you're talking about Mark Teixiera, Miguel Cabrera, or Dunn.
Basketball's statistical revolution is still in its formative stages, but if you're looking for a guy whose traditional stats -- like Dunn's -- don't properly approximate his true offensive value, that man is Kevin Martin.
John Krolik, writing for SLAM, explains:
With his wonky game and his pedestrian 42% field goal percentage, it's easy to miss just how amazingly good of a scorer Martin is ...
it's Martin's True Shooting, the best indicator of scoring efficiency available, that's really incredible- his 60% TS last season is almost unprecedented for someone who scores as much as he does. Even more amazingly, that mark was Martin's lowest TS since his rookie season, and a big step down from his last two seasons, when he recorded marks of 61.4% and 61.8%. Overall, Martin has the 2nd-highest career TS among all active players, trailing only Brent Barry.
To be completely clear: 60% TS for a #1 option is INSANE. LeBron's never cracked 60%. Neither has Kobe, whose career high is 58% and average is 56%. Wade's never done it. The last season MJ did it was the 1990-91 campaign.
Martin is a great scorer not because of superior skills but through a carefully crafted strategy to get points in the most efficient way possible. In a lot of ways, the best comparison for Martin isn't a basketball player at all, but baseball's Adam Dunn. Dunn is an athletically unexciting player with some serious holes in his game, but he's a stat geek darling because of his ability to focus his hitting approach on hitting home runs and drawing walks -- he's long been one of the most statistically effective hitters in baseball despite his career batting average of .250.
By and large, on-base percentage has now been accepted by most baseball observers as a better measurement than batting average when sizing up a player. But True Shooting Percentage still has a long way to go. You don't see the stat on any NBA broadcast or spoken about on studio shows. Skeptics might point out that any stat that regards Erick Dampier and Solomon Jones as the league's two most efficient players has limited usefulness. Yet you would agree that "average points scored when a player goes up for a shot" is a far more precise stat than "percentage of shots made ... except let's leave out free throws and count 2-point baskets the same as 3-point baskets," wouldn't you?
UPDATE: Kevin Pelton of Basketball Prospectus e-mails:
Bill James used to use a stat called secondary average, which was all a player's contributions besides batting average divided by at-bats. You can use similar logic to come up with a "secondary percentage" in basketball for everything that goes into scoring besides FG%. I just take TS% minus FG% to find secondary percentage, and would you guess who was No. 1 in the league last year? The leaders:
Player Team FG% - TS% - Sec%
Kevin Martin (sac): 0.420 0.601 0.181
Chauncey Billups (den): 0.418 0.592 0.174
J.J. Redick (orl): 0.388 0.559 0.171
Brent Barry (hou): 0.407 0.575 0.168
Rudy Fernandez (por): 0.425 0.588 0.163
I actually think Billups is in some ways a better poster boy because you used to hear people say he was inefficient because of his low FG%, which was of course ridiculous.
Posted by Kevin Arnovitz
- Anthony Morrow set a new Summer League record with 47 points against the Hornets.
- Joe Alexander, as much as anyone on the Bucks' roster, will benefit from Brandon Jennings' fluency at running the break. Alexander can run the floor well for a combo forward, and knows how to fill the lane in transition. Thursday, he also harnessed his athleticism and got points driving to the hole with authority against some slower Toronto defenders. He also ran the pick-and-roll as the ball man effectively. All in all, another good outing for Alexander.
- DeMar DeRozan: moving well off the ball. In the second quarter against the Bucks, he made a beautiful back door cut to the hole from the weak side the instant he recognized that the defense was sloughing off him a bit. The result? A perfect lob pass from Quincy Douby, and a vicious slam by DeRozan. He was also undeterred by tight coverage from Jodie Meeks at about 15 feet off the left block. Even with Meeks on top of him, DeRozan managed to get remarkable separation and elevation on his jumper under pressure. Coming hard off screens, DeRozan easily got free from Jodie Meeks. More on DeRozan from Holly MacKenzie here.
- Speaking of Meeks, he's still primarily a spot-up threat, which limits his ability to get to the line (23 attempts from the floor, but only one from the line), so it was nice to see him take it to the hole on occasion ... and finish.
- Meeks and Jennings had great chemistry on Thursday, especially in the third quarter. On a high pick-and-roll for Jennings, the rookie point guard beat the trap. When the help sloughed off Meeks, Jennings kicked a perfect pass to his shooter, and Meeks drained the shot. Meeks' next two buckets from Jennings came in transition. On both breaks, Jennings waited patiently for Meeks to spot up, then perfectly timed his pass to Meeks, hitting him in rhythm. Both shots fell. On a crucial possession in the game's final minute, Jennings found Meeks again on the drive-and-kick, for a 3-pointer that put the Bucks ahead a point. Meeks finished the game with 29 points, including 4-for-8 from beyond the arc.
- Brandon Jennings was really aggressive off screens when he split the trap and recognized that the back line rotation was slow. As a result, he forced fewer bad shots and had an easier time finishing at the cup.
- Apart from Adam Morrison, the Lakers have few recognizable names on their Summer League roster. Morrison didn't play Thursday, which left some additional shots for David Monds. The journeyman forward took full advantage of the opportunities, nailing a slew of mid-range jumpers on his way to 14 points and 6 rebounds -- may not sound like a lot, but the Lakers' summer league team is a little impoverished.
- Chase Budinger put up the best line of the day outside of Anthony Morrow: 25 points on 13 possessions. The forward out of Arizona might have the sweetest stroke in town. The challenge for most pure shooters in the NBA, of course, is finding good looks. This week, Budinger hasn't had any trouble. "He has a knack for getting open," Rockets' assistant Eltson Turner said. "He moves well without the basketball, and you can't leave him. That fits our style."
- On the day he signed a 4-year, $3.8 million contract, DeJuan Blair gave the Spurs a good look at their investment against the Thunder, scoring 20 points on 13 possessions. Blair battled underneath all afternoon, muscling up for putbacks. But there was more to Blair's repertoire, including some wily dribble moves from the top of the key. "They shouldn't have passed on me," Blair said of the Thunder.
- Thunder general manager Sam Presti is collecting versatile pieces to round out an increasingly mature Oklahoma City roster. To that end, Kyle Weaver's game is hard not to like. He wasn't the Thunder's top scorer Thursday, but he gave his team a reliable handle, solid on-ball defense for most of the night on George Hill, and some timely shooting. The Thunder's backcourt is standing room only, but in Weaver, Scott Brooks has a guy who knows his way around the court. For more on Weaver, check out Darnell Mayberry's profile in the Oklahoman.
- In the first half of the Clippers-Grizzlies game, Blake Griffin (No. 1 overall) goes for 12 points and 11 boards, while Hasheem Thabeet (No. 2 overall) goes for 4 points (0 field goals) and 1 rebound. David Thorpe at halftime: "Griffin played as if he was an undrafted player from Bulgaria trying to impress everyone in the place, in search of a job next year. Thabeet jogged around, bumped a few people, and generally seemed uninterested. Passion is a talent."
- Tarence Kinsey wins the Kevin Martin Award: 20 points on two field goals ... but 16-for-18 from the stripe.
- The Warriors' rookies serenade Anthony Randolph on his 20th birthday.
|
|
Chase Budinger: Averaging 17.8 point per game on 68% shooting.TRUEHOOP CONTRIBUTORS
Henry AbbottTrueHoop ESPN Archive |
J.A. AdandeTrueHoop ESPN Archive |
Kevin ArnovitzTrueHoop ESPN Archive |
Chris BroussardTrueHoop ESPN Archive |
Chad FordTrueHoop ESPN Archive |
Israel GutierrezTrueHoop ESPN Archive |
John HollingerTrueHoop ESPN Archive |
Beckley MasonTrueHoop ESPN Archive |
Marc SteinTrueHoop ESPN Archive |
HoopIdeaTrueHoop @HoopIdea |
