Jose Mesa Is Dead

Against Sportsmanship

Wed, 10 Mar 2010 01:30:55 -0800

HBO aired a much hyped documentary about the career-long rivalry between Larry Bird and Magic Johnson this past Saturday night. I watched it tonight, but I’ve also seen a host of basketball writers comment about it since this weekend. All of the commentary is in basically the same glowing terms. Though they all applaud the doc itself, the bigger cheers seem to come from the memories it revived of the actual on-court battles that these two great players had in the earlier era of the NBA—battles that, from the footage I’ve seen, were truly epic.

Here’s what I know: on court, Bird and Magic hated one another. It was about more than basketball to them. Because of the franchises they were both drafted by, the personal vendettas that went back to their college years took on all kinds of new dimensions in the pros. West coast vs. east coast. Glamorous Los Angeles vs. working class Boston. The cold-blooded recluse vs. the warm-hearted charmer. Black vs. white in a racially divided America. To hear them tell it, each guy went to the box scores the next morning and checked to see how his rival did the night before, and each of them used those results as fuel to try to get better. They lived to play one another. More accurately, they lived to try to beat one another.

Admittedly, part of this antagonism was roiling before Magic and Bird arrived on the scene. The Lakers & Celtics had squared off in the Finals seven different times prior to the 1979-80 season, with Boston winning on each occasion. Magic may not have been the whole difference, but he was certainly instrumental. The Celtics and Lakers met in the 1983-84, 1984-85, and 1986-87 finals, with the Lakers coming out victorious in the last two of those three series. Magic was unanimously voted the Finals MVP in ‘87. Bird received that honor when the Celtics took the trophy in ‘84.

While Lakers / Celtics in the Magic / Bird era was arguably the greatest NBA rivalry of the 20th century, there were certainly others. The “Bad Boys” Pistons vs the Bulls, where the infamous “Jordan Rules” were spawned. The Lakers vs. the Pistons in the same time period, along with the MJ Bulls vs. Bird’s Celtics. Even the early 2000s gave the fans the Lakers vs the Sacramento Kings, which had enough drama, entertainment value, and genuine poisonous feelings between the players that it could be considered great.

Yet today’s NBA has none of that.

Yes, rivalries still exist. Obviously the Celtics / Lakers tilt in the 2007-8 Finals was treated as big news. The Suns and Spurs don’t like each other very much. The Cavs were even at the center of what could have been a great rivalry with the Wizards—that is, if they were ever meeting anywhere later than the opening round of the post-season, and if the Wizards were ever actually able to beat the Cavs.

But unfortunately for the fans, we’ve entered what I will call the Sportsmanship Era of the NBA.

Part of this sad circumstance has to do with the way the game is officiated. Chuck Daly’s Jordan Rules made for great drama and a more even competition, but they also very much made it possible that the greatest player in the game could end up getting knocked out of the series (or more) by injury. Flagrant fouls were established in the NBA in 1993 to help protect players like Jordan, whose mastery of the game was so high that only the roughest physical play could hope to stop them.

This isn’t a phenomenon specific to the NBA. The NFL is also notorious for the legislative body armor it’s created around the quarterback position. All sports commissioners have a justified compulsion to protect their leagues’ biggest stars. The acknowledged wisdom is that it’s those stars who generate interest in the league and, therefore, revenue. While the league office can’t make these stars bullet-proof, they can certainly institute as many precautions and penalties as they think are necessary.

The irony, though, is that the “revised” officiating has arguably made the game far less competitive and, therefore, interesting. Just as linebackers and defensive linemen in the NFL argue that they can barely do their jobs now, NBA players argue that it’s impossible to even get near enough to established great players to hope to stop them. In recent NBA history, I like to point to the way Da-wyane Wade was officiated in the 2006 Finals as the best example of this. (There’s an entire series on Youtube covering the 5 most outrageous phantom calls in that series. Phantom fouls three and five are my favorites.)

It’s a conscious decision on the part of the league. David Stern and company have clearly come to the conclusion that what best serves the NBA is great players given a wide berth to be great, not the best teams fighting each other the hardest to win. I’m sure Stern would argue that the two are not mutually exclusive, but I beg to differ—partially because the life or death intensity of Bird and Magic’s rivalry in the 1980s was the phenomenon that prevented the league from capsizing.

By no means am I saying that I want the players going after one another in the parking lot with tire irons. (The last thing I need in my life as a sports fan is LeBron howling “Why? Whyyyyyyy?” while holding a kneecap busted by some thug hired by Kobe to take him out of the Finals.) I’m also not saying that sportsmanship shouldn’t be taught in youth sports, when kids need to learn the boundaries of behavior. But considering the firestorm that ignited over LeBron’s refusal to shake hands with Orlando after losing in game 6 of the ECF last season, I am saying that the focus on clean play and sportsmanship in professional sports has gone too far.

In fairness, the league isn’t wholly responsible for this situation. The other contributing factor is the culture of friendship that’s developed among the players. Unlike LeBron and Da-wyane, Bird and Magic weren’t going to dinner with one another during the season or advising one another on contract negotiations. They played against one another once in college, but they didn’t grow up together in AAU tournaments as high-schoolers and younger.

I’m not necessarily happy about this development as a fan, but it’s one I can understand as a human being. NBA players’ lives are basketball, and this starts at a very early age. Basketball is their recreation, their escape, their profession, their social life, their fraternity, and in many cases, their support group. Outside of professional sports, how many other industries are there in the world where a 19 year-old African-American kid can not only become a multi-millionaire, but also associate with a bunch of other people in the exact same position? I don’t think you need a second finger to count. In this regard, it’s natural for these players to bond with one another. Who else understands their lifestyle, their stresses, their responsibilities, and in many cases, the “have-not to have-everything” culture shock they’re experiencing?

In fact, this may be an even bigger prevention of true rivalries than the rule changes. Magic repeatedly tried to reach out to Bird early in their careers, dating back to when they played one another in the NCAA championship game. The antagonism was manufactured entirely by Bird. He snubbed Magic on purpose and made it clear that he had no desire, no reason to be friends with him. In Bird’s book, Magic’s only function in his life was to play against Bird and ultimately, to lose to him. This persisted for years. Even looking back on it now, Bird admits that his greatest joy in winning the ‘84 title was “knowing that [Magic] was suffering” because he’d lost. The plan ultimately backfired, as Magic credits that loss for driving him to work even harder so that he’d never experience that feeling again. But the fact remains that those Lakers-Celtics Finals would never have reached the intensity level they reached if not for Bird’s willingness to play the heel.

In today’s NBA, I don’t think there are any young players willing to play that role. The only star in the league with the right temperament seems to be Kobe, the guy who, according to Mike D’Antoni, implored his All-Star team to “step on the throats” of the Eastern Conference All-Stars coming out of a time-out a few years back. But like it or not, Kobe is a part of the old guard. His career is in decline. The league is in the hands of LeBron, Da-wyane, Carmelo, Chris Paul, Rajon Rondo, and others still well under 30. Led by LeBron’s example—which is really Magic’s example, minus his early relationship with Bird—these players are as much friends with one another as competitors against one another.

What they don’t have that Magic and Bird both did is a persona different from their true selves. Magic talks extensively in the documentary about how he was really two people: Earvin and Magic. Earvin was the fun-loving charmer who lit up every room he walked into; Magic was the guy who got to the gym before everyone else and literally lived for the opportunity to take revenge on Bird. After their second Finals showdown, Bird met “Earvin” when Converse coerced the two men into shooting a joint shoe commercial in French Lick, Indiana. They connected, they bonded, they felt at ease with one another. Magic then thought they could be friends the next season, that the first time they played one another, the two of them could go out for a beer after the game, chat, catch up, reminisce, etc.

But as soon as the next season began, Bird made it abundantly and instantly clear that Earvin was dead to him. He wanted to throw Magic to the crows. All of the old venom returned in an instant, and the true rivalry—the knock-down, drag-out physical rivalry, the test of wills, the hunger for not only victory but the pain of their competitor—picked up right where it left off. And it was Bird’s attitude that created that scenario.

Professional sports today are a very different animal from the Bird / Magic era: finance-wise, marketing-wise, lifestyle-wise. There didn’t use to be much drive other than winning. Now, players are brands. They have images to not just protect and develop, but cross-market. It’s less profitable for LeBron and Kobe to hate each other than it is for them to be friendly enough to co-star in Vitamin Water and Nike campaigns. Ironically, that Converse commercial with Bird and Magic—the one where they became off-court friends—may have set the precedent for this. But no one in the Sportsmanship Era of the NBA has chosen to flip that switch off so completely that the personal relationships truly become inconsequential when it comes to tip time.

Some people will still call Kobe / LeBron a rivalry. I think that label is a ridiculous reach. Yes, the public has christened them to be the two best players in the game (despite its indisputable factual error). But the two have never played one another in any game of real consequence. In fact, they’ve done more note-worthy things as Olympic teammates than NBA opponents. But the sponsors, the marketers, and even the league know deep down that rivalries are good for the sport. They know this because the Bird / Magic antagonism saved the NBA from bankruptcy in the 1980s. But it also resulted in fights, in blood, in bruises, in injuries—in short, in the general peril that the foundation of the league’s success was one bad fall away from disappearing.

So now the league does its best to cultivate these bloodless face-offs: rivalries of stats, of individual records, of awards, with the hope that they can soon have rivalries where championships are decided between teams of guys who really want to win, but also really want to lend a hand to help their opponent get up from the floor. Hard-fought games that don’t cross the danger zone into “chippy.” Just enough emotion to steer clear of technical fouls. Losers crushed by the outcome, but not so crushed that they would forget to shake hands with the victor afterward. In short, rivalries governed by sportsmanship.

I reject these pseudo-rivalries. If that makes me a barbarian, so be it. But LeBron snubbing Da-wight after losing a hard-fought series is nothing compared to Kevin McHale clothes-lining Kurt Rambis to prevent a lay-up in game 3 of the ‘84 Finals. To pretend otherwise is absurd.

My great fear in all of this is that we as current basketball fans are being shorted, that the great players of today are stopping short of the top level of intensity because of the league’s doing and the players’ handling of own their personal relationships. It’s a selfish perspective, I realize. Part of the reason the NBA is like this is because the players themselves want it to be. After all, league rules aren’t forcing them to help opponents up from fouls or hug one another before and after games. On that level, the Sportsmanship Era is a grassroots movement that puts me even further in the minority than I originally thought.

But if I’m the only one against this new age of sportsmanship, then I’d also ask this: why were so many people so excited by a reminder of when Magic and Bird hated one another? I believe that the answer is that it created some of the best, most memorable basketball ever played. The emotion, the competitiveness that took the games to that level does not exist right now. And unfortunately for the fans, I also believe that it means the current league’s full potential may never be reached.

But that’s ok. At least we can all still be friends.

-T

Is There a More Useless "Award"

Mon, 08 Mar 2010 22:45:16 -0800

…than NBA scoring champion?

Cavs-Spurs Bazooka Point

Mon, 08 Mar 2010 21:42:33 -0800

Tonight’s question has to do with streak shooting, specifically how to value a hypothetical player who - over the course of 82 games - shot something like 80% in 41 of the games and 20% in the others, resulting in an overall shooting percentage of 50%, which I think we all would agree, is very good, especially if he is playing the 1 or the 2 (for reference 43.6% is average this season for guards).

Would you be okay with this guy on your team, or would you prefer to have a guy who shot, say, 60% in one half of his games and 40% in the other?

As far as I know, none of the advanced stats account for consistency. And it may be because numbers-minded analysts/journalists/fans don’t believe in “the hot hand” or the consistency of streakiness … and, to go one step further, I’m not sure there is any empirical evidence to support the existence of extremely streaky shooters…

But I would sure like to know if there was.

The general idea is that an extremely streaky shooter would help your team win by a bunch of points some nights and help them lose by a bunch of points other nights. The overall effect would probably be the same either way (or, for that matter, if a team had a player who shot exactly 50% every single night). Since a team’s point differential is the best predictor of future success, i.e. winning percentage, winning two games by 1 point each or winning one game by 20 points and losing another by 18 points says the same thing, statistically speaking, about the quality of a team.

Of course, that would all change in the playoffs because you can’t wait 82 games for things to even out.

My gut tells me I’d rather have the consistent shooter for that exact reason … but, then again, I might also want the streaky shooter, just so long as I can guarantee that he’s streaking for the Conference Finals and the Finals.

Oh yeah, the Cavs beat the Spurs by two points tonight, after Mo Williams made a couple of key free throws :)

2010 Cap Reality Serie: LA Clippers

Sun, 07 Mar 2010 23:54:31 -0800

Continuing my series on the threats to the Cavs this upcoming off-season, tonight I want to sift through the wreckage that is the LA Clippers. I’m not going to spend any more time on the “big market” argument or the “attractive locale” argument because I’ve covered both in my analyses of the Knicks and Heat previously. So let’s keep moving.

Before the season began, I took a pretty in-depth look at the Clips’ roster and how it compared with the Cavs’. I just re-read it, and there are a couple of “I told you so” moments in it. First, the precaution that Blake Griffin could easily get knocked out of the ROY race by injury; second, that analysts should discard any reference to Al Thornton as a supporting cast member who might intrigue Bron, since the Clips would likely throw him overboard if they were going to go after Bron because of redundancy at the 3; third, a general scoff at the once-hyped notion that the Clippers would make the playoffs this year.

For reference, the Clippers are currently 25-38, 11.5 games out of the last playoff spot, 20.5 games back in their division. They’re on pace to win approximately 5 more games for a final record of 30-53.

On its own, that record puts the Clippers in a decent zone of appeal for free agents—just competitive enough that a major star could feel like his presence could catapult them into the playoffs. This is especially true when you consider that Bully won’t play a single game this season.

However, the troubling thing about the Clippers is that they have the stench of ages on them. The organization has been a laughingstock for decades. I pointed out in my earlier post that in their 25 seasons since moving to LA, the Clippers have lost 60 or more games 7 different times, 50 or more games 17 times. They won 23 games in 2007-8, 19 games in 2008-9, and are on pace for 30 in 2009-10.

This is a particularly interesting red flag because of another major difference between the Clippers and teams like the Nets, Knicks, and Heat. Unlike those other franchises, the Clippers’ front office has never intentionally emptied their roster of talent for the sake of accumulating cap space. Instead, they have a roster that’s one rookie away from the team that some people thought could be a playoff team. And they’re going to be lucky to win 30 games.

Here’s where the “Bully corollary” comes in. Clippers fans will say, “Yeah, well, they’re only going to win 30, but that’s because Griffin was injured for the whole season. Just wait til he’s healthy. He plays like a complete animal.” Cynic that I am, I would instead say, “Yeah, well, they’re only going to win 30 and their #1 overall pick already missed his entire rookie campaign with an injury. He plays like a complete animal. He may never be healthy.”

In fact, since 2008, Blake Griffin has suffered the following injuries:

Jan 2008: sprained MCL

March 2008: torn cartilage in knee. Required surgery.

Feb 2009: concussion.

Oct 2009: stress fracture in left knee. Injury did not heal properly and had to be operated on, forcing him out for the rest of what would’ve been his rookie season.

Personally, if I’m LeBron, I’d be very pessimistic about the number of games Griffin would be out on the floor with me in a Clipper uni.

For comparison’s sake, Bill Walton missed 203 of 410 possible games in his first 5 NBA seasons. The Clippers, ironically enough, signed him to a six-year deal afterwards. He played 14 games total in the first 3 years there, and only 169 of a possible 492 over the length of the contract. Meanwhile, we all know how dependable Greg Oden’s body has been for his first two seasons. Anyone who can be put on the same list as those two guys is not necessarily someone I’d be willing to jump franchises for.

Then, there’s the issue of ownership.

Before we even get into basketball operations, Donald Sterling’s primary claim to fame is having had to settle multiple housing discrimination cases for buildings he owns. This includes shelling out the largest apartment-based settlement in the history of the Department of Justice. For details on his alleged history of racist discrimination, I’d recommend this article.

Now, to the Clippers…Donald Sterling is the polar opposite of Dan Gilbert. He’s known as a tight-fisted, unreasonable wraith with a history of hiring awful front office personnel, then not firing them when they’ve undeniably demonstrated their incompetence. Primarily, he refuses to fire these people because he doesn’t ever want to pay money to someone who’s not actually working for him (which also makes him the polar opposite of Randy “Lost In Space” Lerner, but that’s another post). Because of all this, he’s also the guy principally responsible for this 2000 Sports Illustrated cover story.

SI was justified in their analysis, and nothing has changed since then. Starting with the 2000 season, the Clippers are a combined 316-485, including only one winning season and one playoff appearance (both in the 2005-6 season). Not exactly a drastic turn-around. Or any kind of turn-around.

In light of all of this, I believe it’s foolish to think about the Clippers’ roster in a vacuum. Yes, to the layman’s eye they have some talent.* Chris Kaman was an All-Star this year. Baron Davis has played well and is a recognizable name. Many people think highly of Eric Gordon. Blake Griffin was the #1 overall pick. DeAndre Jordan and Craig Smith have both been touted as promising young big men.

(*Note: advanced stats are not so kind to most of these players. For instance, in WP48, the Clippers had exactly 2 players who ranked above average at the halfway point of this season…and one of them is now playing in Portland.)

But even if someone wants to drink the proverbial Kool-Aid on these players, it’s ignorant to forget that the Clippers have literally sucked for almost 25 straight years, both as a team and an organization. If you’re LeBron, is this really the train you want to hitch your wagon to?

The other supposed positive in the Clippers’ favor is that they will basically allow their free agent target to select his own coach. (Interim coach Kim Hughes will finish out the season but not be retained past then.) But this is only so helpful, since any coach considering going to the Clippers has to wrestle with the same “guilt by association” question I just asked.

In fact, this situation ultimately could hurt the Clippers. If Bron’s hypothetical coaching target turned down the opportunity because he didn’t want to leave wherever he was for the historical minefield of Clipperland, presumably Bron this would submarine the Clippers’ deal for LeBron as well.

My final thought on all this for tonight: remember, Kobe was “on the verge” of becoming a Clipper in 2004…until he decided not to risk tainting himself with the special virus that’s been flowing through the Clippers’ bloodstream for a quarter-century. Instead, he re-signed with the only team he’d ever played for, partially because the Lakers could offer him an extra year and an extra $30M that the Clippers couldn’t.

Have you heard those figures anywhere else before? I’ll save you the time of combing through this article and just pull out the following quote:

“It doesn’t take business acumen to understand the numbers of the NBA. On a maximum contract this summer, the Cavaliers can offer James an extra year and about $30 million more than any other team.”

There’s obviously one big difference between the Lakers of 2004 and the Cavs of 2010. The Lakers had won three titles during Kobe’s time there. As of now, we know how many the Cavs have won during LeBron’s career. If that number remains the same as it is today, then the Clippers could become much less of a dark horse for LeBron’s services. But until then, logic rules the day, and I suggest we all take heart that like bad teams, bad organizations will find a way to lose this one.

-T

Cavs-Bucks Bazooka Point

Sat, 06 Mar 2010 23:36:37 -0800

The above image is a Tweet from @MoGotti2 aka Mo Williams, with a very fair assessment of his 3-17 shooting performance, in a game that we could look at as a nightmare vision of the 2010-11 season, if the doomsday scenario takes place, i.e. LeBron walks.

Do you think Bron thought, “Huh, maybe this team isn’t a whole lot better than the Knicks are without me” while watching from the sidelines?

Overall, a similar story to last night - and, really, the entire regular season - when Andy, Delonte, and Moon are on the floor the Cavs cut deficits and increase leads. When they’re not, well, the opposite happens.

Minus that LeBron guy.

This was also, I thought, another example of Coldstone’s most visibly prominent deficiency as a head coach - hesitance to make a change. He stuck with Mo tonight when he probably shouldn’t … and maybe he’s thinking long term … but it was pretty obvious by the end of the 1st half that the Williams “twins” weren’t getting it done.

Does anyone else want to sign a petition for Delonte to become the starting point guard?

Spurs on Monday. Also known as “the game in which Coldstone sits LeBron as a gift to his mentor Coach Pop, who needs all the help he get.”

Don’t know about you, but I’m personally stunned that the Richard Jefferson trade hasn’t worked out for the Spurs.

Cavs / Pistons: Bazooka Point

Sat, 06 Mar 2010 02:45:58 -0800

Another win for the Cavs—the sixth straight—despite a very shaky first half. Another spectacular night for LeBron: 40 points on 16-27 FG, 13 reb, 6 ast, 2 blk, 3 stl, 4 turnovers, in 42 minutes.

But unfortunately, another discouraging performance from the Cavs’ starting back court.

Mo vs DET: 9 points on 3-9 FG, 2 reb, 4 ast, 1 blk, 0 stl, 2 turnovers in 33 min

Parker vs DET: 2 points on 1-6 FG, 0 reb, 3 ast, 0 blk, 0 stl, 1 turnover in 30 min

The team’s starting guard play has been a red flag all season. As we all know, if Mo isn’t hitting from deep, he’s basically a liability. Meanwhile, Parker is having his career-worst season in per-36 minute scoring (9.2 points) despite shooting a career-best 45.6% 3FG.

Here are their lines in the previous two games:

Mo vs. NJ: 16 points on 5-12 FG, 1 reb, 6 ast, 1 blk, 0 stl, 3 turnovers in 28 min

Parker vs. NJ: 8 points on 2-5 FG, 4 reb, 3 ast, 0 blk, 1 stl, 1 turnover in 30 min

Mo vs. NY: 7 points on 2-8 FG, 3 reb, 10 ast, 1 blk, 0 stl, 1 turnover in 25 min

Parker vs. NY: 8 points on 3-4 FG, 5 reb, 1 ast, 1 blk, 1 stl, 1 turnover in 27 min

Add all of that up, and you get the following:

Mo (last 3 gm total): 32 points on 10-29 FG, 6 reb, 20 ast, 3 blk, 0 stl, 6 TO in 86 min

Mo 3-Game Avg: 10.7 pts on 34.5%FG, 2 reb, 6.7 ast, 1 blk, 0 stl, 2 TO per 29 min

Mo 3-Game per 36: 13.3 pts on 34.5%FG, 2.5 reb, 8.3 ast, 2.5 TO

Mo Season per 36 (Actual): 16.7 pts on 43.6%FG, 3.1 reb, 5.3 ast, 2.7 TO

Parker (last 3 gm total): 18 points on 6-15 FG, 9 reb, 7 ast, 1 blk, 2 stl, 3 TO in 87 min

Parker 3-Game Avg: 6 points on 40%FG, 3 reb, 2.3 ast, 0.3 blk, 0.7 stl, 1 TO per 29 min

Parker 3-game per 36: 7.5 points on 40%FG, 3.7 reb, 2.9 ast, 1.2 TO

Parker Season per 36 (Actual): 9.2 points on 44.2% FG, 3.5 reb, 2.1 ast, 1.1 TO

In summary, this tells us that what you’re seeing right now from the starting Parker / Williams tandem is about what you should expect to see for the rest of the season and, more importantly, the playoffs. In fact, if you look at his overall game, it’s arguable that Mo has actually been playing better all-around over the course of the last 3 games than over the course of the season. Yes, his FG% and scoring are down, but his assists and rebounds have been WAY up with only a minimal rise in his TOs. That said, I suspect this is largely a result of the increased pace the Cavs played against the Knicks and Nets, so the whole thing may be a moot point.

The reality is that Delonte is still the team’s best guard by a wide berth, and unless he gets to play starter minutes (with a healthy dose of Jamario Moon off the bench), the Cavs are going to have to rely on their front line to carry them the rest of the way, just like tonight.

Bucks Saturday. Shaping up to be a tough road game, especially if JJ has another all-game Glitch like he did tonight. Expect him to be mauled regularly by Andrew Bogut for the first 6 minutes of the game, until Coldstone inserts Varejao to take his place.

-T

Dean Oliver on Basketball Analytics

Fri, 05 Mar 2010 12:34:00 -0800

Dean Oliver on Basketball Analytics:

Henry Abbott of True Hoop has posted an interview with Dean Oliver, one of the founders of the stats movement in basketball. You’ll notice one very important statement in the interview:

“It’s an interesting time. Just a couple of weeks ago, I looked at teams that have stats people integrated into the decision process. (Boston, Cleveland, Dallas, Denver, Houston, Oklahoma City, Portland and I may have included Orlando — I’m not certain what they do exactly.) It was seven or eight teams. They had won 60% of their games, and that’s counting Houston, which has only won half their games because they’re missing Yao Ming and Tracy McGrady wasn’t playing.

“The teams that don’t have quants won 40-some percent. And it was pretty linear … the more or less they had someone integrated into their decision making, the more or less they were at the extremes of winning and losing.”

Browns Talk: Kill That Noise

Fri, 05 Mar 2010 00:10:03 -0800

Tonight is arguably one of my least favorite sports nights of the year. Why? Because 45 minutes before I started writing this post, NFL free agency began.

This is not in itself a bad thing. On one level, it’s an improvement. Instead of idle speculation, I get actual information from the NFL sources I follow about roster moves and trades. The Browns could, in theory, start to make some improvements. Most importantly to me, some 21 year-old’s 40 yard dash time at the combine will cease to qualify as news.

The problem for me is what it does to the Cavs.

The regular readers of this blog, I believe, fall into an extreme minority in the Cleveland sports community. Though there are a number of truths I could follow that sentence up with, the one I’m talking about tonight is this: I think we all care tremendously more about the Cavs than the Browns.

Unfortunately, this is not the norm. And it drives me insane.

I understand that for a long time, the Browns were very competitive, very exciting to watch, very much justified as THE team in Cleveland. They were a squad that people felt embodied the spirit of the city. They were full of charismatic stars and great players, like Jim Brown, Bernie Kosar, Clay Matthews, on and on. They were a team that people felt were almost perpetually on the verge of that elusive championship.

But let’s be honest, those days are long gone. Yet the city’s love affair with the Browns still trumps the others, regardless of who’s actually performing and who isn’t. I generally think that the Plain Dealer’s Bud Shaw is a hack, but he hit the nail on the head last spring when he wrote something to the effect of, “The Cavs are heading into the playoffs with the best record in the league, the Indians’ season opener is this coming week, so it’s only natural that most of the reader questions in my inbox are about Brady Quinn.”

The Cavs are on pace to again finish as the #1 seed in the entire league. The Browns haven’t made the playoffs since 2002.

The Cavs boast a guy who may go down as the greatest player in the history of pro basketball. He’s in the midst of having one of the most dominant statistical seasons ever. He may be a unanimous vote for MVP this season. Meanwhile, the Browns don’t even have a legitimate starting quarterback.

Since Dan Gilbert bought the team, the Cavs have built a world-class organization full of character guys committed to winning. They make lop-sidedly positive trades, and with the exception of Larry Hughes, when they decide to spare no expense they usually get a high return on investment. The Browns have been the sports world’s most absurd game of front office musical chairs since their return in 1999. They are likely paying as many people as much money to NOT work for them as they’re paying to the staff currently on the job. And again, they’ve been to the playoffs once in the past decade.

I could go on and on with this stuff. The point is, despite this huge gap in competitiveness and intrigue, the hibernation period is over again. The Browns will now automatically jump to the #1 story position on every Cleveland media outlet. There will be more discussion over the tender given to Matt Roth than to Andy Varejao’s qualifications as Sixth Man of the Year, more interest in pre-draft workouts for cornerbacks than in who the Cavs will be set to play in the second round of the playoffs, more attention paid to any progress in Josh Cribbs’s contract renegotiation than in the return of Z, a guy whose number will hang in the rafters of the Q. It’s as disgraceful as booing the Cavs for trouncing an opponent with efficient offense and stifling defense, but falling short of the Chalupa plateau. (Granted, this hasn’t been as much of a problem this season because of the Cavs’ increased offensive production, but the point stands.)

I don’t even expect this to change if the Cavs do in fact win the NBA title this season. In my most cynical moment, I imagine people emptying off the streets during the the victory parade to mourn upon hearing the news that the Browns cut Brady Quinn—or even worse, LeBron’s re-signing in Cleveland being overshadowed by the Browns’ late acquisition of Troy Smith.

The Cavs are in the midst of another very special season. In a nightmare scenario, this could be the last time we ever see LeBron in a Cleveland uniform. Even if it’s not, he’s now entering his prime with a solid (even excellent), likable supporting cast hungry to bring home the big prize. Let’s all enjoy this. And the next time someone you know brings up Mike Holmgren, for god’s sake, tell them to kill that noise until mid-summer. We’ve got winners in town.

-T

Cavs-Nets Bazooka Point

Wed, 03 Mar 2010 20:37:00 -0800

The game tonight was pretty fun to watch at times, which is all you can hope for as a fan of the Cavaliers (or of the Nets, for that matter). LeBron appeared to be in a bad mood, but that didn’t stop him from shooting 10-18 from the field, grabbing 7 rebounds, dishing out 14 assists (compared to only 3 turnovers), while adding 3 steals and a block.

The only real point I wanted to make about the game was that the Cavs’ numbers are probably going to be inflated over the course of the rest of the season because they’re playing at a faster pace without Shaq. 98.7 possessions per game (including one overtime game and not counting tonight) versus 93 possessions per game with Shaq (NBA average this season is 95.0).

So when JJ finishes games with 13 rebounds like he did tonight just keep that in mind.

As a side note, scoring is up this season overall in the NBA, which comes as a result of the entire league playing at a faster pace.

Finally, I’ve been forgetting to mention that Matt Barnes of the Orlando Magic tweeted me last Friday after his team blew a lead against the New Orleans Hornets. Read from the bottom up:

2010 Cap Reality Series: New Jersey Nets

Tue, 02 Mar 2010 23:00:03 -0800

With the Cavs set to square off against New Jersey Wednesday night, it seemed like an appropriate time to discuss the strengths and weaknesses of that franchise’s case for LeBron.

New Jersey’s biggest advantage—and I say this with complete seriousness—is part owner Jay-Z. Without a doubt, Jay is one of LeBron’s heroes (see: substitute father figures). For proof, all you have to do is go to the Twitter feed of Roots’ mastermind Questlove and read all about Bron’s presence at the show Jay did at MSG tonight. Bron’s relationship with Mr. Carter is well-documented, it’s strong, and it’s going to continue. And you can guarantee that the main reason Jay bought into the Nets was to fulfill the goal of one day getting LeBron on that team. This is a somewhat frightening prospect because historically, Jay-Z is a guy who gets what he wants (see: record sales, pop cultural significance, Beyonce).

Incoming Nets majority owner Mikhail Prokhorov is supposed to assist in this pursuit. He’s a man with resources, to be sure. Prokhorov was #40 on Forbes’s 2009 Billionaires list with an estimated net worth of $9.5B. If you want to believe all the hype, he will be irresistible to Bron because money will be no object. This applies to both salaries for his supporting cast and any off-hours excess that we can imagine. He’s going to be a whirlwind that sweeps through the NBA and blows away every other penny-hoarding owner. The Nets, in short, will be a juggernaut that LeBron will be powerless to resist.

There are only a few small problems with this outlook.

The first of these problems is that the 2009-10 Nets are still in danger of going down in infamy as the worst team in NBA history. Today, they stand at an embarrassing 6-53. Another 4 wins are needed to put them over the 9-73 basement floor installed by the 1972-73 Sixers. Strictly based on their pace so far, it seems unlikely that this will happen.

Even more troubling for the Nets, though, is that no one in the league is able to figure out WHY they’re 6-53. After trading Vince Carter, I doubt there were many NBA speculators out there penciling the Nets into the post-season. I doubt anyone would have been terribly impressed with your fortune-telling abilities if you’d predicted that they would be in last place in the Atlantic. But to be on pace to be historically bad? That’s an entirely different story.

The Nets roster is arguably less of a wasteland than the Knicks’. (For a recap of their players and next year’s salary commitments, see Hoop Data’s feature here.) Unlike Donnie Walsh’s squad, the most promising elements of that roster are all signed for next year, with salary cap space remaining above and beyond them. Though he’s been hurt at various times throughout this year, Devin Harris was selected as an All-Star reserve last season. Brook Lopez is one of the most promising and skilled young Centers in the game right now. And I think that we all remember Courtney Lee from last year. Those three guys on their own should be able to get the Nets to at least 13 wins this season. Yet the squad isn’t even halfway there, with only 23 games left to play.

Perhaps part of this can be blamed on their coaching situation. Lawrence Frank was dismissed early in the season. Kiki Vandeweghe stepped onto the sidelines to replace him…by all accounts, against his will. Kiki (I refuse to type out “Vandeweghe” more than twice in a post, and that right there was #2) will clearly be out of the coach’s seat next season, and Prokhorov will undoubtedly bring in a big name to take over. Unless they’re indeed able to bag Coach K before free agency begins, LeBron would be given free reign to choose his own coach as a part of the Nets’ offer. So any instability attributable to Kiki will be long gone.

The question is, will it really matter? As he’s stated many times, LeBron is all about winning. I didn’t always use to believe that, but I do now. Barring a complete disaster in the playoffs, the Cavs will at least get to the Eastern Conference Finals. Assuming that level of success, they’ll have made it to the ECF or farther in 3 of the last 4 seasons. If they make it to the Finals, that will be the second time in 4 years. To go from that level of consistent success to the team that will undoubtedly finish as the worst in basketball—and possibly the worst in the NBA’s existence—would paint LeBron as the biggest hypocrite in sports history. Which is exactly why this season is such a disaster for New Jersey.

The Heat are flirting with the possibility of barely missing the playoffs in the year heading into Dwyane Wade’s free agency, but at least they’re on the doorstep and will probably end up making it in, even if it’s just for another first round exit. The Knicks are a sorry excuse for a pro basketball team, but they at least have the lure of being able to sign another max guy alongside LeBron. (Much like I’ve said about Sam Presti in the past, it’s always more advantageous to be able to sell potential for greatness than actual results.) The Nets, however, have neither of these things going for them. The best they can hope for is to sell Bron on the idea that Devin Harris when healthy is an All-Star, and Brook Lopez will be there soon.

The immediate counter-punch to this idea comes back to the record. As Mike said yesterday, it’s illogical to argue that just because Mo is widely regarded among casual fans as the second-best player on a very good team, he deserves to be an All-Star. Rod Thorn or Prokhorov would argue that it’s illogical to assume that just because the best player(s) on their roster on a very bad team, it doesn’t mean that they are NOT All-Stars. But that case could be made a lot more forcefully if the team wasn’t on its way to being the losing-est team ever. As we often say in sports, great players—and even very good ones—find ways to win in close games. If the Nets are carrying two guys on their roster that they want to pitch as once-and-future All-Stars, then those guys have to be able to will their team past that all-time worst mark. So far, that hasn’t happened. And that’s a reality that, despite all of the Russian oil money and Jay-Z love, I don’t think Bron can dismiss.

The other major disaster for the Nets is that for the foreseeable future, the location in front of their name will remain “New Jersey.” Though a ground-breaking ceremony for the forthcoming Atlantic Yards project will be held in Brooklyn this month, the Nets recently announced plans to play at least the 2010-11 and 2011-12 seasons at the Prudential Center in Newark. Ownership’s hope is to have the new arena at Atlantic Yards ready for the 2012-13 season. That may or may not happen, given the usual delays that happen in massive construction projects—even those without the type of aggressive protest movement this one has swirling around it. There’s also the potential for more trouble, given that Bruce Ratner’s real estate development company is involved in an ongoing investigation for corruption.

One thing is for sure, though: the franchise’s current situation has provided Jay and Prokhorov the opportunity to show just how convincing they can really be. Have at it, gentlemen.

-T

Woj on LeBron's Number Change

Tue, 02 Mar 2010 14:32:00 -0800

Woj on LeBron's Number Change:

Woj at Yahoo Sports writes that Bron is changing his number for the sake of commerce. I’m sure that has a part in it, but as Windhorst wrote yesterday, there’s no real direct impact on a player’s salary with increased jersey sales. Of course, Bron’s Nike logo will have to be redone to accommodate the new number, so that could lead to more sales.

But, for anyone who’s studied Bron’s behavior, as JMID has, you’ll see that there’s a much more important clause in Woj’s article that he pushes to the background: LeBron’s desire to win Michael Jordan’s approval.

I suspect this is the real source of Bron’s decision to change his number. If, after all, he could get the entire NBA to retire #23, wouldn’t MJ have to at least acknowledge him?

Well, whatever he might “have” to do, it won’t happen. We all know how MJ rolls.

I simply feel that Woj’s point is naive in a way that’s different than usual.

Cavs-Knicks Bazooka Point

Tue, 02 Mar 2010 01:00:00 -0800

The Cavaliers trounced the Knicks tonight. They were up by 49 at one point, and I even thought for a minute that the NBA record for margin of victory (68 points, set by the Cavs, against the Miami Heat in December of 1991, during a game that me and DAD attended) might be in jeopardy. It wasn’t - DDR, Jawad Williams, and Darnell Jackson made sure of that - but, suffice it to say, the outcome of the contest was never in doubt.

We use stats in a lot of our posts on JMID for reasons I shouldn’t necessarily have to explain but will anyway. They’re a great way to validate or invalidate our own perceptions, which can often be tricked by extremes, e.g. Glitch mishandling a perfect pass from Bron may make me want to criticize him more than Shaq getting called for offensive three seconds - but really, both plays hold more or less the same value. Additionally, stats can be quite disruptive to widely accepted beliefs that have little or no basis in reality, like the presumption by some in Cleveland that Mo Williams should’ve been an All-Star this season because the Cavs had the best record in the NBA at the break. Since we’re not exactly writing this blog to cooperate with the general consensus or to support the average opinion, stats can be great tools for us.

Most of all, they are based in logic and science, and not the irrational emotions that often emerge from fandom. We’re trying to kill the hysteria of the curse.

Stats help man the guillotine.

(They may also be the underlying reason the Cleveland Plain Dealer still refuses to cite us in their morning sports blog round-up, but I digress.)

There’s one more, very important, point to make on this, and that is that stats always have to be looked at intelligently (saying something like “the Cavs are 35-5 when three or more players score at least 15 points” proves nothing) and in context (rebound rate is more telling than rebounds per minute is more telling than rebounds per game).

Which is why the ‘09-‘10 Knicks are a complete clusterfuck.

Why?

Job psychology.

People who study statistics will tell you that, overall, numbers for basketball players are much more consistent from year-to-year than they are in other sports like football and baseball. Age and injury are the two biggest reasons given for large discrepancies in players’ stats; I would argue that things like fit and shot selection also play a role in smaller variations from one season to the next (Mo Williams never shot above 38.5% from 3P until he played alongside LeBron; since then, he’s hit 43.6% and 43.2% of his attempts from long distance while also taking more attempts per 36 minutes than ever before).

After watching tonight’s game, I have a new probable cause for statistical variance: Donnie Walsh’s strategy to clear cap space for the summer of 2010.

Can you imagine going to work every day knowing that the front office doesn’t give a damn how well you play because, in their mind, your best trait is that your contract expires after the season? Would this make you play hard? Would it make you want to work on your game with your teammates? Would it make you want to listen to your coach?

I think it would make you feel like shit, personally, to wake up every day knowing, “Hey, nobody wants me to be here!”

We’d have to do a thorough analysis to prove this - and, problematically, the sample size isn’t incredibly large since, as far as I know, no one in the history of sport has pulled the cap space maneuver as drastically as Walsh has - but I think this is one of those cases where psychology will have an effect on his efficiency and production.

Cavs-Nets on Wednesday. I may have to be drunk for that one.

Fool's (Purple and) Gold

Mon, 01 Mar 2010 02:47:00 -0800

Earlier today, something happened that convinced me that I had to temporarily suspend my 2010 cap reality series. Considering that I thoroughly enjoy attacking the myths involved in those free agency rumors, you might guess that what threw me off course involves an equal level of absurdity.

If so, you’d be absolutely correct. Because this afternoon, Hoops Hype’s Roland Lazenby posted an article stating that “one of [his] best inside sources, a close [Phil] Jackson associate” had slipped him the info that LeBron has made “overtures” to the organization that he unequivocally wants to be a Laker starting this summer.

Of all the ridiculous rumors spawned thanks to this topic, this one is my favorite. All of the others involve one of a list of ridiculous elements: disregard for financial reality, distortion of LeBron’s personality, and unwillingness to consider the info source. This Lakers myth takes each and every one of those and ties them up together into a single package.

First, let’s look at the dollar signs. According to Hoops Hype’s breakdown, the Lakers are currently committed* to a team payroll of $83.9M for the 2010-11 season. You may recall that I’ve been basing my cap reality series on a $53M salary ceiling for next year, since every expert I’ve read feels relatively confident that the actual number will hover around that figure. If we stick with that assumption, basic subtraction tells us that the Lakers salary commitments put them just about $30.9M—or 58.3%—over the projected cap. So there’s no way in Hell that the Lakers can get to a point where signing Bron straight up is anything other than a fantasy.

I put the * in the above paragraph to note the one caveat. Though for some reason Hoops Hype doesn’t show it, Kobe has a player option for the 2010-11 season. Theoretically, this means that he could opt out of his deal and bring the Lakers a lot closer to getting out of the tax. However, Kobe’s 2010-11 salary is slated to be $24.8M. Even if the specter of a 2011 lock-out wasn’t haunting every player in the league right now, there is literally no way that anyone would ever voluntarily walk away from $24.8M for one season’s worth of work. The idea is patently insane. So let’s not kid ourselves that Kobe’s going anywhere. Even if he did, the Lakers’ payroll would still only drop to $59.1M, meaning they still wouldn’t have any room to sign Bron unless he was willing to take the bi-annual exception.

This means that the only way that LeBron could ever make it onto the Lakers would be via sign-and-trade. Again, based off a $53M cap, the first year of Bron’s upcoming max contract would be $16.56M. As far as I can tell, the only sign and trade that would work financially for both sides would be Bron for Andrew Bynum and (ironically) Shannon Brown. Theoretically, yes, it could be done. But it would also mean that the Lakers would be committed to ~$58M in payroll for a total of five players in the 2011-12 season (assuming there is such a thing). Barring huge gains by the league between now and then, the team would already be over the cap again, then would either have to re-sign Kobe for another massive contract on top of it, or let him walk…and then fill out the rest of the roster with minimum salary players. All of this despite that Jerry Buss has been going guns out in negotiations since last summer to try to bust down salaries as much as possible (see: the Trevor Ariza exodus and Lamar Odom showdown).

The five guys under contract in that scenario could be dangerous, but to call them a juggernaut is a little extreme. Bron, Pau, a 32 year-old Lamar Odom, a 32 year-old Ron Artest, Sasha Vujacic, and Luke Walton? Hardly dynasty material. And considering that the source emphasizes that Bron doesn’t care whether Kobe’s on the team or not, then that’s the roster that he supposedly wants to make this move to play with.

The picture gets even stranger when you look beyond the numbers.

Lazenby’s source implies that the main reason Bron wants to make this move to LA is to play for Phil Jackson. If you’re keeping track, this raises the list of coaches that LeBron feels he HAS to play for to 4. The previous entries are Mike Kryzewski, Mike D’Antoni, and Pat Riley. In all cases, these wild conclusions are drawn thanks to a fundamental and misunderstood element of Bron’s personality: his compulsion to praise and be praised. No one in the NBA is quicker to give out compliments than LeBron, and naturally, his game and the way he conducts himself off the court make him a coach’s dream. Is it plausible that Bron has told each and every one of these men that he would love to play for them in the NBA? Absolutely. But does it really mean anything? I’m skeptical, to put it mildly.

As Lazenby’s article goes on to detail, though, the problem is that Phil Jackson isn’t necessarily coaching the Lakers next year. Instead, he’s battling the front office over the size and length of his contract, with the threat that he’ll walk if his demands aren’t met—just like he did to the Bulls in 1998. Lazenby writes that Phil has a burning desire to win another title in 2010-11 because he anticipates a work stoppage in 2011-12. If the Lakers don’t bend to his will, then he’ll pack up and coach elsewhere next year, bringing LeBron with him. (Brace yourself for this out-of-left-field bomb: the Knicks are mentioned as the strongest possibility(!).)

This is where the “consider the source” idea comes into play.

Lazenby spends a lot of time in the article comparing the Phil / Bulls / 1998 scenario to the Phil / Lakers / 2010 scenario. In the comparison, he recounts some of the many ways Phil has sought leverage in negotiations. In ‘98, Jordan uncharacteristically came out in vocal support of Phil. At the time, Phil had to have seen this as a major bargaining chip. (“The greatest player in the world wants me to coach his team next year, Reinsdorf. Now, about that lucrative extension…”) Ultimately, it failed. The Bulls dug in their heels, Phil quit, and Jordan looked like the sucker. Lazenby speculates that this is part of the reason that Kobe hasn’t followed Jordan’s example and publicly come out in Phil’s corner: he doesn’t want to be burned the same way Jordan was burned.

The great irony here, though, is that Lazenby seems to be completely ignorant of the fact that this anecdote completely undermines the story he’s writing about LeBron.

Remember, Lazenby’s source for the info about LeBron’s deep desire to be a Laker isn’t a “close LeBron James associate.” He’s a “close [Phil] Jackson associate.” Who happens to be playing hardball with his team’s ownership over a fat new coaching contract extension for next year? That would be Phil Jackson. Who happens to be the greatest player in the world right now? Depending on who you ask, it’s either Kobe or LeBron. (Obviously, it’s LeBron to anyone with an ounce of basketball sense or objectivity, but you know how this goes.) Which one of those two players is coached by Phil Jackson but isn’t willing to vocally come out to support his embattled coach? That would be Kobe.

So if you’re Phil Jackson, and you can’t get your own team’s superstar to support your cause, what’s the best bargaining chip you have available? How about starting a rumor that the most spectacular basketball talent on Earth (who just happens to be a free agent at the same time that your contract ends) wants to play for you on the team you want to continue coaching? Does this sound familiar to anything else Phil has done? (“The greatest player in the world wants me to coach this team next year, Buss. Now, about that lucrative extension…”)

This is a brilliant PR move on Phil’s part. Not only does it drive the Lakers’ fan base into hysterical support for him and this fevered orgasm of what the 2010-11 Lakers could be, but there’s no way for the rumor to be killed. True to his word, Bron has remained silent on his free agent plans since the fall. So it’s not as if he’s going to come out and shoot down this piece of gossip. Instead, the fantasy can run wild through the Hollywood Hills, into the Lakers front office, straight to the desk of Dr. Jerry Buss. I imagine someone fed him Lazenby’s article within 2 minutes of its appearance on Hoops Hype. The question is whether Buss was able to see past the masterful smokescreen Phil laid down.

Sadly for we Cavs fans, though, it’s a foregone conclusion that most of the rest of the NBA junkies who read it, weren’t.

-T

Where's Z?? #3

Sat, 27 Feb 2010 12:21:00 -0800

Yesterday, as tweeted by Wizards Insider, Michael Lee: Stunner! RT @PDcavsinsider WKNR’s Michael Reghi is reporting Z will re-sign with Cavs.

As we all found out later, Reghi had it wrong, Z’s agent quickly denied this report, said Z hadn’t decided yet. So, it ain’t done till its done — we’ll have to wait and see for sure.

However, I wanted to take this opportunity to berate all these people who are bitching about this rule that would allow Z to come back — if he chooses — after 30 days. What’s the big deal?

Oh, it’s wrong. Teams shouldn’t do this (though almost every team would admit that if they could work it out, they would most certainly allow someone to come back to their team).

Hypocrites, I say!

Besides, what’s all this fairness talk about anyway? As we all know, every GM in every sport is trying to screw the other GMs. Although they might say publicly that they want a trade that is good for both teams, that is “crazy talk”. (That’s why every sports columnist in the country ranks or grades trades, to see who the screwers are vs the screewees).

Fortunately for the Cavs, Danny Ferry is really good at proposing, then culminating lopsided deals. Never underhanded or devious (well, maybe a little devious), he orchestrates these deals that are cleary steals for the Cavs.

So, enough of these bleeding heart coaches and GMs complaining about this deal — its within the rules and the Cavs win.

That’s America — ha ha — especially the NBA

Holla at Danny Ferry, Holla at Z - Please come back!

Besides, I’m sick of following the Wizards Insider anyway.

Dad

Cavs-Raptors Bazooka Point

Sat, 27 Feb 2010 00:50:52 -0800

Friday night quick hit:

Cavs shot 86.2% FT tonight. They hit six more free throws than the Raptors attempted, and ultimately, that game doesn’t go into overtime otherwise. As Mike noted last night, Shaq’s absence helps the Cavs’ pick and roll defense significantly. But it also helps the Cavs’ efficiency at the line. They’re still not a team of sharpshooters when it comes to freebies, but in a game like tonight’s, even Andy at 66% can make a huge difference versus Shaq at 51%. Just something else minor to keep in mind as Coldstone weighs the situational advantages and disadvantages of the All-Athletic line-up versus the Slow Down Diesel version (once Shaq is healthy again, that is).

The bigger point this reflects on is that, despite their size disadvantage, the Cavs continued to attack the Raptors in the paint all night. They converted 23 of 32 shots “at” the rim (dunks, lay-ups, tips) for 46 points on 71.9%FG. This is especially impressive when you consider that foul trouble only allowed Andy to play a measly 23 minutes, leaving Jamison and Powe to man the 5 for extended periods. In other words, all the ingredients were in place for the Cavs to have one of those games where they decide to settle for a bunch of perimeter jumpers—but they consciously fought that urge, and it’s a big reason they ultimately came away with a win.

I’d also like to give a quick shout to Matt Devlin and Jack Armstrong, the Raptors’ announce team. While I’ll admit to being a little annoyed by the fact that Devlin called every possession from the opening tip as if it was the deciding one, he and his partner made for one of the most tolerable, even-handed broadcast teams of any I’ve been subjected to via League Pass this year. Armstrong was even quick to admit that the foul call on Mo on the second-to-last play of regulation should’ve gone the other way on Jarrett Jack. Really impressed by the intensity of their crowd and the general attractiveness of the female fans and cheerleaders. If the US ultimately goes all Book of Eli, Toronto is at the top of my migration list.

Finally, wardrobe trivia for those of you who didn’t read Windhorst’s beat blog tonight: in all situations, Antawn Jamison puts his shoes on before his pants.

Cavs-Celtics Bazooka Point

Thu, 25 Feb 2010 20:21:10 -0800

This is going to be brief because I’m overworked right now and will be out of the office for most of the day tomorrow, but here goes —

In the first half, pretty much everything I predicted could happen to the Cavs did: Mo got destroyed by Rondo and the Celtics were living in the paint. At the same time, the Celtics’ defense - still #1 in the league - was forcing the Cavaliers into taking a ton of jump shots. Shaq (3-8) wasn’t shooting well either.

In the second half, and especially in the fourth quarter, all of that changed. Glitch was damn near incredible, as was Varejao, and Cavs fans were able to witness a free preview of what the team could look like in a Shaq and Z-less future (long-term, I mean, as in next season). Varejao was particularly strong at masking Mo’s pick and roll weaknesses (Shaq was not). Against Boston, an unathletic, aging team, this line-up (Andy, JJ, Moon, Delonte, and Mo) killed - against a team like Orlando or Atlana, I don’t know.

It will be interesting to see if Coldstone employs it when he doesn’t have to (side note: the giant line-up with Bron at the point hasn’t been used, I don’t think, since Mo’s been back).

One additional note: why in the hell does Doc Rivers play Glen “He’s Glen” Davis over Shelden Williams? This seems inexcusable to me. Then again, I never would have recommended overpaying Davis like Boston did, just because he had a few good games in the playoffs.

Finally, remember what this match-up looked like on opening night? Remember how we all had a tendency to want to define the season by a single game? Now think about what the game looked like tonight - and then keep in mind that it might look totally different the next time these guys get together.

The NBA regular season: a betting man’s nightmare.

Yes, I'm Actually Going To Do It ...

Thu, 25 Feb 2010 05:45:11 -0800

Yes, I'm Actually Going To Do It ...:

My first Indians post of 2010, in which it’s reported that Russell Branyan will be the starting first baseman, Matt LaPorta will be in left field, and Michael Brantley, well, he may be in the minors.

2010 Cap Reality Series: New York Knicks

Wed, 24 Feb 2010 23:45:56 -0800

Continuing my series on the sordid realities of the teams vying for LeBron this summer, I want to take a look at the Knicks tonight. As you can probably surmise from the photo I’m pairing with this post, I don’t think much of their chances.

This is actually a much simpler analysis than my opening salvo on the Miami Heat. The reason is that the Knicks, to put it in the simplest terms, have cap space and almost literally nothing else.

As Joe Treutlein of Hoop Data details here, Donnie Walsh’s moves at the trade deadline give the Knicks enough cap space to sign two max free agents by the slimmest possible margin. Assuming a buy-out of Eddie Curry and a $53M cap, a mere $50,000 separates New York from joining the list of teams with room for only one max contract.

However, if Spike Lee has any iota of realism in him, he shouldn’t be dancing in the streets just yet. Why? Because to get to this zone, New York’s roster will be populated by these players:

Danilo Gallinari

Wilson Chandler

Toney Douglas

10 players making the league minimum

Without even getting into the performance of those three hold-overs from the 2009-10 season, think about this fact. Even if those players and the two max free agents actually fill out a workable staring line-up, literally every player coming off the New York bench will be making minimum money. Like Pat Riley, Donnie Walsh is therefore banking that quality role players around the league will voluntarily take less money so that they can play with whomever they get as their big-money stars.

As we’ve said over and over again, this is a terrible gamble. It was a bad gamble last summer, and I would argue that it’s an even worse gamble this upcoming summer due to the gathering storm clouds of a 2011 work-stoppage. Any player looking to sign a new deal this summer is going to be prioritizing dollar value more than ever before. So instead of a bench full of skilled role players, the Knicks are most likely going to end up with ten minimum salary guys in the truest “you get what you pay for” sense of the word.

This is a bigger problem than a lot of people want to recognize. LeBron and Dwyane Wade share something that none of the other major 2010 free agents do—they’ve both been to the Finals. LeBron got manhandled there. Wade (thanks to the greatest collection of phantom calls in league history) won. But both players are smart and experienced enough to understand the necessity of a good supporting cast to winning a championship.

“Supporting cast” as a phrase gets distorted pretty frequently, I think, to mean “1 or 2 other guys who can get 20-25 points.” But as people who really watch basketball know, there’s a lot more to it than that. You need shooters, gritty defenders, big men, “energy / hustle” players, rebounders, fighters. The Knicks’ chances of filling out a roster full of true complementary pieces using only the veteran’s minimum…they’re weak, especially in the first year. And LeBron knows it.

There’s a long debate that could be had about which is better: playing with one other star and a bunch of scrap, or no other stars but a roster full of reasonably priced, highly productive role players. A lot of it, I think, depends on how you define “better.” But I would argue forcefully that in the case of a superstar of LeBron’s capabilities, the latter option gives him the best odds of winning a title.

Might Donnie Walsh ultimately be able to build a complete team around LeBron? Yes. But how many years will it take? And with LeBron now used to a certain level of success (and hungry for the big prize), how appealing is the idea of waiting around for a couple of years to get a championship-ready team in place?

Even more importantly, is it even possible to build a championship team when it’s being coached by Mike D’Antoni, perhaps the least defensively minded coach in recent NBA history? I’ve heard analysts say that LeBron would love to play for him because D’Antoni would let LeBron run all game. Not only does Bron not care about running all game, he’s openly said over and over again that he knows defense is what wins championships. So why exactly is the D’Antoni / New York combo such a great fit for him?

So with a roster as unexciting as this, the other two crutches the New York fans / media fall back on are the dual myths of “New York as the Mecca of Basketball” and the “New York as Key to Endorsement Success.” The problem with the former is that it’s all hot air. As we’ve pointed out before, New York has won two NBA titles in their history—1970 and 1972—and since that time plenty of great players have been content to scratch their Madison Square Garden itch by coming into the building once a year and beating up on the home team.

The problem with the marketing myth is that it’s not even just hot air—it’s blatantly, factually false. Kenny Huang, the incoming minority owner of the Cavs, will give Bron the greatest possible inroad to the enormous market that is China. Even without Huang, James’s recent deal with McDonald’s already makes him the sport’s leader in endorsement money. As Kurt Badenhausen of Forbes reported when that deal was signed:

The McDonald’s deal should squelch any talk that James needs to leave Cleveland to be a big star with big endorsement deals. James is already a huge star and has multi-million deals with the biggest global brands in shoes (Nike), beverages (Coca-Cola) and now fast-food (McDonald’s). Knicks fans might want to start preparing for reality. LeBron doesn’t need New York to become a global icon. Cleveland will do just fine.

Couldn’t have said it better myself.

Prediction: Knicks overpay Rudy Gay and another second-tier free agent and follow the model of the mid-2000s Washington Wizards—perennial playoff team that goes nowhere. Donnie Walsh follows Joe Dumars in the ranks of “GMs that everyone finally realized were horrendously overrated.” Bron continues to play at MSG once a year in a way that drives Mike, my dad, and me crazy.

-T

Cavs-Hornets Bazooka Point

Tue, 23 Feb 2010 21:53:40 -0800

*Note: Image is of a Bazooka Scuba Subwoofer Tube

The Cavs survive a career performance from rookie Marcus Thornton (15-22 shooting in only 31 minutes and 14 seconds) to beat New Orleans by ten points.

The main product of my consternation tonight wasn’t the further DNP - Coach’s Decision flip-flopping of Jawad Williams and Jamario Moon (it was Williams’s turn), Mo Williams’s dreadful shooting (2-9), or even the poor defense (NO shot 50%, out-rebounded the Cavs by 3, and only turned the ball over 12 times, below their season average, without Chris Paul) … no, it was the fact that I had to listen to Cleveland announcers Fred McCleod and Austin Carr spout misinformation.

In the first half, while the Cavs were getting shredded in transition, McCleod made a big point of saying that New Orleans likes to get out and run, even when they’re playing on the road, unlike most teams.

Huh?

Why would utilizing transition offense have anything to do with being home or away?

I assume McCleod’s basing this assertion on something no one could ever prove, like the notion that road teams fast break less because they’re tired from traveling. Transition points are very hard to find online, so I can’t do any kind of snap analysis by looking at game logs or I would - despite the fact that McCleod’s statement doesn’t pass the infamous proverbial “smell test.”

AC, on the other hand - who, as a side note, had one of the greatest “Deep in the Q” flubs in history tonight - continually spoke about what a great shooting team New Orleans are.

Unfortunately, “average” is a more opportune word.

45.5% FG | 36.4% 3P | 53.8% TS

League averages are 45.9%, 35.2%, and 54.0% respectively.

Even if we were to look at by zone, we’d see that NOR is within one percent of the league average in every area from the rim to the 3P line. And when it comes to threes, the Hornets are only 2% better then the rest of the league.

Hardly counts as great.

Boston on Thursday - it’s been a long time since the two teams played one another, and right now, it looks like they wouldn’t meet in the playoffs unless BOS somehow gets past ORL, and CLE finishes off ATL.

If you’re a Cavs fans, personally, I recommend rooting for ATL to overtake BOS for the 3 seed in the Eastern Conference, so ATL and ORL can play each other in the semis and the Cavs can deal with Boston.

ORL, by the way, is now second in the NBA in efficiency differential at +7.0. The Cavs are first at +7.8 and the Lakers are third at +6.9. Boston comes next at +5.9.

On Thursday, please watch TNT if you’re in Cleveland instead of FSO. I know Barkley and the Jet have been badly usurped by the splendid tandem of Webber and McHale on NBA TV Fan Night, but at least you’ll get a dose of impartiality and insight from the play-by-play.

Just remember I used the word “dose.”

Where's Z?? #2

Tue, 23 Feb 2010 09:27:00 -0800

Here’s the second post in my new series, again from the Wizards perspective thanks to Michael Lee, the Wizards Insider. It’s a little dated, since he wrote this yesterday — but, still an interesting look at how he and other’s around the league view the deal.

Of course, we also know by now that the league won’t block Z if he does want to come back to the Cavs. The clock is ticking.

Ilgauskas’s agent: No prearranged deal with Cleveland

Zydrunas Ilgauskas’s agent, Herb Rudoy, is still speaking with Wizards President Ernie Grunfeld in hopes of working out a buyout agreement in the next few days. Ilgauskas won’t wear a Wizards No. 17 jersey, but there is speculation that the NBA won’t allow Ilgauskas to return to the Cleveland Cavaliers this season, either.

The Los Angeles Times is reporting that the NBA has told teams that the league won’t let Ilgauskas go back to Cleveland based on evidence of a prearranged deal.

When asked about the suspicions of a wink-and-nod agreement between Ilgauskas and the Cavaliers, Rudoy sent a text message that read, “There is absolutely no truth to it. Ernie and I are still working on a buyout!”

The Wizards don’t have to do a buyout for Ilgauskas, since they already have dipped under luxury tax territory. They certainly have the leverage to get the kind of financial relief they desire from Ilgauskas, who already received $600,000 from his trade kicker. Rudoy told Yahoo! Sports that he expects the two sides to agree on a buyout “Monday or Tuesday.”

The money Washington receives from Ilgauskas, they will likely use to add some more frontcourt depth. The Wizards have just 11 players available and JaVale McGee played with a strained tendon in his right wrist on Saturday in Toronto. “There is a chance we might bring in one guy or make that a rotating spot” with players from the NBA Developmental League, Saunders said on Saturday. “We’re pretty much open.”

Ilgauskas has no desire to play in Washington and returned home to Cleveland immediately after taking his physical with the Wizards on Friday. He has played with the Cavaliers for his entire 14-year career. Although Dallas and Atlanta have expressed interest in signing Ilgauskas, the 7-foot-3 center is expected to join the team after waiting 30 days from the time he was traded.

After the Wizards acquired Ilgauskas in the Antawn Jamison trade on Wednesday, Rudoy told the Cleveland Plain Dealer, “His heart truly is in Cleveland.” “This is my team,” Ilgauskas told the Plain Dealer. “I’m going to be mad, but not so mad that I wouldn’t come back. I understand it’s a business. This is my home. No matter what happens in the future, that will never change.”

Los Angeles Lakers Coach Phil Jackson and Boston Celtics Coach Doc Rivers have both criticized the trade, assuming that Ilgauskas will be Jamison’s teammate before the playoffs. “They’re going to get Ilgauskas back and it’s going to be one of those scenarios that we see in the NBA where you ship a player out, you get another player, then your player retires or they pay him off and then he comes back in 30 days,” Jackson told reporters in Los Angeles after the trade was completed. “I don’t know what that does for the league. I think that’s kind of a weird situation.”

Rivers’s indignation seems odd, since he actually benefit from situation five years ago. The Celtics traded Gary Payton to the Atlanta Hawks for Antoine Walker and Payton returned after the Hawks waived him. “I actually do have a problem with that though. We did it, and I’m joking, but I do think” it’s a problem, Rivers said. “I don’t know what you do…just not allow them to go back to the same team or whatever. I do think that will be changed eventually, but I do have a problem with it.”

Grunfeld has also been criticized by one unnamed New York Knicks executive, who believe that the former Knicks general manager stuck it to his former team by giving LeBron James the missing piece to a championship. The executive told the New York Daily News, “It was as if the Wizards said, “You want Antawn Jamison? Well, here he is, take him,’” said one Knick executive. “They handed him over, just like the Timberwolves gave Kevin Garnett to the Celtics.”

All this and Cleveland is 0-3 since making the trade.

Holla at New Orleans

Windy just reported - JJ sick (coincidentally??) and Jamison to start. Powe might be activated — very interesting

I added the coincidentally part

Dad