A New Jersey Nets fan would have been brimming with optimism when the news that savvy Russian billionaire Mikhail Prokhorov was taking over the floundering franchise. The optimism could have ran over as Avery Johnson was announced coach, who holds the highest winning percentage in league history, and on draft night, where the Nets wisely drafted a player with unlimited potential in Derrick Favors. But now I wonder if the promise of Prokhorov, a man who seems unnaturally sharp, is wearing thin. He just gave the GM and executive job to Billy King, a man who ran the 76ers into the ground with some massive, unwarranted contracts. To wit, former Blazers' GM Kevin Pritchard is still on the market after assembling a championship-caliber team in Portland, before being unfortunatley derailed by injuries. King runs the risk of killing the Brooklyn buzz by offering Samuel Dalembert another 60 million dollar contract, because hey, you can't put a price on size!
The Nets, still in Rod Thorn's control, made a few small-time, decent moves. They weren't going to put the Nets in the playoffs, but hopefully restore some decent role players in what was easily the most repulsive cast last year.
Jordan Farmar: 3 years $12 million. Not shrewd by any means, but I could have seen Farmar getting twice that money somewhere else. For a couple of years now, it's been speculated that Farmar could flourish outside of the triangle, and now he has that chance. So far, he's been below average on good teams. He's a solid but unimpressive shooter. A scoring point guard, with big-time athleticism, but little playmaking ability. He makes mistakes on defense but also can stick 1-on-1 in certain situations. Famar does have an above-average (slightly) season under his belt. He'll probably be a 20 minute bench player, but a proven above-average player with potential to flourish outside of the triangle. 4 million a year isn't cheap but Farmar could prove to be worth it.
Anthony Morrow: 3 years $12 million. I absolutely love Morrow. He's a career 46% 3 point shooter. 59% True Shooting. Can he do anything else? Nope! But should you give 4 million a year to a guy who shoots 46% from 3? Yes! Not to mention, he should get even more open looks with Lopez on the block. When it comes to 3's, Morrow doesn't create them. He merely spots up for 94% of them. But he knocks them down! Another bonus, he doesn't turn the ball over. His first two years he has a Win Share Rate of .187, a little below average, but remember his defensive rating takes a huge hit when he plays with the Warriors (and he himself cannot play defense). If the Nets can shape up their interior defense, Morrow's individual defense will be hidden by the fact he shoots 46% from three(!!). I like this signing. Billy King probably would have given him 50 million if had gotten to him in time.
Johan Petro: 3 years $10 million. This move comes fairly cheap for a 7 footer who showed a lot of improvement last year and could be a nice backup to Lopez. He had career highs in rebounding rate and TS%. The troublesome part is that for the previous two years, he was one of the worst offensive players in the league, and had back to back years of .030 WSR and .036. Last year, Petro got up to a career high .184. Maybe he'll keep getting better, start rebounding like a 7 footer and become a little more rugged. For 10 million, it's not bad, but again, this isn't the move putting them in the playoffs.
Travis Outlaw: 5 years $35 million. This move got a little pricey. Outlaw gets tagged as a scorer, but he averages 9.5 PPG for his career, despite a fairly high usage rate at 22.2%. He's been in the league 7 years and has managed to be above-average just once, in 2009. 51% career TS%, paltry assist rate, and an unskilled defender. They just handed 7 million a year to a guy who gives about 5 wins. If Farmar, Morrow, and Petro were just peripheral moves to solidify the Big One, this move fell flat. Outlaw is one of the classic, high usage-low production player that don't win you games.
All of that free agent money, while 3 of the 4 moves are certainly well spent (especially Morrow), netted them very little help to a team that won 12 games this year. That means Lopez and Favors are going to have to develop much steeper and quicker, and Devin Harris has to get back to being a productive player. There's no Amar'e or Boozer here to help smooth the process out. And now with Billy King on board, hope may be dwindling that the Nets can become anything more than a perennial 5,6,7 seed in the East.
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
Saturday, July 10, 2010
The Rising Optimism of the Thunder. It Lasted a Week.
There's been enough said on the new Miami Heat. My commentary will only begin to differentiate itself once the roster is totally filled out and I can project what the Heat might do. No question the Heat will be fascinating to watch, and no doubt a force to be reckoned with, but the Heat may have killed one of the best growing stories in the NBA. I felt that if a superteam didn't emerge from free agency (it did), the Thunder were poised to become the new San Antonio Spurs. Small market, home-grown powerhouse that would spend the next decade collecting titles.
Who's to say it's not a good thing for the league that now the decade looks like it'll belong to the Heat more so than the Thunder? The Spurs' quiet domination coincided with rising indifference towards the NBA. The Spurs were 'boring' to many fans, because they lacked highlight plays and their superstar could never offer a quote or anything more than a 8 foot bank shot. While Kevin Durant's popularity seems to be skyrocketing, not to mention fans love perimeter players, he's not a highlight machine or much more than a humble, sweet player. Granted, he's awesome as hell, but watching LeBron play is like a big budget action movie with shit constantly blowing up, while Durant is like the slow indie film that soaks in and tells its story slowly.
The Heat may be hated, but unlike the Spurs, fans watched the Spurs with disinterest (like those recent Pistons teams). Even if it's in order to venomously root against the Heat, people will want to watch them play basketball. While the Thunder generated a warm buzz when the playoffs were becoming a strong possibility as Durant was scoring over 25 points every game, and the fight they gave the Lakers, I never got the sense that fans had anything more than passing interest in this new team. Then again, I could be wrong to assume that the similarities to the Spurs would produce similar disinterest. Maybe the Thunder are positioned to become the lovable foil to the Heat, something like the Utah Jazz of the 90s.
Personally, I was excited about the Thunder. Durant was only going to further root himself as the #2 man next to LeBron, Westbrook looked like he could capitalize on his brilliant playoff debut, James Harden stepping up as the 3rd scorer/shooter, and Serge Ibaka and Cole Adrich as an emerging shot-blocking, rebounding, interior defense combo that the Thunder really lacked. Textbook example of team building by Sam Presti. But now the tables have turned, and the Thunder look like they could win the West several times, but how can they beat the Heat? Durant is fantastic, but it's highly doubtful he'll reach LeBron's level. Westbrook will never be the top 4 player that Dwyane Wade is, and Ibaka/Alrich/Harden won't likely hit Bosh's peak, either. Even if the Thunder edge the Heat in supporting cast, how does the talent disparity allow the Thunder to beat the Heat in a 7 game series? And look, I try to be objective over here at MEC, but Durant gets vote for favorite player here, for his humility and he's exceptionally fun to watch. Despite that, Durant will always be a step behind LeBron, as will KD's supporting cast. It's not knocking those guys; it's just the sheer power that the Heat have assembled.
For the NBA to fully cash in on the Heat's villainous potential, they need a true rival, or else they run the risk of beating the hell out of so many people that fans will turn off the TV, knowing the results will be another Heat beatdown. The Jazz, Suns, and Blazers made for good rivals for the Bulls because people still felt like those were the teams designed to beat the champs. Never happened, but interest never waned. The Lakers will be a great initial rival, but their shelf life seems short with their age and brittleness. This is where the Thunder have to step up and always provide the league with a threat that they'll be able to make a run at the Heat.
Who's to say it's not a good thing for the league that now the decade looks like it'll belong to the Heat more so than the Thunder? The Spurs' quiet domination coincided with rising indifference towards the NBA. The Spurs were 'boring' to many fans, because they lacked highlight plays and their superstar could never offer a quote or anything more than a 8 foot bank shot. While Kevin Durant's popularity seems to be skyrocketing, not to mention fans love perimeter players, he's not a highlight machine or much more than a humble, sweet player. Granted, he's awesome as hell, but watching LeBron play is like a big budget action movie with shit constantly blowing up, while Durant is like the slow indie film that soaks in and tells its story slowly.
The Heat may be hated, but unlike the Spurs, fans watched the Spurs with disinterest (like those recent Pistons teams). Even if it's in order to venomously root against the Heat, people will want to watch them play basketball. While the Thunder generated a warm buzz when the playoffs were becoming a strong possibility as Durant was scoring over 25 points every game, and the fight they gave the Lakers, I never got the sense that fans had anything more than passing interest in this new team. Then again, I could be wrong to assume that the similarities to the Spurs would produce similar disinterest. Maybe the Thunder are positioned to become the lovable foil to the Heat, something like the Utah Jazz of the 90s.
Personally, I was excited about the Thunder. Durant was only going to further root himself as the #2 man next to LeBron, Westbrook looked like he could capitalize on his brilliant playoff debut, James Harden stepping up as the 3rd scorer/shooter, and Serge Ibaka and Cole Adrich as an emerging shot-blocking, rebounding, interior defense combo that the Thunder really lacked. Textbook example of team building by Sam Presti. But now the tables have turned, and the Thunder look like they could win the West several times, but how can they beat the Heat? Durant is fantastic, but it's highly doubtful he'll reach LeBron's level. Westbrook will never be the top 4 player that Dwyane Wade is, and Ibaka/Alrich/Harden won't likely hit Bosh's peak, either. Even if the Thunder edge the Heat in supporting cast, how does the talent disparity allow the Thunder to beat the Heat in a 7 game series? And look, I try to be objective over here at MEC, but Durant gets vote for favorite player here, for his humility and he's exceptionally fun to watch. Despite that, Durant will always be a step behind LeBron, as will KD's supporting cast. It's not knocking those guys; it's just the sheer power that the Heat have assembled.
For the NBA to fully cash in on the Heat's villainous potential, they need a true rival, or else they run the risk of beating the hell out of so many people that fans will turn off the TV, knowing the results will be another Heat beatdown. The Jazz, Suns, and Blazers made for good rivals for the Bulls because people still felt like those were the teams designed to beat the champs. Never happened, but interest never waned. The Lakers will be a great initial rival, but their shelf life seems short with their age and brittleness. This is where the Thunder have to step up and always provide the league with a threat that they'll be able to make a run at the Heat.
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
Quick Note on the Pitiful Wizards
In my draft recap, I noted how repulsed I was by the management of the Washington Wizards. To recount, the Wizards are team that needs A LOT of help before they can think about playoffs and contending. They need to rebuild, which means shrewd moves and wise plucking of talent. So in order to punch that idea in the face, they trade for Kirk Hinrich, who makes $9 million with 2 years left. That's an expensive price for a point guard after they just drafted a mega point guard prospect. Hinrich is a solid player, but for 9 million and forced to play on the bench behind Wall, that's a stupid deal. How can you rebuild with that philosophy? Not only did they make a bad move from a team building standpoint, from a competitive standpoint they gave the Bulls the potential of landing 2 free agents this summer.
As if the Wizards didn't already demostrate incompetence, today, they traded for Yi from the Nets. Yi's Win Share Rate has been .059; he's accounted for 2.8 wins in his career. Over the past 3 years, if you needed some firepower for the validity of Win Share Rate, the worst players by WSR have included Smush Parker (the worst), Mike James, Jamaal Tinsley, Ricky Davis, Sebastian Telfair, and Deshawn Stevenson; all guys that are laughable and WSR backs up the notion that they're bad players. Yi is ranked as the 15th worst player in that time-span. He's also set to make 9.5 million dollars over the course of 2 more years. Did they Wizards think they were poaching young talent from the Nets? They just snatched one of the worst players in the league. The good news is that the Wiz will probably be so bad next year, they'll get another high lottery pick to get somebody next to Wall.
As if the Wizards didn't already demostrate incompetence, today, they traded for Yi from the Nets. Yi's Win Share Rate has been .059; he's accounted for 2.8 wins in his career. Over the past 3 years, if you needed some firepower for the validity of Win Share Rate, the worst players by WSR have included Smush Parker (the worst), Mike James, Jamaal Tinsley, Ricky Davis, Sebastian Telfair, and Deshawn Stevenson; all guys that are laughable and WSR backs up the notion that they're bad players. Yi is ranked as the 15th worst player in that time-span. He's also set to make 9.5 million dollars over the course of 2 more years. Did they Wizards think they were poaching young talent from the Nets? They just snatched one of the worst players in the league. The good news is that the Wiz will probably be so bad next year, they'll get another high lottery pick to get somebody next to Wall.
Thursday, June 24, 2010
Covering the Draft; Calling it Like I See it
The draft is about to begin and I wanna go through it and take a good look at what the teams are doing. First up, the Washington Wizards
Washington: John Wall
The Wizards did something today that should scare the hell out of John Wall. They shed further light into their incompetence as an organization. As I've written before, I think the Wizards are the least talented team in the NBA. But at least they were not talented with defined positions. The Wizards have agreed to take Kirk Hinrich off the Bulls' hands, along with the 17th pick, which now gives the Wizards 3 point guards making a lot of money. They already had Arenas and his massive contract. But with Wall on the board, screw it, they have to take him. So they had to figure out a way to play 2 PGs at the same time. And now! They have Hinrich. They won't start all 3 together, but Hinrich will likely come off the bench. He makes 9 million dollars a year! A rebuilding team should not take on 9 million dollars for a backup point guard. That's dumb. They'll probably draft Avery Bradley at 17 in hopes to field a 5 man team all under 6'5". From a competitive standpoint, they just gave the Chicago Bulls even more leverage to pull off free agency brilliance. Anyway, #1 pick John Wall. Obvious pick. He's really talented. He'll join a bunch of bad players.
Philadelphia: Evan Turner
This is the right pick despite this being not a great fit. The fact is Philly lacks a franchise guy, something Iguodala will never be. Turner gives them a shot at landing that guy. There's young potential in Philly, like Marreese Speights, Lou Williams, Jrue Holiday, and Thad Young. Turner will have pieces to work with if the Sixers can figure out how to play everyone and those guys pull their own weight. The fit isn't great because Iguodala plays so similarly to Turner, but if Turner is good enough, then they'll find a way to make it work.
New Jersey: Derrick Favors
Another easy pick. Brook Lopez now has a legitimate PF to play next to him and maybe the Nets can start to assemble a young, scary frontline. The Nets need a lot of help but you can only draft one at a time, so super athletic, two-way player will help fill some need.
Minnesota: Wesley Johnson
As many have stated, this is a 4 player draft. Wes Johnson doesn't appear to be one of those 4. The TWolves clearly have issues trying to play Kevin Love and Al Jefferson together, which means, in order to build towards contending, one of them has to go. The right play would have been trading Jefferson, and drafting Cousins, who fits with Kevin Love a lot better. However, the TWolves seem commited to making Jefferson-Love work, so they addressed the team's most pressing need. They have some of the worst wing players in the NBA, so Johnson gives them a long, athletic, good-shooting 3. I think Johnson is going to be, if not a bust, then no better than a Tayshaun Prince player (would you re-take Prince 4th?). There are 3 tiers for this pick. The Gerald Wallace/Shawn Marion tier. At 23 and questions about his aggressiveness, I think this is too lofty, although that would certainly be worth a #4 pick. Then there's the Tayshaun Prince, Marvin Williams, Shane Battier tier. Not an All-Star, but a long defender who plays passive and shoots spot up jumpers. That's probably where Johnson will end up, which isn't too exciting. Then there's the Corey Brewer tier, who will show Johnson the ropes in Minnesota. All the tools were there but didn't translate and is an incompetent basketball player. Johnson probably won't sink that low. Maybe trading Jefferson wasn't a realistic option, so if not, this is about the best they could do because you can't take Cousins if that's the case. This is a shaky pick, but at least it fills a need for this fledging franchise.
Sacramento: Demarcus Cousins
They did it again! Worst team last year gets screwed in the lottery, ends up with the 4th pick, still get Rookie of the Year, Tyreke Evans. 3rd worst record this year, 5th pick, yet they land the guy who a small minority have called the most talented player in the draft. This is the perfect pick. Tyreke now gets a legitimate big man, and Carl Landry gets somebody to complement him excellently. This team is still young and still developing the defensive mindset, but Cousins is a pefect fit in Sacramento. Spencer Hawe's softness will be a thing of the past, as Cousins' hard nosed play will hopefully transform them. Also, the Kings have Samuel Dalembert, so the 15th best rebounding team a year ago will get a major lift. If Cousins comes in as a 15-10 guy and Tyreke polishes up his game, the Kings might make the playoffs next year. Watch out.
Golden State: Ekpe Udoh
Give the Warriors credit. At #6, it's unlikely to find the perfect guy or a sleeping superstar, and the Warriors need a big make-over, but this was the right pick. Udoh will be a very good defensive player and rebounder, which is just what Golden State needs. His offensive game might be raw but he's going to GS to keep teams under 110 points every now and then. If you're the Warriors and Steph Curry looks like he might be one of the next big things, don't you look at this team and wonder how the hell to support him? Weird tweeners all over the place who don't play defense. Now they have somebody who can focus on helping in a specific area. Nice job, actually.
Detroit: Greg Monroe
Monroe is a bit of a question mark. This is either going to be a home run pick for Detroit or nothing special. It's unclear how well he'll rebound and defend. It's unclear how aggressive he is offensively. The only lock is he'll be a good passer. Beyond that, he can be the Piston's best player or he can be a fringe player forever. But this was the pick the Pistons had to make, with a ton of perimeter players but no bigs. Monroe may be too soft to change much in Detroit, but they're hoping he becomes a special player, and I'll admit, the potential is there.
Los Angeles: Al-Farouq Aminu
I think this is the first bad pick of the draft. Even Wes Johnson is the right pick if circumstances prevented Minnesota from moving one of their big men. Aminu has power forward skills in a small forward's body. The Clippers need a lot of things but the one thing they don't need is a power forward. Aminu doesn't have the ball skills or shooting ability to play the 3 effectively. I'm not sure Aminu would have been a good fit for any team (as a starter) because of the reasons I just named, but the Clippers were the ones to take him. The worst part? They were looking for a small forward, but Gordon Hayward, Paul George, Xavier Henry, and Luke Babbitt were all on the board and capable of playing the position with more ball skill and better shooting. Blake Griffin is now surrounded with players who have talent, but don't use it correctly or just can't produce sufficient results. They're everywhere.
Utah: Gordon Hayward
At first, this pick seemed bizarre to me. Cole Aldrich was there to beef up their frontline. Xavier Henry seemed like he would have been a great fit. But they end up taking Hayward and I'm starting to talk myself into it a little more. He's similar, like the Junior version, to Evan Turner. Solid athlete, good at everything, not great at anything. Utah will face Kevin Durant many times, so the more I thought about it, 6'6" Xavier Henry may not have the impact of 6'8" Hayward trying to contain KD. That's Utah's biggest weakness is defense. They need size up front, but they also need somebody rangey on the perimeter. Hayward's ability on that end will be determined later, but for now, this is a solid pick for an already talented team.
Indiana: Paul George
The second bad pick! Look, the Pacers really need a point guard, but there just wasn't one available. Fine. But their best player is already a small forward. Why would they take another small forward? Maybe George gets run at shooting guard. Plus I hate the name Paul George. If they wanted to play somebody with Granger, why didn't they go with Henry, who's actually a shooting guard? Why add a primary scorer when you already have one? How about Ed Davis or Patrick Patterson to give Indiana some extra punch inside? However, if there's a pick I feel I could be wrong about, it could be this one. George and Granger may get along fine beside each other. It's not like Ed Davis or Patterson are ideal fits anyway, considering Troy Murphy is productive offensively. To me, it seems like they re-drafted Danny Granger, but whatever, time will have to tell.
Oklahoma City: Cole Alrich
Honestly, this might be the best pick of the draft, all things considered. Cousins is great for the Kings, but it was an obvious choice. OKC trading for Cole immediately cures the team's biggest weakness: center! Jeff Green had a lot of struggles against Pau Gasol, and there are just too many good offensive power forwards in the NBA to be weak at the 4. The emergence of Serge Ibaka all of the sudden gives the Thunder rebounding, shot blocking, and defense in places that seemed awfully lacking at this time last year. The consenus on Aldrich is you're getting a fail-proof, solid player. For OKC, that's exactly what they need. Aldrich will shore up their defensive rebounding, which may have cost them the Lakers series (Pau's offensive put back). For people complaining about the Thunder missing out on Marcus Camby, here's a much younger consolation prize. Also, the Thunder will surely help their already great defense. It's hard to be a great defensive team when all of the defense is on the perimeter, but they somehow managed it. Now they have Ibaka and Alrich to protect the paint and clear their stops by securing the rebound. For every other team, this is a scary pick-up for the rapidly improving Thunder. Extremely well-done.
Memphis: Xavier Henry
Solid pick by the Grizz. They need perimeter help and better shooting, as well as someone who will compete defensively. They need a point guard, but none were available, so you have to like this pick. Henry's role will depend on Rudy Gay's transactions, but he'll be a good fit in Memphis, as he possibly evolves into a more confident scorer.
Toronto: Ed Davis
This looks like a safe-guard against Chris Bosh leaving, so can you blame the Raptors? Davis is raw but he's athletic and looks to be a good 2-way player.
Houston: Patrick Patterson
Milwaukee almost landed the perfect guy for them, but Houston got to him first and it's a solid pick. They're covered up everywhere on the perimeter, and with Yao's uncertainity, adding more size will really benefit Houston. Houston keeps adding quality players, and if the great Yao can be there for a playoff run, they're very dangerous. Good value pick.
Milwaukee: Larry Sanders
It's smart drafting by a GM who keeps impressing when few thought much about him. A few days after making a wise move to bring in Corey Maggette for nobody, the Bucks will add much needed frontcourt depth. The Bucks need an active 6'10" body who can fly around and be effective defensively to stabilize a position that features 2 guys who aren't definitely power forwards (Mbah a Moute and Ilyasova). The Bucks have their core in place, but this was a good value pick for a team looking way up.
Portland: Luke Babbitt (plus Minnesota)
Very conflicting series of events. First, Minnesota drafts a small forward after they already took a small forward. And in those guys' case, they are only playing small forward; shooting guard is out of the question for Wes Johnson or Babbitt. So, that didn't make sense. Then, they trade him for the criminally average Martell Webster, who at least is a shooting guard. We now know it's going to be Jonny Flynn, Webster, Johnson, Love, and Jefferson. In Minnesota's defense, Webster has a better outlook defensively than Babbitt. Babbitt would have further exposed the defensive limits of Love-Jefferson: Paint Protectors. Webster isn't a stopper but he's solid enough. I guess the queston is, is Webster worth the 16th pick in the draft? I'm saying no, but he's a good streak shooter and shooting is very hard to come by in Minnesota. For Portland, this is another move in the infuriating decisions this franchise continues to make. Nicolas Batum might be the most underrated player in the NBA. Under no circumstance should he NOT be the starting small forward. Babbitt is a scorer but looks like he'll be a below average defensive player. The Blazers have more than enough offense with a healthy team. Their problem is defense. Batum is a great defender. Babbitt could be a nice fit (assuming he's not Adam Morrison reincarnate) in, say, Philadelphia or New Orleans. Memphis maybe, too. But the Blazers got the opposite of what they needed. A scorer who doesn't play defense. I can only hope Batum finally plays 35 minutes a game like he deserves. The Blazers continue to meander in 12-15th rage in defense and that just isn't good enough. Babbitt doesn't help that. Batum does! Batum also shot 52% from the field 41% from 3 and 84% from the free throw line. He's awesome. WHY DID THE BLAZERS TRADE FOR A SMALL FORWARD??? Fuck them.
Washington: Kevin Seraphin
This pick was made by Chicago for Washington. Seraphin might stay stashed over seas, which means he's valueless to me.
Los Angeles Clippers: Eric Bledsoe
This pick was made by the Thunder, which gives the Clippers a 3rd guard and a possible replacement to Baron Davis in the future. This was actually a good pick for the Clippers because they need more guard help and Bledsoe has a lot of potential to be a solid starter in the league.
Boston: Avery Bradley
Easy, smart pick for the Celtics. The future of the Celtics will determine what role Bradley takes on, but he can be a reliable 3rd guard for the time being, similar to Bledsoe the pick before. Great defender, streaky shooter, very athletic, and a little raw with ball skills. The Celtics need guard help, though, and with the possible departure of Ray Allen, Bradley is a good pick. Good name, too.
San Antonio: James Anderson
One of the guys I could see averaging 20 points a game, for better or worse. He was efficient in college, so if that translates to the NBA, he could be another nice piece. With Ginobili constantly unsure if he'll play with injuries, Anderson could give them a spark of perimeter scoring.
Wrapping up with highlights:
-Atlanta getting Jordan Crawford making a whole lot of nonsense. They already have a 6'5" J.Crawford who is a gunner. Why not get another one! They need depth up front to spell Josh Smith and Al Horford, but they just drafted Jamal Crawford with Jordan Crawford.
-Memphis getting Greivis Vasquez was a really good pick at 28, I think. Memphis now collected Xavier Henry and Vasquez for more perimeter help. Vasquez is a gamer who will give a nice contrast to the below average Mike Conley.
-Sacramento with Hassan Whiteside in the 2nd was another steal who can help them. Long, athletic 7 footer who's very raw. Once Dalembert passes through Sacramento, the Kings will have another athletic big guy who can help them shake this softness/defensive/rebounding issue that loomed large this year. Tyreke Evans will relish playing with big guys who can protect the rim behind him and make his defensive efforts mean something.
Best pick: Aldrich to the Thunder
2nd best: Cousins to the Kings
Worst pick: Paul George to the Pacers
2nd worst: Aminu to the Clippers (as a starter)
I'm very excited to watch the Thunder saddle up with a true big man and for Tyreke and Cousins to play together.
Washington: John Wall
The Wizards did something today that should scare the hell out of John Wall. They shed further light into their incompetence as an organization. As I've written before, I think the Wizards are the least talented team in the NBA. But at least they were not talented with defined positions. The Wizards have agreed to take Kirk Hinrich off the Bulls' hands, along with the 17th pick, which now gives the Wizards 3 point guards making a lot of money. They already had Arenas and his massive contract. But with Wall on the board, screw it, they have to take him. So they had to figure out a way to play 2 PGs at the same time. And now! They have Hinrich. They won't start all 3 together, but Hinrich will likely come off the bench. He makes 9 million dollars a year! A rebuilding team should not take on 9 million dollars for a backup point guard. That's dumb. They'll probably draft Avery Bradley at 17 in hopes to field a 5 man team all under 6'5". From a competitive standpoint, they just gave the Chicago Bulls even more leverage to pull off free agency brilliance. Anyway, #1 pick John Wall. Obvious pick. He's really talented. He'll join a bunch of bad players.
Philadelphia: Evan Turner
This is the right pick despite this being not a great fit. The fact is Philly lacks a franchise guy, something Iguodala will never be. Turner gives them a shot at landing that guy. There's young potential in Philly, like Marreese Speights, Lou Williams, Jrue Holiday, and Thad Young. Turner will have pieces to work with if the Sixers can figure out how to play everyone and those guys pull their own weight. The fit isn't great because Iguodala plays so similarly to Turner, but if Turner is good enough, then they'll find a way to make it work.
New Jersey: Derrick Favors
Another easy pick. Brook Lopez now has a legitimate PF to play next to him and maybe the Nets can start to assemble a young, scary frontline. The Nets need a lot of help but you can only draft one at a time, so super athletic, two-way player will help fill some need.
Minnesota: Wesley Johnson
As many have stated, this is a 4 player draft. Wes Johnson doesn't appear to be one of those 4. The TWolves clearly have issues trying to play Kevin Love and Al Jefferson together, which means, in order to build towards contending, one of them has to go. The right play would have been trading Jefferson, and drafting Cousins, who fits with Kevin Love a lot better. However, the TWolves seem commited to making Jefferson-Love work, so they addressed the team's most pressing need. They have some of the worst wing players in the NBA, so Johnson gives them a long, athletic, good-shooting 3. I think Johnson is going to be, if not a bust, then no better than a Tayshaun Prince player (would you re-take Prince 4th?). There are 3 tiers for this pick. The Gerald Wallace/Shawn Marion tier. At 23 and questions about his aggressiveness, I think this is too lofty, although that would certainly be worth a #4 pick. Then there's the Tayshaun Prince, Marvin Williams, Shane Battier tier. Not an All-Star, but a long defender who plays passive and shoots spot up jumpers. That's probably where Johnson will end up, which isn't too exciting. Then there's the Corey Brewer tier, who will show Johnson the ropes in Minnesota. All the tools were there but didn't translate and is an incompetent basketball player. Johnson probably won't sink that low. Maybe trading Jefferson wasn't a realistic option, so if not, this is about the best they could do because you can't take Cousins if that's the case. This is a shaky pick, but at least it fills a need for this fledging franchise.
Sacramento: Demarcus Cousins
They did it again! Worst team last year gets screwed in the lottery, ends up with the 4th pick, still get Rookie of the Year, Tyreke Evans. 3rd worst record this year, 5th pick, yet they land the guy who a small minority have called the most talented player in the draft. This is the perfect pick. Tyreke now gets a legitimate big man, and Carl Landry gets somebody to complement him excellently. This team is still young and still developing the defensive mindset, but Cousins is a pefect fit in Sacramento. Spencer Hawe's softness will be a thing of the past, as Cousins' hard nosed play will hopefully transform them. Also, the Kings have Samuel Dalembert, so the 15th best rebounding team a year ago will get a major lift. If Cousins comes in as a 15-10 guy and Tyreke polishes up his game, the Kings might make the playoffs next year. Watch out.
Golden State: Ekpe Udoh
Give the Warriors credit. At #6, it's unlikely to find the perfect guy or a sleeping superstar, and the Warriors need a big make-over, but this was the right pick. Udoh will be a very good defensive player and rebounder, which is just what Golden State needs. His offensive game might be raw but he's going to GS to keep teams under 110 points every now and then. If you're the Warriors and Steph Curry looks like he might be one of the next big things, don't you look at this team and wonder how the hell to support him? Weird tweeners all over the place who don't play defense. Now they have somebody who can focus on helping in a specific area. Nice job, actually.
Detroit: Greg Monroe
Monroe is a bit of a question mark. This is either going to be a home run pick for Detroit or nothing special. It's unclear how well he'll rebound and defend. It's unclear how aggressive he is offensively. The only lock is he'll be a good passer. Beyond that, he can be the Piston's best player or he can be a fringe player forever. But this was the pick the Pistons had to make, with a ton of perimeter players but no bigs. Monroe may be too soft to change much in Detroit, but they're hoping he becomes a special player, and I'll admit, the potential is there.
Los Angeles: Al-Farouq Aminu
I think this is the first bad pick of the draft. Even Wes Johnson is the right pick if circumstances prevented Minnesota from moving one of their big men. Aminu has power forward skills in a small forward's body. The Clippers need a lot of things but the one thing they don't need is a power forward. Aminu doesn't have the ball skills or shooting ability to play the 3 effectively. I'm not sure Aminu would have been a good fit for any team (as a starter) because of the reasons I just named, but the Clippers were the ones to take him. The worst part? They were looking for a small forward, but Gordon Hayward, Paul George, Xavier Henry, and Luke Babbitt were all on the board and capable of playing the position with more ball skill and better shooting. Blake Griffin is now surrounded with players who have talent, but don't use it correctly or just can't produce sufficient results. They're everywhere.
Utah: Gordon Hayward
At first, this pick seemed bizarre to me. Cole Aldrich was there to beef up their frontline. Xavier Henry seemed like he would have been a great fit. But they end up taking Hayward and I'm starting to talk myself into it a little more. He's similar, like the Junior version, to Evan Turner. Solid athlete, good at everything, not great at anything. Utah will face Kevin Durant many times, so the more I thought about it, 6'6" Xavier Henry may not have the impact of 6'8" Hayward trying to contain KD. That's Utah's biggest weakness is defense. They need size up front, but they also need somebody rangey on the perimeter. Hayward's ability on that end will be determined later, but for now, this is a solid pick for an already talented team.
Indiana: Paul George
The second bad pick! Look, the Pacers really need a point guard, but there just wasn't one available. Fine. But their best player is already a small forward. Why would they take another small forward? Maybe George gets run at shooting guard. Plus I hate the name Paul George. If they wanted to play somebody with Granger, why didn't they go with Henry, who's actually a shooting guard? Why add a primary scorer when you already have one? How about Ed Davis or Patrick Patterson to give Indiana some extra punch inside? However, if there's a pick I feel I could be wrong about, it could be this one. George and Granger may get along fine beside each other. It's not like Ed Davis or Patterson are ideal fits anyway, considering Troy Murphy is productive offensively. To me, it seems like they re-drafted Danny Granger, but whatever, time will have to tell.
Oklahoma City: Cole Alrich
Honestly, this might be the best pick of the draft, all things considered. Cousins is great for the Kings, but it was an obvious choice. OKC trading for Cole immediately cures the team's biggest weakness: center! Jeff Green had a lot of struggles against Pau Gasol, and there are just too many good offensive power forwards in the NBA to be weak at the 4. The emergence of Serge Ibaka all of the sudden gives the Thunder rebounding, shot blocking, and defense in places that seemed awfully lacking at this time last year. The consenus on Aldrich is you're getting a fail-proof, solid player. For OKC, that's exactly what they need. Aldrich will shore up their defensive rebounding, which may have cost them the Lakers series (Pau's offensive put back). For people complaining about the Thunder missing out on Marcus Camby, here's a much younger consolation prize. Also, the Thunder will surely help their already great defense. It's hard to be a great defensive team when all of the defense is on the perimeter, but they somehow managed it. Now they have Ibaka and Alrich to protect the paint and clear their stops by securing the rebound. For every other team, this is a scary pick-up for the rapidly improving Thunder. Extremely well-done.
Memphis: Xavier Henry
Solid pick by the Grizz. They need perimeter help and better shooting, as well as someone who will compete defensively. They need a point guard, but none were available, so you have to like this pick. Henry's role will depend on Rudy Gay's transactions, but he'll be a good fit in Memphis, as he possibly evolves into a more confident scorer.
Toronto: Ed Davis
This looks like a safe-guard against Chris Bosh leaving, so can you blame the Raptors? Davis is raw but he's athletic and looks to be a good 2-way player.
Houston: Patrick Patterson
Milwaukee almost landed the perfect guy for them, but Houston got to him first and it's a solid pick. They're covered up everywhere on the perimeter, and with Yao's uncertainity, adding more size will really benefit Houston. Houston keeps adding quality players, and if the great Yao can be there for a playoff run, they're very dangerous. Good value pick.
Milwaukee: Larry Sanders
It's smart drafting by a GM who keeps impressing when few thought much about him. A few days after making a wise move to bring in Corey Maggette for nobody, the Bucks will add much needed frontcourt depth. The Bucks need an active 6'10" body who can fly around and be effective defensively to stabilize a position that features 2 guys who aren't definitely power forwards (Mbah a Moute and Ilyasova). The Bucks have their core in place, but this was a good value pick for a team looking way up.
Portland: Luke Babbitt (plus Minnesota)
Very conflicting series of events. First, Minnesota drafts a small forward after they already took a small forward. And in those guys' case, they are only playing small forward; shooting guard is out of the question for Wes Johnson or Babbitt. So, that didn't make sense. Then, they trade him for the criminally average Martell Webster, who at least is a shooting guard. We now know it's going to be Jonny Flynn, Webster, Johnson, Love, and Jefferson. In Minnesota's defense, Webster has a better outlook defensively than Babbitt. Babbitt would have further exposed the defensive limits of Love-Jefferson: Paint Protectors. Webster isn't a stopper but he's solid enough. I guess the queston is, is Webster worth the 16th pick in the draft? I'm saying no, but he's a good streak shooter and shooting is very hard to come by in Minnesota. For Portland, this is another move in the infuriating decisions this franchise continues to make. Nicolas Batum might be the most underrated player in the NBA. Under no circumstance should he NOT be the starting small forward. Babbitt is a scorer but looks like he'll be a below average defensive player. The Blazers have more than enough offense with a healthy team. Their problem is defense. Batum is a great defender. Babbitt could be a nice fit (assuming he's not Adam Morrison reincarnate) in, say, Philadelphia or New Orleans. Memphis maybe, too. But the Blazers got the opposite of what they needed. A scorer who doesn't play defense. I can only hope Batum finally plays 35 minutes a game like he deserves. The Blazers continue to meander in 12-15th rage in defense and that just isn't good enough. Babbitt doesn't help that. Batum does! Batum also shot 52% from the field 41% from 3 and 84% from the free throw line. He's awesome. WHY DID THE BLAZERS TRADE FOR A SMALL FORWARD??? Fuck them.
Washington: Kevin Seraphin
This pick was made by Chicago for Washington. Seraphin might stay stashed over seas, which means he's valueless to me.
Los Angeles Clippers: Eric Bledsoe
This pick was made by the Thunder, which gives the Clippers a 3rd guard and a possible replacement to Baron Davis in the future. This was actually a good pick for the Clippers because they need more guard help and Bledsoe has a lot of potential to be a solid starter in the league.
Boston: Avery Bradley
Easy, smart pick for the Celtics. The future of the Celtics will determine what role Bradley takes on, but he can be a reliable 3rd guard for the time being, similar to Bledsoe the pick before. Great defender, streaky shooter, very athletic, and a little raw with ball skills. The Celtics need guard help, though, and with the possible departure of Ray Allen, Bradley is a good pick. Good name, too.
San Antonio: James Anderson
One of the guys I could see averaging 20 points a game, for better or worse. He was efficient in college, so if that translates to the NBA, he could be another nice piece. With Ginobili constantly unsure if he'll play with injuries, Anderson could give them a spark of perimeter scoring.
Wrapping up with highlights:
-Atlanta getting Jordan Crawford making a whole lot of nonsense. They already have a 6'5" J.Crawford who is a gunner. Why not get another one! They need depth up front to spell Josh Smith and Al Horford, but they just drafted Jamal Crawford with Jordan Crawford.
-Memphis getting Greivis Vasquez was a really good pick at 28, I think. Memphis now collected Xavier Henry and Vasquez for more perimeter help. Vasquez is a gamer who will give a nice contrast to the below average Mike Conley.
-Sacramento with Hassan Whiteside in the 2nd was another steal who can help them. Long, athletic 7 footer who's very raw. Once Dalembert passes through Sacramento, the Kings will have another athletic big guy who can help them shake this softness/defensive/rebounding issue that loomed large this year. Tyreke Evans will relish playing with big guys who can protect the rim behind him and make his defensive efforts mean something.
Best pick: Aldrich to the Thunder
2nd best: Cousins to the Kings
Worst pick: Paul George to the Pacers
2nd worst: Aminu to the Clippers (as a starter)
I'm very excited to watch the Thunder saddle up with a true big man and for Tyreke and Cousins to play together.
Wednesday, June 23, 2010
Analyzing the Swaps
I'm testing out my summer toy, which is using Win Shares to predict overall team success. The Milwaukee Bucks just sent off two ungodly bad players for Corey Maggette, as well as moved a future 2nd round pick for Chris Douglas-Roberts from New Jersey. Also, a deal is in the works for a Al Jefferson-Zach Randolph swap. That deal might not happen, or it may happen but include another player of two. Either way, this will give me a chance to figure out who's getting what out of these deals. First, the Bucks, because their trade was interesting as hell.
What the Bucks had was Charlie Bell's .124 WIn Share Rate. Way below average. He accounted for 2 wins of the Buck's 46. Dan Gadzuric had a .159 and accounted for .5 win. So, the Bucks shipped out 2.5 wins from last year's team. They're bringing back Maggette's .303, who won 6.3 games for Golden State last year. He had his best offensive season ever, despite being 30. Raw numbers suggest the Bucks just won themselves 4 more games. However, Maggette is going to a defensive minded team, and it's easier to play good defense when other people are playing good defense. Maggette had a very good offensive rating despite an awful defensive rating (the Golden State Way). His D Rating will go up quite a bit just playing with the Bucks. That means that even a slight regression in his offensive rating could still mean Maggette produces more around 8 wins than 6. That's a +6 wins for the Bucks. Then! Let's say Maggette steals a lot of minutes from Carlos Delfino. John Salmons had a .345 WSR in Milwaukee; Delfino had a .211. Delfino is an average player who would be nice to bring off the bench. Now for the Bucks, an average producer gets reduced minutes while a productive player like Maggette takes his place. More wins. Jennings will get better, so more wins. However, there's no evidence that Chris Douglas-Roberts is remotely useful. .041 WSR for CDR. At best, Scott Skiles can turn him into a defensive minded, slashing bench player. At worst, he doesn't play much and the Bucks have no harm done except for a meaningless 2nd round pick. All in all, it's exciting to be a Bucks fan, when last year, I thought they were one of the most doomed teams in the league. The only thing that can stand in their way is Andrew Bogut returning to his middling form prior to last year, Luke Ridnour returns to form after having an awesome year out of nowhere, and John Salmons flames out again like he did earlier this year in Chicago. It seems as if trading him is the only thing that fires up Salmons. I can't believe I'm saying this, but it's going to be interesting to watch.
Here's the skeletal overview of a Z-Bo, Jefferson trade. Both guys are undersized offensive-minded guys who give a lot on defense. From that standpoint, these are almost the exact same guys, so I don't know how this trade interests either team. From a production standpoint, Al Jefferson is a career .248 player, his best year being .285. Zach Randolph is a .209 player with his best year being .369. Yep, this trade makes no sense. The TWolves should want to move Jefferson for a wing, so they can take Demarcus Cousins, someone who can play with Kevin Love. Trading Jefferson for the same guy is stupid, especially since he's older and probably crazy. Then they'd have to pass on Cousins at #4 and end up settling for the guy I think is the bust of the draft, Wesley Johnson. I just hope my man Kevin Love gets out of there before he sinks into clinical depression.
What the Bucks had was Charlie Bell's .124 WIn Share Rate. Way below average. He accounted for 2 wins of the Buck's 46. Dan Gadzuric had a .159 and accounted for .5 win. So, the Bucks shipped out 2.5 wins from last year's team. They're bringing back Maggette's .303, who won 6.3 games for Golden State last year. He had his best offensive season ever, despite being 30. Raw numbers suggest the Bucks just won themselves 4 more games. However, Maggette is going to a defensive minded team, and it's easier to play good defense when other people are playing good defense. Maggette had a very good offensive rating despite an awful defensive rating (the Golden State Way). His D Rating will go up quite a bit just playing with the Bucks. That means that even a slight regression in his offensive rating could still mean Maggette produces more around 8 wins than 6. That's a +6 wins for the Bucks. Then! Let's say Maggette steals a lot of minutes from Carlos Delfino. John Salmons had a .345 WSR in Milwaukee; Delfino had a .211. Delfino is an average player who would be nice to bring off the bench. Now for the Bucks, an average producer gets reduced minutes while a productive player like Maggette takes his place. More wins. Jennings will get better, so more wins. However, there's no evidence that Chris Douglas-Roberts is remotely useful. .041 WSR for CDR. At best, Scott Skiles can turn him into a defensive minded, slashing bench player. At worst, he doesn't play much and the Bucks have no harm done except for a meaningless 2nd round pick. All in all, it's exciting to be a Bucks fan, when last year, I thought they were one of the most doomed teams in the league. The only thing that can stand in their way is Andrew Bogut returning to his middling form prior to last year, Luke Ridnour returns to form after having an awesome year out of nowhere, and John Salmons flames out again like he did earlier this year in Chicago. It seems as if trading him is the only thing that fires up Salmons. I can't believe I'm saying this, but it's going to be interesting to watch.
Here's the skeletal overview of a Z-Bo, Jefferson trade. Both guys are undersized offensive-minded guys who give a lot on defense. From that standpoint, these are almost the exact same guys, so I don't know how this trade interests either team. From a production standpoint, Al Jefferson is a career .248 player, his best year being .285. Zach Randolph is a .209 player with his best year being .369. Yep, this trade makes no sense. The TWolves should want to move Jefferson for a wing, so they can take Demarcus Cousins, someone who can play with Kevin Love. Trading Jefferson for the same guy is stupid, especially since he's older and probably crazy. Then they'd have to pass on Cousins at #4 and end up settling for the guy I think is the bust of the draft, Wesley Johnson. I just hope my man Kevin Love gets out of there before he sinks into clinical depression.
Wednesday, June 2, 2010
David vs. Hakeem
To date, one of the most fascinating things I've learned since starting up this blog was in my historical review of Hakeem Olajuwon in The Post of Basketball. I thought advanced stats would marvel at Hakeem, but in fact, it did the opposite. Win Share Rate found that Hakeem was the 14th best big man ever. In contrast, Bill Simmons' The Book of Basketball ranked Olajuwon as the 10th best player ever (since then, he has unofficially moved Kobe into the top 10). While we're at it, Simmons put Robinson as the 28th best player ever. Wow. As my Post of Basketball concluded (with no subjective revision on my part) was that David Robinson was the 2nd best player ever, just slightly behind Michael Jordan. Robinson has been panned and usually comes out of the short end of the Robinson-Olajuwon debate. On the surface, it's understandable. When the league was up for grabs following the Jordan retirement in 1994, it was Olajuwon's Rockets who cleaned up repeat titles, beating the Spurs in the process. So why does advanced stats have Olajuwon as the 14th best big man ever and Robinson as the best (Kareem would have been first with fewer Death Years at 55 years old)?
The interesting part, as I wrote about, was that Olajuwon's resume really wasn't that impressive, outside of the championships. Spotty records and playoff bow-outs. He's noted for having bad teammates, but how does his cast compare to Robinson's? This post will expound more on why Olajuwon is knocked down a few pegs by advanced stats and why Robinson looks so great, even though he's a passing thought when talking about greatest players.
The criteria for this great bout will be as followed: basic box score career statistics, advanced career statistics, standard and advanced playoff statistics, head-to-head competition, and the intricate teammate comparison.
Olajuwon played 18 seasons, while Robinson played in 13 (14 technically, but only played 6 games in 1996). Despite the added years, they both had primes and late-career declines.
Robinson: 987 games. 21.1 PPG. 10.6 RPG. 2.5 APG. 51.8% FG. 8.3 FTA/PG. 73.6% FT. 3.0 BPG. 1.4 SPG. 2.4 TPG. --Playoffs-- 123 games. 18.1 PPG. 10.6 RPG. 2.3 RPG. 47.9% FG. 7.9 FTA/PG. 70.8% FT. 2.5 BPG. 1.2 SPG. 2.3 TPG.
Olajuwon: 1238 games. 21.8 PPG. 11.1 RPG. 2.5 APG. 51.2% FG. 6.2 FTA/PG. 71.2% FT. 3.1 BPG. 1.7 SPG. 3.0 TPG. --Playoffs--145 games. 25.9 PPG. 11.2 RPG. 3.2 APG. 52.8% FG. 7.1 FTA/PG. 71.9% FT. 3.3 BPG. 1.7 SPG. 2.9 TPG.
In basic box score statistics, Robinson and Olajuwon are so, so close in every category during the regular season. The only advantage is Robinson going to the line an extra trip per game than Hakeem. From this, there doesn't appear to be enough difference in these two's numbers to suggest that Robinson is the best big man ever and Olajuwon is 14th. One thing my Post of Basketball didn't account for was playoff performance. From these statistics, Robinson got significantly worse in the postseason, while Olajuwon skyrocketed. This is bad for the gawdy claims in the Post of Basketball. Hakeem is making Simmons look like a genius. When I expected Hakeem to be the 2nd best big man ever, way ahead of David, this type of playoff production was what I had in mind. On to the advanced stats, which adjust for pace and factor in cumlative production.
Robinson: 58.3% TS. 17.3% Reb Rt. 12.4% Ast Rt. 11.9% TO Rt. 7.8% Blks+Stls Rt. 26.2% Use Rt. 116 Off Rating. 96 Def Rating. 178.7 Win Shares. .521 WSR.--Playoffs--54.7% TS. 17.5 Reb Rt. 12.3% Ast Rt. 12.1 TO Rt. 7.1% Blks+Stls Rt. 25.1% Use Rt. 110 Off Rating. 96 Def Rating. 17.5 Win Shares. .415 WSR.
Olajuwon: 55.3% TS. 17.2% Reb Rt. 12.1% Ast Rt. 13.1% TO Rt. 7.8% Blks+Stls Rt. 27.1% Use Rt. 108 Off Rating. 98 Def Rating. 162.8 Win Shares. .368 WSR.--Playoffs--56.9% TS. 16.0% Reb Rt. 15.6% Ast Rt. 11.4% TO Rt. 7.7% Blks+Stls Rt. 28.1% Use Rt. 112 Off Rating. 101 Def Rating. 22.6 Win Shares. .393 WSR.
Intrigue! The close regular season pendulum gets swung heavily towards Robinson. Little percentages start to add in advanced stats, so David pushes ahead in True Shooting Percentage, and Turnover Rate. In the playoffs, Robinson nosedives. Absolutely nosedives. Everything goes in the wrong direction. It's probably no coincidence that the Spurs had a tendency to disappoint in the playoffs pre-Duncan. Their best player's production loss of 20% when the playoffs started is going to hurt a team's chances. Olajuwon, meanwhile, got better in the playoffs, increasing 7% of production. Despite the big changes, David still edged him. Although it reflects poorly on the league's 2nd most productive player ever if he disappears in the playoffs. Head-to-Head might give us another perspective, albeit without advanced stats.
42 games not including playoffs. Robinson 30 wins. Hakeem 12 wins. The stats are again close, looking similar to their respective regular season career numbers. However, in their lone playoff meeting, the Rockets won in 6 games en route to the championship. And now the challenging teammate tracker. Was Hakeem sacked with sorry teammates while David failed to get the job done?
Robinson's top 3 teammates, by year (min. 25 minutes a game)
1989: Terry Cummings .308, Mo Cheeks .249, Willie Anderson .233 (important sidenote, the Spurs the year before won 21 games and landed the #1 pick. Without making any major upgrades in the offseason besides Cummings, David Robinson put on a world beating rookie season and they won 56 games. That's a 25 win improvement.)
1990: Sean Elliott .289, Rod Strickland .275, Terry Cummings .255
1991: Terry Cummings .325, Sean Elliott .269, Rod Strickland .253
1992: Antoine Carr .285, Avery Johnson .256, Sean Elliott .234
1993: Vinny Del Negro .293, Dale Ellis .293, Dennis Rodman .291
1994: Dennis Rodman .370, Sean Elliott .304, Vinny Del Negro .288
1995: Vinny Del Negro .300, Avery Johnson .295, Sean Elliott .265
1996: No David, won 20 games. Will Purdue .229, Dominique Wilkins .175, DelNegro .138
1997: Tim Duncan .400, Avery Johnson .251, Vinny Del Negro .215
1998: Tim Duncan .443, Mario Elie .349, Sean Elliott .232
1999: Tim Duncan .452, Terry Porter .347 (23.7 MPG), Avery Johnson .245
2000: Tim Duncan .416, Derek Anderson .346, Antonio Daniels .320
2001: Tim Duncan* .535, Steve Smith .289, Antonio Daniels .271
2002: Tim Duncan* .519, Tony Parker .278, Malik Rose .269 (24.5 MPG)
*- Denotes best player besides Robinson. There you have it. Before Duncan arrived, Robinson's best teammate was Dennis Rodman, who only played in 49 games. His core consisted of Sean Elliott, Terry Cummings, Vinny Del Negro, and Avery Johnson. You typically want a .350 player to flank your superstar, but he was lucky to get .300 out of his 2nd best player. Robinson was Tim's superior for 4 years before Duncan finally entered his prime, winning a championship as the lead dog. When you look at the 1998-99 championship team, they weren't loaded with talent. Duncan and Robinson were awesome and Mario Elie was great that year, but then Elliott is a huge drop-off as the 4th guy. They won that title and it's a testament to how good Robinson was. So, it wasn't like Robinson was playing with Charles Barkley and Reggie Miller while failing to make the Finals pre-Duncan. His teammates don't hold up, except the late career arrival of Duncan. Despite this, Robinson's teams managed to win 50 games 11 out of 13 years (49 and 47 wins, so close). So, in the playoffs, while Robinson deserves the blame for going downhill, he had no teammates to support him when he was blazing hot.
Robinson's teammates don't set a very high standard, so it'll be interesting to see how Olajuwon's looks.
1984: Rodney McCray .283, John Lucas .276 (24.6 MPG), Lewis Lloyd .221. (This was the season Ralph Sampson averaged 22 and 10. He came out below average, surprisingly. He used a lot of possessions, which were used inefficiently; low TS%, average rebound rate, and high turnover rate. Kinda like the center version of Monta Ellis).
1985: John Lucus .269, Lewis Lloyd .258, Rodney McCray .241 (Similar story with Samp)
1986: Rodney McCray .300, Jim Petersen .196, Robert Reid .158
1987: Rodney McCray .283, Allen Leavell .237, Purvis Short .226 (24.1 MPG)
1988: Otis Thorpe .278, Sleepy Floyd .276, Buck Johnson .195
1989: Mitchell Wiggins .292, Otis Thorpe .288, Sleepy Floyd .240
1990: Otis Thorpe .342, Kenny Smith .334, Vernon Maxwell .206
1991: Otis Thorpe .291, Kenny Smith .187, Vernon Maxwell .144
1992: Kenny Smith .339, Otis Thorpe .255, Vernon Maxwell .173
1993: Otis Thorpe .337, Kenny Smith .276, Robert Horry .249
1994: Clyde Drexler* .400, Kenny Smith .301, Mario Elie .253
1995: Clyde Drexler .336, Mario Elie .274, Sam Cassell .232
1996: Charles Barkley* .468, Drexler .357, Mario Elie .331 (all higher than Hakeem)
1997: Charles Barkley* .383, Clyde Drexler** .275, Kevin Willis .273
1998: Charles Barkley* .446, Scottie Pippen .244, Cuttino Mobley .158
1999: Kelvin Cato .266*, Walt Williams .237**, Steve Francis .231***
2000: Steve Francis .382*, Cuttino Mobley .273, Shandon Anderson .163
2001: Jerome Williams .305*, Vince Carter** .294, Morris Peterson .246***
Interestingly, both players won 2 titles, only winning 1 as the alpha dog. Like Robinson, Hakeem had Barkley join a little too late in the game, as Olajuwon was slowing down from his .400 days. Before that, all Hakeem had was a solid but not great trio of Otis Thorpe, Kenny Smith, and Vernon Maxwell (Maxwell was pretty bad). The teammates certainly aren't better than what Robinson had, but they at least seem comparable. Very few .300 guys. Olajuwon's Rockets won 50 games 6 times in 17 years, compared to Robinson's 11 of 13, and again, their teammates seem comparable. In fact, Thorpe was often more than anything Robinson got before Duncan.
So, this post has told us a few things. Head-to-head was dominated by Robinson's Spurs, with the numbers edge going to Robinson, as well. Robinson was great in the regular season, while he consistently backslid in the playoffs. Olajuwon was very good in the regular season, but got even better during the playoffs. Their teammates weren't much different early in their career; solid role players and middling nobodys. Ultimately, I believe Robinson's legacy could have been a lot different if brought his regular season dominance into the playoffs. That probably would have resulted in at least 1 more championship and a few more impressive runs. Olajuwon stepped up in the playoffs and delivered on repeat titles. But in their full bodies of work, Robinson has the edge largely because of his efficiency in relation to the more shot-happy Olajuwon. It may seem bittersweet to award the prize to the guy who shrank in the playoffs, but still, all the evidence indicates that Robinson was the man of his era and one of the best all of time.
The interesting part, as I wrote about, was that Olajuwon's resume really wasn't that impressive, outside of the championships. Spotty records and playoff bow-outs. He's noted for having bad teammates, but how does his cast compare to Robinson's? This post will expound more on why Olajuwon is knocked down a few pegs by advanced stats and why Robinson looks so great, even though he's a passing thought when talking about greatest players.
The criteria for this great bout will be as followed: basic box score career statistics, advanced career statistics, standard and advanced playoff statistics, head-to-head competition, and the intricate teammate comparison.
Olajuwon played 18 seasons, while Robinson played in 13 (14 technically, but only played 6 games in 1996). Despite the added years, they both had primes and late-career declines.
Robinson: 987 games. 21.1 PPG. 10.6 RPG. 2.5 APG. 51.8% FG. 8.3 FTA/PG. 73.6% FT. 3.0 BPG. 1.4 SPG. 2.4 TPG. --Playoffs-- 123 games. 18.1 PPG. 10.6 RPG. 2.3 RPG. 47.9% FG. 7.9 FTA/PG. 70.8% FT. 2.5 BPG. 1.2 SPG. 2.3 TPG.
Olajuwon: 1238 games. 21.8 PPG. 11.1 RPG. 2.5 APG. 51.2% FG. 6.2 FTA/PG. 71.2% FT. 3.1 BPG. 1.7 SPG. 3.0 TPG. --Playoffs--145 games. 25.9 PPG. 11.2 RPG. 3.2 APG. 52.8% FG. 7.1 FTA/PG. 71.9% FT. 3.3 BPG. 1.7 SPG. 2.9 TPG.
In basic box score statistics, Robinson and Olajuwon are so, so close in every category during the regular season. The only advantage is Robinson going to the line an extra trip per game than Hakeem. From this, there doesn't appear to be enough difference in these two's numbers to suggest that Robinson is the best big man ever and Olajuwon is 14th. One thing my Post of Basketball didn't account for was playoff performance. From these statistics, Robinson got significantly worse in the postseason, while Olajuwon skyrocketed. This is bad for the gawdy claims in the Post of Basketball. Hakeem is making Simmons look like a genius. When I expected Hakeem to be the 2nd best big man ever, way ahead of David, this type of playoff production was what I had in mind. On to the advanced stats, which adjust for pace and factor in cumlative production.
Robinson: 58.3% TS. 17.3% Reb Rt. 12.4% Ast Rt. 11.9% TO Rt. 7.8% Blks+Stls Rt. 26.2% Use Rt. 116 Off Rating. 96 Def Rating. 178.7 Win Shares. .521 WSR.--Playoffs--54.7% TS. 17.5 Reb Rt. 12.3% Ast Rt. 12.1 TO Rt. 7.1% Blks+Stls Rt. 25.1% Use Rt. 110 Off Rating. 96 Def Rating. 17.5 Win Shares. .415 WSR.
Olajuwon: 55.3% TS. 17.2% Reb Rt. 12.1% Ast Rt. 13.1% TO Rt. 7.8% Blks+Stls Rt. 27.1% Use Rt. 108 Off Rating. 98 Def Rating. 162.8 Win Shares. .368 WSR.--Playoffs--56.9% TS. 16.0% Reb Rt. 15.6% Ast Rt. 11.4% TO Rt. 7.7% Blks+Stls Rt. 28.1% Use Rt. 112 Off Rating. 101 Def Rating. 22.6 Win Shares. .393 WSR.
Intrigue! The close regular season pendulum gets swung heavily towards Robinson. Little percentages start to add in advanced stats, so David pushes ahead in True Shooting Percentage, and Turnover Rate. In the playoffs, Robinson nosedives. Absolutely nosedives. Everything goes in the wrong direction. It's probably no coincidence that the Spurs had a tendency to disappoint in the playoffs pre-Duncan. Their best player's production loss of 20% when the playoffs started is going to hurt a team's chances. Olajuwon, meanwhile, got better in the playoffs, increasing 7% of production. Despite the big changes, David still edged him. Although it reflects poorly on the league's 2nd most productive player ever if he disappears in the playoffs. Head-to-Head might give us another perspective, albeit without advanced stats.
42 games not including playoffs. Robinson 30 wins. Hakeem 12 wins. The stats are again close, looking similar to their respective regular season career numbers. However, in their lone playoff meeting, the Rockets won in 6 games en route to the championship. And now the challenging teammate tracker. Was Hakeem sacked with sorry teammates while David failed to get the job done?
Robinson's top 3 teammates, by year (min. 25 minutes a game)
1989: Terry Cummings .308, Mo Cheeks .249, Willie Anderson .233 (important sidenote, the Spurs the year before won 21 games and landed the #1 pick. Without making any major upgrades in the offseason besides Cummings, David Robinson put on a world beating rookie season and they won 56 games. That's a 25 win improvement.)
1990: Sean Elliott .289, Rod Strickland .275, Terry Cummings .255
1991: Terry Cummings .325, Sean Elliott .269, Rod Strickland .253
1992: Antoine Carr .285, Avery Johnson .256, Sean Elliott .234
1993: Vinny Del Negro .293, Dale Ellis .293, Dennis Rodman .291
1994: Dennis Rodman .370, Sean Elliott .304, Vinny Del Negro .288
1995: Vinny Del Negro .300, Avery Johnson .295, Sean Elliott .265
1996: No David, won 20 games. Will Purdue .229, Dominique Wilkins .175, DelNegro .138
1997: Tim Duncan .400, Avery Johnson .251, Vinny Del Negro .215
1998: Tim Duncan .443, Mario Elie .349, Sean Elliott .232
1999: Tim Duncan .452, Terry Porter .347 (23.7 MPG), Avery Johnson .245
2000: Tim Duncan .416, Derek Anderson .346, Antonio Daniels .320
2001: Tim Duncan* .535, Steve Smith .289, Antonio Daniels .271
2002: Tim Duncan* .519, Tony Parker .278, Malik Rose .269 (24.5 MPG)
*- Denotes best player besides Robinson. There you have it. Before Duncan arrived, Robinson's best teammate was Dennis Rodman, who only played in 49 games. His core consisted of Sean Elliott, Terry Cummings, Vinny Del Negro, and Avery Johnson. You typically want a .350 player to flank your superstar, but he was lucky to get .300 out of his 2nd best player. Robinson was Tim's superior for 4 years before Duncan finally entered his prime, winning a championship as the lead dog. When you look at the 1998-99 championship team, they weren't loaded with talent. Duncan and Robinson were awesome and Mario Elie was great that year, but then Elliott is a huge drop-off as the 4th guy. They won that title and it's a testament to how good Robinson was. So, it wasn't like Robinson was playing with Charles Barkley and Reggie Miller while failing to make the Finals pre-Duncan. His teammates don't hold up, except the late career arrival of Duncan. Despite this, Robinson's teams managed to win 50 games 11 out of 13 years (49 and 47 wins, so close). So, in the playoffs, while Robinson deserves the blame for going downhill, he had no teammates to support him when he was blazing hot.
Robinson's teammates don't set a very high standard, so it'll be interesting to see how Olajuwon's looks.
1984: Rodney McCray .283, John Lucas .276 (24.6 MPG), Lewis Lloyd .221. (This was the season Ralph Sampson averaged 22 and 10. He came out below average, surprisingly. He used a lot of possessions, which were used inefficiently; low TS%, average rebound rate, and high turnover rate. Kinda like the center version of Monta Ellis).
1985: John Lucus .269, Lewis Lloyd .258, Rodney McCray .241 (Similar story with Samp)
1986: Rodney McCray .300, Jim Petersen .196, Robert Reid .158
1987: Rodney McCray .283, Allen Leavell .237, Purvis Short .226 (24.1 MPG)
1988: Otis Thorpe .278, Sleepy Floyd .276, Buck Johnson .195
1989: Mitchell Wiggins .292, Otis Thorpe .288, Sleepy Floyd .240
1990: Otis Thorpe .342, Kenny Smith .334, Vernon Maxwell .206
1991: Otis Thorpe .291, Kenny Smith .187, Vernon Maxwell .144
1992: Kenny Smith .339, Otis Thorpe .255, Vernon Maxwell .173
1993: Otis Thorpe .337, Kenny Smith .276, Robert Horry .249
1994: Clyde Drexler* .400, Kenny Smith .301, Mario Elie .253
1995: Clyde Drexler .336, Mario Elie .274, Sam Cassell .232
1996: Charles Barkley* .468, Drexler .357, Mario Elie .331 (all higher than Hakeem)
1997: Charles Barkley* .383, Clyde Drexler** .275, Kevin Willis .273
1998: Charles Barkley* .446, Scottie Pippen .244, Cuttino Mobley .158
1999: Kelvin Cato .266*, Walt Williams .237**, Steve Francis .231***
2000: Steve Francis .382*, Cuttino Mobley .273, Shandon Anderson .163
2001: Jerome Williams .305*, Vince Carter** .294, Morris Peterson .246***
Interestingly, both players won 2 titles, only winning 1 as the alpha dog. Like Robinson, Hakeem had Barkley join a little too late in the game, as Olajuwon was slowing down from his .400 days. Before that, all Hakeem had was a solid but not great trio of Otis Thorpe, Kenny Smith, and Vernon Maxwell (Maxwell was pretty bad). The teammates certainly aren't better than what Robinson had, but they at least seem comparable. Very few .300 guys. Olajuwon's Rockets won 50 games 6 times in 17 years, compared to Robinson's 11 of 13, and again, their teammates seem comparable. In fact, Thorpe was often more than anything Robinson got before Duncan.
So, this post has told us a few things. Head-to-head was dominated by Robinson's Spurs, with the numbers edge going to Robinson, as well. Robinson was great in the regular season, while he consistently backslid in the playoffs. Olajuwon was very good in the regular season, but got even better during the playoffs. Their teammates weren't much different early in their career; solid role players and middling nobodys. Ultimately, I believe Robinson's legacy could have been a lot different if brought his regular season dominance into the playoffs. That probably would have resulted in at least 1 more championship and a few more impressive runs. Olajuwon stepped up in the playoffs and delivered on repeat titles. But in their full bodies of work, Robinson has the edge largely because of his efficiency in relation to the more shot-happy Olajuwon. It may seem bittersweet to award the prize to the guy who shrank in the playoffs, but still, all the evidence indicates that Robinson was the man of his era and one of the best all of time.
Shoddy Finals Preview
Going by the Win Share Rate and the top 7 players for both teams, injuries nonwithstanding, let's match-up the Celtics and Lakers by position. This is also overly objective considering how match-ups dictate production. For instance, if Kevin Durant is a .500 player, Ron Artest for 6 games playing defense can make that number significantly less. And he did. Same thing goes for the Paul Pierce/Artest match-up. So be flexible with these. Here we go, both regular season and playoff stats.
Point Guard
Rajon Rondo- .324 (regular season)/.341
Derek Fisher- .175/.167
Analysis: Rondo had been +.400 in the playoffs before his injuries, so his health is going to determine a lot in this series. Either way, Rondo has a big edge here in raw WSR, but throw in that Fisher has A LOT of trouble guarding athletic guys like Rondo and it's going to be a key complexion for the series. Kobe might take Rondo, which leaves Ray Allen more options and so on. There's a lot of avenues here, but what's clear is that Rondo has a big advantage already, and it's only going to get bigger.
Shooting Guard
Ray Allen- .280/.339
Kobe Bryant- .332/.394
Analysis: Again, crossmatching will determine a lot. Both Ray and Kobe had subpar regular seasons, but have totally revved back up in the playoffs. Kobe is back to playing like an elite, so big advantage to Kobe in this one.
Small Forward
Paul Pierce- .344/.307
Ron Artest- .204/.136
Analysis: If there's good news for Boston is that LeBron shut Pierce down, yet Boston still dominated the series. I fully expect Artest to make life hell for Pierce, ala Durant. Ron's numbers are awful and it's hard to believe that Pierce, however well he's guarded, won't sink as low as Artest's WSR. Advantage to Pierce, but the advantage is mitigated by Artest's defense.
Power Forward
Kevin Garnett- .354/.294
Pau Gasol- .458/.436
Analysis: Big advantage for the Lakers, but unlike Rondo/Fisher, Rondo can extend the advantage. Garnett can give Gasol fits with his length and natural defensive ability, but Gasol won't be able to do much to Garnett. KG is a spot-up mid-range shooter, which isn't in Gasol's wheelhouse. Still an advantage for LA, but KG has a good chance to close the gap by playing terrific defense on Pau.
Center
Kendrick Perkins- .241/.138
Andrew Bynum- .395/.336
Analysis: Bynum's health is way up in the air, even more than Rondo, so it's a guessing game what he can give LA. Perkins' defense can impact Bynum, as well, but in the playoffs, Perkins has been terrible. I guess this is a wait and see, because Bynum's health and Perkins defense, plus foul trouble, is going to unpredictable but huge.
Bench
Rasheed Wallace- .202/.301
Glen Davis- .172/.325
Lamar Odom- .298/.274
Jordan Farmar- .190/.188
Analysis: Odom clearly has the most upside, but the Odom for Bynum switch isn't the best idea, considering how much higher Bynum is ranked than LO. Both Wallace and Davis are playing well beyond what they did in the regular season, so who can be sure what's real and what may be fleeting. Farmar is steady, but ultimately, an average bench player. Overall bench talent goes to Boston, who can also bring in Nate Robinson and Tony Davis, while Shannon Brown and Sasha Vujacic aren't as good of players.
Overall top 7 (playoff WSR)
Boston- .292
LA- .276
Based on the top 7 players in raw playoff WSR, Boston has the advantage. Given the fact that Rondo can (and has proven to) play better, as well as KG limiting Gasol, and Bynum's injury, that team advantage can rise. Artest slowing Pierce, Rondo not being 100%, and having home-court can lessen the gap. Tentatively, based solely on team WSR, I'm saying Boston in 7.
Point Guard
Rajon Rondo- .324 (regular season)/.341
Derek Fisher- .175/.167
Analysis: Rondo had been +.400 in the playoffs before his injuries, so his health is going to determine a lot in this series. Either way, Rondo has a big edge here in raw WSR, but throw in that Fisher has A LOT of trouble guarding athletic guys like Rondo and it's going to be a key complexion for the series. Kobe might take Rondo, which leaves Ray Allen more options and so on. There's a lot of avenues here, but what's clear is that Rondo has a big advantage already, and it's only going to get bigger.
Shooting Guard
Ray Allen- .280/.339
Kobe Bryant- .332/.394
Analysis: Again, crossmatching will determine a lot. Both Ray and Kobe had subpar regular seasons, but have totally revved back up in the playoffs. Kobe is back to playing like an elite, so big advantage to Kobe in this one.
Small Forward
Paul Pierce- .344/.307
Ron Artest- .204/.136
Analysis: If there's good news for Boston is that LeBron shut Pierce down, yet Boston still dominated the series. I fully expect Artest to make life hell for Pierce, ala Durant. Ron's numbers are awful and it's hard to believe that Pierce, however well he's guarded, won't sink as low as Artest's WSR. Advantage to Pierce, but the advantage is mitigated by Artest's defense.
Power Forward
Kevin Garnett- .354/.294
Pau Gasol- .458/.436
Analysis: Big advantage for the Lakers, but unlike Rondo/Fisher, Rondo can extend the advantage. Garnett can give Gasol fits with his length and natural defensive ability, but Gasol won't be able to do much to Garnett. KG is a spot-up mid-range shooter, which isn't in Gasol's wheelhouse. Still an advantage for LA, but KG has a good chance to close the gap by playing terrific defense on Pau.
Center
Kendrick Perkins- .241/.138
Andrew Bynum- .395/.336
Analysis: Bynum's health is way up in the air, even more than Rondo, so it's a guessing game what he can give LA. Perkins' defense can impact Bynum, as well, but in the playoffs, Perkins has been terrible. I guess this is a wait and see, because Bynum's health and Perkins defense, plus foul trouble, is going to unpredictable but huge.
Bench
Rasheed Wallace- .202/.301
Glen Davis- .172/.325
Lamar Odom- .298/.274
Jordan Farmar- .190/.188
Analysis: Odom clearly has the most upside, but the Odom for Bynum switch isn't the best idea, considering how much higher Bynum is ranked than LO. Both Wallace and Davis are playing well beyond what they did in the regular season, so who can be sure what's real and what may be fleeting. Farmar is steady, but ultimately, an average bench player. Overall bench talent goes to Boston, who can also bring in Nate Robinson and Tony Davis, while Shannon Brown and Sasha Vujacic aren't as good of players.
Overall top 7 (playoff WSR)
Boston- .292
LA- .276
Based on the top 7 players in raw playoff WSR, Boston has the advantage. Given the fact that Rondo can (and has proven to) play better, as well as KG limiting Gasol, and Bynum's injury, that team advantage can rise. Artest slowing Pierce, Rondo not being 100%, and having home-court can lessen the gap. Tentatively, based solely on team WSR, I'm saying Boston in 7.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
