Don't Ever Give Up: The Basketball Blog

DGUtube: Don't let the door hit you on your way out.

2009-09-04T13:26:00.001-04:00

Bruce Bowen made a career out of being a dirty player on a team whose coach intimidated the refs to such a degree that they were afraid to apply the same standard to Bowen that they did to others. It was an extremely successful combination.

Bowen had no discernible basketball skills but was good at stealthily playing the game outside of its intended rules. However, unlike somewhat lovable dirty players like Larry Bird, Charles Oakley, or Bill Laimbeer, Bowen was always afraid to commit to real confrontation, running to the officials when the going got tough. This trait was ugly and obvious and even many Spurs fans were embarrassed to support him.

Although Bowen was dishonorable in the truest sense of the word, this was his greatest asset. Other athletes let pride or a sense of self-respect get in the way of the kind of uncontrolled willingness to cheat that could get in another player's head and change a game. Bruce Bowen had absolutely no reservations, and it took a Nixonian leader like Gregg Popovic to recognize this and utilize Bowen as his very own plumber.

After basketball, Bowen will operate the hair salon he owns with his wife. It is fitting that he will find profit in another job where those who believe in manliness do not venture.

Enjoy below a compilation of some of Bruce Bowen's hijinx.

DGUtube: Best Summer Camp Ever

2009-09-03T16:27:00.001-04:00

Bball Trick Shots Summer Camp Edition - Watch more Funny Videos

Arcane Birthday Biographies: Mighty Mouse

2009-09-03T13:00:00.001-04:00

"Mighty Mouse was always saving people, always coming to the rescue. He was the man. He could get you out of any jam. That's what I always wanted to be like."

"Oh, and yeah, he was small." -Damon Stoudamire

"...when the Toronto pick was announced, Raptor fans at the SkyDome in Toronto, the site of the draft, booed loudly. They wanted [Isiah] Thomas to choose Ed O'Bannon..." -Sports Illustrated

"This franchise isn't in it to go to the playoffs someday. We're here to work toward winning a championship, and anything short of that is failure. That's one of the reasons we wanted Damon. He comes across as the type of player who won't be satisfied to have a good career and no ring." -Isiah Thomas

Five foot nine inch Damon Stoudamire's had a good career, but no ring. Today, we celebrate his birthday and remember his many ups and downs in a career that saw its share of disappointment and enmity. We also remember that he was one of the most talented point guards of the late 90's.

Damon Stoudamire was a native of Portland, Oregon, and he grew up without a father. His uncles got him into sports and despite his small stature, Damon was a natural basketball player. He won two championships in high school before leaving town for Lute Olson's Arizona Wildcats.

In Arizona, Stoudamire formed what some called the best backcourt in college basketball with Khalid Reeves, and led the team to the 1994 Final Four (which Arizona lost in the semi finals). Stoudamire played one more season after the Final Four, averaged 22 and 7 his senior year, and was projected to go in the mid-teens in the draft. Isiah Thomas, however, intervened and in a risky, highly-criticized move, picking him seventh. Stoudamire's rookie contract had a provision that mandated that he attend that year's NBA finals (Bulls over Sonics) in order to whet his appetite.

The pick paid off. Unfortunately, the 1995-96 Raptors may have been the worst team in NBA history. The five leading scorers after Stoudamire that year were, in order: Sharone Wright, Tracy Murray, Oliver Miller (yes, that Oliver Miller), Willie Anderson, and Tony Massenburg. The fact that the team won 21 games is a tribute to Stoudamire, and he was the only thing Toronto had going for it.

The next year, the team added Marcus Camby and Walt Williams and won thirty games. So what did Isiah Thomas, the GM/VP do? Trade Stoudamire for Kenny Anderson, of course.

The underlying reasons for this trade were actually more nuanced than they now seem (and on its face it's a terrible basketball decision). Stoudamire indicated that he would want a lot of money and conditions if Toronto intended to resign him, and that he might not resign at all. As a result, they started shopping him. The Raptors were literally minutes away from moving Stoudamire in a three-team deal that would have sent Penny Hardaway to the Nets and perhaps changed the course of NBA history, but Stoudamire told the Magic he would not re-sign with them, and the deal was off. Damon wanted to go home to Portland, where he would be a hero. He was partially successful.

When Stoudamire arrived in Portland, he was not popular. He was initially benched for Scottie Pippen, who split time with Bonzi Wells at the point, and it looked like his career was in jeopardy. However, he made it back to the starting lineup and eventually became a key component in the most balanced team in the NBA. Before long, the Blazers would establish themselves as one of the best teams not to reach the finals in the last twenty years.

That 1999-2000 Trailblazers are most famous for their tragic combustion against the Lakers in which they blew a 19 point lead in the final minutes of the seventh game of the Western Conference Finals. Although that memory is surely unpleasant, it's easy to forget just how amazing it is that any team was able to take the Shaq and Kobe juggernaut to a seventh game, let alone have them down almost twenty in the fourth quarter. That year, the Pacers were the prospective opponents in the NBA finals, and the winners of the West were all but guaranteed a championship. The Blazers were incredibly balanced and poised to beat the Lakers, but unfortunately fell victim to one of the greatest rallies in the league's history.

From there, the Mighty Mouse began an undignified downhill path to retirement. His consistency deteriorated and could no longer carry his team. He was held up as an example of the bad attitudes on the Jail Blazers because of a couple of possession charges (one of which was thrown out when a Judge ruled police had illegally searched Stoudamire's home). There was still talent there (in 2005, Stoudamire scored his career high of 54 points at age 31 in what can only be described as a massive anomaly) but the rest of his career became a quiet wind-down as he played the part of the NBA veteran point guard who can give you some quality minutes but is essentially disposable.

Stoudamire's career was marred by bad choices (which his agent probably had more to do with than him), bad publicity, and bad losses, but he was one of the quickest, best point guards of his generation. Happy birthday, Mighty Mouse.

And now, the reason why Ricky Rubio will not play in the NBA

2009-09-03T11:11:00.000-04:00

What follows is, I swear to god, a quote from Ricky Rubio that explains why he will not play in the NBA this year. From me: No comment.

"When the season ended, I entered the draft with the intention of going to the NBA," Rubio said Wednesday. "But some things happened that kept me from being ahead of the rest and I ended up No. 5, which I was happy with, but it didn't allow me the chance to go to the NBA. I tried, but in the end it wasn't to be."

Evaluating the first ESPN rankings: Eastern Conference

2009-09-02T10:35:00.002-04:00

Yeah, I know it's stupid to always be talking about ESPN, or to talk about their rankings, and I know I'm an idiot for writing this. I enjoy going through the rankings and they usually get me in the mindset for the season. Also, it's a pretty good representation of the general consensus because it is based on a vote of 53 people with an interest in the game. So to the masses out there reading this, I'm sorry. At least this isn't about Ricky Rubio.

This is ESPN's order with my annotations:

1. Cavs. The safe pick. Here's the problem: Shaq is going to absolutely blow this year. I think that will hurt their defense and move them down one spot. But in the East they may still be in first place just by virtue of LeBron.
2. Celtics. You can't really put them anywhere else, but with the high possibility of injuries, it's hard to predict what will happen to the Celtics. I think they'll have the best regular season record in the east just because they are consistent and because Rondo is becoming really, really good.
3. Magic. Lewis on steroids. Vince Carter coming to town. Hedo going to Canada. I don't like it and think they'll be worse than the Hawks this year. They seem like a team where everything came together at exactly the right time, and I don't think that will continue.
4. Hawks. Solid young team. Another year of experience. The addition of Jamal Crawford and Joe Smith. I say they're the third best team in the East. I think Marvin Williams may really come into his own this year and with him, Crawford, and Bibby on the wing and Horford and Smith down low, there are no weak points in the starting lineup.
5. Heat. I don't think Wade will make it through this season without getting injured, but he's so good that it's impossible to count out a team he plays on. If Chalmers and Beasley can step it up, which I am sure will happen at least with Chalmers, this seems like a reasonable prediction.
6. Bulls. They looked great against the Celtics and then let their second best player (who hit huge shots in the playoffs) go. But at least they pay Brad Miller and Luol Deng more than they refused to pay Gordon. I hate the move to let Gordon go but recognize that Tyrus Thomas, Rose, Noah, Deng, and Salmons are all good young players. Unfortunately, they're all in disorder. Will the Bulls play Kirk Hinrich at shooting guard? Jannero Pargo? Will that be Salmons' job? The Bulls should be ranked 9 due to their screwy mix.
7. 76ers. Elton Brand is back. They sucked with Elton Brand. They have no point guard. They have no shooters. They have no center. "But Marrese Speights' had a top-10 Hollinger rating!" They will not make the playoffs, even though I think Eddie Jordan is a great coach. Put them in at 12.
8. Wizards. Obviously everything hinges on Gilbert Arenas. Because he's been so unreliable for the last two years, I'm putting this team at 11. Randy Foye and Mike Miller won't be difference makers.
9. Raptors. The Raptors look legit to me. Calderon and Jack are good point guards, Belinelli is a decent SG, Turkoglu obviously can mash, Bosh is an all-star, and Bargnani sneaky came into his own last year. I don't know why for the life of me anyone would think this team is worse than the Sixers. I think they'll finish at 6.
10. Pistons. They were 39 and 43 last year. They subtracted Rasheed, who was on his deathbed, and added Ben Gordon, Villaneuva, Chris Wilcox, and Ben Wallace. Rodney Stuckey is poised for a big year. How the hell is this team going to miss the playoffs? I put them at a strong 7 and can't imagine why anyone would put them at 10. /notices Kwame Brown penciled in as starting center.
11. Bobcats. Great coach and great potential to be a good defensive team, but they lack that one scorer. If Gerald Henderson turns out to be ROY (i'll eat my hat) they could be a player but for now they need just a little more. 10. (/Boris Diaw "sacre bleu!")
12. Pacers. This is actually a very good team. TJ Ford is a good point guard, Dahntay Jones is coming into his own as a late-bloomer, Granger is amazing, Troy Murphy put up David Lee stats last year but shoots 40% from 3pt, and Jeff Foster, well, he sucks, but Roy Hibbert might not be bad. Plus with Tyler Hansbrough, Mike Dunleavy, Earl Watson, and Brandon Rush off the bench, the Pacers can almost go ten deep. I like them as the 8 seed. And by the way, if you don't think Tyler Hansbrough is the perfect player for this team, you don't know anything about basketball. Or Indiana. Or white people.
13. Knicks. The Knicks are currently locking out the only player that plays hard on their team. Darko Milicic will probably start at center for them. Their only young prospects at this point are Wilson Chandler and Danilo Gallinari, who play the same position. Even if they sign Lee and Robinson and/or Sessions, both of those guys are not enough to lift this team out of the basement. 15. Go Knicks.
14. Bucks. If Redd could play, this team would not be terrible. However, that's a big if. I like them starting Amir Johnson and I think Bmah a Moute may actually develop into someone good, but they need more than Ridnour at point and I don't think Charlie Bell or Brandon Jennings can get things going without an A-lister somewhere. Bogut has shown that he is a talented non-factor. 14 seems appropriate.
15. Nets. Not a good mix of players, not a good overall situation, but this is not the worst team in the east, either. Devin Harris is probably the best point guard in the eastern conference. Brook Lopez could be (/shudder) the best center in the eastern conference. I like Courtney Lee, Jarvis Hayes, and Chris Douglas-Roberts and whomever gets playing time will be at least replacement level. Bobby Simmons, if he returns healthy, is actually a pretty legit perimeter threat, and Yi Jianlian...well, he sucks, but I think the Nets are a strong 13. /Chinese government censor enters rectum

So, to recap, here are the DGU official standings predictions:
1. Celtics.
2. Cavs.
3. Hawks.
4. Magic.
5. Heat.
6. Raptors.
7. Pistons.
8. Pacers.
9. Bulls.
10. Bobcats.
11. Wizards.
12. Sixers.
13. Nets.
14. Bucks.
15. Knicks.

Marquis Daniels to Celtics

2009-09-02T08:43:00.001-04:00

Danny Ainge is quite the enigma as the Celtics general manager. On the one hand, he makes boneheaded decisions like trading for Raef LaFrentz, letting James Posey get away after he was key to their championship, and signing a busted Rasheed Wallace. On the other hand, he does consistently well in the draft and often makes great signings like this one (in which Daniels took a lower amount of $1.99M to play for the Celts).

I used to hate Ainge but obviously let up on him after the Celtics put together their championship team. I was ready to start again after he busted up their role players and left three older stars to fend for themselves, but in all honesty the team looks pretty strong going into this year. I love Marquis Daniels and think this makes the Celtics a hell of a lot more interesting.

20/20 Hindsight: Kevin Garnett

2009-09-01T13:29:00.000-04:00

This is neither here nor there, but I was just thinking about the trade of Kevin Garnett to the Celtics, which seemed like quite a one-sided deal at the time.

The players the Celtics gave up were Al Jefferson, who is quickly becoming one of the best big men in the NBA, Ryan Gomes, who actually has put up solid numbers for the last two seasons, Sebastian Telfair (bust), Gerald Green (bust), Theo Ratliff (good contract at the time), and draft picks that became Johnny Flynn and Wayne Ellington.

So the T-Wolves got at that time one money big man, a future starter, two picks that were still somewhat highly regarded, a good contract to move, and good draft picks. I think Johnny Flynn will be a good point guard so for argument's sake let's say he'll be a player.

Anyway, looking back, that was a very fair trade. Minnesota had reached the end of the line with Garnett and traded him when he had near-maximum value, and they got one sure-thing, one solid starter, and many, many blue-chip prospects. Boston got an NBA championship but last season and possibly this season will be a roller coaster of high pay and injury woes. (That is, if Danny Ainge doesn't just decide to trade Rondo because he doesn't put the seat down.)

This was one of the better trades in recent NBA history. Just sayin.

DGUtube: Big Game James

2009-09-01T13:00:00.000-04:00

The Chief versus Big Game James. Great competitors. One accused of throwing his pregnant wife down the stairs, the other of soliciting prostitutes. One day in 1989, they met, and on that day, James Worthy was the better man.

Fuck You, Ricky Rubio

2009-09-01T11:10:00.000-04:00

I'm sick and tired of hearing about Ricky Rubio and after this, I'm not going to waste my time writing about that little Spanish asshole.

WAH WAH WAH I don't want to play in Minnesota daddy! Fuck you, you Spanish cockstuffer. Go play in European leagues where everyone sucks and no one gives a shit about you.

WAH WAH WAH We drafted him and can't get him! Fuck you, David Kahn. You should have just stuck with Flynn, or gotten someone else, because Rubio sucks anyway and his only skill is passing.

WAH WAH WAH New York Knicks. Fuck you! I'm so tired of this team trying to get hyped shitty players. He sucks at everything every good Knicks point guard has ever been good at. REMEMBER CHRIS CHILDS!

Every single party who is involved in this Rubio debacle drives me nuts. The media who calls him the next Maravich (except for the fact that he can't shoot). People who think his performance in the Olympics will translate into NBA suitability (except for the fact that they play with a college three point line and he was being defended by JASON FUCKING KIDD THE WORST FUCKING DEFENSIVE POINT GUARD IN THE NBA). (Also, look at the box score for the gold medal game here. Not impressive.) People that argue that his age belies unlimited potential (see Telfair, Sebastian).

Anyone who thinks this is a good move for Rubio is an idiot. He'll play with second-rate competition under second-rate coaches and he'll still be a terrible defender who isn't used to shooting NBA three pointers and who doesn't know the game as well as someone with an NCAA pedigree (like, say Johnny Flynn).

This is the end of Ricky Rubio's publicity here for the near future. Fuck you, Ricky Rubio.

Coach, I'd like to talk to you about my recent PR issues

2009-08-31T15:13:00.002-04:00

Stephen: Hey, coach, how's it going? You're looking pretty good after the recent off-season. Say, have you lost weight?

Stephen: Yeah, well, it definitely looks like you have. Listen, I just want to clear the air here. I know you saw my interview in Dime magazine and I know you probably heard my twitter about wanting to be on another team. But I just wanted to make clear to you that I was talking about what's going to happen next year and I am certainly happy to play for you this year under the terms of my contract.

Stephen: I mean, if anything, you're the best coach I've ever played for, and I love the fans here, and our win in the Dallas series two years ago was one of the best moments of my basketball life. I'm totally committed to the team. But at the same time, I'm not getting any younger, and I'm starting to think more about how I'll be remembered and less about the long-term plan of the team I play with.

Stephen: And I think it's important for you and the rest of management here to know that if this team isn't serious about winning, then I won't hesitate to consider other teams when the time comes for me to be a free agent. But that's all in the future and I'm ready to play basketball for the Golden State Warriors this season.

Okay, Coach?

Coach?

Hello?

Don: Well, Stephen, that's a real fucking shame.

Stephen: No, coach, what I'm telling you is that I'm ready to play. I'm ready to go.

Don: Stephen, do you speak English?

Stephen: What? I mean, yeah, sure I do.

Don: That's good.

Stephen:....

Don: Stephen, I think I'm going to try you out at center for a the first couple of games. Give Biedrins some time on the wing where he can help us with his shooting.

Stephen: Excuse me, coach? But Biedrins can't shoot, like, at all.

Don: In addition I'm going to substitute you out every seven minutes and then return you whenever my nephew signals me from the stands with the U.S. Navy's flag language.

Stephen: Flag language? What?

Don: Stephen, if I've asked you once, I've asked you a million times. Are you a complete fucking pussy?

Stephen: Coach, I'm ready to play.

Don: /sips Bud Light.

Stephen: So...we cool?

Don: These fucking Dutchmen have ruined this beer. Get the fuck out of my office. And tell Dell Curry to give me a call. I'm thinking he's ripe for a comeback now that we've got Stevie.

Arcane Birthday Biographies: Rubber Band Man

2009-08-31T14:01:00.000-04:00

(This is the best and only picture I could find. Sorry)

T.I. is not the original rubber band man. That honor, as far as my in-depth research can determine, lies with Mickey Johnson, a steady power forward who played in the NBA for 11 workmanlike seasons in which he averaged about 15 points and 8 rebounds per game.

Johnson's career might be fairly unremarkable had he not played a part in one of the most important games in NBA history.

Let's go back to 1976. That was a watershed year for the NBA for a number of reasons. Most importantly, the ABA merger had just been completed and a number of new teams and players were joining the NBA and returning it to its rightful place as the best basketball league in the world. 1976 also produced one of the most memorable championship teams in history, the Portland Trailblazers team coached by the great Jack Ramsey and led by Bill Walton. Those Blazers were the subject of what some regard as the best sports book of all time, Breaks of the Game by David Halberstram.

Perhaps because of Bill Walton's continuing fame or the aforementioned book, those Blazers hold a special place in the NBA fanship's collective memory. Mickey Johnson was a victim of those Blazers, but he was part of the team that presented them with their greatest challenge that year, the 1976-77 Chicago Bulls.

Those Bulls were coming off their worst season ever. They had just lost one of their better guards, Jerry Sloan, to a major knee injury, and seen the resignation of their borderline hall of fame coach, Dick Motta. The Motta estrangement was a blessing in disguise, however, because the Bulls were led by Norm Van Lier, a five star general from the school of Fuck It, Let's Fight 'Em All, who was constantly at odds with Motta. (Van Lier had a famously hot temper and led the NBA in technical fouls in almost every season he played.) In addition to Van Lier and Mickey Johnson, some long-term planning on the part of Chicago's general office brought them a future hall of famer for their 1976-77 season.

Artis Gilmore was drafted by Chicago in the 7th round of the 1971 NBA draft despite clear indications that he would sign with the Kentucky Colonels of the ABA. When the merger happened in 1976, Chicago retained the NBA rights to Gilmore and was able to sign him for a cool $1 million, a huge contract at the time.

The mix of players in Chicago was an odd one. There was almost no shooting ability at the guard positions (neither Van Lear nor his revolving door of backcourt mates averaged more than 12 points per game) and defenses collapsed on Gilmore and Johnson. Johnson was called Rubber Band Man because he was lanky, and his game lacked the power to overcome the increased pressure. Chicago went 2-1 to start their season, and then lost their next thirteen games.

Coach Norm Badger, who had taken over for Motta, always intended to make the Bulls a running team, and that helped mitigate their shooting struggles. But the team's real turnaround came when Jerry Sloan found out that he couldn't return from knee surgery. Despite his physical predicament, he just couldn't bear to leave the game, so he hung around as an "informal assistant". His main focus, unsurprisingly, was defense, and he soon earned the nickname "Gestapo" in practice for his demeanor.

The combination of the Chinese fire drill and Sloan's ability to improve the defense made Chicago one of the best teams in the NBA and although they were six games out of making the playoffs after the all-star game, they finished the season 20-4 in what was called The Mircale on Madison Street. Mickey Johnson and Artis Gilmore were the team's two best players and Van Lier was their leader. The City of Chicago's interest in basketball became fervent for the first time and Chicago Stadium became notorious for its burgeoning, boisterous crowd. me and drew a first round matchup with the Blazers.

Back in 1977, the first round of the NBA playoffs was a best-of-three series, and Chicago and Portland split the first two games. In the second game, there was a altercation between two players that was quickly escalated by Mo Lucas (perhaps the closest thing the NBA has ever had to an enforcer) which ended with Chicago's assistant coach attempting to strangle Portland's Herm Gilliam before releasing his grip in conjunction with a Mo Lucas right hook.

Mickey Johnson's outstanding play down the stretch and in the playoffs was key to Chicago's success and it was the best time of his life. He was a son of Chicago, and he gave his best for his hometown crowd.

The decisive third game also went down to the wire. Portland, the home team, opened an early lead, but Chicago made a furious rally. The teams were tied when with less than thirty seconds, Lionel Hollins of Portland hit a contested jumper at the top of the key. The Bulls eventually got in an inbounds situation with fifteen seconds leftt. John Mengelt, the Bulls' starting shooting guard, tried to throw Artis Gilmore an alley-oop, but the ball ended up going in the basket. The violation gave Portland the ball, the series, and eventually the championship.

Portland's Coach Ramsey forever remembered that Chicago was Portland's toughest series on its road to the finals, and Mickey Johnson was as big a contributor to the team as everyone. Happy birthday, Rubber Band Man, as we at DGU remember that the defeated make history, too.

Stephen Jackson Demands Trade

2009-08-31T10:34:00.000-04:00

Stephen Jackson wants to leave the Golden State Warriors to play for Cleveland, where he can contend for a championship, or a team in Texas, or the New York Knicks.

"I want to be in a situation where I can get a ring," Jackson told Dime (diet Slam) magazine. No word on how New York plays into that unless he is anticipating LeBron signing there.

This is, of course, the same Stephen Jackson who left the Spurs after being an integral part of their 2003 championship team to sign with the Atlanta Hawks, a team coming off a 35 win season. And the same Stephen Jackson who jointed the sixty-win Pacers in a sign and trade and joined in a melee in his seventh game of the season in the famous bloodbath at Auburn Hills.

Call me skeptical, but I have a feeling I know what's really going on, and that's a little thorn in Stephen's side.

Chris Bosh is Weird Interlude

2009-08-28T13:56:00.000-04:00

You only need to watch like thirty seconds of this. Unless you want to watch the whole thing, I guess.

Guess That NBA Tattoo!

2009-08-28T13:52:00.001-04:00

If you can't make this out due to the annoying faux film outline, this is a tattoo that shows the upper half of the statue of liberty draped in a banner reading "Victory" which has the colors of the stars and stripes filling the letters.

The player in question states that "it's from a World War I propaganda poster. I've always been into patriotic art."

I suppose the tattoo is a little less irritating considering the player in question didn't think it up. Actually, check that, it would be less irritating if the player wasn't.....
...........................................................
.............................................
...............................
.....................
............
.....
....
.
.
.
.
........
.............
......................
.................................
......................................................
..........................................................................

Cherokee Parks!

DGUtube: Ronnie Fields

2009-08-28T10:37:00.000-04:00

Ronnie Fields was Kevin Garnett's teammate and was arguably as impressive a prospect as Garnett himself. His senior year he averaged 34 points, 12 rebounds, 4 assists, 4 steals, and 4 blocks per game, and he was a listed 6'2" with a reported (bullshit) vertical leap of 50 inches. He is the third best scorer in Chicago PS history, an All-American first teamer, and the first sophomore to play in the "best of the best" game at Nike All American Camp in a game that featured Allen Iverson, Kevin Garnett, and Ron Mercer.

Sadly, Fields broke his neck in 1996 and was ruled academically ineligible to play at DePaul, where he could have eventually teamed with Quentin Richardson. He ended up drafted by the CBA in the seventh round, leading it in scoring for a couple of years, but he never even came close to living up to his promise.

Today, let's remember that man, could that guy dunk.

Arcane Birthday Biographies: The Ballad of Uncle John Long

2009-08-28T10:06:00.001-04:00

Some people don't know (or can't believe) that Dick Vitale was once the coach of the Detroit Pistons. His stay with Detroit was short and unsatisfactory, ending only twelve games into his sophomore campaign, and even before he started coaching, he was derided for taking two players from the college team he had coached the season before in the first and second round.

When a guy like Rick Pitino did a similar maneuver as coach of the Celtics, it went fairly unnoticed, but this illustrates one of the many differences between Rick Pitino and Dick Vitale. Rick coached Kentucky. Dick? University of Detroit.

Needless to say, it was highly unusual for a professional team to pick two players from the University of Detroit in the first two rounds and the second round pick, John Long, was not expected to amount to much. However, in his rookie campaign, he proved himself a reliable scorer, and was second among all rookies that year with 16.1 points per game.

While Vitale didn't stick around, Long did, and for eight years, he helped build the foundation of the Bad Boys Pistons and averaged as much as 21.9 points per game playing as Isiah Thomas's wingman (a partnership that lasted five years). In 1984-85, Long and Thomas made a valiant run to six games in the conference semi-finals against one of the great Celtics teams of the 80s, and laid the foundation for one of the best rivalries in the history of the NBA.

Alas, in 1985-86, a young man from McNeese State named Joe Dumars was drafted by the Pistons, and that meant that John Long's time with the Pistons was through. He was traded to the Indiana Pacers and played well, averaging over 15 per game, but the very next year, they drafted a skinny kid from UCLA named Reggie Miller, and again Long was gone.

Everyone who played with John Long admired his skill, character, and toughness, and Isiah Thomas was a driving force towards getting Long back on the Pistons just in time for them to win their first championship, even though at that point, he was barely a rotation player. He soon retired in 1991 to barnstorm and play in Argentina, where he averaged a cool 40 points per game.

It wasn't all over, though, for John Long. In 1995-96, at the age of forty, Long received a call from his old backcourt mate Isiah, then a first-year GM of the fledgling Toronto Raptors. Despite a four year layoff, Long came back to play for the expansion Raptors, earning a spot at the bottom of the rotation and even hitting a game-winner against the Bullets at a time when wins didn't come too easily for the Raptors. One night, he scored more points (12) than his two NBA nephews, Terry Mills (5) and Grant Long (9).

A great player from a family of great players that never quite made the impact to be remembered by the masses, today DGU wishes John Long a happy birthday.

A journey deep into the mind of Chris Wallace

2009-08-27T09:59:00.000-04:00

Chris Wallace: Boy, oh boy, do I love being an executive in the NBA. But I'll tell ya, sometimes its a little bit tough, what with the entire sports media constantly calling my moves idiotic and with that nasty Gregg Popovic suggesting that a trade board be created to decline my mindless and power-altering trades.

Itellya, a guy can feel pretty unappreciated. You think they consider that I drafted Paul Pierce? Chauncey Billups? Joe Johnson? If they had only kept that core together Boston would have been just fine. And can I just remindya it was Pitino's idea to trade Billups, not mine. That guy sure can be pushy.

Anyway, I don't mind saying I've had a pretty good offseason up here in Memphis. Why, I turned Quentin Richardson into Zach Randolph, filled a need at power forward, and I have one of the better young backcourts in the NBA. Heck, just the other day, a blog noted that our team has a shot at forty wins. Forty! That ain't bad when I think about where we were just a year ago.

Yep, I'm feeling pretty good about myself and our team. I'lltellya, though, I can't help thinking that our team just needs one more piece...one more thing to take us to the playoffs.

Bad Chris Wallace: YO CHRIS! Wheda fuck you at? This team ain't nothing but a bunch of pussies and my boy Mayo. You need a playa, playa!

Chris: Oh, hello, Mr. Wallace. I know you're not really there, and now I'm going to just relax and go back to the business at hand.

Bad Chris: OH I BE HERE.

Chris: No, you're not.

Bad Chris: I BE.

Chris: No, you're not.

Bad Chris: I BE THAT, BABY.

Chris: Godamnit they said this would work. Alright listen, what will it take to make you leave me alone?

Bad Chris: I want my boy on this team. I want him now.

Chris: Are you referring to the puff daddy?

Bad Chris: Man, fuck that dude. I'm talking about my boy Iverson.

Chris: But Mr. Wallace, that makes no sense. I would just be stifling the young backcourt I've worked so hard to put together. Also, I've heard that his practice habits are less than ideal.

Bad Chris: You gon sign him.

Chris: Sir, I politely decline. I'm still hearing about the Gasol trade you forced.

Bad Chris: HAHA! Man you see the look on that mothafuckin frenchman's face when we told him we were sending him to LA! OH SHIT that was good.

Chris: But Mr. Wallace, he's doing very well. He won a championship. I'm the laughing stock of the league.

Bad Chris: Whatever, he's a fuckin bitch, and now he's where all the other bitches belong, L. fuckin A.

Chris: Listen, I'm not signing Iverson.

Bad Chris: YOU BE.

Chris: I'm not.

Bad Chris: FUCK. YOU. Then I'm stayin.

Chris: Damnit....well...I mean, I suppose he is one of the greatest scorers in history.

Bad Chris: HAHA! YEAH BOY! SEE YOU SOON!

Chris: Well, at least this'll look good in the press.

Chris Bosh is really weird.

2009-08-26T16:52:00.002-04:00

Here's something you don't see every day. Chris Bosh. Working out with a little girl. Who is directing him with what appears to be a karate bow. Made of silver. Chew on that.

The real question is will Bosh be able to follow the silver bow at the next level, when there are NBA players manipulating it?

Guess That NBA Tattoo!

2009-08-26T13:52:00.001-04:00

The above tattoo, to those whitebread folks who make up the majority of my readership, signifies Warner Brothers, a once-great film company that watered itself down to become associated most with "The WB", the network on which white person favorites like Dawson's Creek and Gilmore Girls filled the airwaves.

Now, clearly, the skin of the player with the above "WB" tattoo is not white. Or Asian. While one could try to make the argument that it could have been the Jamie Foxx show that drove this player to love the network, they would be wrong.

In fact, as the internet tells me, WB stands for a couple of things, one of which will aid you, my reader, in guessing the player. The first is "Warn a brotha" as in "Warnabrotha" as in "Warner Brothers". Or, translated into the New England parlance: "Do not cooperate with the law enforcement authorities in the investigation of your fellow neighboorhood chums."

The other meaning of the tattoo, supposedly, is "West Baltimore", which is the home of the above player. This could be all the hinting any heads out there need. And with that, the answer is.....
........................................
.............................
...................
...............
..........
.......
......
...
...
.

..
........
...............
....................
...............................
.............................................
..........................................................

Carmelo Anthony!

Early Season Optimism

2009-08-26T12:39:00.000-04:00

Here's a little food for thought.

The Memphis Grizzlies will have a pretty solid lineup this year. Mike Conley was really starting to play well at the end of last season, OJ Mayo had a great rookie year and is underrated as a person, Rudy Gay is one of the best small forwards in the NBA, Zach Randolph is a 20-10 guy, and Thabeet/Marc Gasol form a pretty good defense/offense tandem at the pivot.

Who is their coach? I don't know. He's somehow been their coach three times but has less than 70 total games under his belt. Is it a questionable mix of personalities? Probably. However, Mayo gets a bad rap for the famous highlight of him throwing the ball into the stands in his last high school game and for taking dolla bills to play for USC. I don't think he's actually that selfish or a team cancer. Randolph's history is indefensible, but aside from him, there are no character problems with the other guys (unless you count inability to shoot as a character problem).

Memphis plays in the best division in the NBA and the road to the playoffs for them will be extremely difficult. However, I believe that this team is capable of 40 wins this season, a marked improvement for one of the worst franchises of the last couple of years. You heard it here.

Arcane Birthday Biographies: Morris Peterson

2009-08-26T10:33:00.000-04:00

Morris Peterson's life in basketball revolved around Mateen Cleaves from the time they were children. Born less than a month a part, the boys lived blocks from each other in Flint, Michigan.

In high school, they played on rival teams and knew each other well from Flint's pickup scene. Cleaves was the man back then, and Mo Pete was known as nothing more than a gunner. When both accepted scholarships to Michigan State, Cleaves was taking a school that was close to home over all the other big names, and Peterson was lucky just to have a scholarship from an established program.

As the players progressed through their careers (which would both culminate in a national championship in 2000 with the help of Jason Richardson), Mateen was the most important player. He was Michigan State's only three-time All-American and named MOP of the 2000 Final Four.

Obviously, today, Mateen Cleaves is in street clothes and Mo Pete is in the NBA. What happened?

It all turned on the right hand of Peterson. In 1997, Peterson broke his non-shooting hand on a dunk attempt, and although he was still serviceable with a cast, he couldn't really get his offensive game going. He had been a horrific defender before the injury but with his cast, the only way he could get on the court was by playing defense.

Ever since, Peterson has been known as more of a sweet-shooting forward with defense than a gunner, and he was a key player in the 2000 championship, a first round pick, and started in the NBA until last season.

Happy Birthday, Mo.

NBA Could Grind To Halt With Ref Holdout

2009-08-26T09:58:00.001-04:00

News comes today that the NBA and the referees' union (umpire and referee unions always seem to be the most powerful in the world...why the hell is that?) are far apart on a deal in which the NBA is asking the refs to cut their budget across the board by 10%.

Apparently things are serious enough that established referees may not be allowed to take part in preseason games. The referees have responded as follows:

The referees have argued against the sort of budget cuts widely imposed on team and league office staff members by insisting the late hours they work and difficult travel conditions they endure in addition to the injury risks they're subjected to make them unlike any other group of NBA employees.

Well, that's a pretty sensible and I can really see where they're BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Who in god's name do these assholes think they are? They can't police their own, they've been caught in one of the worst scandals in the past decade, they have one of the sweetest jobs in sports, they somehow manage to be worse than referees of basketball at a lower level, and now they're refusing to take the same pay cut everyone else in the league (like...uh...the players) will have to endure? Incredible!

Stern must be licking his chops like a modern-day Reagan. These buffoons just gave him an excuse to get them out of the door and hire a bunch of cheaper, less crotchety referees who in all honesty can't be any worse than the officials the NBA has used for the past ten years.

Please god let these referees stand strong like Joey Crawford against a Tim Duncan smile.

/honks horn

DGUtube: Remember Steve Franchise

2009-08-26T09:30:00.001-04:00

It wasn't Steve Francis's fault that his career somehow led him to be one of the final pieces in Isiah Thomas's reign of tyranny with the Knicks, but that's the way it played out. It's sad to think of the days when Steve Francis and Cuttino Mobely were on the verge of making the playoffs all by themselves when one considers just how suddenly and unfortunately the careers of each man ended. (Cuttino had to retire last year when he discovered he had a congenital heart problem and Francis's career ended in the wake of severe tendinitis and migraine problems.)

Few remember that it was Francis who took the Rockets to a 45 win season in just his second year (starting lineup: Francis, Mobely, Shandon Anderson, Maurice Taylor, Hakeem at age 39 when he averaged 10 points per game) and that when he succumbed to the rare, migraine-inducing Meniere's diseease, the Rockets took such a tumble that they were able to get the first pick in the draft that eventually became Yo Yao Ming.

Today let's celebrate the man who was frankly the most exciting point guard of his time, bar none. If you don't agree, you probably don't remember, so please, cue the video.

Hawks add final piece to their dynasty

2009-08-26T09:06:00.000-04:00

He was drafted ahead of Antonio McDyess, Jerry Stackhouse, Rasheed Wallace, Kevin Garnett, Damon Stoudamire, and Michael Finley. He signed a backdoor deal that ruined the Minnesota Timberwolves' chances of winning a title with Kevin Garnett. He is currently working on an album under his alter ego, "Joe Beast", with singles forthcoming including "Murda Kapital" and "I Does This" (what is this, 1998?). He is the final piece as Rick Sund puts the finishing touches on the Atlanta Hawks. He is....the most uninteresting basketball player in the world.

Guess That NBA Tattoo!

2009-08-25T17:15:00.002-04:00

Welcome to the inaugural edition of DGU's new feature, Guess That NBA Tattoo. For the auspicious first tattoo, I chose probably the most interesting tattoo in the NBA.
.

This might be easy for some people as that tattoo has received some publicity. If you can't make it out, it is two hands in prayer, holding a pistol, in front of a gravestone, and the gravestone seems to have a crosshairs on top of it.

My interpretation is that this is actually a represntation of one of this player's boys rising from the grave, gun still in his hands, ready to go to purgatorial war which will probably end in a result similar to what got him in the grave, if all the stuff I hear about jesus's marksmanship is true.

Can you name the player who possesses this fine piece of urban art?

And the answer is......

..................................................................................

...............................................................

....................................................

..............................................

..........................................

...................................

............................

......................

...................

..................

..............

...........

.......

...

.......

.........

............

(I don't know how to add space other than this....sorry.)

................

...................

.........................

...........................

...................................

Unnoticed Transaction News

2009-08-25T15:31:00.000-04:00

Right now, Mark Madsen is not in the NBA. At all.

While it is always fun to see a big, awkward white guy enjoy winning a championship he has almost nothing to do with, I, for one, won't miss Madsen. He was so out of control he almost ended TJ Ford's career, I despised his boy-next-door attitude, and his victory dance after the Lakers championship made me feel about the same way I would if I had taken a shot with a lead pipe to the testicles.

Excuse me? I'm sorry?

2009-08-25T13:43:00.000-04:00

Chris Bosh will be releasing a CD, DVD and iPhone application this fall.

Bosh's DVD will include all of the "original comic" characters he has created in videos uploaded to YouTube, as well as an inside look at Bosh's life in Dallas and how he made it to the NBA.

The CD will feature music by some of Bosh's favourite artists, as well as recordings from new artists. Bosh is soliciting songs from unsigned artists, giving them a chance to submit songs for consideration for the album.

Bosh's iPhone application will allow fans to keep track of the NBA superstar with automatic updates from his Twitter feed, when he posts a video on YouTube and to keep track of his game statistics during the NBA season. Bosh is the first athlete to have his own iPhone application.

I think I speak for every single fan in the NBA when I say "What?"

Let me share with you my new strategy

2009-08-25T13:00:00.000-04:00

Hello folks. Thank you for coming to my press conference. I'd like to address this year's free agent class and the Knicks' recent activity.

You may have recently heard about the many developments other teams are making in the free agent market. Detroit, for instance, has picked up Ben Gordon, Charlie Villenueva, and Chris Wilcox. Many Knicks fans out there have been asking me, "Donnie, what are we going to do in the free agent market?"

/James Dolan muffled screaming in background.

We have many options to consider as we prepare not only for this summer, but also for the next. One of the major problems with this organization in the past has been a refusal to think long-term, and I think our success depends on a recognizition of the need for serious change in the goals of the New York Knicks.

/James Dolan's head sticks out from stage right, is pulled back by hair.

As part of this philosophy, we must look at our current free agent class as one in which spending presents us with opportunities for our upcoming season but saving provides us opportunities for the free agent market of 2010.

/James Dolan runs onto the stage

Dolan: DO YOU REALIZE YOU LET JAMAL CRAWFORD GET AWAY TWICE NOW, YOU OLD ITALIAN PRICK!!!!

Walsh: For the last time, Jim, I'm not Italian.

Dolan: WHERE THE FUCK IS THAT WOP DEGO COCKSUCKER WHO TOLD ME GALINARI IS THE FUTURE OF THIS FRANCHISE!

Walsh: Coach D'Antoni is at home in West Virginia. I already left you a note that he called to advise us to sign Ramon Sessions.

Dolan: SESSIONS? NEVER HEARD OF HIM. IS JAMAL CRAWFORD STILL A FREE AGENT?

/Beautiful woman appears at the side of the stage

Dolan: HOLY SHIT HOLY SHIT HOLY SHIT I WANT TO SUCK THAT LIKE A PIMENTO OUT OF A MARTINI OLIVE

/Dolan exits stage right, is grabbed as he reaches the curtain.

Walsh: As I was saying, our new strategy must be to spend with great care. It is for this reason that we made Ramon Sessions an offer one month ago and subsequently stopped talking to him entirely.

/Muffled screaming in the background. "iverson! i want iverson!"

Walsh: We believe this strategy is the best option for the future of the New York Knicks. Thank you.

Arcane Birthday Biographies: Tony Dumas

2009-08-25T12:05:00.002-04:00

Perhaps somewhere, on a computer made out of championship rings, Robert Horry is cruising the internet, wondering if any intrepid blogger or sportswriter has noticed that it is Big Shot Bob's 39th birthday.

I could only imagine the look on his face if he came upon today's celebration of the onetime great Tony Dumas.

Say what you will about Dumas's lack of success in the NBA. He was only a starter for one year, and in that one year shot poorly and couldn't crack twelve points a game. He was a dunker of some note, but lost in the 1995 dunk contest in particularly embarrassing fashion, missing every dunk he attempted. He was the first man ever to do so, and the last dunk, a simple one-handed tomahawk, was particularly embarrassing. Gary Payton could be seen on the sidelines, his mouth moving quickly, teeth bared, undoubtedly saturating the air above the court with funny, vile insults.

Today, however, on Tony's birthday, let's remember his successes. He was one of the greatest scorers in NCAA history (almost 2,500 points), and he played for one of the worst teams in Division I: The Missouri-Kansas City Kangaroos.

Happy birthday, Tony Dumas. You were the greatest Kangaroo.

DGUtube: Lost Video Collection

2009-08-25T11:20:00.002-04:00

This is a new segment here where I find a good old youtube and show it to you. Cool, no?

My first video goes out to two great guards whose in-game highlights are overshadowed today by our collective memory of Jordan, Dominique, Magic, Larry, and Isiah.

UPDATE: Embedding has been disabled. I call bullshit. Link here.

Hi. I'm a professional motivational speaker.

2009-08-25T11:08:00.000-04:00

I'd just like to throw my two cents in about John Lucas's involvement in the Beasley issue and his supposed expertise and success with rehabbing players.

Full disclosure and not so brief aside: I am a huge fan of Jerry Tarkanian and have always held a grudge about John Lucas replacing him as the Spurs' head coach in 1992 after only 20 games (Tark was 9-11!. One of the driving forces behind Tarkanian's firing was Dale Ellis's public expression of discontent. Dale Ellis! Though One of my favorite factoids about the Tark firing is as follows: "Tarkanian may have actually brought about his own dismissal with a letter he sent to McCombs on Monday urging the acquisition of a point guard and arguing that the team could simply not win without one. "All I wanted was a point guard," he said." (Source: New York Times.))

Back to the subject at hand. This week it has become clear that the entire NBA world sees John Lucas as some kind of rehabilitation specialist. He helped TJ Ford recover from his back injury. He counseled Sean Williams while at BC. He rehabilitated Daryl Strawberry in the early 90's.

HEYWAITAMINUTE! Strawberry was back on coke and ho's approximately twelve times after Lucas's intervention. Sean Williams never made anything of himself. And TJ Ford, well, he didn't exactly have a drug problem and I'm not sure making a player work hard qualifies someone as anything more than a drill sergeant.

John Lucas, when he was with the Spurs, was a successful coach. He threw it all away by taking an offer behind his team president's back to become the Sixers' General Manager, Vice President, and Coach. That didn't work out so well for him and he spent the next two seasons going 24-58 and then 18-64. (He was noted for trying to take Derrick Coleman on as a reclamation project. It did not go well.)

Lucas then went on to coach the Cavs, where he was fired in his second year after having the worst record in the league. (One could, however, argue that Lucas's poor record led Cleveland to the acquisition of LeBron James, in which case I may be underestimating his genius.)

My point here is not that Lucas was a terrible coach (though I think he was) or that he can't rehabilitate players. But he currently makes his living as a consultant for players to hire and the Beasley situation is getting him more publicity than I've ever heard him get before.

I can't help but think that Lucas is charging a pretty penny (pursuant to the NBA's rules, the team must pay for treatment in its substance abuse program) for his services and it's a little questionable that it's been publicly announced that he is working with Beasley to overcome an issue that should be privately addressed. I think Lucas's history of player oversight (Lloyd Daniels, Derrick Coleman, Vernon Maxwell, Darius Miles, DaJuan Wagner, and Ricky Davis played under him, to name a few) is questionable. And I think that in Michael Beasley, Lucas may have found the best possible PR boon his company will ever receive.

More conspiracy theories soon!

As always, e-mail me at dontgiveupthebasketballblog@gmail.com

When I party, I party hardy

2009-08-25T10:24:00.000-04:00

Sly and the family did some partying in their time and it's now apparent that Michael Beasley does as well.

While this could be serious (heroin addiction, alcoholism, depression, etc.) the facts appear to me to suggest that Beasley may have found a loophole to help him avoid being fined for the incident.

It's a well-known fact that NBA players smoke pot. It's a well-known fact that smoking pot is neither a health risk nor addictive. It's a well-known fact that twenty-year old men with millions of dollars like to party. However, encouraging drug use is obviously not something the NBA wants to be involved in, so it has a well-publicized and somewhat successful drug treatment program.

The story linked to above contains an interesting paragraph:

Sources said the Heat encouraged Beasley to check into the facility to address possible substance and psychological issues. He is expected to spend time with former NBA player and coach John Lucas (notes), who is renowned for his success in working with troubled players. As part of the NBA’s treatment program, Beasley is expected to stay in the facility for a minimum of 30 days with little outside contact, one source close to him said.

When I had first heard the Beasley story it appeared that he was in rehabilitation on his own accord but the above suggests that the NBA is mandating and controlling his treatment program. This would only occur if Beasley had voluntarily submitted to the NBA's treatment program.

The NBA's treatment program provides athletes with a way to avoid fines and discipline and specifically provides in its rules that "In order to encourage players with problems to seek help, this treatment is provided at the expense of the team, the player continues to be paid, and penalties are generally not imposed as long as the player complies with the terms of his prescribed treatment."

The previous involvement with marijuana in Beasley's rookie training camp cost him a cool $50,000.00, and one could reasonably assume that a second fine would be greater. I don't want to downplay the seriousness of Beasley's condition, which at this point cannot be determined, but isn't it a possibility that this is a money-making maneuver?

As always, comment or e-mail me at dontgiveupthebasketballblog@gmail.com.

Sofamore Statistics are Stoopid

2009-01-30T10:51:00.004-05:00

Today I'd like you to join me in a brief discussion of the Rookie/Sophomore roster selection for the 2009 All-Star Saturday festivities. The rosters for the game are as follows:

ROOKIE TEAM ROSTER

Player (Team)	Position	Height	Weight	School/Country
Michael Beasley (Heat)	F	6-9	245	Kansas State
Rudy Fernandez (Trail Blazers)	G-F	6-6	185	Spain
Marc Gasol (Grizzlies)	C	7-1	265	Spain
Eric Gordon (Clippers)	G	6-3	222	Indiana
Brook Lopez (Nets)	C	7-0	260	Stanford
O.J. Mayo (Grizzlies)	G	6-4	210	USC
Greg Oden (Trail Blazers)	C	7-0	285	Ohio State
Derrick Rose (Bulls)	G	6-3	190	Memphis
Russell Westbrook (Thunder)	G	6-3	187	UCLA

Head Coach -- TBD
Assistant Coach -- Dwyane Wade

SOPHOMORE TEAM ROSTER

Player (Team)	Position	Height	Weight	School/Country
Aaron Brooks (Rockets)	G	6-0	161	Oregon
Wilson Chandler (Knicks)	F	6-8	220	DePaul
Kevin Durant (Thunder)	G-F	6-9	215	Texas
Jeff Green (Thunder)	F	6-9	235	Georgetown
Al Horford (Hawks)	F-C	6-10	245	Florida
Luis Scola (Rockets)	F-C	6-9	245	Argentina
Al Thornton (Clippers)	F	6-8	220	Florida State
Rodney Stuckey (Pistons)	G	6-5	205	Eastern Washington
Thaddeus Young (Sixers)	F	6-8	220	Georgia Tech

Head Coach -- TBD
Assistant Coach -- Dwight Howard

Source: NBA.com

Today, John Hollinger of ESPN, who specializes in the study of "accurate measurement" statistics (think football's DVOA) and who coined the PER ("player efficiency rating" - a rating which Hollinger believes can accurately rank any player at any position) took the rosters of this year's rookie/soph game to task because he believed they ignored the truly good young players (that is, those with high PERs or other statistics he deems accurate assessors of talent). To put it plainly, John was upset that the NBA had not been using his statistical methods to assess the play of young basketball players.

The rosters for the R/S game are chosen by a group of assistant coaches (I'm not sure if it's all of them or a committee) who watch the young players during the season and presumably review their statistics when they make a selection. If a rookie is in a coach's conference, they will have seen them play twice before the All-Star game; if not, once. The coaches are the beneficiaries of reports on the prospective rooks/sophs from their scouting staffs during the regular season (particularly important with rookies) and they have, of course, considerable experience and expertise in basketball.

Mr. Hollinger, on the other hand, has a background entirely based in online sports journalism. He is without graduate degrees, scouting experience, and as far as I know never played above high school (if he even played there). ESPN has somehow managed to prevent lechrous NBA teams from hiring Hollinger to give them an edge over their competition with his impressive statistical analysis - he has no professional experience other than his ESPN work.

Although it may seem strange in light of the foregoing, Mr. Hollinger, who got his start with the web site humbly described as "the basketball page for thinking fans", believes that he knows more about who should and who should not be on the rookie team than the NBA's assistant coaches. I believe that he is incorrect and seek to discredit him. His original article, from which I am about to refer, is available here.

The first selection Hollinger takes issue with is the selection of Eric Gordon over Kevin Love. He states that Gordon was picked because of his gaudy per-game statistics (13.8, 2.5, and 2.5) and, to quote him: "Don't get me wrong; Gordon is going to have a fine career, it seems, and in almost any other year he'd be a shoo-in for the team. But he made this squad mainly because the forlorn Clippers have no choice but to play him extensive minutes."

Despite good play by the T-Wolves in January, I don't think Hollinger would describe either Love's or Gordon's teams as "good". It's true that Gordon gets to start because Cuttino Mobley went down and that Love has the shadow of Al Jefferson to deal with, but there is one plain fact that Hollinger is missing. Kevin Love is not getting time on a bad team because of the bad team's decision not to play him. Kevin McHale, no less than one of the top five post players in history, is starting Craig Smith over Mr. Love.

Hollinger explains what McHale and the NBA assistant coaches are missing: Love leads the league in offensive rebound rate, as I mentioned the other day, but his prodigious work on the boards has gone largely unnoticed because he plays only 23.2 minutes a game, far less than Gordon's 32.2. (Note: Hollinger is incorrect about Love's rebound rate - he only leads rookies - he is third in the NBA.)

Do you see how this works? Although Kevin Love's own coach, who watches him practice, spends from 8-10 hours a day with him, and knows more than we could ever hope to about his personality, temperment, and ability, does not play him more than Craig Smith, and he is wrong not to, because Kevin Love has amazing ORP48 (Offensive Rebounds Per 48 Minutes) statistics. But, just for the sake of argument, let's take a look at how the ORP48 statistics relate to player skill. Below is a chart of the Top 15 ORP48ers*:

5	Marcus Camby , LAC	36	34.6	123	3.4	366	10.2	489	13.6	18.8
6	Dwight Howard , ORL	43	36.2	187	4.3	412	9.6	599	13.9	18.5
7	Adonal Foyle , ORL	5	5.7	2	.4	9	1.8	11	2.2	18.5
8	Andris Biedrins , GSW	45	31.8	184	4.1	359	8.0	543	12.1	18.2
9	* Kevin Love , MIN	44	23.1	150	3.4	221	5.0	371	8.4	17.6
10	Joel Przybilla , POR	45	21.8	94	2.1	251	5.6	345	7.7	16.9
11	* Hamed Haddadi , MEM	4	3.6	2	.5	3	.8	5	1.2	16.8
12	Samuel Dalembert , PHI	44	24.7	112	2.5	264	6.0	376	8.5	16.6
13	Carlos Boozer , UTA	12	33.8	43	3.6	97	8.1	140	11.7	16.6
14	Troy Murphy , IND	41	33.2	72	1.8	396	9.7	468	11.4	16.5
15	Marcin Gortat , ORL	28	10.7	42	1.5	60	2.1	102	3.6	16.4
16	Austin Croshere , SAS-MIL	14	7.1	11	.8	23	1.6	34	2.4	16.3
17	Antonio McDyess , DET	25	23.9	58	2.3	140	5.6	198	7.9	15.9
18	David Lee , NYK	45	35.1	140	3.1	382	8.5	522	11.6	15.9
19	Joakim Noah , CHI	44	19.3	124	2.8	152	3.5	276	6.3	15.6
20	Andrew Bogut , MIL	34	32.1	114	3.4	241	7.1	355	10.4	15.6
21	Reggie Evans , PHI	41	12.0	58	1.4	101	2.5	159	3.9	15.5
22	Aaron Gray , CHI	39	14.8	73	1.9	113	2.9	186	4.8	15.4
23	Erick Dampier , DAL	45	23.0	128	2.8	203	4.5	331	7.4	15.4

*Note that the list display starts at five and includes eighteen entries because the top five all played five games or less and there were three people on the list who should not be applicable due to too few games played who I couldn't figure out how to remove.

That chart is a who's who of marginal big men in the NBA. Are some of them (Dwight Howard, Marcus Camby) excellent rebounders? Absolutely. Are some of them horrendous guys who can hustle their asses off with no regard for fouling because they don't have to play that many minutes? Yes! (See: Joel Pryzbilla, whose stats are almost identical to Love, Aaron Gray, Reggie Evans, Marcin Gortat). In my mind, Love can fall into the latter category as easily as he can the first, and Hollinger gives no other statistic to support the assertion that Love is more deserving than Gordon. Even if he is correct that Love is the third-best offensive rebounder in the league, does this fact prove he has more skill than someone who is, say, an excellent scorer? Or passer?

The story with these players' rookies season thusfar illustrates their skill level and, in my mind, shows how they should be rated respective to each other. Love has been playing consistently all year, and has shown some improvement. In November, he averaged 8.4 points and 6.1 rebounds per game. In December, he averaged 6.6 ppg and 9.1 rpg. In January, he averaged 12.5 ppg and 10.1 rpg. These numbers are, obviously, mediocre.

Gordon's numbers tell a similar story. It's just a better one. In November, he averaged 7.8 ppg, 1.4 rpg, and 1.7 apg. In December, it was 13.9 ppg, 3.7 rpg, and 1.8 apg. This January, he has averaged 21.4 ppg, 2.4 rpg, and 4.3 apg.

If anyone wants to argue that a player who is their team's top scorer every night should be cut from a team because a guy who is good at offensive rebounding in limited minutes and who is warming the pine behind Craig Smith is statistically better than the scorer, I think it's safe to say that person is not qualified to question the assistant coaches.

Let's continue with Hollinger's "snubs". Hollinger notes: Because of that [coaches looking at only simple statistics and ignoring minutes played], we'll have the Human Goaltend Violation, Al Thornton of the Clippers, playing in the game instead of Houston's Carl Landry, and we'll have New York's Wilson Chandler instead of Toronto's Jamario Moon.

(What is a human goaltend violation? Does Al Thornton goaltend often? I tried to find statistics reflecting the same and I don't think the NBA keeps them.)

Some of my readers may recall that I am a big Carl Landry fan and certainly have no axe to grind. I also like Jamario Moon, one of the best dunkers in the NBA.

However, in this analysis, Hollinger is simply ignoring the reality of Landry and Moon's situations. Carl Landry, love him though I do, is judged by Rick Adelman, one of the better coaches in the NBA, to be worse than Luis Scola (12.3/7.9). I have nothing against Luis Scola, but he's not that good. There's a simple commutative rule in sports: if you're getting benched behind a guy who's not that good...you're not that good either. Coaches with thirty years of experience rating players don't usually make mistakes on their own teams (though it's not unheard of) and I don't think anyone would argue that Rick Adelman benching Landry is an exception to that rule.

So why does Landry deserve to make the team, you ask? Landry, in particular, is a stunning exclusion. I've written many times already about his impressive per-minute numbers the past two seasons, but suffice to say that he ranks right between Josh Smith and David West in PER, and that his numbers are actually down from what he did as a rookie.

See...he's right in between Josh Smith and David West. If only Rick Adelman knew.

I went on ESPN and looked at the season PER ratings. David West is rated 49th in the NBA (20 spots behind Marreese Speights...who was not even chosen for the rookie team!), and I can't find Carl Landry. ESPN would have me pay a fee to view beyond fifty, and he's presumably there, ahead of Al Thornton. But in my mind, Thonrton (who averages about 17 and 5) being behind Landry (who has scored twenty points twice this season (20 and 21)) in PER is more of a condemnation of PER than an accurate assessment of skill.

The Chandler/Moon comparison is also quite damning. Jamario moon is a 28 year old sophomore whose statistics dropped from last season (8.5 ppg) to this one (7.5 ppg). He is athletic, a good defender...and he scores 7.5 points per game despite starting all but seven Raptors games this year. That makes him, as far as I know, the second least-effective starter in the NBA (after Ben Wallace). Fine me a worse one and I'll give you credit.

Wilson Chandler, on the other hand, is 22 years old, and went from scoring 7.3 ppg, 3.6 rpg, and .5 apg last year to 13.8 ppg, 5.0 rpg, 2.1 apg, and also throws in a block and a steal per game.

I know there are factors (D'Antoni) that might skew Chandler's statistics but I don't see how one can argue that someone who actually got worse since last year, is old, and is the second-worst starter in the NBA should replace a young, up-and-coming player who happens to shoot for a low percentage.

Hollinger's last point is that Aaron Brooks should be replaced by Ramon Sessions. I have no problem with that, but would like to take this opportunity to cite Hollinger's draft analysis of 2007 which stated, based on the same statistical analysis that now vindicates Sessions, that:

Nevada guard Ramon Sessions, and Florida guard Taurean Green are fringe first-rounders who are best to be avoided.

Hollinger for his draft analysis had rated Sessions behind Josh McRoberts ("he has the assist to turnover ratio of a point guard"), Mike Conley ("in the last six drafts, only Chris Paul ranked higher than Mike Conley"), Nick Fazekas ("in a dead heat for No. 4...he's like Nick Collison with a jump shot"), and many others.

The point I'm trying to make here is this: John Hollinger and his ignorant yet arrogant analyses are full of shit.

As always, e-mail me at dontgiveupthebasketballblog@gmail.com.

Welcome Back

2009-01-08T09:49:00.006-05:00

Did you miss the blog that told you as far back as February 22, 2007 that Paul Millsap was a keeper? The blog unafraid to compare the beauty of Zaza Pachulia with Zha Zha Gabor? The blog that has drawn comments from as many as three readers who I don't even know personally?

Well, I did. And after a tiring election season, I'm back in the saddle and ready to serve.

In the tradition of DGU, I would like to open with a discussion of one of my favorite rookies in the current class, Russell Westbrook. 2008/2009 is quietly shaping up to be an impressive rookie class (having nothing to do with Kevin Love's breathtaking outlet passes), and Westbrook plays no small part.

Perhaps most impressive about the 08/09 class is that it has has two very talented stars (OJ Mayo and Derrick Rose) and two solid pivot men (Marc Gasol and Brook Lopez), a combination that no recent draft has been able to produce. There are also many young men that could become very good players (Michael Beasley, Greg Oden, Kevin Love, Eric Gordon, Mario Chalmers) and some nice surprises (Luc Richard Mbah a Moute, Courtney Lee, Anthony Morrow, Jason Thompson). It's just a good, solid class.

The thing that makes me the happiest, though, is that it's produced a guard who is a great, great dunker (with no disrespect to Mr. Rose) and I'd like to honor him with the memory of a couple of his college dunks. I'll be pulling for him in the slam dunk contest but Nate Robinson is clearly the man to beat in that arena. Either way, it's always fun to have some new, young talent in the highlight reels.

(Do you think Vince Carter ever thinks to himself "I would make a ton of money if I participated in the dunk contest and people started to like me again"? I mean, that makes a lot of sense, right? I realize there's been a rule change but obviously they'd change it back for him. Sorry, back to Westbrook.)

Now tell me that doesn't excite you a little bit.

Impressively, Westbrook is playing better in the NBA than he ever did in college. His averages of 14 points, 5 assists, 4 rebounds, and 1.5 steals compare to UCLA stats of 12.7 points, 4.3 assists, and 3.9 rebounds. His rookie stats are impressive enough that I'd say they are the second best all-around line in the rookie class to Rose's 17.1, 6.0, 3.5, and .86.

What's really admirable is that Westbrook is not a point guard by trade and only played the position sparingly at UCLA. However, Oklahoma City has dictated to him his role of starting point guard and he has filled it admirably, despite limited shooting range and a team that is at the bottom of the heap for NBA talent. There was a nice story in the Oklahoma City papers a couple of days ago that noted "...Russell Westbrook didn't know there was such a thing as the rookie of the month award in the NBA -- until he won it."

Here's to you, Russell. You're the DGU ROY thusfar, if only for your response to the thoughtful journalist who asked "Do you believe in moral victories, Russell?"

("No.")

As always, e-mail me at dontgiveupthebasketballblog@gmail.com

Politics

2008-08-14T15:03:00.002-04:00

Not that any of you out there read this, but if you're in Vermont, give this page a look.

http://www.tomcostelloforvt.com/

Thanks.

James

"P-U-R-V-I-S. Purvis."

2008-07-02T08:32:00.003-04:00

Happy birthday to Mr. Purvis Short, one of the more unheralded players in basketball history and surely the only man ever to score 28 points per game and miss the all-star game (despite getting an MVP vote).

I wrote about Mr. Short's career a couple of months ago here.

JV

Finals Final und Draft Shaft

2008-06-27T07:45:00.004-04:00

I generally think of the time between the finals and the draft as a journalistic no-man's land. No one cares about post-finals stories unless their team won or the story involves a blowup on the losing team (which, unbelievably, didn't happen this year). No one cares about mock drafts in the NBA, because there's usually a very small pool of talent that can actually play. Personally, I think mock drafts are much less interesting than trying to figure out how well certain players will adjust to the league, but every web site that covers basketball keeps doing them, so maybe I'm all alone in that feeling.

In any event, I can wrap up my thoughts on the finals quickly. I thought the Celtics played great defense and I enjoyed watching Ray Allen get his groove back and Kevin Garnett and Paul Pierce win a championship. I'm happy the Lakers lost because I don't care for Kobe, and I'm still awestruck that the Jazz didn't stick it to them in the playoffs (many said this about the Spurs, but I didn't think the Spurs looked great this year).

The draft is a little more interesting than looking back at the finals. The newsmaker to me was the Knciks' drafting of Danilo Gallinari. To a Knicks fan like myself, following the team has become almost a masochistic endeavor, because each decision seems improbably less logical than the last. Even this spring, seemingly a step forward, was haphazard. "Let's hire Donnie Walsh without interviewing Jerry West, even though Jerry wants the job." "Let's hire Mark Jackson sight unseen. No wait! D'Antoni will fit in great with the New York population, let's hire him! And let's make him the highest-paid coach in NBA history!"

The really sad part of the story is that the Knicks, due to their crazed, cash-throwing hubris, aren't even lovable losers...they're like the fat, ugly, unbelievably rich girl who thinks she's better than everyone and refuses to talk to them because thusfar she's lived a life of luxury without consequences.

Last night, of course, the Knicks drafted the player from Italy whose father was roommates with Mike D'Antoni and who refused to work out for any team other than the Knicks or Nets. As his draft profile said: "He is a proven scorer who needs help to develop defensively." There doesn't seem to be a single person on the planet outside of the Knicks management who is optimistic abotu the pick and I can't think of many positive signs to note about Gallinari. For a team that has embittered its fans so often by making novel picks or thoughtless trades, it would have been sensible for the Knicks to just get a solid player.

Sadly, Gallinari brought fans straight back to the Knicks' last draft debacle, when they drafted young Frederick Weis, arguably the worst player in the entire world, in front of Ron Artest, the penultimate Knicks prospect (played at St. Johns, best defensive player of his generation, mean, nasty, and crazy...oh it was so perfect).

The story on Gallinari is that he's a euro who can shoot and handle the ball, something Donnie Walsh described as "an unusual package". Broadcasters were trying to throw all sorts of comparisons out last night as to who Gallinari plays like, and I think their statements ("he drives to the hoop like Ginobili") were somewhere between uneducated and insane. After watching the video of this guy play, he seems to me to be a less-polished, worse-shooting, higher-jumping version of Andres Nocioni. This sounds like a bit of a slap in the face but I actually respect Nocioni as a good forward (of course, he can play defense, which the scouts say Gallinari can't). So maybe Donnie Walsh knows what he's doing and we should all try to ignore that his last draft pick was Shawne Williams at 17.

Sadly, the Gallinari pick seems like another small step in the Knicks' fractured yet constant struggle for identity and development. It appears that because the Knicks refuse to think long-term, each step is in a different direction and there is almost never tangible forward progress.

To be fair to the Knicks, though, I don't know that any team who drafted last night made significant forward progress; the Bulls got a great point guard when they already have a good one. The Heat got an undersized power forward who needs the ball and I don't see how that could fit with Dwayne Wade. Memphis's trade/pick of OJ Mayo might have been the best fit, or perhaps Minnesota's pick of Kevin Love (who I think will be terrible, but who still fits on that team nicely). Even those picks have massive qualifiers like "OJ Mayo has the kind of ego that could destroy a young team," or "Kevin Love's best talent is throwing outlet passes". Everything else is a total crap-shoot: Westbrook to the Sonics, Augustin to the Bobcats, Lopez to the Nets, Alexander to the Bucks....who knows what to think about these moves, none of which seem like home runs.

Perhaps more meaningful than the often-mediocre draft picks were the big trades pulled off during the day and then later at the draft.

The Bucks moving Yi Jianlian and Boby Simmons for Richard Jefferson, kind of a strange draft-day deal in that it did not involve draft picks, seems like it could work out well for both teams. The Nets get a Chinese hero, never a bad thing to have in the New York market, as well as a decent shooter at small forward. (The price they pay is inheriting one of the worst contracts in the league.)

By acquiring Richard Jefferson, the Bucks get one of the better small forwards in the league, who is highly-paid but probably deserves it (and who had an under-the-radar career year last year). The Bucks now have Mo Williams at point, Michael Redd at SG, Jefferson at SF, Villenueva at PF, and Bogut at C, with Charlie Bell coming off the bench as their sixth man. Frankly, that's a team with offensive and defensive potential, and I think with the right coach they can put themselves in pretty strong position in the Eastern conference. Is Scott Skiles the man for the job? Who knows.

The newsman says that the Raptors and the Pacers agreed to trade Jermaine O'Neal to Toronto for TJ Ford and Radoslav Nesterovic, but that the trade can't go through until July 9 because TJ Ford is a "base-year compensation" player. I don't know what that means.

I think this is also a good trade for everyone. The Pacers get rid of a monstrous contract and get two good ones (both Nesterovic and Ford earn about $8 million but both expire in 2009). (Wondering who signed Radoslav Nesterovic to a six year, $45 million contract? Bet you wouldn't have guessed the San Antonio Spurs.) They also get a point guard who can compliment Crazy Jamaal Tinsley. As a Knicks fan, it's nice to see somebody unafraid of rebuilding, and based on Jermaine O'Neal's recent injury struggles and his generally bad attitude, this seems like the perfect time to let him go. (Oh yeah, that reminds me, they're rebuilding a team that was completely screwed up by the guy the Knicks just hired...)

The Raptors will be an interesting team with O'Neal and Bosh up front. O'Neal is a very good shot-blocker and both players have good offensive games and will provide rebounding and toughness. When you think about it, it's almost a perfect compliment to the many euro-shooters on the Raptors, because they'll be able to set up outside and let the two big guys work on the boards to get the break running or to get offensive rebounds. The more I think about this, the more potential I think it has to work. The only downside is that Jermaine O'Neal will be making close to $20 Million for the next two seasons.

Despite the possible trade gains for the aforementioned teams, I think there was some nice drafting that could pay dividends in the long term. In my eyes the teams who made the best moves last night were the Minnesota Timberwolves and the New Jersey Nets, and I am not referring to the OJ Mayo/Kevin love pick or the "better" Lopez twin.

After everyone went to bed, the T-Wolves used the 34th pick to get a great backup and probably a solid starting point guard who can shoot, defend, and who has good size when they drafted Mario Chalmers, the guy who beat the number one pick in the draft last year in a head-to-head matchup.

The Nets got Chris Douglas Roberts with the 40th pick in the draft, a great move and a good excuse to get Vince Carter the hell out of dodge. I think Douglas Roberts will be a good player in this league and if the Knicks hadn't traded away their 33rd pick to Portland (who landed Joey Dorsey, a guy who might have fit in nicely with the Bockers), I would have loved to see them get Douglas Roberts or Chalmers. I would go so far as to say that Chris Douglas Roberts was the best shooting guard in the draft.

Chalmers and Roberts are the kind of players that can make any team better and I hope they both get to see some quality playing time.

As always, e-mail me at dontgiveupthebasketballblog@gmail.com

3-1 and done

2008-06-13T08:34:00.003-04:00

Last night was one of the great games in NBA history. For the Lakers and their fans it was a true heartbreaker, a game where they got the lead too early and had to bear the weight of hope and fear as it was whittled down. For the Celtics, and especially Ray Allen, it was vindication for everything they've worked for and a statement that despite their lack of playoff experience and their early troubles, they were not going to give up without a fight. I was particularly happy for Jesus, who probably played one of the best and definitely the most significant game of his life last night. He was outstanding on both ends of the floor, he drove and shot with amazing skill, he scrapped and fought even when the Celtics were down 21, and he never sat for one second. In the end, every one of his 19 points and 9 rebounds seemed like they were more significant than those of anyone else.

This year's Celtics bring to mind another great team, the 1994-1995 NBA Champion Houston Rockets. Those Rockets had an even more difficult time in the playoffs than the Celtics; they were down 2-1 in a best-of-five series to the Utah Jazz in the first round and down 3-1 to the Phoenix Suns in the Western Conference Finals. They were scrutinized during their entire playoff journey, and when they reached the Finals, they had to face an Orlando Magic team featuring Penny and Shaq in their prime that had just beaten the Michael Jordan.

The Rockets steamrolled the Magic in four games. They were led by hungry and humble Hakeem Olajuwan, an aging but excellent small forward in Clyde Drexler and a scrappy team of adequate scorers like Vernon Maxwell and Mario Elie. The offense was conducted by the tandem of quick Kenny Smith and a young Sam Cassell.

One particularly notable moment in the Rockets 1995 playoff run came during the series they played against the San Antonio Spurs, who had won 59 games that year. During the pregame events, David Robinson was presented with the Most Valuable Player award, a clear statement by observers and prognosticators that he and his Spurs were superior to Olajuwon's Rockets. Hakeem dominated Robinson, outscoring him 42-22 and showing that being MVP is about more than the ability to dominate the regular season. (Robinson had averaged 27.6 points per game that season.)

Obviously, the resemblances to the Celtics are significant, and that's fine and dandy, but if there's anyone who should take an interest in the old Rockets team, it's Kobe Bryant. Kobe is currently on the hook for an epic collapse, and it is clear to everyone watching the game, from me to Curt Schilling to a beer-drunk redneck in Easton, Pennsylvania that he is not doing anything to make his team play better than the sum of its parts.

Olajuwon, in my opinion the greatest center of all-time, was also one of the great leaders of all-time. He was humble both on and off the court, he was accepting and open-minded, and he displayed honesty and candor without worrying that it would undermine his authority. When combined with his incredible talent, these qualities that made his teammates admire him, follow him, and play better and more cohesively under the capable command of Rudy Tomjonavich.

When Hakeem's team was down 3-1 to the Rockets in the Western Conference Finals, he spoke to his teammates about the position they were in and the pressure that was on them. He explained that any fear or nervousness they had was misguided, because down 3-1, no one expected them to win, so they had no reason worry about losing. They (along with everyone else) had already written themselves off, and although that was certainly not positive, they could play without the pressure of expectation (something Kobe knows a thing or two about).

Hakeem explained how the Rockets' near-failure also presented a great opportunity, because if they played hard, they could do something historic. Each athlete recognized this opportunity and instead of coming into Game 5 depressed and embarrassed, the team came out focused, hopeful, and relaxed. Hakeem knew he was the best player in the series and he knew his team could win, and his team knew this, too. Bolstered by Hakeem's confidence in himself and in his team and his sheer domination on the Court, the Rockets won their next three games and stunned a Suns team that seemed destined for greatness.

Anyone who has watched the Finals would assume that there is no way Kobe can perform similar magic, but his team is in the same position those old Rockets were. It is probable that they have the ability to beat the Boston Celtics if everyone can get on the same page, and Kobe is capable of a much stronger performance than he has given so far.

Can the Lakers make a historic comeback? I say no. But if Kobe ever hopes to be remembered as an all-time great, and if these Lakers want to be known as true peers of their forebearers in LA, they should see that they have been given a chance that very few athletes ever have: beat the odds, beat the favorites, and you will be remembered next to the most dominant of champions in the annals of history.

As always, e-mail me at dontgiveupthebasketballblog@gmail.com

Random Video Moments!

2008-06-12T16:08:00.002-04:00

I'm pretty excited for the first truly series-changing game of the finals tonight, as I'm sure most fans are. I think the Celtics will pull it out if they play as physically in the post as they did in Game 3.

As for this video, it's a highlight reel of dunks by Isma'il Muhammad. Why? Why the fuck not.

As always, e-mail me at dontgiveupthebasketballblog@gmail.com

Update

2008-06-11T15:37:00.001-04:00

Here is the best I could do all day to find some highlights. You'll have to sit through some droning and you don't get to see things as they happened, but it's better than nothing.

JV

This is not happening, this is not happening, this is not happening, this is not happening....

2008-06-11T09:29:00.002-04:00

The allegations of Tim Donaghy, summarized in an ESPN article that came out this morning (here), are fairly extreme, and describe a conspiracy that goes all the way to the commissioner. Most significant is Donaghy's assertion that the league was behind controversial refereeing in Game 6 of the 2002 Western Conference Finals between the Kings and the Lakers (the Lakers went on to win the Finals that year). If what Donaghy states is true, basketball would sustain a black mark rivaling any in the history of sports. David Stern's reputation would dive into Nixonian territory and, frankly, basketball could find itself in the hands of a different governing body.

Let's remember, though, that Tim Donaghy is a convicted felon and a Grade A scumbag. He's the kind of gambling-addicted suburban slob that once tried to run his mailman off the road when the mail truck hit his recycling bin. He's the idiot who took loans from the mafia. He has shown a clear lack of morals and honesty and his own selfish sense of self-preservation led to his downfall. He may be just a rat trying to swim his way to shore, only this time he's trying to welch his way out of dealing with the FBI instead of the mob.

It's impossible at this time to tell which side is telling the truth, but it seems worth it to at least discuss what's going on here. I vividly remember the 2002 playoffs (and many series of those years) for their incredibly inconsistent refereeing. That Kings/Lakers game in particular stands out as one that I will never forget because I felt it was actually turned by poor officiating. From that day on, if you asked me for an example of a game should have gone the other way, I would have said Kings/Lakers, 2002, Game 6.

I realize my memories, like those of most people, are susceptible to change over the years, so I decided to check out some video highlights from the game. Interestingly, there are none anywhere on the internet. Considering this was one of the most important (and discussed) games of all time, I found that surprising, especially in the wake of this morning's news, but maybe it's just a coincidence.

Actually, I had a hard time even finding the play-by-play. Once I got a hold of it, I realized that it wasn't going to be much help--it's hard to bring back memories of what actually happened (calling phantom fouls, for instance) with numbers on a chart. But here's what I can tell you:

The game was tied at 75-75 at the beginning of the fourth quarter. It went back and forth until 3:06, when the Kings took the lead at 92-90 and the Lakers called timeout. Up until that point, if you're reading the play-by-play and can't remember anything and are only able to analyze the numbers, nothing seems awry.

After they were down 92-90 at 3:06, the Lakers scored sixteen points. Fourteen of those points came from eight trips to the free throw line (in 2:55). In the same period of time, the Kings went to the line three times, made six foul shots, and scored two baskets, losing 106-102. The Lakers' only conventional score came at 0:52 (by Shaq).

That Shaq basket made it 101-98, Lakers. In the next forty-three seconds, the Lakers went to the line three more times, went 5-6, and put the game away.

If that helps you, great, but I hope some video of the actual refereeing or the whole quarter comes out sometime soon. If it does, I'll post it here. Numbers never tell the whole story and I wouldn't be surprised if many close games end in a flurry of free-throws by the winning team because the losing team is forced to foul (though by my reading, this was not the case in the Lakers/Kings game).
Whether or not Donaghy is telling the truth about this game or his other allegations is hard to judge, because he's created a "chicken or the egg" situation. Is he finally able to provide evidence that games many have always thought were rigged actually were, or is he using those assumptions to take advantage of fans who demand an explanation and save himself? Donaghy's letter (only five pages, written by his lawyer) discussed almost exclusively highly-publicized refereeing controversies of the past few years, and each of Donaghy's allegations are based on things he "heard" from referees or officials involved with the game. Though the supposed transgressions are explained in detail, there is no explanation why Tim Donaghy, a man who did not officiate any of the games in question, would have access to such dangerous information. Although Donaghy was the back-up official for one of the games he described, it may be that he is merely using that fact to gain a foothold to show he has primary knowledge.

The unfortunate truth that it is so hard to determine whether there are teeth to Donaghy's allegations underscore a larger problem for the NBA: this is an era of inadequate officiating. If fans were satisfied with the quality and fairness of officials, it would be a lot easier to deny Donaghy. Of course, fans of all sports are always complaining that the referees are biased, but in my opinion, for the last decade the NBA has retained the least professional, least consistent officials in major American sports. This is significant regardless of their intent.

One thing I thought was interesting about Donaghy's letter (not in the ESPN article) was his statement about the lack of objectivity of the NBA's "observer" program (something he would have actually had direct experience with). This program is set up to monitor referees, and a designated (and I assume anonymous) observer goes to a game, takes notes, reviews the game tape, and writes a report on how fair he thinks it was called. According to Donaghy "the observer rating system was frequently manipulated. Although the observers were supposed to remain anonymous, all the referees knew who they were. Referees friendly with NBA observers monitoring their game would likely receive a good report."

The only example of impropriety Donaghy could give was an observer asking a referee to buy his book, which doesn't sound like a big deal. However, a breakdown in oversight is hard to identify and there is often no evidence because it's more about cordiality and lack of professionalism than formal deal-making or guns, drugs, and money. Arthur Anderson's failure to objectively audit Enron because the executives were buddy-buddy and too trusting of each other is a good example of this. I wonder if the observer program is a problem that Donaghy was aware of that he tried to exaggerate into something criminal to support himself. Obviously, that throws doubt on whether anything he says is true, but it follows the pattern of his trying to take a problem and make it look like impropriety, and if the observer program is that - a problem - then it underscores the bigger point about poor refereeing.

At this point, I believe David Stern, and do not think there is a conspiracy by the league to help some teams and hurt others. The ten years of embarrassment by the New York Knicks and the fifteen years of hell for the Celtics before 2008 are the basis for my beliefs, along with what I believed were preferential calls for the small-market, unexciting San Antonio Spurs since roughly 1999. (And how about that other team from Los Angeles?)

The thing is, when the quality of officiating stinks, it leads fans to conspiracy theories, and everything that is accomplished by any team is thrown into question. That the Donaghy situation even developed is evidence of the NBA's failure to exercise oversight over its referees.

In the end, let's hope that the NBA does the right thing to heal itself from this scandal. Fix the referees, fix the league.

As always, e-mail me at dontgiveupthebasketballblog@gmail.com

Better Know the Lakers

2008-06-10T09:21:00.006-04:00

Kobe. Pau. Bynum. Fisher.

These are the Lakers we know. Some of us love them. Some of us do not. As a matter of fact, some of us feel that Derek Fisher is a smaller, more annoying version of Bruce Bowen without the defensive skills but with all of the "flop to injure the other player" mind-set who has been the beneficiary of more calls in the last decade than any single player other than perhaps Shaquille O'Neal and who is wholly undeserving of being known as an even adequate point guard.

Note: Yes, I feel bad that Shaq gets hacked a lot without intervention, and I'm totally with him when he complains about how much it hurts when other players rap him across his forearms, which are generally considered his most sensitive body part, but that doesn't change the fact that for about twelve years, his go-to move has been "spin, elbow defender to face, drive". Here are some of his greatest hits in reverse chronological order:

(/Exhales)

But let's forget about Shaq's dirty elbows and try to concentrate on the 2008 Lakers, because they are, after all, more than just Kobe, Pau, Bynum and Derek Fisher. Interestingly, they're one of the least-black teams in the NBA, the complete opposite of both their old dynasty and the current Celtics team they oppose. They have a lot of specialists, weirdos, Euros, and long-hairs, and frankly, they're pretty interesting. So let's get to it.

The Roster, Ordered Alphabetically, Erratically Rated by Jimmy V

Trevor Ariza. Trevor is one of the only South American players in the NBA. Trevor was born in Venezuela, generally a baseball country, and one can only imagine how much difficulty he would have had with his strike zone. Trevor went to high school in LA where he averaged an impressive 21 points, 14 rebounds, and 9 assists per game and played every position. He is asthmatic and during his freshman year at UCLA one of his lungs actually collapsed. He is a very, very good dunker:

Dunk rating: 8. Hustle rating: 7. Shooting: 5. Lung rating: 1.

Jordan Farmar. He has very large ears. He wears his hair in the "Long Island Guido" fashion. Like Ariza, he is from LA, where he averaged 27 a game in high school. His favorite music artist is Usher. He is half black and half The Jew.

Douchebag rating: 8.2. Hair rating: 2. Sneaker size: 7.5. Chances that he hangs out with Kobe and actually enjoys it: Actually, quite good.

Didier Ilunga Mbenga's first-person description: I AM FROM THE CONGO. I AM IN LOS ANGELES. I WAS IN EUROPE. I SPEAK 5 LANGUAGES. I HAVE A BLACK BELT IN JUDO. MOST OF MY FAMILY WAS KILLED BY CONGOLESE WARLORDS. I USED TO BE CALLED D.J. I DO NOT KNOW WHY.

Coby Karl: For first 22 years of his life, he played second fiddle to his dad as the second-best Karl in the history of basketball. Now, he adds the distinction of being the second-best "Kho-bee" on his team. Remarkably, Karl only averaged eight points and two rebounds per game in his junior year of high school but managed to shore up his game enough to go to Boise State and make the NBA as an undrafted free agent. He made his NBA debut on the same day he made his NBDL debut because he played only 37 seconds in the NBA game and was sent down quickly enough (to the Los Angeles D-Fenders) to play in a night game.

Dunk rating: Shaquille (I've seen him dunk. He dunks like Shaq. It's weird. It makes the rest of the Lakers just about shit their pants.). Whiteness factor: 93. Overall: Possibly the worst player in the NBA.

Chris Mihm. In case you forgot, he was drafted with the seventh pick in the first round of the draft by the Chicago Bulls (and traded to the Cavs). The All-Star "Traded for Chris Mihm" team is unusually good: Gary Payton, Rajon Rondo, Jamal Crawford, Larry Hughes, Toni Kukoc, and Chris Webber have all found themselves on the other side of deals including Mihm. (Webber was traded to the Bullets in 1994 for, among other things, a pick that in 2000 that became Mihm.) He is a tall, stiff, somewhat athletic white guy. His favorite cereal is undisclosed.

Dunk rating: Was once dunked on by Chris Wilcox twice in one game, the second time so seriously that he was badly injured. Pass rating: Can pass. Height rating: 9.

Ira Newble. One of the better defensive players in the NBA in the past few years, he somehow has aged to 33 in a flash. He once refused to play in a Cavs game, which is, frankly, amazing. He may have had the worst college career of anyone in the NBA, averaging 3.2 points per game in his senior year at Miami University. He got most of the Cleveland Cavaliers to sign a letter condemning the Chinese government's investment in the genocidal regime in Darfur. The two players who refused to sign were LeBron James and Damon Jones for what one can assume were "economic reasons". I'm not sure whether I think it's nice that he's trying to help people or a little lame that he only did it once he saw Hotel Rwanda. Your call.

Dunk rating: 3. Defense: 7.5. Humanitarian efforts: 4. (Most NBA players would be a 1, so that's fair given that he hasn't actually spent much money or devoted much time, in my opinion.)

Vladimir Radmanovic. Shoots high-arcing shots. Flops. Sucks at defense. Am I telling you anything you don't already know? No. But did you know he's in the midst of a six-year, $42 million dollar contract? Did you realize he resembles Joe Namath? Did you know he embarassed his country in the 2002 FIBA World Championships? He was not playing well and when his coach, an obviously fiery man named Svetislav Pesic, saw him sitting at the end of the bench "eating a banana", he kicked him off the team. The team rallied in the second half, and then beat Argentina (featuring Manu Ginobili among others) in the final to win the gold medal.

Rating in American basketball: 3.5. Rating in Serbian basketball: 2.5. Ability to hit meaningless three-pointers: 9.

Ronny Turiaf. From Wikipedia: "Turiaf is most notably known for his aggressive play and his dance routines at the sidelines used to support and invigorate his teammates."

Aggressive play rating: 2. Dance rating: 1. Invigoration rating: 0.

Sasha Vujacic. Goes by "Sasha". Is from Bosnia, which makes him Vladimir Radmanovic's mortal enemy. His nickname, supposedly, is "The Machine", which was also Vladimir Radmanovic's nickname when he played sixth man for the Sonics. No word on who is involved with who's wife. He is actually 6'7", which he does not appear to be on television. Phil Jackson once called him an "11:00 a.m. player", as in "he's good in practice but sucks in games". Sasha cheers for the Kings and hates the Lakers because of fellow Former Yugoslavians Vlade Divac and Predrag Stojakovic.

Annoying rating: Very. Hair rating: 2. Potential to engage in a fight to the death with Vladimir Radmanovic: 10.

Luke Walton: Bill Walton's son. I bet you had no idea.

As always, e-mail me at dontgiveupthebasketballblog@gmail.com

Tweet!

2008-06-09T10:56:00.003-04:00

Throughout this (and many) year's NBA playoffs, refereeing has been a problem. Last night's game was called with almost no objectivity or precision which has resulted in unwarranted questioning of the fairness of the Celtics' victory. It's time to have a conversation about how the NBA can effectively shore up their officiating corps so that the game is more watchable and more fair.

Regarding gameplay, it's easy to diagnose the problem - the refs are blowing their whistles too much. They seem to err on the side of making a call despite the damage the constant whistle-blowing does to the pace of the game and the competitive balance. From opening tip to closing buzzer in last night's game, if any referee saw something that might be interpreted as a touch foul, they called it. It didn't even matter if it was off the ball and away from the play. It didn't matter if the referee didn't have a good sight line or if the call was based on an interpretation of a reaction. Amazingly, the only time the referees seemed willing to swallow their whistles was when there was genuine contact during difficult but dangerous offensive foul-or-blocking-foul "50/50" calls.

I recently watched the Stanley Cup and was pleasantly surprised by the uninterrupted pace that was the direct result of restraint by the referees. Of course, there were bad calls, but they mattered less because more was decided when the puck was on the ice. The reduction in the play stoppages made the game much more engrossing and exciting and I found myself concentrating on what was playing out in front of me much more than I have during this year's Finals. In light of the fact that I know almost nothing about hockey and barely follow it and have been a basketball fan since childhood, this is distressing. I can't imagine I'm the only one who feels this way.

The best thing about the reduction in calls during the hockey game was the shift in focus from the referees to the players. When I watch a basketball game, I am conscious of the effect of the referees perhaps every other trip down the floor. In the Stanley Cup, they were ancillary, keeping the game clean but otherwise putting the onus on the players. If the NBA was played this way, the game would be much-improved.

As a result of the way the refs called the game last night, I've read this morning numerous complaints about Boston-biased officiating. There were certainly some questionable calls that went the Celtics' way. Foremost among these were the two off-the-ball fouls the called on Kobe as he tried to get through screens. However, I don't believe that the free-throw disparity (which was 38-10 for the Celtics) showed that the officials were biased against the Lakers.

The Lakers lack of free throw attempts was caused by their reluctance to attack the hoop and their limited commitment to maintaining a presence in the post. Frankly, I can't think of Kobe driving to the hoop once, except for the quasi-fadeaway bank shots he executed on a couple of possessions. Most of the contact between the teams was during rebounding or off of the ball, and I don't think anyone would allege that Boston was beating up Kobe, Derek Fisher, or Gasol, who were responsible for most of the offensive execution. The only hard foul last night that I remember was on Rondo when he went up for a probable dunk attempt.

The fact of the matter is that the actual fouls called last night were pretty even - 28 against the Lakers, 21 against the Celtics. The Lakers couldn't stop penetration by Leon Powe (who shot thirteen free throws), and aside from him, none of the Celtics starters shot more than seven free throws. (Kobe also shot seven).

In fact, the only Laker who consistently tried to get the rim was Pau Gasol, and he was rarely successful at getting good position when the Lakers were looking for him, which was also rare. When he did get close, he generally beat his defender badly, and that is why he was 8-12. Oftentimes when there was contact, he initiated it as he drove to the hoop, especially with his off-hand. The bottom line is that Pau's lack of production had as much to do with lack of position as it did with clearing out the post for isolating Kobe or moving to the top of the key to execute the triangle offense and his game was not affected in any meaningful way by Celtics fouling.

Of the other Lakers, Lamar Odom was content to settle for jumpers, and the role players (Fisher, Radmonovic, Vujacic, Farmer, and Walton), who are jump-shooters anyway, were not attempting to get to the hoop or draw contact at all. I don't know what play Lakers fans can really complain about, unless they believe that the Celtics shouldn't have gotten as many attempts as they did.

On that front, it seems to me that it was pretty fair. Kevin Garnett and Ray Allen combined for five free throws. Rondo shot six (which he definitely deserved). Paul Pierce shot seven and was robbed of a four-point play for an alleged travel that I thought was more of a message to him to stop trying to make the refs call the "Barry Foul". (For the record, the correct call was a no-call, because Pierce jumped into the defender and the defender jumped into him. The shot should have counted. As a matter of fact, in the vast majority of questionable situations [especially the early Kobe foul calls] I am convinced that the correct call would have been the no call.)

I just don't see a lot of evidence that the Celtics were unfair beneficiaries of the shoddy officiating. The Lakers should have attacked the hoop and they failed to. Pau Gasol only took twelve shots even though he was doing damage. Kobe shot mostly fallaways and pullups. It's true that Lamar Odom was mugged on a rebound at the end of the first half and Gasol may have deserved a whistle or too, but you could say the same about a number of Celtics possessions.

The real issue is not whether the Celtics or the Lakers were favored, though. Last night's game was not fun to watch because the only time the referees relaxed was when it was a blowout. (This was also when the game got exciting and there started to be a meaningful give-and-take between the teams.)

The NBA Finals should be as exciting as any championship game, and until the referees show greater restraint, the Finals will be the ugly sister of the major American sports. I love basketball and I can barely enjoy watching the games. I am not one of these bleeding heart "oh if only it was like the good old days" fans and I'm not trying to show how much I know by constantly complaining about the incompetency of teams/coaches/refs/administrators. I have two eyes and I like basketball and I know that if the NBA doesn't get its refereeing sorted out people are not going to continue to enjoy watching big basketball games, even if this year's rivalry produces a misleading ratings jump. If anything, the jump in ratings is an indictment of our current era, because it shows that people would rather connect to the past then take an interest in the future.

I don't know why the league or the referees are doing things the way they are and why last night was so bad. Whether the officials were making an unnecessary attempt to "take control" or "establish guidelines" by making "statement calls" or whether they are just incompetent doesn't matter. The athletes in the NBA are tough and do not need touch foul-calls unless the foul affects a shot. Fat, middle-aged men and women all over America are able to comprehend this system in pick-up basketball.

The NBA's referees need to let the players play and have the courage to step in only when they feel that an offensive player is impeded or a foul is in bad faith or the result of being out of control. I can only imagine how much more enjoyable it would be to watch uninterrupted basketball (though I'm sure ABC would lose a lot of money in advertising revenue). No rule change could help the game as much as this.

As always, e-mail me at dontgiveupthebasketballblog@gmail.com

Don't Ever Give Up: The Finals Preview

2008-06-03T11:16:00.008-04:00

This Finals is about two men - Paul Pierce and Kobe Bryant.

For Pierce, every game will be a home game (his hometown being Inglewood), and he will be arguably the only player in the contest that will lead his team to victory if he plays well and doom them if he does not. He will be playing against the team he loved as a child and he will be playing to change the way history will remember him. One might say Kevin Garnett is playing under similar circumstances, but Garnett has had many chances for success in his career. This is either Pierce's second or third chance, depending on how you consider the old Jim O'Brien teams, and that makes it much more special.

For Kobe, this game will represent vindication. I don't think it (or anything) will satisfy him, but he doubtless believes winning the Finals by himself will fulfill some sort of legacy or need. If he didn't think that, I can't see why he wanted to be traded out of L.A. Any casual observer watching Kobe can see that he has spent a good deal of his career trying to satisfy his audience, to be something he thinks he should be, and to be loved by everyone. His canned laughter, his attempts at a rap career, and his so-called "style" have all been little steps in this direction, and this Finals will be a big one. I expect Kobe to play like a man possessed.

Don't forget, Kobe's dad was an NBA basketball player. Perhaps he wasn't a great one, but there have always been examples of athletes, artists, intellectuals, and even politicians with famous fathers who display a profound and urgent desire to eclipse their fathers and whose success (and often downfall) is powered more than anything else by a fear of nonacceptance. I'm not sure this explains Kobe's oft-awkward personality, though - as Freud allegedly noted, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

My personal feeling is that Kobe Bryant has already failed in his role as a leader, and that a Lakers victory would be, if anything, a victory for Phil Jackson. The interesting thing about the series is that although it feels like the first game with any historical potential since the end of the Shaq/Lakers dynasty, it will probably be remembered as a one-time event rather than the drawn-out rivalry it evokes.

If one sets aside the geographic and historical implications, the matchup between the Lakers and the Celtics, in theory, is a good one. The Lakers are one of the top offensive teams in the league, and the Celtics are one of the best defensive teams. The best sporting events are generally contests where irresistible force meets an immovable object, but frankly, the playoffs have shown that the Celtics are not exactly "immovable". If they lose this series, that will be their undoing.

The Lakers, despite their consistent success in the playoffs (against some very good defensive teams and also the Nuggets), are a very good but not great offensive squad. They have a two-dimensional point guard in Derek Fisher, a shooting guard who has an extremely inconsistent on-court demeanor in Kobe, a small forward who is frankly not good in Vujacic, a power forward who can't shoot and has taken advantage of matchups against "whoever's not guarding Pau Gasol" (Fabricio Oberto, for instance), and a center who is truthfully more of a power forward and who has never averaged ten rebounds per game in his career.

The Celtics match up well with this team. Rondo is the kind of defender who should be able to euthanize Derek Fisher, but I'm fearful that Boston will try to drop him down on Pau Gasol when the ball is in the post. If this happens, Derek Fisher is all but guaranteed to hit three to five backbreaking three pointers a game, and this may decide the series. (All too often in the Shaq/Kobe years, games were decided by guys like Fisher, Horry, Fox, George, and Lue because they hit those open shots when teams were forced to double down.)

The matchup between Ray Allen and Kobe presents an intriguing dilemma - is it worth leaving Ray Allen in the lineup when he's been the most inconsistent player in the playoffs, especially on defense? Or is it better to give up offense at the shooting guard position and put a big guy like Posey or a small guy like House in and let them try to pressure Kobe defensively?

This dilemma illustrates why it is such a problem that Rondo can't shoot. If Rondo could even occasionally hit three-pointers, taking Ray Allen out might not be a huge problem in terms of running the offense, but when it's Rondo and James Posey out there, you can't really rely on either player to hit a three when the ball's kicked out of a double team or a driving player. That brings the whole offense closer to the hoop, lets the Lakers double-team or crowd the key, and causes problems for Pierce and Garnett. (I know James Posey and Eddie House are not bad at shooting threes. But they're not threatening the way a proper shooting guard should be.)

I think it makes sense to leave Ray Allen in for his offensive potential and hope to god that getting him minutes helps him iron out his problems. To compensate for his defensive shortcomings, I would advocate switching Allen's defensive assignment to Derek Fisher and telling him to only concentrate on stopping Fisher from getting open shots. Ray may be a little slow laterally, but he can do that effectively in a big game.

This puts Rondo in a tough position, because he can't guard Kobe, but neither can Posey, Allen, or House. Rondo at least has a chance of keeping Bryant from penetrating effectively, and honestly, with his long arms, I don't know if its as bad a mismatch as it seems in theory.

Although this defense is vulnerable to pick and rolls, Kobe's perimeter game, and the crippling of Rondo's self-esteem, the Celtics need to have a perimeter guy in if they're going to have Rondo running things out there. Ray Allen is one of the best in the league's history and to limit his opportunity in the Finals could be a terrible mistake for the Celtics. He might be the smartest and best prepared player on either team. He has a history of success against Kobe and of success in the playoffs. Also, he had the second-best dunk-on of the 2000 Olympics (fast forward to 1:20):

The biggest advantage Boston has (and the reason I believe they will win or lose with Paul Pierce) is at small forward. The only player who can possibly guard Pierce is Kobe, and that will leave a player like Sasha Vujacic or Vlad Radmanovic on Ray Allen. Either way, this is a win-win situation, because if LeBron James can't stop Paul Pierce, neither can Kobe. But for Pierce to be unstoppable, he must be aggressive, get to the hoop, get to the line, and hit those terribly hard-looking shots he seems to toss up so easily. If he scores an efficient 25 per game, the rest of the Celtics could more than make up for as much as 35 per game from Kobe.

I'm assuming for the purpose of this article that Lamar Odom will be matched up with Kevin Garnett and Pau Gasol will be matched with Kendrick Perkins. I flip-flopped back and forth a few times in my assessment of who would guard who, and to be honest, it doesn't really make sense either way. My rationale for the choice I made is that Perk and Pau play in the post more than Garnett and Gasol do. But who knows what Phil Jackson or Doc Rivers will do.

Lamar Odom is going to have his hands very full whoever guards him. This will be the first series he doesn't have to go up against another Western team's terrible excuse for a center. Garnett should shut him down entirely, and that's a big problem, because Odom has been very important for the Lakers in the Spurs and Utah series. The question is whether he was so helpful because he raised his quality of play or because he took advantage of the lack of skills of his defender. I can't believe it is the former, even though I like Odom, and I think he is due for a serious slump.

Garnett, on the other hand, will be guarded by one of the weaker defenders on the Lakers. In Boston's first meeting, he outscored Odom 21 to 4, and the second time, outscored him 22 to 14. However, both Lakers/Celtics contests during the regular season were before the Pau Gasol trade, so it's impossible to know how this will effect the matchup.

It is Pau that will be the biggest unknown in the series, and other than Pierce, his success may be more important than anyone else's (only because Kobe's is a given). I don't know how well Kendrick Perkins will guard him. The only game Boston played against Gasol (when he was on the Grizzlies) saw him score 12 points on 3-13 shooting (in 40 minutes). I didn't watch that game and frankly know nothing about it. I am familiar enough with Gasol and Perkins to be sure that Perkins will have his hands full, even though he's been playing well. Gasol has all the tools necessary to get Perkins uncomfortable and into foul trouble, and I'm sure he'll do that.

However, the Celtics play great interior defense, and Kevin Garnett will provide help from the weak side along with whoever else is near the key. Pau is the player who can really screw up the team defense of the Celtics if he requires a lot of help to guard, but I'm not convinced he will be able to do it in what should be a very physical finals.

The Celtics have a great advantage in the depth of their bench, but this will only really matter if they decide to get out and run, which I don't expect. Doc Rivers has not done a good job being consistent with his lineups and although the quality of the players on Boston's bench is better, I do not think their play will effect the series in any meaningful way (at least any more than the Lakers bench).

The bottom line, for me, comes down to defense. I can see Boston shutting down every player on the Lakers other than Kobe, whereas the Lakers will have the ability only to slow down Ray Allen. Two heads are better than one, even Kobe's. Celtics in six.

As always, e-mail me at dontgiveupthebasketballblog@gmail.com

PS: I leave you with the sage words of Ray Allen circa 2004, immediately after Shaq left the Lakers, on Kobe Bryant:

"He's going to be very selfish and he feels like he needs to show this league and the people in this country that he is better without Shaq. He can win championships without Shaq. So offensively, he's going to jump out and say, 'I can average 30 points. I can still carry the load on this team...If Kobe doesn't see he needs two and a half good players to be a legitimate playoff contender or win a championship in about a year or two he'll be calling out to Jerry Buss that 'We need some help in here,' or 'Trade me' and we'll all be saying, 'I told you so,' when he says that."

Jesus!

Problems and Solutions around the NBA

2008-05-19T09:41:00.003-04:00

Problem: You are the Celtics, one of the most egregious examples of a team built for the short-term in the NBA's history. If it hadn't been for the Shaquille O'Neal/Gary Payton/Dwayne Wade Heat, you would probably be the worst, and if you lose this year, history will remember you as something akin to basketball's equivalent of the Jose Canseco/Greg Vaughn/Fred McGriff Tampa Bay Devil Rays. You have to do well right now because the chances of another injury-free, high-spirits season are slim.

Solution: Remember that Paul Pierce is still in his prime, averaged at least 25.0 points per game for the two years before this one, and has always come to play in big games. Last night he was as good or better than LeBron, and he will present serious problems for Detroit in the next round.

Problem: Now you have to play the Pistons, you have a terrible record in away games, and as an opponent, the Pistons are vastly superior to the Cavs and the Hawks.

Solution: This is going to be a tricky puzzle for Boston if the Celts can't find some offensive continuity. Last night, it was depressing to see Kevin Garnett unable to shake Ben Wallace laterally and be forced into shooting turnaround jumpers, and I'm of the opinion that he'll do the same against Rasheed Wallace. It was even more depressing to see Ray Allen mired in what has to be one of the worst slumps of his career. Doc Rivers benching him for most of Game 7 will not bolster his confidence.

However, the Celtics have something to counteract the Pistons: defense. I believe that Garnett can shut down Rasheed Wallace in the post and on the perimeter, Rondo can give Chauncey Billups serious problems, James Posey can hold off Tayshaun Prince, and that Eddie House can guard Richard Hamilton. I think that's exactly the way the Celtics should try to match up, because they will still be superior offensively, can float Paul Pierce around wherever he pleases, and can try to work Ray Allen in as a sixth man. If Allen gets his groove back, it's over.

The problem with this, obviously, is that Detroit will have another big man on the floor, but I like the strategy of making the Pistons adjust to a small lineup. The other big man will most likely be Antonio McDyess, who can't defend Pierce and who is mainly a mid-range jump shooter. If Detroit decides to use Jason Maxiell, this will be more of a problem for Pierce, but again, on offense, he will be almost untouchable. I think in this scenario the Celtics could and should win the series within six games.

Problem: P.J. Brown just knocked you out of the playoffs.
Solution: None.

Problem: It is 2008, this is the playoffs, and P.J. Brown is emerging as your second best player.
Solution: None.

Problem: Last night's game was one of the worst examples of officiating I can remember. To the credit of the refs, they were fairly impartial in their incompetency. The only time the game had any flow was in the latter half of the third quarter, when the refs swallowed their whistles and watched as Paul Pierce and LeBron James engaged each other in great display of individual rivalry within team sports.

The only thing more frustrating than the refereeing was the shoddy coverage by ABC. They refused to show replays of bad calls and Jeff Van Gundy failed to notice many of the errors. It seemed like he was more concerned with one-liners, and it was quite vexing to hear the commentators discuss the replays being shown to the Garden crowd (eliciting loud boos) but not get to see them on the broadcast.

The sorry state of refereeing is a real problem in the NBA, and I'm always astonished how bad the playoff crews can be. I realize that they can't see everything, but there's one ref for every three players out there and they are generally inconsistent, inattentive, and combative.

Specifically, last night's crew of Ken Mauer, Eddie Rush, and Bennett Salvatore was calling fouls with a complete lack of uniformity (the only thing Van Gundy noticed), missing travels and double dribbles, unable to see who touched the ball last as it went out of bounds, not getting offensive fouls right, and doing a grave injustice in failing to assess Delonte West a technical foul for his antics during the Eddie House jump-ball fiasco. The crew not in control, they let players and the crowd influence them, and they were not up to the standards of professional referees, let alone the more elite crews that are supposed to officiate playoff games.

Some background on the bunch: Ken Mauer served five months in jail for felony tax evasion in 2000. Eddie Rush is statistically one of seven referees in the NBA who had worse records for the home team against the spread than Tim Donaghy. Salvatore is remembered for making two series-changing calls in the Miami/Dallas finals of 2006 including a foul call with 1.9 seconds remaining in a game the Mavericks led by one that led to a problem wherein "ABC sports, the television network covering the 2006 finals, could not display a conclusive replay supporting the call by Salvatore". (See Salvatore's wikipedia entry. He also once said "I can't tell you how many times I make a call that I think is correct -- and then go into locker room and it's wrong or vice versa.")

This is the play from the 2006 Finals (fast forward to 3:55). Keep in mind we're talking about a last second shot here in a one point game in overtime in the NBA finals with a series tied at 2-2.

I love to watch basketball and it kills me when games are decided or affected by referees. Anyone who thinks this is not a problem, in my opinion, is not paying attention.

Solution: For all the NBA's talk, they obviously have poor accountability. They happily let Tim Donaghy ref important playoff games despite years of statistics showing a spread-based bias, and he'd probably be doing the same thing if the FBI hadn't stepped in with some help from an organization that knows how to conduct an investigation.

It's not that hard to explain to refs what rules you want standardized and how they should be called. The NBA probably employs a few hundred people who are experts in basketball, even compared with the most self-righteous fan (me). Why can't they figure out a program to shore up the refereeing and make the games more about basketball?

I truly believe the games would be much more fun to watch if the referees called the game consistently and let the players play in the playoffs. Though I was happy they didn't call a foul on PJ Brown on LeBron's last drive last night (which was, by the way, a very good call).

Problem: David West won't be at 100% tonight after being injured by Big Game Bob.
Solution: Chris Paul.

As always, e-mail me at dontgiveupthebasketballblog@gmail.com

Calculated Video Moments!

2008-05-16T14:53:00.004-04:00

Just a little reminder of what a classy organization the Spurs run and how little help they get from officials. By the way, in case it's not clear, the call there was an offensive foul on Chris Paul. As the announcer notes: "not only was it not a good play right there, but ...Chris Paul was called for the offensive foul."

In case my criticism is getting excessive and turning away folks who like to hear more than one side of the story, I decided to insert a little piece of wisdom from a true Spurs fan. Her web page is here. As you can see, she seems to be a Spurs fan and a Cowboys fan...kind of a funny combination for a Texan like herself, but I'll let you draw your own conclusions about what that says about the clearly bandwagon nature of most Spurs followers, who may or may not live in a city that should have been given to the Indians or the Mexicans or made into the world's largest garbage barge.

Here is her statement (check the link if you don't think I'm pasting it in its entirety): Anyone who thinks David Stern was on the Spurs side in anything is extremely ignorant of the NBA. David Stern hates the Spurs because he, like every other idiot who prefers an open dunk to a blocked ball, thinks the Spurs are boring which is why when he was asked who he'd prefer in the playoffs he said "Lakers VS Lakers". Because they get ratings, as do the dirty, back 'n forth up the court, drama filled, Suns. Find another excuse as to why you lost because you will never take responsibility for lacking in the fundamentals of basketball.

If you're interested, LoneStarScorpio, as she calls herself, also made a video where she defends the Spurs actions in last year's series (the one where Robert Horry hip checked Steve Nash twenty feet, inciting a fight that caused Amare Stoudamire and Boris Diaw to be suspended) and the misanthropic demeanor of Philadelphia Eagles fans. Her videos are on the page linked to above.

Don't Ever Give Up: The Basketball Blog. Always fair and balanced.

As always, e-mail me at dontgiveupthebasketballblog@gmail.com

"Things went our way tonight, that's for sure."

2008-05-16T09:43:00.003-04:00

The title above is yesterday's quote by the ever-introspective coach of the San Antonio Spurs.

I can't write intelligently on this because I am so filled with rage. Between the "offensive foul" on Paul (Bowen flopping), the three fouls in less than a minute on David West (Ginobili flopping), and Robert Horry's objectionable cheap shot to injure Mr. West, it's just more of the same from the dirty, officially-sanctioned, incomparably frustrating Spurs. That their classless, unintelligent, inhumane, bandwagon-redneck-beer-drunk-circle-jerk fans cheered for Horry as West had to be carried off the court was the icing on the cake.

Game 7 is on Monday. Let's pray for good officiating, correct interpretation of the NBA's rules on fouls (and illegal screens!), and a New Orleans victory.

As always, e-mail me at dontgiveupthebasketballblog@gmail.com

PS: I would love a career-ending injury to Bruce Bowen, too. Like a bullet to the fucking head.
PPS: I'm with Ozzy.

Random Video Moments!

2008-05-14T11:08:00.004-04:00

Here's a playoff edition of random video moments.

Since I was a little unfair to the Pistons in my last post, I figured I'd do a video moment for a player on the Pistons I like a lot, Jason Maxiell, the spiritual successor to Maurice Evans.

Maxiell offers some food for thought about a possible NBA Finals matchup:

As always, e-mail me at dontgiveupthebasketballblog@gmail.com

PS: Happy birthday to Pooh Richardson, whose jersey I own and who, in 1991, averaged 17.1 points and 9.1 assists per game.

The Playoffs and Mike D'Antoni: Formerly Synonymous

2008-05-14T10:04:00.004-04:00

There's a lot going on in the NBA as the Playoffs hit the stretch and the Knicks hire their new coach, Mike D'Antoni. Let's take this one at a time.

The Playoffs.

The playoffs are looking really exciting from here on out. The series that is the least fun to watch (Orlando/Detroit) is over and done, the Lakers/Jazz and Celtics/Cavs series are both at 2-2, and the New Orleans/San Antonio series is arguably the most historic contest in five years.

When the Lakers were up 1-0, I said the Jazz would win in seven, and I still think they will. I'm really happy that they climbed out of their 0-2 hole and it's exciting to see them keep up with LA offensively.

Maybe I'm underestimating Kobe (or Pau Gasol), but I'm discouraged that the Jazz have had to outscore the Lakers rather than beat them with defense. The Lakers are a two-dimensional team at best, and they can't rebound or play defense. That the Jazz are in this series based on their scoring is an incredible endorsement for Deron Williams and, in my eyes, one of the biggest surprises of the playoffs.

The Celtics/Cavaliers series is obviously not playing out as I expected (Celtics in 4). I incorrectly believed that the Celtics aversion to the road was an anomaly and that it was their inability to deal with two slashers (and Josh Smith's out of character shooting excellence) that made the difference for the Hawks. The Cavs, with only one slasher (albeit the best in the league), seemed to me like armadillos in the road. Frankly, I still feel that way.

What I can't fathom is the Celtics' inability to score against the Cavaliers, who have only been able to produce meaningful offense in one of the contests. It's a serious problem; the Celtics have failed to score 90 points in any game. That is unbelievable for a team that averaged over 100 during the regular season and scored over 110 in two of the four regular season games against Cleveland (one was an overtime game).

I have to admit that I was a little surprised (owing to my own ignorance) to find the Cavs had beaten the Celtics twice this year. Perhaps that should have been an indicator of their ability to match up, or gain a mental edge, or something. But I still don't see it, and until I can put my finger on why the Celtics are unable to score against Cleveland, I continue to believe that they should be favored to win every game. I think they will from here on out.

Random note: Did you know that Sam Cassell's 1994-1995 Houston Rockets set a playoff record with seven straight away wins? Cassell, a 25 year old rookie at the time, noted "I love the playoffs because they're the money games, that's where you make your name. You don't have to be 35 years old to figure that out." Let's hope a 35 year old Cassell can help Boston figure it out.

Detroit Basketball! has gone from a team I loved to watch (when Rick Carlisle and Larry Brown coached them and they took down the Lakers Dynasty) to a team I generally avoid. I just don't care for them anymore, even though they play great defense, good offense, have a great point guard, and seem like a club I would enjoy following. They're something that I may have enjoyed at one time but now I've just had enough. It's like when there's nothing on but a Frasier rerun.

The most important series that makes the rest of the playoffs seem unimportant is New Orleans/San Antonio. Who could have imagined that in one season the Suns and Mavericks would falter as the Spurs main foe and the Hornets would rise to fill the spot with perhaps more talent, brains, and tenacity than any of their forebearers? Not I, and I love them to death.

It seemed remarkable at first that the Hornets opened up a 2-0 lead, but the Spurs held serve at home (following a year-long pattern) and seemed to crush the resolve of the boys from New Orleans by bringing the series to 2-2.

New Orleans, though, showed their psychological strength by coming back and blowing out the Spurs, setting up one chance at home and once chance in San Antonio to end the Spurs' season.

I think they'll have to get off the mat one more time but that they will be able to make the Game 6 away game closer than their other two losses, and that this will give them the belief in themselves to go home and take care of the Spurs. It's an incredibly hard task against the most-seasoned, best-coached, best-executing team in the league, but I have faith in Chris Paul above everything else. There are just some players that are superior, and when they play point guard or center, they can win a game by themselves.

One thing that I think really helped New Orleans was their reluctance to double-team Tim Duncan in Game 5. I have urged singled coverage from the start and believe that if the Hornets let Tim Duncan get his shots off against one man while avoiding those backbreaking role-player three pointers (almost always the result of late switches caused by double teams in the post), they will win. Last night, the Hornets did that, and were successful at compromising Duncan's offense as well as the Spurs' three point attack (The Spurs went 9-23 with a 3-4 night from Ime Udoka, but I still consider the Hornets' strategy to have succeeded.)

There is one huge problem for New Orleans, and that's the possible loss of Tyson Chandler. I am a huge Chandler fan and I think he's necessary for his defensive and rebounding acumen and his ability to guard Duncan and save David West from potential fatigue and foul trouble. The late word is that Chandler will be okay for Game 6, but he's as much an athlete as a basketball player, and if he can't run and jump well, he's going to be ineffective. We'll see.

Iron Mike

In closing, I want to comment on today's news that Mike D'Antoni is being hired by the Knicks. I have nothing against D'Antoni and frankly don't believe the person chosen to coach the Knicks will matter much, as their problems have much more to do with personnel and salary.

However, I'm saddened that the Knicks felt they needed to sign D'Antoni to a 4-year, $24 million dollar deal, continuing a cycle of finding a big name, hiring them at a huge cost (money and time) and waiting and hoping.

I realize that the big deal was probably the only way to get D'Antoni, but we're not talking about a member of the NBA's coaching elite the way we were with Larry Brown five years ago. I can understand throwing money at a coach that is possibly top ten. With D'Antoni, I would argue that despite his coach of the year awards, he is not.

It seems to me that the best thing for the Knicks to do would have been to have gotten either someone with a lot of experience who is now an assistant or "retired" (how about Rudy T? Paul Westphal?) or an assistant on the rise. (Why not go after Gregg Poppovich's assistants? How about Bob McAdoo?) If either of those two options are taken, you have a fresh face for a low salary and a chance for them to coach for a season with almost no culpability. If they succeed at all, they've clearly got the goods. If they fail, no big deal, try someone else and see if they work.

The Knicks are just continuing a pattern of refusing to look at many options (how about doing some interviews?) and throwing money at their problems. It doesn't work, and it never will.

As always, e-mail me at dontgiveupthebasketballblog@gmail.com

Counterpoint: O.J. Mayo

2008-05-13T14:17:00.005-04:00

I've been reading a little bit about this OJ Mayo situation and its supposed connection to the NBA's new rule requiring draft entrants to be 19 years old. If anybody is unaware, OJ Mayo was recently accused of having taken payments to play basketball for USC for one year and then sign with sports agent Bill Duffy.

I'm introducing a new feature here at Don't Ever Give Up in which I provide editorial counterpoint to another article that presents an opinion I don't agree with. Today's entry is this article by ESPN writer Tim Keown, reproduced below in its entirety. I made it red, which seems to be ESPN's official color. My remarks are in black.

Here we go:

OJ Mayo demonstrates the NBA eligibility rule is a disaster

So take a look at O.J. Mayo now, staring bug-eyed into the camera, trying to get his mind to work fast enough to figure out how not to answer a question regarding improper payments while he was in high school and at USC. And please, tell me again how great the NBA age requirement is for the college game.

Please explain to me what the NBA rules have to do with this.

It was a charade when it was enacted, a farce now.

Oh, you're about to explain. Sorry. Go on.

David Stern's brainchild was hailed as a monument of wise paternalism and good sense back when it was enacted. Smarter, more mature players, with a year of college worldliness behind them, would make both world a better place.

This is invective and lacks a real conclusion. The age rule had two goals: (1) Stop unfortunate high schoolers from going to the NBA and getting completely screwed up and failing; and (2) shore up the general quality of NBA play. It was also a response to fans who were upset that so many players went straight to the NBA from high school and had a consistent lack of fundamentals and coping ability. So far, it seems to be working.

But as the Mayo mess shows, it hasn't done the college game any favors.

Actually, it has. The rule was hailed at its inception for the effect it would have on the quality of NCAA basketball - by keeping NBA prospects in school for a year, the pool of NCAA players improves dramatically. That effect has been pronounced. The most exciting players in the NCAA for the past two years have been products of the rule. Before the rule, we had George Mason in the Final Four. Keown still has not shown any causal relationship between the NBA age rule and the Mayo scandal - he's only made conclusory allegations.

First, let's dispense with the idea that one-and-done college basketball players are anything but mercenaries. Mayo was just the worst and most obvious transgressor, choosing USC to use both the school and the city to further his profile. The transparency of the entire Mayo operation was evident from the time he was a junior in high school.

Though I'm no fan of the double-negative, this article from the New York Times shows shows that it is true that Mayo hoped to use USC to showcase himself. (I wonder if the fellow in the Times article was Mayo's "runner" from this scandal.) I think Keown is going a little far with his suggestion that Mayo is the first or most "transparent" athlete to go to a school with the intent of showcasing himself - college athletes in every sport have been doing that since at least the 1980's.

Here's how the NBA's age requirement works for a guy who is guaranteed to be a lottery pick: He can do the bare minimum amount of work his first semester, then go to zero classes his second semester and be ineligible to compete the first semester of his sophomore year.

Finally, here is an attempt to make a connection! Keown blames the NBA's rule for the fact that NCAA players (under NCAA rules) only have to take classes for one semester before they go to the NBA. So, it's the fault of the NBA that players are taking advantage of liberal NCAA rules? This doesn't really make sense, and on top of it, I don't really see what the big deal is. God forbid we have a student athlete who intends to leave college after one year missing a semester of classes! That would have a serious effect on both athletics and academics!

Here's how college sports work in the real world: athletes take bullshit classes and generally detract from the academic reputation of most institutions and America's collegiate system as a whole. From Matt Leinart's ballroom dancing studies to the infamous Georgia basketball "class", it's clear that athletes do not play by the same rules as regular students, and haven't for at least 35 years. (I realize that this isn't always the case, but as they say, there's an exception to every rule.)

Lots of people complain about the defiling of the "student athlete", and if those people want to watch reruns of college sports contests from the 70's and 80's, that's fine with me. I'll take the best (often dumb) athletes, and if the NCAA cares so much about its image, they can get rid of those dummies, and I along with most people will not watch.

I don't think it's fair to question the NBA for the NCAA's faults when the NCAA has put itself in a position to be the NBA's feeder system and made billions of dollars. If a writer, pundit, or even athlete has a problem with the fact that the NCAA is more about athletics then academics even though they still maintain the window dressing of academic integrity, you know who they should go to? The NCAA, that's who.

But guess what? Oh, you already guessed it -- he's gone by then, in the NBA getting paid legally.

So if someone really wants to work the system, he can go to zero classes, use the system for his own exposure, and in the end the NBA can feel good about itself for protecting the youth of America.

This is in stark contrast to the era before the NBA enacted the rule, when NCAA basketball players like Carmelo Anthony and Allen Iverson spent rigorous freshman years at Syracuse (for the weather) and Georgetown (for its political science classes).

We get it, and that explains the lack of outrage in the wake of the news that a street runner -- agent-speak for "con man who is paid to get close to high school superstars" -- was paid by Bill Duffy and Associates to pay Mayo for being Mayo. Clothes, gifts, cash -- all with the hope that he'll remember BDA when the time comes for a little payback.

Could it be that the lack of outrage has to do with the fact that no one was hurt or even affected negatively?

USC, of course, is the unwitting bystander in all this.

Yeah, right. Just like it was an innocent bystander when Reggie Bush was running the same game. Or when basketball player Jeff Trepagnier was running the same game in 2000 with -- oh, no, it couldn't be, could it? -- alleged Mayo bagman Rodney Guillory.

This makes some sense. The NCAA player, who was breaking the NCAA rule, should have been caught either by his team's management or the governing body. Because, uh, it's the NCAA and its teams that are responsible for enforcing its rules and ensuring its health...not the NBA.

By the way, Jeff Trepagnier could jam.

We've grown immune to this. It's just what happens. Agents pay guys to pay athletes; it's a financial funneling system that bypasses the rules against direct contact with an agent by allowing direct contact with a guy who is one step removed from the agent.

It was painful to watch Mayo and Guillory stammer and stare through their on-camera appearances on Sunday's "Outside The Lines." Guillory is apparently a pretty slick guy, but he sure doesn't play one on TV.

There's an outside chance you can feel a shred of pity for Mayo, and that's being charitable. But any sympathy for Mayo arises only because these runner types are really bottom-feeders, the lowest life form known to sports.

I would say they're a lot less unpleasant than the athletes who cheat, juice, break the law, womanize, get in fights with fans, street race, and sanction dog-fighting rings. Oh, and kill people.

Think about it: They get paid to befriend and pay high school kids for the purpose of turning them over to an agent or financial advisor down the road.

It's pimping, no two ways around it. And somehow, in this system of tortured values, they're an indispensable part of the process. (end of article)

Okay, but how is any of this the NBA's fault? If this is such a problem, then shouldn't someone make it illegal for agents to give money to potential clients the same way lawyers can't solicit crash victims? I still don't see why blame lies with the NBA. It makes no sense.

It's not logical to promote the OJ Mayo scandal as a condemnation of the age rule. Forcing kids to go to college for a year is definitely a good thing, for both the NBA and the college game. Kids learn more about basketball when they can star for a college team than they do riding the pine and buying the donuts for the Clippers, and that benefits the players' future employers as well as their schools.

If academic integrity is the real concern, there's no reason to lay blame on the NBA's rule. The Mayo scandal is one in a long line of publicized screw-ups resulting from NCAA rules designed to maximize the amount of athletes in the extremely profitable sports programs while maintaining a guise of "integrity" and academics. That's the farce.

As always, e-mail me at dontgiveupthebasketballblog@gmail.com

The worst of the best single game point totals.

2008-05-07T13:30:00.007-04:00

Sorry I couldn't think of a clearer title - It's not as confusing as it sounds.

This is a study of an interesting phenomenon: Bad players with high single-game totals.

The genesis of this project traces to a series of basketball cards I had when I was younger. In 1993, Topps released the "50 Point Club" set of inserts, which existed a time when inserts were, depending on how you look at it, more or less gimmicky than they are today. Anyway, I was a pretty passionate card collector in the mid 90's and a lot of these old Topps came my way - I probably had at least 80% of the "50 Point Club" set.

Obviously, it contained mostly the usual suspects of the early 90's - David Robinson, Michael Jordan, Clyde Drexler, and so on. But one always stood out: Nick Anderson. You see, although this was a 1993 edition card, I was probably buying them around 1995, when Anderson was arguably the fourth fiddle on a great Magic team behind Shaq, Penny, and Dennis Scott. (At least that's how it seemed to me at the time.) I found it fascinating to imagine how a player of Anderson's mediocre caliber could do something so significant and to this date I enjoy reading the box scores and looking looking at shot charts when something like that happens. (Linas Kleiza's 41 point game this year is a good example.) It seems like there's always something interesting about the type of players who do that sort of thing. For instance:

This is interesting three ways.

1. Linas Kleiza slammed on Frederick Weis, and yes, I am sure that is Frederick Weis despite the poor description of the video.
2. Frederick Weis wears #15 and a headband, almost like he's emulating a certain shooting guard from the US of A.
3. The Knicks drafted Frederick Weis with the 15th pick in the first round in 1999. (Yes, it has now been almost a full ten years since the Knicks started making terrible decisions!)

In honor of Kleiza, here are the top eight bad players with high single game totals:

8. Terry Cummings. 52 points against the Charlotte Hornets on January 31, 1990. This ridiculous piece of basketball history happened during the Hornets' second season, when they boasted a lineup featuring J.R. Reid, Armon Gilliam, Mugsy Bogues, Rex Chapman, and Kelly Tripucka. The latter three of those players are cool as shit, but we're not talking all-stars, here.

The Hornets were the worst team in the league that year, and at the time of the game, had a record of 8-33. San Antonio was 29-13 and featured Mo Cheeks, David Robinson and Sean Elliot along with Cummings.

The final score tells the story: 129-95 SAS. Every starter was taken out after a merciful twenty five minutes, but for whatever reason, Cummings stayed in the game. Two time all-star TC was no slouch in the eighties but by 89-90 he was in his last 20 ppg season and would never get there again. Why his coach decided that Cummings should have the chance is beyond me. (In case you are wondering, it was not the same coach that left David Robinson in to score 71 against the Clippers in their final game of the season. Cummings was coached by Larry Brown, Robinson by Brian Hill.)

7. Mahmoud Abdul-Rauf. 51 points against the Utah Jazz - December 7, 1995. The artist formerly known as Chris Jackson and the lineal top free throw shooter in NBA history must have been on fire on that cold December night in Salt Lake City. He was playing the Jazz, one of the best teams in the league, and he didn't have much support. Rookie Antonio McDyess was still unready for full-time scoring duty, and Dale Ellis and Bryant Stith were still, uh, key scoring components of that Nuggets team.

So Abdul-Rauf did what he knew how to do and shot the damn thing. To the tune of 17-27 from the field, 9-14 from behind the arc, and 8-8 from the free throw line. When all was said and done, despite 26 points from the mailman, 21 from John Stockton, and 25 (in 32 minutes) from Jeff Hornacek, the Jazz went were the losers that night. Impressively, despite playing against one of the best defensive point guards ever, Abdul-Rauf had only two turnovers (to go with his two steals, two assists, two rebounds, and two fouls).

6. Dale Ellis: 53 points against the Milwaukee Bucks on November 9, 1989. I can only imagine how crazy this game was. It was the fifth game of the year for both teams and shouldn't have been notable. But it was. How's 155-154 sound for a final score? The Sonics were led by Dale Ellis, who at the time was one of the NBA's best scorers and whose real name, by the way, is Lamar Mundane. Dale had a long and productive NBA career but I had no idea that he once averaged 27.5 points per game, which makes this seem less like an anomaly. But to those of us who saw him play with Gary Payton and Shawn kemp as essentially a role player, it is very, very strange.

What's amazing about this game is not that Dale Ellis didn't have the talent - it's that the nature of the whole production, which was an ironman effort on Ellis's part. This game had FIVE OVERTIMES. Ellis only had 33 at the end of regulation and had to play an incredible 69 minutes to get his point total. Along the way, he took an astonishing 39 shots and managed to avoid being one of the six players to foul out of the game. (In a show of his disregard for the historic game Olden Polynice somehow managed to collect five fouls in 17 minutes that night.)

5. Vernon "Mighty Mouse" Maxwell: 51 points against the Cleveland Cavs - January 26, 1991. In a game that might otherwise be notable only for the facts that Steve Kerr scored four points in two minutes and Larry Smith had 2 points, 17 rebounds, and 5 steals, Vernon Maxwell went Uncle Buck on everyone, helping Houston win by six on the road. Maxwell was in full scoring mode, with a less-than-spectacular 1/5 assist to turnover ratio, but hey, his team won the game, and he didn't do it in a blowout, so you have to give the man credit. As a matter of fact, no starter had more than three assists (Kenny Smith was the leader in 30 minutes of playing), and no one had more than 12 points (again, Kenny Smith). So the Mouse pretty much brought it home. For a guy with a career average of 12.8 points per game, that ain't bad.

4. Tom Chambers: 60 points against the Seattle Supersons, March 24, 1990. 1990 was a year for the Sonics that was much like 2007 for the New Orleans Hornets. They had a great young player (Shawn Kemp) and a pretty good team and were just waiting to bust out, but were still stuck at .500.

That year the Suns fielded a very good and largely forgotten squad with Eddie Johnson, Kevin Johnson, and Tom Chambers leading a team that went all the way to the Western Conference Finals.

89/90 was also a career year for Chambers, whose production would soon begin to slide. He averaged an astonishing 27.2 points per game and dropped a cool 56 only a month before his sixty point breakout.

If it was a 56 point game we were talking about, I don't know if it would be list-worthy. But 60? That's rare air. Here is a list of everyone in NBA history who has scored 60:

David Robinson
Kobe Bryant
Michael Jordan
Tracy McGrady
Shaquille O'Neal
Karl Malone
Gilbert Arenas
Allen Iverson
Wilt Chamberlain
Elgin Baylor
Rick Barry
Pete Maravich
George Gervin
David Thompson
Joe Fulks
Jerry West
George Mikan
Larry Bird
Bernard King
Tom Chambers!

You notice something these people have in common? They're all not only hall-of-famers, but it's basically a list of the most important players in NBA history. Sure, McGrady and Arenas are somewhat outliers, but they have each been NBA scoring champions and have each gone for 30 per game a for full season.

Noteworthy was the nature of the Chambers game - a 30 point blowout against a team with no playoff hope whatsoever. Chambers certainly didn't need to play 42 minutes. But in all fairness, he shot almost 70% (22-32) and went to the line 18 times (hitting 16), so he did have to so some work. Whatever the circumstances, I think this is arguably the strangest high scoring game in NBA history. And it's only number four on the list!

3. Nick Anderson. 50 points against the New Jersey Nets on April 23, 1993. If you had gone to the last game of the Orlando Magic's 1992-93 season, here are some things you would have witnessed:

-Donald Royal scoring as many points as his teammate Shaquille O'Neal.
-20 point efforts from Rumeal Robinson, Drazen Petrovic, Derek Coleman, and Bernard King (wow!).
-A triple double by Rumeal Robinson (Wow!).
-Shaquille O'Neal, despite scoring only ten points in 34 minutes, breaking down the backboard at the support braces so the whole thing tipped over on his head.
-50 points by Nick Anderson.

If I had the chance to go back to any regular season game in NBA history, this would be on my list. But this isn't about the game, it's about Nick Anderson's 50.

It's pretty obvious how this thing happened. It was the last game of the season, and Nick Anderson got hot. Shaq wasn't playing well. The Magic were already out of the playoffs. The Magic had no scorers other than Anderson and Shaq. Tom Tolbert and Anthony Bowie were in the starting lineup.

Interestingly, one player who wasn't in the starting lineup was Nick Anderson. In fact, he only played 33 minutes in the game. In that short time, he went 17-25, hit a few threes, and was 12-12 from the free-throw line, but didn't register an assist, steal, block, or turnover. He only had one foul and two rebounds.

Based purely on statistics, I think you could argue Anderson's game is one of the best examples of quick scoring in the NBA's history, and it is quite odd that a player who never scored twenty points a game is in there.

2. Tony Delk. 53 points against the Sacramento Kings on January 2, 2001. Tony Delk's new year's resolution in 2001 must have been to stop passing, rebounding, and playing defense and concentrate more on scoring. That's exactly what he did on the old iteration of the Suns that was built around Shawn Marion, Jason Kidd, and Rodney Rogers.

Kidd helped him out with a cool 17 assists but Delk was hitting everything, and notably did not make a single three-pointer (he only took one). He was 20-27 from the field (.741) and 13-15 from the line (.867)

A six foot player not named Allen Iverson scoring 53 points without shooting threes is nothing short of incredible. Tony Delk was barely a starter (only 11 games that season, and only 103 out of 545 in his career), and he has only averaged ten points a game twice in his career. Throw in the fact that the game was a closely contested loss (Tony Delk couldn't do much about Peja Stojakovic scoring 33 and Vlade Divac scoring 34) and it's nothing short of mind-boggling. I almost had him at number one, if it wasn't for....

1. Willie Ricardo Burton. 53 points against the Miami Heat on December 13, 1994. I bet I can guess your first question. The answer is that Willie Burton was a 6'7 forward who wasn't a great athlete or a great scorer but who was good in most respects. He was one of those players who has a promising rookie campaign followed by an inability to progress (think Shawn Bradley).

Willie's best season was in 1994-95, with a Philadelphia Sixers team that was one of the worst teams in the NBA, eventually going 24-58. Dana Barrows and Jeff Malone were the stars of the team, Clarence Weatherspoon the best forward, and center was manned by none other than The Stormin Mormon. Burton was the fourth leading scorer that year with 15.3 points per game. Aside from his first two seasons (12.0 and 11.2, respectively), this would be the only time Burton ever averaged more than ten points per game.

In December, the Sixers played the Heat, who had just dealt Burton away. Despite their eventual struggles, Philadelphia still was only a couple of wins from .500 at that point, at 8-11. Willie took advantage of the 22-foot three point line that year, making 106 of his 140 career three pointers, and in this game, his 22-foot excellence was on fine display along with the rest of his game.

Burton only had to take 19 shots (eight of them three-pointers) because he was getting to the rack with ease. He shot 28 free throws and made 24 of them, along with five three pointers. He outscored his man, some kid named Glen Rice who averaged 22.3 points per game that year, by a cool 28 points. Outshot him from deep, too.

To go along with his 53 points, Burton had 8 rebounds, 3 assists, a steal, two blocks, and only one turnover. Unfortunately, the Sixers lost by fifteen in a game in which Burton's teammates' box scores read like this:

Scott Williams: 2-6
Clarence Weatherspoon: 4-20 (Yes, he took one more shot than Burton)
Shawn Bradley: 1-2
B.J. Tyler: 0-4
Sharone Wright: 2-6
Dana Barrows: 6-10

It is my opinion that the one night when Willie Ricardo Burton went for 53 points despite only starting 116 games in an eight year career, bookending his 15.3 points per game season with seasons of 7.0 and 6.2 points per game, respectively, and only reaching the playoffs once, he turned in the best example in NBA history of a bad player having a great single game.

As always, e-mail me at dontgiveupthebasketballblog@gmail.com

Random Video Moments

2008-05-06T14:02:00.003-04:00

In honor of Mo Pete's journey back to the highest levels of basketball (he won a championship in college with Mateen Cleaves, remember), I give you the following "don't mess with left-handed shooter" evidence of his greatness:

As always, e-mail me at dontgiveupthebasketballblog@gmail.com

Some Notes on Round 2

2008-05-06T13:13:00.003-04:00

Here are the late predications for Round 2. Please note that I had the Hornets winning in seven on the record.

Lakers v. Jazz. The Lakers are thought by many to be the best team in the West. Personally, I think they're the third best team after the Hornets and the Spurs. They may play great basketball but there's not a lot of players on the roster who can play physical basketball, and they lack rebounders. For all the attention Young Andrew Bynum gets, he rebounds like Eddy Curry.

The Jazz are slightly less talented than the Lakers (not by much) but they bring a lot more versatility to the table. If they want to beat you up, they can beat you up. If they want to shoot the lights out, they can shoot the lights out. They're capable of playing offense on the break or in half-court sets and they're coached by the master of half-court disaster himself, Jerry Sloan. Oh, and they play defense.

I just don't think Kobe and the Lakers have what it takes to deal with this. Kobe is a flawed leader with the personality of a Pippen and Pau Gasol is very good seven footer who couldn't box Carlos Boozer out if he literally trapped Boozer in a large wooden box. Throw in the Jazz's superior defense and the Lakers have only two things going for them: Kobe's scoring ability and home-court advantage.

Neither of those two things is small, and Game 1 clearly illustrated that the Jazz can be blown out by this excellent offensive team. However, in the long haul, I'll take Jerry Sloan any day.

Jazz in 7.

Spurs v. Hornets. I already covered this a few days ago. I'm glad the Hornets won their first two games but, like anyone who has been watching basketball in the last few years, I'm not going to count the Spurs out until it's official.

The Spurs are not a good road team, despite their supposed monopoly on fundamentals. This year they were a pathetic 22-19 on the road and they scored 92.8 ppg to their opponents' 92.7. On the other hand, they're almost flawless at home, scoring 98 points and giving up only 88.4 during a regular season in which they only lost 7 home games.

So as much as spectators (including this guy) want the Hornets to be David to the Spurs' Goliath, what happened in the first round isn't actually that surprising. The Hornets were the higher seed, they were playing at home, and they won both games. The Spurs are a bad road team, they got terrible performances from their top two scorers in each of the first two games, and they lost. Were it not for the respective history of the teams, this might not even be a big deal.

What will be a big deal is game three on Thursday. If New Orleans wins that game, they'll be back home for game five and frankly, have a good chance to sweep a demoralized Spurs team in Game 4. However, if the Spurs win, they'll remind New Orleans that 2-1 looks a hell of a lot less impressive than 2-0. Based on the motivation and what's at stake, this has the potential to be the game of the year.

New Orleans in 7.

Boston v. Cleveland. I haven't actually heard any announcers state this but I'm sure there will be a lot of talk about last year's Cavs/Pistons series in which the Pistons were heavily favored but succumbed to what turned into one of the great playoff performances of our time by LeBron.

This year, Boston is the best team in the East, and like the Pistons of 2007, they win through defense and a balance of great players. Like the Pistons of 2007, they don't have anyone remotely qualified to guard LeBron (in fact the 2007 Pistons were better-equipped with Tayshaun Prince). Like the Pistons of 2007, they're a great regular season team with a questionable coach.

There is one big difference here, and it's the reason LeBron is not going to win this series by himself like he did last year against the Pistons: Scoring. Boston can score from four out of five starting positions with ease against the Cavs, and they'll bring a vastly superior bench and considerable advantages at every nonLebron position.

Cleveland is not an awful defensive team but they have big liabilities when they put Ilguaskas or Szczrbiak on the floor ( the former can't run, the latter can't run, defend, pass, or rebound). A team with a couple of defensive liabilities can stop a group like the 2007 Pistons if they can control Chauncey Billups and Rasheed Wallace, but to ask the cast of characters on the Cavs to stay with Garnett, Pierce, and Allen is unreasonable. Even Rondo will have a field day against this soft defensive unit.

Like anyone who follows basketball, betting against LeBron makes me uncomfortable. But when you can't defend and the other team has a great offense, I'm willing to do it.

Celtics in 5.

Magic v. Pistons. This should be the most boring of the playoff series, but it's up against some very tough competition.

I'm making this prediction knowing the Magic are down 2-0, and frankly, at the beginning of the series, I may have picked the Magic. However, in light of the considerable progress of the series, it's clear they have a big problem.

The Pistons have the benefit of two veteran, feisty power forwards (Sheed and McDyess) and one young athletic forward (Maxiell) to defend Dwight Howard and force him outside the key when he plays defense. Indeed, Rasheed Wallace and Antonio McDyess may be the two best shooting forwards other than Nowitzki in the league.

Wallace, McDyess, and Maxiell will leave Tayshaun Prince free to defend either Turkoglu or Rashard Lewis, and the Magic really have no one that can hang with Chauncey or Richard Hamilton.

I think the Magic can take one or two games if Dwight Howard can get Rasheed and/or McDyess in foul trouble and then begin to dominate a weakened frontcourt. Orlando is great at scoring points and should be able to with its perimeter shooters while Howard dominates. But being down 2-0 to the Pistons, who seem to have received a wake-up call from the Sixers, is a bad, bad place to be.

Pistons in Six.

As always, e-mail me at dontgiveupthebasketballblog@gmail.com

Simmons

2008-05-02T12:05:00.003-04:00

I've been a little iffy on Bill Simmons lately, but I thought his recent article about the fall of the Phoenix Suns was really worth reading. Here is the link.

As always, e-mail me at dontgiveupthebasketballblog@gmail.com

A word on blogs

2008-05-02T09:39:00.018-04:00

I think the blog vs. mainstream media issue deserves comment. In true shitbird fashion, I'm a day late and a dollar short. Fortunately, no one reads this, so I don't think it's going to cause a stir.

I was fairly astonished at the CostasNow segment between Will Leitch (of deadspin.com) and Buzz Bissinger (who wrote Friday Night Lights). Bissinger's outrage was, obviously, the first thing that got my attention, but what surprised me more was the thesis of his argument, which seemed to be:

-You're biased;
-You don't check facts;
-You sensationalize your stories;
-Newspaper and the sports media in general do not do these things; and
-You are killing newspapers, etc. by taking advantage of lazy young jerks that don't want to pay the fifty cents and take the ten minutes to read a "real" article.

(-also, you don't know anything about anything and are not qualified)

All of this is completely true. Blogs are not good sources for factual information (nor are many sites on the internet), they are not subject to any review for moral, grammatical, or creative standards, and they are hopelessly biased, even on the largest stage. (I'm thinking of The Sports Guy, if that's not clear.)

The problem with this fundamentally sound argument is that there's no logical conclusion. Should blogs be held to a higher standard by some sort of journalistic authority? Should they be restricted in some fashion? Should famous sports figures be able to sue bloggers for posting damaging pictures that the athletes had no idea could end up on the internet?

Maybe some people think the answer is yes, but any such restriction or oversight would be unconstitutional. Stating your opinion, smearing people, and misreporting the facts is not new in sports (or society) and is not unique to blogs. Newspapers do it all the time - the internet is just more conducive to problems. However, it's all perfectly legal according to the standard set forth in the Supreme Court's opinion in People v. Larry Flint. The essential conclusion of the case is that famous people can be lampooned, insulted, parodied, or suggestively commented upon legally because it's in the interest of free speech to hear opinions on the people that matter in the public sphere. And the Court is correct - one of America's greatest strengths is its tolerance for unpopular opinions, idiocy, and vulgarity. That tolerance helped us achieve social change, and also resulted in Richard Pryor.

Despite its many shortcomings, the internet does provide something in the way of journalistic integrity that newspapers do not: interactivity that leads to accountability. If you write something that is not fair or not true (or even something that is fair or true), your readers (even my two) have a universe of information at their fingertips and can double-check it, analyze it, review it, and critique it. They are, in effect, more powerful in numbers and capability than any editor could hope to be. (Blogs were a big reason the erroneous nature of Vescey's Post story, linked to above, became widely known in less than a day. A retraction along with a full article discussing the situation was printed two days ago.)

For example: A few days ago I wrote about Geoff Huston's 27 assist game. In my article, I stated that Geoff Huston had played at Texas Tech with Bill Cartwright. I got my information from this article, on NBA.com, which, by the way, failed to note that Huston had accomplished one of the more productive games in the history of his position. The article stated that "The 6-2 guard, who played his college ball for Texas Tech University, was one of five rookies to make the roster that season, along with Bill Cartwright..."

If I had read the above-quoted sentence in context, I would have realized it was describing Huston's rookie year on the Knicks. But I went too fast and didn't think too hard (this was in the course of a lot of research because Geoff Huston, uh, doesn't exactly have a lot of history out there). I made a dumb mistake and should have known better for a variety of reasons.

I literally have two readers and one of them caught the error, told me that Bill Cartwright had gone to USF, and I fixed it within about an hour. And I have two readers! Can you imagine the input that comes in to some of the larger blogs?

Even if this accountability doesn't shore up the writing as a whole, that does not detract from the greater fact that has been revealed by the proliferation of sports blogs: newspapers and the media in general have overestimated the value of journalistic integrity and underestimated that value of opinion and information to the average sports fan.

Journalistic integrity is very important, especially in the world of news and politics, where accurate representation is one of the most important elements of The American Democracy. If people don't know the truth, they can't be expected to participate in a meaningful way. If people aren't confident of the soundness of their news reporting (not just political news, but the condition of the country and its people in general), this creates a significant impediment to the whole democratic process.

That's why the New York Times and its peers have felt no pressure from the blogging phenomenon. Political blogs have no value compared to a respected paper that gets its information from direct sources all over the globe, has strict editorial standards, and presents opinions from some of the foremost scholars and writers in the world.

Sports are different. In sports, there is a place for truth, but its value is secondary to the entertainment. People do not watch sports to learn. They watch sports for their own enjoyment, because watching two people or two teams competing is thrilling. The desire for pleasure extends to the world of sports journalism, which at its core is developed to bring the sports fan closer to the game and give them a better understanding of the athletes or teams they follow.

In this respect, newspapers have been the best resource for many years because of the unprecedented access that sportswriters enjoy. They are the conduits between the adoring (or abhorring) public and the athletes that trail only movie stars in fame.

But newspaper and the extended media have limitations, some of which are intrinsic and some of which many media outlets bring upon themselves. The intrinsic limitations are volume and timing - there are probably thirty bloggers for every sportswriter, and they can update and react to issues almost immediately (except for me, apparently).

The more significant limitation, though, is the one the media has wrought upon itself: editorial censorship. Newspapers and networks have broad audiences who will be offended by wild accusations, coarse subject-matter, and trivial but interesting linguistic mechanisms ("Fuck"). Bloggers, on the other hand, are free to write with absolute candor and in politically incorrect and often offensive terms.

It is perfectly understandable that mainstream sports media adheres to a high, politically correct standard - they make money by appealing to a broad segment of society (people who read the whole paper). But quite often, sports fans are not a such a broad audience, and a good part of the group is comprised of mostly adult white males who enjoy R-rated movies (at least), sex, drinking, dirty jokes, violence, and the like. Mainstream media is not the medium most conducive to reaching these fans - their coverage can be painfully vanilla and is often cliched and repetitive. The optimal medium for reaching this less-appropriate fan base is the blogs. And that's why many are experiencing such a gain in popularity.

At the core of the issue is what Leitch noted on HBO. The world of blogging is a meritocracy and the most entertaining content is what draws readers. People don't pay a fee and won't stay if you don't keep 'em. Although the writing may be bad, the facts wrong, the speculation virulent, and the sensationalism trashy, apparently, there are some people out there who like that.

People getting what they want is not a threat to journalism - it's a wake up call from all of the reading public who have been stuck with inadequate coverage, poor announcing, inane human interest stories, and an emphasis on political correctness the leaves many fans unfulfilled. There's a reason it's better to have two newspapers in town than one - competition improves the product.

The following is a parody of the cliched sportswriting.

Let the games begin.

As always, e-mail me at dontgiveupthebasketballblog@gmail.com

High Flying Playoff Action!

2008-05-01T16:43:00.004-04:00

A lot is going on in that void at the end of the first round where everyone remembers that seven games is a little much. However, we have some early exits, and I think it's appropriate to evaluate my picks of a few days ago and see how I'm doing.

Lakers - Nuggets: I said LakeShow in five, they won in four. I'll take it.

Jazz - Rockets: I said Jazz in four, they're up 3-2. I think I got a little too sexed up on Jerry Sloan, I guess, but that's nothing to apologize about.

Suns - Spurs: I said Suns in seven, they lost in five. Deep down in the hearts of most of the prognosticators who picked the Suns, I bet they felt the same way I did: "I just don't want to pick the Spurs and be right." Well, I was wrong. The BoringBall era continues....

Hornets - Mavs: I said New Orleans in six, they won in five. I couldn't be more tickled. This Spurs series is going to be amazing. I believe the expression Tony Parker will use is "je suis confus!"

Celtics - Hawks: I said Celtics in four, they're up 3-2. It's safe to say no one saw this coming. Lang Whitaker from Slamonline (a huge Hawks fan) said something to the effect of "I watched 70 Hawks game this year and even I didn't give them a chance." (See? I'm not really wrong wrong.)

Cavs - Wizards: I said Cavs in six, they're up 3-2. This would be the first pick I actually get right if they win. I suck.

Magic - Raptors: I said the Raptors would win in seven which provoked an outcry from 100% of my readership (I should have known...). They lost and looked bad and I was wrong. I don't know why everyone is blaming TJ Ford, though - he played two bad games initially but really picked it up as the series progressed. How about the little issue that no one on the Raptors can rebound? (Possible solution: Oakley comeback #2?)

Pistons - Sixers: I said the Pistons would win in five, and they're up 3-2. When I imagined their game tonight, this was what I thought: "I can't believe the Sixers will win tonight, but if they do, for some reason that doesn't seem surprising." Does that make any sense?

My success rate is poor but in terms of overall outcome I am still shooting bogies. I can live with that (and, as anyone who has seen me on a golf course can attest, bogies are definitely a plus).

I'd like to turn now to the only series that is set, the forthcoming contest between New Orleans and San Antonio. Boy, what a doozy.

Full disclosure: I dislike the Spurs and cannot write objectively about them. This is as biased a blog as you might read in that respect that does not show pictures of Tony Parker posing half-naked for a French photoshoot. (But the link is here. And by half naked, I mean full naked.)

Glad I got that out of the way. Obviously, the marquee matchup here is between the point guards, and based entirely on reputation, Chris Paul should destroy Tony Parker.

I love Chris Paul and I think he's amazing. I don't like Tony Parker and he's caused me misery in the past. However, I don't think Paul's dominance of Parker is as cut and dry as it may seem.

Tony Parker is definitely not the player Chris Paul is, but that's not the issue when you evaluate playoff matchups. If it was, Steve Nash would have beaten Parker senseless.

Tony has an advantage over Paul by virtue of the team he has behind him. The Spurs will play defense, pick up their assignments and rotations, and probably rough Chris Paul up.

New Orleans is not a shoddy defensive team by any measure and they made Jason Kidd look foolish. However, Tony Parker is almost the exact opposite of Kidd - he may be the quickest guard in the NBA, he doesn't take a lot of long jump shots, and he causes headache after headache for teams that need to adjust to his near-constant penetration.

When New Orleans was working against Kidd, they had the advantage of Kidd's former coach and the veteran guard's advancing age. With Parker there will be no such luck. I still think Chris Paul will outplay Tony Parker, and at times, it will be ridiculous. But I also think the pendulum will swing the other way more often than it should, and this could be the difference in the series.

New Orleans's greatest strength may be Tyson Chandler. He is arguably the best defender in the league and has younger legs and a longer reach than Tim Duncan. If he can stay out of foul trouble, he may be able to slow Duncan. Unfortunately, Chandler has no record of doing this successfully - Tim Duncan averaged close to 20 and 10 against New Orleans this season. The important thing to consider is not Chandler's ability to halt Tim Duncan's progress, though - what is important is that Chandler may be able to handle him in single coverage, which will allow the perimeter defense to space itself properly and avoid those dagger threes the Spurs are so adept at.

The Parker/Paul and Duncan/Chandler matchups will be the most fun to watch. But based on the season series (split 2-2), Parker and Duncan (and Ginobili, even) are not the key.

I believe that the Hornets' ability to win the series will be contingent on their stopping everyone else, whoever that may be. In the Hornets' two wins against the Spurs this year, they gave up about 20 to Duncan, 20 to Parker, and 10 to Ginobili. Each win was by 25 points - a thorough blowout - and the Spurs scored in the 70s each time around.

I think that this is evidence that Byron Scott realizes that he has better players on both sides of the ball than the Spurs, even if they are not as good as a whole. The key to exploiting a situation like this is executing on the offensive end and relying on single coverage man-to-man defense when the ball comes back.

New Orleans has two skilled players in the frontcourt, one of the best perimeter shooters in the league, the best point guard, and a very, very robust bench. Tyson Chandler (or David West) may surrender 25 points to Duncan, Chris Paul may give up 20 to Parker, and and Peterson/Pargo may give up 15 to Ginobili. But Paul is going to score 25 right back on Parker, West will put 20 right back on Duncan (or Oberto), and Peterson/Pargo will be good for 15. That finds both teams almost even, and New Orleans still has a great offensive rebounder who will be getting points in the paint, a superior bench, and a point guard with a ceiling that could mean another ten to twenty points on any given night.

Generally, we'll have: Chandler vs. Oberto (yikes), Peja vs. Finley or Bowen (yikes), and the Hornets bench (Julian Wright, Rasual Butler [Pargo named above]) vs. the Spurs bench (Brent Barry, Ime Udoka, Matt Bonner). I see this as a wash.

I think this one is going to go seven, I think Tim Duncan is going to drop a couple of stinkers, I think West will start slow, and I think the Hornets will win it.

Hornets in Seven.

As always, e-mail me at dontgiveupthebasketballblog@gmail.com

ZekeDay!

2008-04-30T14:52:00.003-04:00

Happy birthday to you, Happy birthday to you, Happy birthday Isiah, and...that's your cue.

Like many Knicks fans, I am happy that Isiah is no longer President but not happy that he is still involved with the team. As Jerry Seinfeld noted, when you remove a band-aid, you need to get it right off!.

I'm a little remiss to do two birthdays in two days, but let's remember, Isiah is one of the great players in NBA history and the most influential player in the last twenty, er, thirty years (jesus!) not named Jordan, Bird, or Magic.

Pretty impressive for a guy who never made the 20,000 point club, was 6-1, 180, and played during one of the roughest eras in basketball history.

Unfortunately, Isiah did have one weakness, which was exposed by an unlikely foe.

Dig that Jordan jumpsuit Will Smith is wearing in old Hornets colors....mmm!

As always, e-mail me at dontgiveupthebasketballblog@gmail.com

One Dimensional Birthdays

2008-04-29T16:33:00.002-04:00

On this day in 1976, one of the great crossover artists was born.

Seven years later on the same date, a great dunker would follow, no less than the Great White Hope. Probably the only white guy who has or will ever beat James White in a slam dunk contest.

Playoff Word Association

2008-04-29T16:05:00.005-04:00

Hey, everybody, it's time for playoff word association!

Lakers: Good
Nuggets: Bad
George Karl: GM
Phil Jackson: Coach

Atlanta: "Scrappy"
Boston: "Scurvy"

Joe Johnson: Score
Josh Smith: Dunk
Al Horford: Smash
Ray Allen: What?

Jerry Sloan: Preeminent
Houston Rockets: Fucked

Tony Parker: Lucky
Steve Nash: Unlucky

Chris Paul: Maverick
Jason Kidd: Goose

Chris Bosh: Alone

Dwight Howard: Score
Dwight Howard: Dunk
Dwight Howard: Smash

LeBron: Brooklyn
Arenas: Mars

Maybe there's a reason I don't get paid for this and no one reads it...

As always, e-mail me at dontgiveupthebasketballblog@gmail.com

Great Point Guard Feats

2008-04-28T09:02:00.009-04:00

The annihilation of Jason Kidd by Chris Paul is painful to watch, slightly damaging to the legacy of a probable hall-of-fame point guard, and one of the more sudden and severe changing-of-the-guards in basketball's history. Ali-Holmes might be an appropriate analogue.

The great matchup got me thinking about Jason Kidd's legacy, which in turn got me thinking about point guards, so I figured why not do a piece on some interesting tidbits in the history of the position - Great Point Guard Feats. So that's what I did, and I'll get to it after some thoughts on the playoffs.

Playoff Thoughts (in brief)
-I was startled at Atlanta's performance in Game 3. They were ferocious, scrappy, (insert over-used synonym for "hustled"), and had a great home crowd (surprising for one of the least loyal fan bases in sports). They were also lucky, and the beneficiaries of the truly deplorable Violet Palmer. I don't think there's any way they will equal a great Game 3 performance until next year. It was fun to watch, though.
-I'm enjoying the Cavs-Wizards series...it kind of reminds me of a modern Jordan vs. The Knicks drama. LeBron plays Jordan and the Wizards, built by mid-90's Knicks GM Ernie Grunfeld, are kinda-sorta appropriate to play the old Knicks. They are certainly not afraid to play rough out there.
-I'm still holding out hope for the Raptors, though Chris Bosh's 39 point game should have been the opportunity for them to tie the series, and they didn't even come close. Not a good sign.
-I can't believe Philly won another game. I still don't think they'll win the series.
-The Nuggets are the worst defensive team in the league.
-Jerry Sloan is the best coach in the league.

Alright, on to the point guards. Here are some (three) great point guard feats.

1. The 1,000 assist season and the single-game record. There are two players other than John Stockton who have doled out 1,000 assists in a year (he did it seven times, including five 1,100 assist seasons out of the six in NBA history).

The first is Isiah Thomas, who managed 1,123 in his career 1984-85 season and never again got more than 914. I'm sure you might have guessed Zeke was one of the players - many argue he's the greatest "pure" point guard in NBA history. (I do not subscribe to this argument - I would go 1. Magic 2. Stockton 3. Thomas, but that's just me.)

The second you may not have guessed. It's not Magic, it's not Tiny, it's not Pearl, it's not Cousy, it's not even a former NBA all-star. Kevin (not Terry!) Porter had an outstanding year in 1978 for the Pistons in which he averaged 15.4 ppg and 13.4 apg - a total of 1,099 assists. Porter was 28 and the very next year would be relegated to the bench of the Washington Bullets. Two years after that, he would be out of the league.

Kevin Porter was one of the greatest passers in the NBA's history and he is largely forgotten today. Frankly, he wasn't an object of great affection in his own time and was largely thought to be an enemy of coaches. Porter also held the single game record of 29 assists before Scott Skiles broke it in 1990. His record is of note because unlike Skiles's it was legitimate. And as we're talking about Great Point Guard Feats, I'd like to discuss that for just a second.

Skiles broke Porter's record in a 155-116 blowout over the Denver Nuggets, a game in which it was announced on the PA system that Skiles had a chance to break the record and in which he intentionally racked up assists despite being up by 40. Skiles had 13 points and 6 assists in the fourth quarter when future hall of fame coach Matt Guokas left him in and told him to go for the record. The game was the most lopsided victory in the history of the Magic (also the highest-scoring first half). At the time of the game, the Magic were 6-23 and the Nuggets were 6-22. They were the two worst teams in the league. Furthermore, the Nuggets were known as the worst defensive team in the league, and they relied primarily on a run-n-gun offense predicated on Chris Jackson's (Mahmoud Abdul-Rauf's) ability to score.

Porter's game was not auspicious (for reasons explained herein) but it was a real contest - he had 29 assists in a 126-112 victory over the Houston Rockets. The game was from a different era in the NBA - it was held at the Rutgers Athletic Center (in the bustling metropolis of Piscataway, N.J.) in front of 3,873 fans, and Porter's coach was none other than Richard Vitale. It was awesome, baby.

2. Geoff Huston's 27 assist game. Geoff Huston was one in a long line of great NYC point guards who specialized in the art of distribution. He great up in Brooklyn and is one of those New Yorkers who never really left - he played for the Knicks for a year and now works in the Bronx at St. Mary's Recreation Center, an organization that tries to help the less fortunate from The Bronx (and there are a few of them up there) get education and training to improve their lives.

Like many Brooklyn ballers, he was discovered by an out of town coach, and it wasn't long before he found himself playing at Texas Tech. Huston was drafted by his hometown Knicks but only played one season there, a solid rookie campaign in which he averaged 8.5 points and 6.2 assists per game.

For the rest of his career, Huston was neither great nor bad - he generally averaged between ten and fifteen points per game and between six and nine assists. His career numbers look awfully similar to Andre Miller, and like Miller, he was an effective midrange shooter who was good at driving to the hoop and terrible at shooting three pointers. (Huston was 16-63 in a ten-year career, Miller is 103-508.)

There was nothing physically special about Huston - he stood 6-2 and weighed 175 pounds. He was not a strong prospect (drafted six picks into the third round of the 1979 draft) and, except perhaps in the halls of Canarsie High School, was the beneficiary of very few honors and accolades.

Huston did, however, play one of the best games at his position in the history of basketball. In 1982, Huston had a decent year in which he started about half of the Cleveland Cavaliers games and averaged 10.3 points per game and 7.6 assists. For reasons I am unable to divine, on January 27, Huston was at his best in a close win over the Golden State Warriors. That night, the Cavs prevailed 110, 106, and Huston was credited with 27 assists - one of the greatest single-game performances by a point guard in NBA history. (Exactly one week later, Huston would hand out 20 assists against the Indiana Pacers.)

3. Twenty Points and Eight Assists. 20-8 does not sound that illusive. Oftentimes, the best point guard in the NBA (or at least the highest-scoring point guard) averages roughly 20-8.

However, over a career, it is much rarer. Oscar Robertson averaged 25.7 points per game and 9.5 assists, and pretty much blew the record out of the water, but after him, it's never been done. The next closest is...Stephon Marbury.

After his horrendous season last year, Stephon has lost the distinction of being in the exclusive 20-8 club. All the same, I think it's instructive that he is (I believe) the only man to have had an opportunity to join it after a long career.

I am a Stephon Marbury defender because I think he is the best offensive point guard of our [pre-Chris Paul, post-Isiah] generation. I defy someone to name a point guard with the ability to slash, distribute, jump, and shoot the way Stephon can. Even at an advanced point in his career, with a ton of games behind him, Marbury still retains the ability to get to the hole better than almost everyone in the league.

Obviously, Stephon is reviled by the majority of the Knicks fan base (rich white people from Long Island). He seems to be a lightning rod for fans in general, despite his relatively clean record and charitable donations. (To wit: He was named to The Sporting News list of "good guys in sports" three times, gave $1M to help the Katrina relief effort, invests in not-for-profit housing in bad parts of New York City, has seven barbers on hire on Coney Island giving free haircuts to kids, founded a shoe company on the premise that ghetto kids shouldn't be tempted to try to afford $100 Jordans when they can barely afford to eat, and gave a free pair of those shoes to every high school basketball player in New York City.) (I guess one can only get a good reputation with the NBA fanbase for rebuilding the inner city if they get AIDS from their extramarital affairs, almost give it to their wife and son, open some "charitable" Starbucks and movie theaters, make a ton of money, and have a failed, self-serving talk show.)

("But he won four rings!")

Stephon's style of play has often caused difficulty on the teams he plays on (much like Jason Kidd's lack of a jump shot) and his personality is clearly eccentric. However, his statistics speak for themselves, and anyone who thinks that numbers like those can somehow be a falsified memoriam of a player who is in fact a selfish, no talent hack need to take a math class.

Those who hate Stephon in New York should remember that he's been playing for Isiah Thomas for four years and probably had to deal with the ridiculous situation in a more personal, direct way than Knicks fans can imagine. Stephon is not Mahatma Gandhi but the only way people can explain why they hate him is that "he's a cancer". I think the 20-8 speaks for itself when it comes to Marbury.

I would also note that it seems to me you could say precisely the same thing ("he's a cancer") about Kobe if it wasn't for him getting drafted onto a team with Mr. Alpha, Shaquille O'Neal, and now becoming the beneficiary of a trade he didn't have any part in orchestrating.

As always, e-mail me at dontgiveupthebasketballblog@gmail.com

Bum! Da da duh duh da da duh duh doo doo doo doo

2008-04-24T09:02:00.009-04:00

The NBA is losing its fan base, and the reason is broadcasting. They have been neglecting fans for the last five years and seem as if they will continue to do so in the future.

The reason I'm writing about this now (as opposed to in the last five years) is because of the way the playoffs are being broadcast. Every year everyone in the basketball world bitches about the NBA's bad ratings and how they get worse and worse no matter the quality of play. There have been many suggestions to "fix" the problem including widening the Court, changing the rules (done), and bombing the city of San Antonio (well, that one was mine).

The problem isn't the game - In 1978, the 44-38 Washington Bullets/47-35 Seattle Supersonics final (featuring Elvin Hayes, Bob Dandridge, Gus Williams, and Fred Brown!) drew a higher rating than four of the last five Finals. The problem, in fact, is that the NBA (and ABC) have a fundamental misunderstanding of how to broadcast basketball. No one there seems to get that broadcasting at a reasonable time, on network television, especially on weekends, gets good ratings. It also gets fans. It is so. fucking. simple.

The NBA's rationale for late night games is that they'll get the "prime time" audience on the West Coast. However, the NFL doesn't give two shits if people on the West Coast have to watch the game early, and it doesn't seem to be hurting their ratings. I bet some people actually like that games are early out there (I would). Because of playoff games starting so late, kids on the East Coast probably don't even know what the hell is going on in the NBA but are already nagging their parents to get them Tomlinsonian visors for Pop Warner or an Eli Manning Fathead.

I think part of the misunderstanding is the result of the retirement of Jordan - it obfuscated the real problem because everyone in the NBA has attributed the drop in popularity to a sudden lack of a superstar. This is reflective of the philosophy of finding someone to blame whenever there's a difficult problem, and it's gotten a lot of people and businesses in a lot of trouble. In the old days, it was the motivation behind the lynch mob.

The retirement of MJ is only a small part of the problem. The real deal is that when the NBA went from NBC to ABC, the quality of coverage took a huge step backwards. Regular season and playoff games on network TV are now a rarity (only on weekends after Christmas, if ever), the announcing and production quality is worse (although they seem to pour money into kitschy camera angles and mod-art sets), and on a weeknights, it is impossible to watch the playoffs if you don't have a good cable package. Sadly, the suits at the NBA don't seem to appreciate is that there are a lot of people who don't. It's called the middle class. I'm one of them.

When I want to watch the playoffs during the week, I have to go down to a bar, which is fine, but I usually skip the late game (I start work at 7:30 a.m.) and I usually have to miss a game because it's on NBAtv, which no one in the world gets except for people in major metropolitan areas with $80/month cable packages, David Stern, and his houseservants.

Can you imagine an NFL playoff game being on NFLtv? Do you remember the furor that was provoked when Green Bay played the Cowboys in the regular season on NFLtv? I simply do not understand how the NBA can be so thoughtless.

Since we're in the playoffs, that's what I'll focus on. The NBC playoffs worked like this: Playoff tripleheaders on Saturdays and Sundays starting at 12:00 p.m. Doubledheaders starting around 3:00 p.m. (I think) when there were not enough teams to create a tripleheader. Marv Albert or Bob Costas on the play-by-play. I'm not positive but I believe the entire playoffs were on NBC (as opposed to TNT, whose broadcasts now feel like network games when compared to ESPN and ABC's shoddy, talking-head coverage).

The reason the NBA decided to get rid of NBC was simple: money. In 2002, NBC offered a paltry four-year, $1.3 billion offer to keep programming. ESPN/ABC/TNT responded with a six year, $4.6 billion offer which was signed.

You really can't blame the NBA. $3.3 billion is a lot of freaking money. And you can't even blame ESPN/ABC, who had the cash and used it. However, the actions immediately following the deal that both parties made to change the way basketball was broadcast deserve extreme, extensive criticism.

NBC had been broadcasting 33 regular-season games and between 20 and 40 postseason games per year. According to David Stern, the number of reduced network telecasts (now about 11, I believe) was at the NBA's request. They believed they would get a higher audience for a single game if they avoided the tripleheaders that NBC showed during the on regular season weekends and instead shifted primary coverage to cable with a single "pillar" game on the weekend. The logic behind this seems to be that one game is more of an "event" than three, and events are what get regular people (as opposed to fans) to watch basketball games. The cable was still there for the die-hards.

I realize that it makes theoretical sense. Big basketball fans probably make up only a small percentage of the group that contributes to the NBA's ratings. However, what Stern's businessman's perspective misses is the fact that all fans were once just regular people. There's a reason they got sucked in and a reason they are loyal - it's the product, stupid. Without broadcast coverage, a whole group of potential basketball fans is left by the wayside even if the current fans do tune in to cable coverage.

Trying to transform the product with the masses in mind can work if you keep the essential stuff there - the games. But the problem is, Stern took those away to try to effect a psychological change in the average, more passive fan. The arrogance behind this move is astonishing, when you think about it.

(By the way...Doesn't that sound great, a weekend tripleheader? Man, what I wouldn't do to sit down on a Saturday or Sunday and watch basketball all afternoon. Hard to believe that's what we used to have.)

The results of the move towards fewer games are the real reason for the slump in ratings, and that slump has been predictably disastrous. It correlates perfectly with the 2002 switch to fewer network games. From 2002 through 2006, the average ratings on broadcast television have dropped a full point (from 3.0 to 2.0), and playoff games have dropped two points (from 5.5 to 3.3).

(Remeber: Nielsen ratings measure the percentage of American households, so that's not a drop of two million viewers, it's a drop of six million.)

The drop in Finals ratings is perhaps the most instructive. NBC's worst year was the last year of its contract, 2002, when the Lakers swept the Nets. In that Finals (an abominable contest and one of only four sweeps since 1976), NBC drew a 10.2 rating. The ratings for the next five years (of ABC's coverage) were 6.5, 11.5, 8.2, 8.5, and 6.2 last year (the lowest recorded Finals rating in NBA history).

To give that some perspective, since 1976, there have been only eight Finals in which there was a Nielsen rating of less than ten (the equivalent of 30 million households if measured today). Four of them were in the first five years of the ABC contract.

NBA or ABC advocates would argue that Michael Jordan's retirement also correlates with the sudden drop in ratings. However, those who would blame MJ must remember that he retired in 1994, so we can look at how that affected the ratings during NBC coverage. The first season after Michael Jordan's first retirement, the Finals drew a respectable 12.4 rating. The next year, despite a sweep, the rating was 13.9.

That means that twice as many people tuned in to watch Shaq's Magic get swept by the Houston Rockets in 1995 (two lesser cities, from a TV perspective) than watched last year's finals. Did the '95 Finals present more "star power" than LeBron vs. Tim Duncan did last year? Was the game played in a more watchable way? No basketball fan could make the argument. The fact of the Magic/Houston sweep doubling the ratings of last year's Finals is hard to believe, blows the MJ argument out of the water, and if you care about basketball, is truly infuriating.

There's a simple lesson here: You can't increase the popularity of a sport by getting rid of TV time. The suits that made the boneheaded decision to do so badly hurt professional basketball and the effects of the decision will be felt for years to come. Games at night, games on cable, and especially games on NBAtv leave out some of the most important audiences of sports - kids, poor, lower and middle class people, people in the country, and people who enjoy sitting down all day on Sunday to watch sports (every other male in America).

I hate to see the sport I love take a backseat to football and baseball because of the NBA (or ABC) position that showing less games can coerce better ratings. If you want better ratings in the long term, you need growth, and if you want to grow a sport, there's only one way - attract fans.

I hope we haven't already lost the next generation.

As always, e-mail me at dontgiveupthebasketballblog@gmail.com

Please do not make me root for this man any more.

2008-04-22T13:41:00.005-04:00

Dear James Dolan:

Hi, there. Jimmy V. again. Still haven't heard from you about my idea to not turn the Knicks into the worst team of this generation. Your response probably got lost in the mail or something.

I'm writing today about a fellow named Mark Jackson. You may remember him. He played for the Knicks and was a Christ-quoting point guard. Not the quarterback one, the baby fat one.

I don't really care for Mark, I'll admit it. I was too young to root for him in his first go-around with the Knicks, and caught him right in the meat of his Pacers years. You know, the ones where he was the seventh leading scorer on the team that went to the finals, right behind Travis Best.

Anyway, I hear that Donnie Walsh is thinking about hiring Mark Jackson. I was wondering if you could write back and explain the logic of that move. It seems to me that there might be some negatives. I made you a list:

1. No coaching experience.
2. No assistant coaching experience.
3. No management experience.
4. Very, very bad color commentary.

a. "Little move there, and THA BANK IS OPEN!"
b. "Mehmet Okur has played [Tim] Duncan better than anyone I've ever seen anyone play him."
c. "You got someone on the ropes....take 'em to the dance floor. Tony Parker in traffic....BALLIN!"
d.

Q: Who are your favorite sportscasters?

A: I watch guys like Joe Morgan. I'll watch Hubie Brown. I'll watch George Foreman or Roy Jones Jr.. I just think you have to do it. You have to make it interesting. You have to make it fun. [For those of you who are not aware, George Foreman and Roy Jones Jr., both hall of fame boxers, are comically bad commentators that sometimes appear on HBO PPV events because someone wants to have a boxer in the booth.]

5. No one in the entire city of New York is outwardly excited that Mark Jackson will be coach.
6. It seems like giving point guards with questionable coaching resumes jobs has not worked out well for the Knicks in the past.
7. No coaching experience.
8. Never a team leader.
9. No coaching experience.
10. We have no idea if he can coach.

Now, JamesD, this is just me, but don't most of the "benchmark" organizations in sports generally have the advantage of being able to hire coaches with experience, track records, or at the very least credentials more considerable than Mark's?

I realize I may be biased, so I decided I'd make a list of advantages we get with Mark Jackson:

1. He seems to have a good personality.
2. High moral character (as far as I know).
3. Number two all-time in assists.
4. Trip to the NBA Finals.
5. Played for Pat Riley (who traded him for Doc Rivers, Charles Smith, and Bo Kimble).
6. (Presumably) kept spirits up on 21-61 Denver Nuggets during his time there.
7. Involved with one of the great dunks of all-time.

8. Former Knick (hiring former players often results in coaches who perform well, because of the causal relationship between playing for a team and being able to coach them).
9. Announcers are known for expansive knowledge of play-calling, personnel management, and player development.
10. Mark probably got to learn from a lot of different coaches during his stints with the Knicks, Clippers, Pacers, Nuggets, Pacers again, Raptors, Knicks again, Jazz, and Rockets.

I admit, the above list is pretty impressive, but I'm not convinced. Is it really your intent to hire a guy just because he is from New York and has a post-basketball career in broadcasting? I mean, I've heard of coaches becoming announcers, but I don't believe it's ever gone the other way. Doesn't that mean anything?

I'm reminded of Kareem Abdul Jabbar (known for his intelligence) and his inability to find a head coaching job above the minor league level. He is probably the greatest player in NCAA history, he is the NBA's all-time leading scorer, he has beaten Larry King on Celebrity Jeopardy, but the only coaching gig he could get was for the Oklahoma Storm of the USBL. And after winning the championship with them, he was turned down for a job at the noted basketball power that is Columbia University.

I know Kareem is "mean", but he is from Harlem (his dad was in the NYPD), he's known for an all-time stat that seems more important than Jackson's, and he's smart. Why not consider someone like him, Jimmy D?

Unfortunately, I think I know the answer. Mark Jackson is a nice man, and obviously not incompetent when it comes to basketball. He gets along with the press and some consider him gregarious. Although Kareem has rings and MVPs and a solid resume (he has been an assistant with the Sonics and Clippers), he has always been unafraid to speak his mind and refused to compromise.

It seems to me that the choice of Mark Jackson is meant only to pacify the Knicks fan base, and this is an egregious error on the part of the Knicks. It's been too long for pacification, and most of the moves the Knicks have made to satisfy fans that they believe will not tolerate long-term building have resulted in a near-ten year drought.

Please, JamesD, consider a better coaching candidate. Consider someone who has coached at least at the high school level. Maybe even someone who has shown the ability to bring players together at the professional level!

I know that Donnie Walsh is behind this, and I know you gave him autonomy, but just this once, maybe for the first time, you can get involved in the day-to-day operations of the Knicks and help them make the right move. Obviously, they're already floundering without you.

Best,
Jimmy V

As always, e-mail me at dontgiveupthebasketballblog@gmail.com

PS: It's another topic for another day, but it is a crime Kareem can't get a shot at coaching. Why are people so afraid of coaches who are notable for their principles, candor, and willingness to criticize? It seems to me that many some of the best coaches in the NBA (Jerry Sloan, Phil Jackson, Greg Popovich, Larry Brown) display these traits. There's a reason teams have PR departments and coaches' ability to resonate with the public shouldn't be part of their job requirements.

Blah Blah Blah The East Sucks

2008-04-21T10:36:00.008-04:00

I won't bore you with too much commentary about the sorry state of the Eastern Conference, especially in an "up" year where the East can brag about having one of the top three players in the NBA and its best team. However, I will take this opportunity to note that the Celtics have maybe two seasons at best to take advantage of their unique threesome (har, har), and apart from their success, the future looks no less grim for the East than it did last year, and there is still an eight-seed in the playoffs with 37 wins.

Though the East is certainly not a conference with a wealth of talent or many exciting matchups, it's not like it's Death Valley, either. With that in mind, here is the preview of what the East will have to offer.

Celtics v. Atlanta Hawks. I like the Hawks, I really do. Joe Johnson is the Michael Finley of our era. Josh Smith is one of the best defensive players in the NBA. Marvin Williams had a very solid sophomore season despite being stigmatized by his draft position (ahead of Chris Paul, which is brought up so much, "Drafted before Chris Paul" is becoming his middle name). Mike Bibby reminded people that he is, in fact, only 29 years old. Josh Childress is probably one of the best sixth men in the league. Al Horford is among this year's best rookies. Tyronn Lue is not good.

Unfortunately, that group is notable for the complete and utter absence of a big man. Atlanta, often criticized for drafting Marvin Williams above Chris Paul, made another boneheaded mistake when they drafted Shelden Williams fifth in 2007, ahead of Brandon Roy, Randy Foye, and Rudy Gay. The pick makes sense from the "draft what you need" perspective, but the fact that it was a necessity exposes the larger folly of the Hawks front office.

Atlanta has been "building" for years and the Shelden Williams pick was arguably their only attempt to shore up their frontcourt. The move was made far too late, and because of the Hawks' lack of planning, they were forced to make do with an undersized, underskilled waste of a lottery pick.

To wit: Atlanta's other moves have were the signing of Lorenzen Wright in 2006, the acquisition of Tom Gugliotta and Obinna Ekezie in 2005, the signing of Donnell Harvey and Lonny Baxter in 2004, and a mix of euro and african journeymen in between.

It's 2008, the Hawks have never been starved for cap room, and those transactions don't cut it. And that's why they're going to get absolutely blown away by a Boston team with presence and depth in the post. Even Kedrick Perkins will be significantly better than any player in the Atlanta frontcourt.

Any schmo can sing the laurels of Boston and I'll wait until a more interesting matchup to do it. I am astonished at how poorly Atlanta matches up with Boston and I believe that the biggest problem for the Hawks after their lack of size will be Mike Bibby's inability to play well against Rajon Rondo's defense. I am making that statement knowing full well Rondo stopped Bibby in game one, so it's not great crystal ball work, but still, it's a big deal. In the past, Bibby has performed extremely well in the playoffs and he's one of two players on the Hawks with playoff experience. The rest of the group are very young and without Bibby to lead them, calm down the offense, and take some of the scoring load off of guys who are not go-to (like Childress and Williams), the Hawks will be all screwed up.

A friend of a friend related a story to me about seeing a few of the Hawks (I think it was Marvin Williams, Salim Stoudamire, and another young player) in a restaurant in New York a few years ago. He was able to overhear their conversation and was surprised how much, in his words, "they sounded just like we did when we were in high school". They were talking about how Al Harrington had to get his shots for the contract, how they weren't going to get the playing time they want for this reason and that, and pretty standard young-stupid-player stuff.

The point is, they're from a bad rebuilding environment that has led to a much improved team that may lack character and certainly lacks toughness. This should be the only sweep of the first round.

Celtics in 4.

Did you know? The entire Celtics team averages 4.62 blocks per game. Josh Smith averages 2.8.

Cleveland Cavaliers v. Washington Wizards. This year's matchup of teams that get too much publicity for having a really good/really crazy player looks like it will be barely watchable, at best.

With the Cavs, you know what you're getting: A great performance from LeBron, who is truly amazing; A solid performance from Zydrunas Ilgauskas, who is overdue for one of those catchy euro name shortenings ("Zudo" or something); and mediocre performances from everyone else.

The Cavs are one of the worst-constructed teams in the league, built for the short-term despite having a player who will be the best in the NBA for at least the next 6-10 years. If the Knicks had somehow drafted LeBron (which they may have had an opportunity to do if they had attempted to rebuild when they started to go bad), this is basically what you'd have. You could even make the case that the Cavs are the worst-managed team in the league.

The Wizards, on the other hand, are one of the best-managed teams in the league, despite their lack of success. Ernie Grunfeld is an extremely smart and shrewd GM and took a team that was the victim of horrible mismanagement for years and filled it players via long-term free agency acquisitions (Gilbert Arenas, whatever you think of him, was signed away from the Warriors for a fairly reasonable 6 year, $63.7 M contract; DeShawn Stevensen was signed for the league minimum, Brenden Haywood is on a five year, $25M contract), smart trades (Kwame Brown and Laron Profit for Caron Butler and Chucky Atkins; Jerry Stackhouse, Christian Laettner, and the rights to Devin Harris for Antawn Jamison) and sensible draft picks (Harris would have been a good one, Nick Young).

In many ways, this matchup is a showcase for how good management can be overcome by good luck. Both teams are virtually the same - their record differs by a win and a loss, they both average slightly less points than they allow, they are both significantly better at home than on the road, and they can both be boring as hell to watch. Despite the similarities, it is clear that the Cavs have a decisive advantage.

The difference is LeBron. If he could beat Detroit last year all by himself, I'm sure he can do the same to the Wizards. No one on the Wizards has the kind of skills to compete with him over the course of a seven game series, though their defense and the stellar game of Caron Butler and Antawn should be enough for them to steal a couple of games.

Cavs in 6.

Did you know: Antonio Daniels was once one of the best-dunking point guards in the NBA.

Raptors v. Magic. The Toronto Raptors are a young team that is, counterintuitively, in regression. They won 50 games last year and went 41-41 this year. Conversely, the Orlando Magic are a team on the rise. They won about 40 games last year, and this year went 52-30.

The build of these teams is actually pretty similar. Each has a stud in the frontcourt surrounded by offensively minded, comfortable-on-the-perimeter players. Each has an offense run by a dual committee of point guards. The Magic and Raptors have, respectively, the third and fourth largest positive point differentials in the Eastern Conference.

Looking at the player matchups, it seems like the Magic have the advantage because they have the more dominant big man (Howard) and more supplemental scoring ability. Both Rashard Lewis and Hedo Turkoglu average over 18 points per game, and the second and third scorers on the Raptors average 12.5 and 12.1 points per game, respectively.

The Magic even beat the Raptors handily in the first game, where Bosh was convincingly outworked in the post and Ford/Calderon were obliterated by Jameer Nelson and Keyon Dooling.

For all of their outward disadvantages, the Raptors have on thing the Magic don't: balance. The Magic are largely reliant on Howard's post dominance and the skill of their shooters. If Howard isn't doing much in the post, neither of the shooters will be able to take over.

It would be great if the Raptors had more frontcourt depth and could afford to use fouls and bang Dwight Howard around, but the backup centers are Kris Humphries and Primoz Brezec, so that strategy is out. However, Dwight Howard is not good with the ball or smooth in the post. He's not a great passer either.

I believe this will make Howard vulnerable to the double-team. The Raptors have many guards and forwards who are adequate defenders and if they can stay on their heels and ensure that the Magic shooters don't get too wide open, Howard can be neutralized.

On the other end of the court, I don't think the Magic can stop the Raptors offense. Chris Bosh has the ability to draw Dwight Howard out or work him in the post, Anthony Parker cannot be covered by anyone, and T.J. Ford and Jose Calderon should be able to take better advantage of the point guard matchup than they did in Game 1. (They have nowhere to go but up after that.)

I'll admit, I don't think Toronto will win the series easily, and a part of me thinks that if they go down 2-0, they will get swept. Nevertheless, I like the Raptors and respect them and think they're the kind of team that might win in a seven game series. (Can I be honest? This pick sounded a lot better to me yesterday before the Raptors lost game one and I started thinking about it to write my preview. But I am committed, god damnit.)

Raptors in 7.

Did you know: Stan Van Gundy got his start at Castleton State College (VT), where yours truly went to basketball camp.

Pistons v. Sixers.

I am not really excited about this series and I'm no longer excited at the Pistons. They are past their prime but remain one of the best teams in the East, and the Sixers will simply not be able to handle them. This reminds me of the 2001 Finals, where the Sixers won the first game (and Allen Iverson stepped on Tyronn Lue....ah) and then proceeded to get hammered for the next four.

As Matt pointed out in the comments yesterday, the Sixers have beaten some notable teams in the last month. However, most of those wins came against teams whose playoff spots were (relatively) locked up, while the Sixers were fighting to get in, so I don't give them as much credit as I would in the middle of the season. But it's not like it's not worth mentioning when you beat quality teams to get into the playoffs, either.

The problem for the Sixers is simple - it's going to be very hard for them to score against the Detroit defense. They won't get a lot of offensive rebounds, they won't be able to run their offense smoothly, and they're going to need bodies they don't have who are able to handle Detroit's style.

Detroit is the last of the traditional Eastern Conference playoff teams (which is funny considering what an afterthought Detroit was during the gritty-East prime). The foundation built there by Rick Carlisle and perfected by Larry Brown is a blueprint for a good defensive team, and one could make the argument that the Pistons are on the cusp of being an all-time defensive team worthy of comparison to the original bad boys, the 90's Knicks and Heat, and other historically defensive teams.

When a team runs into a defensive team of Detroit's caliber, all of the enthusiasm and motivation in the world won't make up for the lack of a big man (don't even start with the suggestion that Samuel Dalembert is worthy of this distinction) or Philly's inability to put players on the floor who can consistently hit a long jumper.

Although Detroit will probably win the series, the "next season" looks to Philadelphia like an opportunity to make a leap forward, while Detroit will continue their regression if they don't make some player moves. This series may be a great building block for a young team, and it reminds me of 2001, when Vince Carter and Tracy McGrady's Raptors lost to the Knicks in a very tough first round matchup (Sprewell dominated Carter and McGrady carried the Raptors). Despite losing to the more experienced, tougher, and quite frankly dirtier Knicks team, the Raptors were able to come back next year, destroy the Knicks in the first round, and come within a few shorthairs of a finals bid. (You may remember Vince Carter's herculean effort against the Sixers that year and a couple of gunfights between Carter and Iverson. That was a good time in basketball, and it's sad to think that those two guys would never reach the same heights.)

Detroit in 5.

Did you know: The total number of games in which Reggie Evans had more rebounds than he did in game one was...one.

As always, write me at dontgiveupthebasketballblog@gmail.com.

PS: Isn't it nice to have the playoffs without the Nets? I like the Nets, but I was just so tired of watching those Nets, I don't know if I can express it. Some teams are just no fun. It's kind of fitting that the no fun team came from Jersey.

PPS: That picture of Thaddeus Young made me think a little bit about how crazy Georgia Tech would have been if somehow Young could have played with Isma'il Muhammad. Oh well...

Playoffs? PLAYOFFS?

2008-04-18T13:46:00.007-04:00

The 2008 first round of the playoffs is the most compelling group of series I have ever seen in my life. With the possible exception of Cavs/Wizards, I want to watch every game of every series. I feel like a kid again. And I only have to wait one day!

West

Lakers v. Nuggets: This is probably the strangest matchup in the playoffs. Who would have thought at the beginning of the season that the term "enigmatic" would refer to the team playing against the Lakers, rather than the Lakers themselves?

LA has been covered pretty exhaustively and I'm not going to waste too much time with them. They have talent at every position except for point guard, and even there, Derek Fisher is a steady hand with a lot of playoff experience. The Lakers deserve to be heavy favorites.

However, in my view, LA has two potential problems: defense and setting up the offense. If the Nuggets are on their game, there's no reason they don't have the firepower to score with the Lakers, and I question whether the Lakers can stop them if they have to. The biggest difference between the teams is that the Nuggets have a much tougher cast of characters than the Lakers, from Iverson to Camby to J.R. Smith to Eduardo Najera. With the possible exception of Iverson, the entire lineup is defensively sound, comfortable banging, and surely down for whatever. Can one say that about a Lakers team with a babyfaced center who averages 7.5 rebounds a game, a Euro power forward, and a point guard who will be completely unable to stop Allen Iverson? My thought is no.

The Nuggets pose more matchup problems for the Lakers than any other team in the West (except for perhaps the Jazz). Their depth will allow them to foul, their top two scorers are All-NBA, and they have a glut of big men. The Nuggets have been blown out in spectacular fashion in two of the three regular season matches (and they lost the other one despite 51 points from Iverson) but I don't think that trend is going to hold because when I say the Nugs present matchup problems, I'm talking about the playoffs, not the eighth game of the season in which Sasha Vujacic takes over in the fourth quarter.

Despite a favorable matchup, I don't think the Nuggets have what it will take to prevail. Even though they have great offensive weapons, the reason they're an eight seed and the Lakers are a one seed is consistency. The Nuggets completely lack it, whereas between Kobe, Pau, Odom, Fisher, and Bynum, you know what you're going to get almost every night (a lot). Most importantly, the Nuggets don't show defensive consistency, which is troubling because they have great athletes who should be able to defend against any team in the NBA.

Lakers in Five. (My opinion - the Nuggets should fire George Karl and hire Jeff Van Gundy in the offseason. To quote JVG: "I love to teach offensive players to play defense, and hate to teach defensive players to play offense".)

Did you know?: Carmelo Anthony's rebounding numbers compare favorably with Andrew Bynum's, even on the offensive glass.

Jazz v. Rockets. This is a great matchup of good old boy coaches and will surely be a war. Adelman is every bit as talented at organizing an offensive unit as Jerry Sloan is at doing the same with defense, and both men have been putting on a coaching tour de force this year. It's sad that Jerry Sloan never gets consideration for coach of the year, because the consistency of the Jazz through a rise, fall, and rise again decade has been incredible. They have always been more than the sum of their parts, even when Ben Handlogten was a part of their rotation.

I was driving the Rockets bandwagon last year because I thought they had the perfect mix of role players and stars - a giant center, an unstoppable wingman, a great shooter who is a good defender (Luther Head), a good shooter who is a great defender (Battier) and an underrated point guard (the legendary Rafer Alston). I assumed Jeff Van Gundy was the right man to make a playoff team out of the mix.

Clearly, I was wrong, and I was surprised this year when the Rockets gave VG the boot and hired Rick Adelman. However, along with the addition of Luis Scola, the offseason changes have made the Rockets a more versatile offensive team that hasn't lost much on the defensive end.

This matchup of classic Western contenders brings me back to the time an aging Eddie Johnson, after being picked up for the last six weeks of the regular season by Houston, scored 31 points against Utah in game 3 of the Western Conference Finals and hit a game-winning three pointer in game 4. Houston fans will recall, unfortunately, that Johnson's heroics led to this in a memorable end to arguably the greatest conference finals ever:

Boy, what a game.

Anyway, I just think the Jazz are too good to lose to a Houston team with only one major scoring option. They play great defense and I think Sloan's team defense will beat Adelman's offense in a battle of equals. And these are not equals. Houston will have to deal with questions like:

-Who can defend Carlos Boozer? Anyone?
-What if Kirilenko slows down McGrady? This is not out of the question.
-How is Alston going to get help defending Deron Williams (he'll need it, as he gives up size, age, and athletic ability) when there are two lights-out shooters on either wing and two dangerous scorers in the post? Who doubles in that situation, and how do you do it against the best passer on the team and one of the best in the NBA?
-Is Okur/Scola the most boring matchup of the playoffs?

Houston plays well with a lot of heart, but that's not enough for me.

Utah in 4.

Did you know: Utah is one of the two teams in the league Tracy McGrady averaged 30 points against.

Spurs v. Suns

This has been one of the only exciting playoff series in the past few years, with the Spurs prevailing each time in contests that were infamously officiated by the great Tim Donghay. I remember watching these games some restaurant in a complete furor because I was so angry at the refereeing. And I don't think Donghay was the problem entirely - referees love the San Antonio Spurs. They let themselves be intimidated by Greg Popovich, they let Tim Duncan whine more than any player in the league, and they are constantly fooled by Emmanuel Ginobili's flopping antics. Oh, and then there's Bruce Bowen, the dirtiest, most reckless, most untalented starter in the league. He can ruin a game and forces the referees to focus on him in loco parentis.

One thing that makes me happy about Shaq being traded to the Suns is that he's not going to take all of that bullshit from the Spurs. I'm worried that he's getting to the point in terms of diminished skills where it doesn't matter, but I think one problem with the Suns in recent year has been that although Steve Nash is a good leader, he can't be the kind of enforcer that a Jordan, Isiah Thomas, or Larry Bird was. The reason those guys were able to lay down the law when things got dirty or tough was partly their own willpower and courage - and I firmly believe that Nash has both of those ingredients. The other part, though, was "the big guy" in the background. Jordan had Bill Cartwright (later Horace Grant, later Dennis Rodman), Isiah had a team of thugs, and Larry Bird had Parish and McHale (who were, despite their thin physiques, definitely down for a little fun and games). Steve Nash has never had that, and although Amare is big, and Marion was a great athlete, and Grant Hill is a longtime veteran, when Steve Nash was getting slammed, the Spurs weren't afraid. Did the Suns get off the bench, ready to fight? Yes. Did the Spurs care? Absolutely not.

Shaq is no longer young, his feet are slower, and he can't play defense the way he used to. Still, you can bet if Bruce Bowen is trying to step under people's feet or Ginobili is flopping, Shaq will not be afraid to inform them of the rules they are breaking. He is a member of the law enforcement community, after all.

I don't even need to discuss the matchups beyond that. We've seen this many times before and know how it'll shake out - Spurs getting stops and scoring on the seat of their pants while the Suns try to make their offense work with varied success against one of the league's great defensive units.

I hope and pray that it'll go seven and that the evil Spurs will be vanquished.

Suns in 7.

Did you know: Bruce Bowen averages less than 10 points, 5 rebounds, 2 assists, 1.1 steals, and .5 blocks.......per 48 minutes.

Hornets v. Mavs. This series is the only series in the West that presents something different from what we've seen for the last half-decade, much like the Warriors/Mavs series last year. The Mavs have had an up and down season, and the Hornets are an unknown entity who have two players in the rotation with playoff experience (Peja and Bonzi Wells).

There are going to be some great matchups here. Paul/Kidd is presents an obvious "holding off a changing of the guard" scenario. West/Nowitzki and Stojakovic/Howard are fascinating contests between players who score in bunches in very different ways. Chandler and Dampier will face off to make the plays that win the possession battle.

I don't think Dallas has what it takes to win this series. They have too many defensive liabilities and New Orleans has too many scoring options. The only chance for Dallas to win is if Jason Kidd plays the series of his life, something he's shown a repeated inability to do in the past against lesser talent than Paul.

Yes, Dallas has the experience. But New Orleans has the youth and the talent. In the playoffs, the former matters more, but experience doesn't win playoff series by itself. Ask last year's Pistons.

New Orleans in 6.

Did you know: Jason Kidd's 3pt% for the Nets was 34%, about in line with his career average. Since being traded to Dallas, he has shot 46% from behind the arc, a better percentage than he has shot from the field or from behind the three point line in his entire career.

I'm going to do the East tomorrow, but I want to get my predictions down on the record for future embarrassment.

Celtics in 4.
Cavs in 6.
Raptors in 7.
Pistons in 5.

As always, e-mail me at dontgiveupthebasketballblog@gmail.com