It's a Marathon, Not a Sprint

We've all heard that the regular season in the NBA is a marathon and not a sprint. I suppose that is true, but the marathon is certainly run at different speeds. Just look at a teams like the Celtics, the Heat, the Thunder, and the Clippers. Each of these four teams has a very different approach to this regular season. Not only do games have varied meanings for these franchises, but the entire season does. For a recent example, look at the 2009-2010 Boston Celtics and the 2009-2010 Oklahoma City Thunder.

Very few people believed the Celtics would come within one quarter of winning the title when the playoffs began. They limped into the playoffs and had been anything but dominant when the regular season ended. But they knew the regular season wasn't about being killers, but was about remaining healthy. Had they been healthy the year before, they probably would have made the finals in consecutive years. With this in mind, they worried more about being able to play as a full squad than seeding or placating their fan base. (To see how put-off their fan base was at the end of the regular season last year check out ESPN's Bill Simmons' playoff predictions. Simmons is an unabashed Celtics fan and had virtually given up on the team.) And their strategy worked. They had a fantastic run in the playoffs and came awfully close to winning the Championship.

As for the Thunder, the regular season had a whole other meaning. They were one of the youngest teams in the NBA and were trying to build winning habits that would endure for seasons to come. Each game had a distinct meaning for them. They wanted to be the team that tried hard on every play and molded their young players into winners. These things can't be accomplished with players and coaches taking nights off. They were not the only team in this category, but they were pretty successful running their operations this way.

So what about this season? Where do teams fall in the "What Does This Regular Season Mean?" hierarchy? Here is my take:

The "Paycheck Please" Teams (These guys are showing up for the paycheck and that is about it. Don't expect much of a fight from any of these franchises. They are going to be bad and ugly.):
Memphis Grizzlies
Sacramento Kings
Charlotte Bobcats
Cleveland Cavaliers
Detroit Pistons
Toronto Raptors

The "Young Guns" Teams (These franchises have young players that could take them to the next level. This is motivation enough to not completely give up on things, but they are not going to be extremely competitive yet. This season is about gaining experience and learning the game. They will try hard most nights and the absolute best case would be sneaking into the playoffs.):
Los Angeles Clippers
Washington Wizards
New Jersey Nets
Golden State Warriors
Minnesota Timberwolves
Milwaukee Bucks

The "Trade Piece" Teams (These teams have pieces they hope to use in a trade. In essence, each game is a chance for the players to showcase their skills and for management to make sure they look good. This usually doesn't result in consistent winning):
Houston Rockets
Philadelphia 76ers
Denver Nuggets

The "Middle Men" Teams (These teams know who they are. They are good enough to compete, but not good enough to do anything really memorable. The regular season for these teams is going to be uneven. Some stretches will result in winning and will temporarily build their confidence and other stretches will be harsh reminders that they are not going to compete for a championship.):
Atlanta Hawks
Indiana Pacers
Portland Trailblazers
Phoenix Suns
New Orleans Hornets

The "Building for the Future" Teams (These teams are going to play really hard each night. They are young, but have some experience and will probably be the elite teams in the future. Each game is a chance to build towards this goal.):
Chicago Bulls
Oklahoma City Thunder

The "Something to Prove" Teams (To these teams, the regular season means the most. Each of these teams has something to prove. It may be proving that a trade or free agent signing was worth it or it may be trying to prove that you belong in the discussion with the elite franchises in the current NBA. Whatever the reason, these teams will play hard most nights and will achieve very good results in the regular season, relatively speaking. This may result in playoff success, but it isn't a lock.):
New York Knicks
Orlando Magic
Miami Heat
Utah Jazz
Dallas Mavericks

The "Scoff at the Regular Season" Teams (Although these teams may experience a lot of success in the regular season, they could really care less. The only thing left for these teams to accomplish is getting another ring. With that in mind, superstar players will not go hard all the time or they may play reduced minutes. What this really means is that passing judgment on one of these teams based on the regular season is meaningless. Just like the Celtics of '09-'10.):
Boston Celtics
Los Angeles Lakers
San Antonio Spurs

It is fun to sit and wonder which team is better at the turn of the new year, but remember that the regular season takes on different meanings for each team.

Age Limit? Age Limit.

With a potential lockout looming, the NBPA is looking for ground to stand on. They are proposing rolling back the player age minimum from 19 to 18. This stance is something I simply don't get. The role of the NBPA is to represent current NBA players... so why would they want to hurt the careers of their more veteran class by inundating the league with more players that are young and too green for the league? I'm not entirely sure... They claim that they will try to create incentive for high-schoolers to skip the draft and focus on college, but I'm not sure that tack will work. What incentive can they realistically provide? The age limit needs fixing, and I'm pretty sure without a serious fix, nothing will persuade these kids from skipping college.

The problem is, an age limit of 18 is bad for the NBA, and an age limit of 19 is killing college basketball with so many one-and-dones that A) have no real loyalty to their team and B) make a mockery of the term "student-athlete". As far as the NBA is concerned, having too many high-school kids make the jump in recent years really hurt teams as they were forced to take chances on potential instead of draft based more on real knowledge of skills/game experience. Either way, the rule needs some tweaking. Here is a list of all high-school to NBA players... which includes some very impressive, and some very dreadful names. Even among those who have made All-Star games, it could be argued that their careers would've been just as good if they had played some college ball to refine their skills (think about the 17-year old Jermaine O'Neal, youngest player in league history). Others obviously needed the structure and training of college (Bassy Telfair, Darius Miles) but even I can admit that Eddy Curry + a meal plan = 400... easy.... so maybe it was best that he went pro. Players like Lebron, Kobe, and Chocolate Thunder from the Planet Lovetron were always going to be successful, so I can't argue against their leap from high school to the pros... but it is fairly clear that it isn't the best decision for everyone.

So where do we go from here?

The Supreme Court did away with the old "player must have completed 4 years of college" rule, but I don't understand how the NBA can't operate under the same rule as the NFL, which states that a player must be 3 years removed from graduating high school to enter the draft. However, as a compromise, the MLB method may be the best. Draft players out of high school, they then have the option of signing and foregoing their college experience OR if they are not happy with their draft standing, they can enter college and must remain for 3 years before entering the draft for a 2nd time. This allows "locks" like Dwight Howard, Lebron James, and Kevin Garnett to enter the draft and stay, and marginal picks like James Lang and Korleone Young (who?) realize that a 2nd Round pick's salary isn't that hot, and go to college to refine their games. This also maintains some integrity to the college game, which is suffering under the current system, and would continue to suffer even if players were allowed to jump to the NBA after high school. This way, stars are guaranteed to be there for 3 years, improving overall play and drawing more attention to the game. It isn't perfect, but it is probably as close as we're gonna get.

Give Me Chris Paul

I love point guards. I have an unabashed fascination with point guard play. Maybe it is because I grew up in L.A. in the 80’s and had a chance to see NBA basketball orchestrated by Magic Johnson on a consistent basis. The way he could manipulate a defense was astounding. I suppose that is the reason he went to 9 NBA Finals and won 5 NBA championships. Well, that and playing with guys like James Worthy and Kareem Abdul-Jabbar.

Needless to say, this love of exciting point guard play has me basking in the glow of the NBA right now. Young guys like Rondo, Westbrook, and Rose are so fun to watch and older guys like Nash continue to amaze. And then there are established, in-their-prime guys like Deron Williams and Chris Paul that are playing the position so freakishly well. Personally, I think these guys are the top six at the position. Discussing who is the best point guard in the game today is a fun, impossible-to-figure-out conversation. So, why not have it right here?

It is really hard to compare the games of these six guys because they are all asked to do different things. For example, Rondo doesn’t really have to worry about scoring because he is on such a well rounded team (it must be nice to have three first ballot Hall-of-Famers to play with). On the other hand, Rose has to score because his team is pretty thin offensively (ever watch Noah and Brewer shoot?).

For the record, I think all of these guys are fantastic. To me, the two that seemingly have the biggest weaknesses are Nash (he hasn’t played defense since 1983) and Rondo (my sister has a jumper that is about as consistent as his and my mom shoots free throws better). And Westbrook and Rose are in their third and fourth seasons, respectively, and seem to have a little way to go before they reach their full potential. Williams and CP3 are both well-rounded players that don’t have many weaknesses.

So how do you have this discussion? It has to revolve around efficiency. We have all heard the cliché that the point guard is the quarterback of a basketball team, right? Well, the best quarterbacks have high completion percentages, avoid taking sacks or wasting plays, and throw a lot more touchdowns than they do interceptions. The point guard position is similar, hence the cliché. You want a guy who is effective when he shoots, does not turn the ball over much, and gets the ball back for your team. It is important to remember that basketball is a game of possessions and there are a finite number in the course of 48 minutes. The more you can make out of those possessions (i.e. a made shot or assist versus a turnover) the better you and your team will be.

When it comes to effective shooting Nash, Williams and CP3 are better all round shooters (Field Goal, 3 Point, and Free Throw Percentages) than Rose, Rondo, and Westbrook, although Rose has closed the gap a little this year. Nash is one of the best shooters in the history of the NBA. He has shot 50% from the field, 40% from 3, and shot 90% from the line four times in his career. That is a feat that has been done a handful of times in NBA history and he has done it four times! This season, his shooting is down, but he deserves the credit of being fantastically efficient. Although Williams does score more, CP3 is more efficient than Williams in all three categories and has been for their respective careers. In fact, so far this year CP3 is the most efficient shooter out of the six of these players, including Nash.

Defensively, Nash takes a backseat to the rest of the competition. Again, Nash and defense are not friends. (And, no, it is not because he is small and white. For his career Nash has averaged a paltry 0.8 steals per game and has made a grand total of zero All Defensive teams. John Stockton averaged 2.2 steals per game for his career and made five All Defensive teams. So there.) For their careers, Paul is the only player of these six that averages more than two steals per game. This season Westbrook, Rose, and Rondo are all averaging over two steals per game, while CP3 is averaging a staggering 3.17 steals per game so far (0.8 steals more than Rondo who is in second). As a reminder, this is significant because of the finite number of possessions in a game. CP3 is getting his team more possessions than anyone else via steals. Finally, Rondo and Paul are the only two of these six players that have made an All Defensive team. They have both been selected twice.

(Side note: Even though point guards are not normally expected to get rebounds, it is another way to get your team extra possessions. This may be one of the reasons Magic and Jason Kidd experienced so much team success. Westbrook is the only player out of these six that has a higher career rebound per game average than CP3. Westbrook’s average is 4.9 rpg and CP3’s is 4.7 rpg.)

Lastly and maybe most importantly, point guards are supposed to get the ball to their teammates. All six of these players are good at distributing the ball (they’re all currently averaging over 8 apg), but because of the rule of efficiency, it is important to do this without turning the ball over a lot. If you are constantly giving the ball to the other team, that really hurts. For all the good Westbrook does, he turns the ball over more than four times per game. This means that he is averaging 2.11 assists or positive passes to his 1 turnover or bad pass. In this category, CP3 is the runaway winner. He leads all six players for both career and season assist-to-turnover ratio. In fact, he is the only player of these six that is averaging less than three turnovers per game this season.

All of these players are fantastic in their own right, but CP3 seems to be in another league. He shoots at a higher percentage, gets the ball through steals and rebounds, and doesn’t turn the ball over very often better than the rest of these players. He is wildly efficient. Currently, there are 15 of the 30 NBA teams that having a positive point differential. The average point differential for these 15 teams is 4.45 points. That means the winning teams in the NBA are winning their games by an average of two possessions. If you have a player that treats each possession like it may win or lose the game, you have a keeper and no point guard in the NBA does that better today than Chris Paul.

Trade Time!

The ESPN Trade Machine is one of man's greatest inventions since the dawn of time. It can not be overstated. You simply go online, and right from your desk (couch, bed, toilet) you can become the smartest GM in the world, and turn your team from notties to hotties in a matter of minutes.

However, in the real world, trades generally have to be beneficial to both teams (excluding any Gasol to the Lakers trades, or anything else done by Chris Wallace) and those trades are harder to come up with.

Lish and I came up with the following trades over the past couple days that could/should happen during the 2010-11 season... and would if we were GMs.

Scenario #1: The Magic send Gortat and Pietrus to Houston for Chuck Hayes and Shane Battier. The Rockets get a real center (with Yao still out, they need to address this or they will continue to stall) that can protect the rim and a valuable bench guy. They could start Brooks, Martin, Budinger/Pietrus (or go small with Lee), Scola, and Gortat. The Magic get a serviceable backup center and one of the best glue guys in the league. This would allow them to play small again (which seemed to be their best trick when they made the finals) with Lewis at the 4 and Battier at the 3. Plus they are already a good defensive team with Howard roaming the paint and throw in Battier and they would be even better. Battier could guard Wade, James, Pierce, or Allen better than Pietrus and Gortat is way better than any center option the Rockets have.

Scenario #2: This trade will only happen after the Grizzlies have realized they aren't going anywhere again (maybe Jan. or Feb.) and they are way over the cap for a team that is struggling financially. To dump some salary they send Mayo, Thabeet, and Tony Allen to the Mavs for Caron Butler and Stevenson. This provides cap relief for the Grizz and gives the Mavs and darn good, young guard in Mayo. Sure they have to eat Thabeet's contract, but Cuban doesn't mind overpaying for bigs. This gives the Mavs a 2-guard that isn't a ball stopper who has some legit range.


Scenario #3: The Lakers are in danger of overusing Odom and Gasol due to the continued absence of Andrew Bynum. To get some relief and spell the oft-injured big man throughout the rest of the season, Los Angeles needs to flip Sasha Vujacic for former-Laker, current-Knick Ronny Turiaf and Bill Walker. Walker is more or less a throw-in to balance the trade under league rules, as both teams are over the cap. Vujacic ends up in the D'Antoni system, which would seemingly utilize his particular skill set more than the Triangle. The emergence of Shannon Brown makes Vujacic fairly expendable. In return, the Lakers get Turiaf, who knows the system, to give Gasol a rest until Bynum comes back, and then continues to let Bynum ease back into the game before the stretch run in April. The major players in the deal, Turiaf and Vujacic, are both on expiring contracts, so the long-term ramifications are minimal.

Scenario #4: What can Miami do to improve? Will it just take time for Wade and James to fine-tune their games together? Will Bosh ever perform at a level that would justify his ridiculous salary? Well... here at hoopaholics, we're impatient, so we need to make this team better NOW. Per league rules, this trade can't occur until December 15th, but that is mere days away, so in a few weeks, this would work. I don't think Wade and James can ever perform at their highest levels playing with each other. The experiment isn't going to work in the long run. One of them has to go. If Miami deals one, it should be Wade, who is 3 years older and has a lower ceiling than LBJ. I think this proposed deal would actually benefit all 3 teams, creating some fun playoff matchups in the future to boot.

Miami sends DWade to Chicago
Chicago sends Noah and Korver to Miami, and Deng to Denver
Denver sends Chris Andersen to Chicago, and Al Harrington to Miami

Confusing? Yes. Will it work? It should, and could with trade exceptions, draft picks, and cash.

Lineups could look like this:
Miami: Chalmers, Miller, James, Bosh, and Noah
Chicago: Rose, Wade, Brewer, Boozer, and Andersen
Denver: Billups, JR Smith, Anthony, Deng, and Nene

Denver has a replacement when it loses Anthony, Chicago has the best backcourt in the league, and Miami has the best frontline in the league, as Noah covers up all of Bosh's deficiencies.

Now would these teams do this? No. Of course not... but it is fun to dream.

Did the Heat Ignore the History of Team USA? Are we?

When I was 10 my Mom gave me a gift that lasted until my folks sold the house I grew up in. She gave me a sticker set of the original Dream Team, which I immediately put on the sliding mirror doors of the closet in my bedroom. Incidentally, Larry Bird, Charles Barkley, Magic Johnson, Michael Jordan, and others shared some of my life’s most awkward moments. But it was worth it to constantly be reminded of such dominance on a basketball court. Yet as we all know, Team USA Basketball did not remain dominant forever.

I guess it is hard to tell exactly when the slide began, but Team USA seemed to hit its worst stretch in 2002. That team consisted of a strange collection of players: Paul Pierce, Elton Brand, Antonio Davis, Baron Davis, Michael Finley, Raef LaFrentz, Shawn Marion, Andre Miller, Reggie Miller, Jermaine O’Neal, Ben Wallace, and Jay Williams. Looking at that now is pretty funny, but that team actually had some nice pieces. Pierce and Reggie could certainly spread the floor. Wallace, A. Davis, and LaFrentz were energy guys that could rebound and protect the rim without needing the ball on offense. O’Neal and Brand could score with their back to the basket and hit mid-range jumpers, which is oh-so important in international basketball. However, we can all agree this team was made up of what was second tier NBA talent at the time and that resulted in a 6^th place finish in a tournament that took place in the USA. In short, after the first team made up of NBA players lost in international competition, USA basketball decided to recommit to getting “Grade A” talent from the NBA. And with the 2004 Olympics looming, they snagged some choice ballers.

The team from 2004 looked like a much better team. That roster included NBA MVPs Tim Duncan and Allen Iverson, flanked by Stephon Marbury, Lamar Odom, Richard Jefferson, Amare Stoudemire, Shawn Marion, Carlos Boozer, Emeka Okafor, Carmelo Anthony, Dwayne Wade, and LeBron James. Yet again, this team disappointed and finished with the bronze. It was after this team, the team nicknamed “The Nightmare Team,” that USA basketball had an epiphany. They realized they couldn’t just throw the best players together without any real time to figure each other out, but that they needed longer commitments from players so they could install a system that the players could learn together.

This strategy took form in 2006 when a group of NBA players (and a few choice college players on their way to the NBA) were invited to commit three years to Team USA. Unfortunately, this strategy didn’t immediately yield winning results, as the 2006 team finished 3^rd in the FIBA World Championship (The 2006 Roster: Shane Battier, Brad Miller, Kirk Hinrich, Joe Johnson, Antawn Jamison, Chris Paul, Dwight Howard, Elton Brand, Carmelo Anothony, Dwayne Wade, LeBron James, and Chris Bosh.) However, the Redeem Team won the gold in 2008 with players like Deron Williams, Jason Kidd, and Kobe Bryant finally healthy enough to join the team in competition and contribute. And most recently, as we know, the 2010 team brought home the Gold again (thanks KD!).

Now what does this history have to do with the current Miami Heat? The most obvious answer is that Dwayne, LeBron, and Bosh have lost before having played for the team with loads of talent. When Pat Riley was orchestrating this off-season haul, did he get so excited and miss that point? Frankly, I don’t think losing tournaments in international competition has much to do with the success in the NBA. Look at Tim Duncan. But maybe there was something about these guys being together without someone like Kobe to take over when they needed it most that made it hard for them to get over the hump.

But maybe the more salient point is this: teams take time to become teams. I find it hard to argue that the 2008 squad was built around a “team concept” when the guys that got the most playing time were Kobe, LeBron, Carmelo, Dwayne, CP3, Bosh, Dwight Howard, and Deron Williams. All of these guys are the best or second best at their positions in the world (except Bosh), meaning they did not play second banana on their respective NBA teams at the time. However, these guys had been practicing together for three years due to their commitment to play for Team USA. Even Kobe, who didn’t play until the Olympics, spent time at the Team USA summer camps learning the system and watching his teammates. This means they had time to become the best they could be. The 2006 3^rd place finish was a necessary step in figuring out how a squad comprised of superstars could play together as a team.

Because of all of this, I think we are judging the Heat way too soon. Is it fun to do? Sure. Will I do it? Absolutely (Spoiler Alert: just wait until our next post!). But we need to give this group of players time to find themselves as a team. It may take longer than we had hoped (i.e. Team USA 2006), but I think the players they have assembled are talented enough to figure it out. And when they do, they just may be world beaters (i.e. Team USA 2008).

Contraction

Contractions are the push to bring new life into the world... and contraction would bring new life to the NBA. (See what I did there?)

It's a messy situation that no one wants to talk about, and probably won't ever happen, because David Stern doesn't admit defeat... and contracting teams is admitting defeat. However, it would be for the overall good of the league if there were fewer players. The CBA is expiring at the end of the year and we're headed towards a lockout of some length. I don't claim to be an expert of the ins and outs of the CBA, the NBPA, or anything really. However, if the player's portion of the proverbial pie is decreased... players could keep similar salaries if there were... wait for it... FEWER PLAYERS! Genius, I know.

My plan would be for 2 teams to be contracted, 1 from each conference, in an effort to rid the Association of marginal players getting ridiculous contracts. Now, I'm not naive, I know that GMs will continue to give marginal players ridiculous contracts... but this way, there will be about 10-12 less of them each year.

The teams I think make the most sense are Memphis and Toronto, from the great Canadian expanision of 1995. However, I'm sure the league doesn't want to lose the tiny piece of the Canadian market they hold (because the Raptors are currently the most unwatchable team in the league), so Charlotte could also be substituted for Toronto... kind of a in-last, first-out situation. Also, Toronto AND Charlotte could go, and Memphis could move to the East... But, this is my plan... and Toronto and Memphis have to go.

If you look at Toronto's roster, you will find no one of real worth, and several guys (Barbosa, Stojakovic, Amir Johnson, Calderon) who are committing outright larceny with those salaries.

Memphis's squad does not have the same problem, however, Memphis draws few fans, has no real history, and is the easiest team in the West to bid adieu to. (The Kings and T'Wolves could be better choices, but the Maloofs grip on the Kings (along with their impending move to Vegas in a few years) and the slightly longer history and better fan presence in Minnesota keeps Memphis as the team to cut). Memphis has some quality pieces, in Gay, Mayo, Randolph, Conley (so-so), and Marc Gasol.

The simplest and most fair plan to disperse these players to the other teams is to simply treat them as unrestricted free agents at the end of the season. Would Gay get another $120 Million dollar contract? Probably not, but that's good for the NBA. Player salaries have gotten a little ridiculous. Amir Johnson is not worth $34 Million over 5 years. He's not. Almost every team in the NBA is paying one of their players a "max" contract... some even have more than one on the books. The thing is... there are probably only 12-15 max players in the league. That means an additional 15 guys are making that money just because everyone else is doing it... this same principle trickles down and too many players get too much money pledged to them.

So just think, would you rather see Toronto and Memphis continue to play "NBA Basketball" or would you like to see OJ Mayo on the Thunder, Andrea Bargnani in Houston, Rudy Gay running alongside John Wall, Marc Gasol taking his talents to South Beach, Zach Randolph eating up the post in Chicago, and Leandro Barbosa returning to his only fit... as a backup PG in D'Antoni's system?

Oh, and a bunch of scrubs can go to the D-League or Europe... or China to hangout with Starbury.

The Players You'd Least/Most Like to Meet in a Dark Alley

Everyone has heard the old saying, "I wouldn't want to meet him in a dark alley." Well, we decided to put our heads together and figure out the NBA players who we would least like to meet in a dark alley and most like to meet in a dark alley. No need to keep you waiting. We present the final cuts!

Least Like to Meet in a Dark Alley (In No Particular Order)

Delonte West: Possibly not human, definitely packing heat and it is probably hidden somewhere unexpected unless you are Antonio Banderas (i.e. a guitar case). If your mom is with you, your fright should go up tenfold.

Eddy Curry or Oliver Miller: A high probability that you would look like dinner.

DeJuan Blair: He is 6 ft. 7 in. and weighs 265 lbs. It is suggested you play dead on sight.

Brian Scalabrine: Cartman was right. You can't and shouldn't trust gingers.

Kevin Garnett: It only happens when his team is winning, but he gets a look in his eyes that is common among violent offenders.

David Stern: He is very powerful. It is likely that he can levitate.


Most Like to Meet in a Dark Alley (Again, In No Particular Order)

Shaq: If the Big Shamroq/Shaqtus/Aristotle cornered you in an alley it would most likely lead to something awesome, like being on a game show. This could result in winning money. Plus he was in Kazaam.

Kyle Korver: Because it may actually be Ashton Kutcher and you may be on Punk'd (is that show even on anymore?).

Any Spaniard, Argentine, or player from a Slavic country: If you made contact with him, he would likely flop and you could get away.

Muggsy Bogues: Because he dressed like an elf one Christmas ('tis almost the season) and it was phenomenal.

Baron Davis or James Harden: Because there is so much we don't understand about the beard. Is shampoo and conditioner used? If so, how often? Is it routinely combed? Is it greasy? Is it used to store an emergency supply of food? Can I touch it?

Who would you least/most like to run into in a dark alley?

Sixth Man, Schmixth Man

I was born in 1982, so I have an innate connection to anything that was founded during that glorious year. Unfortunately for the legacy of my birth year, the NBA 6th Man of the Year Award was started during the 1982-1983 season. Maybe some of you do not think this is unfortunate, but you’re wrong. It is because this award is stupid. Not convinced? Then let us go for a walk.

Although I cannot find it anywhere, I believe the league had good intentions with this award. I bet they thought it would be nice to give an award to a player who was not a star, but was able to make a difference in his team’s success. Kind of like your team mom bringing treats for the entire team at the end of a little league game. Professional athletes need orange slices and squeeze-its so they can feel appreciated too. (The not so altruistic theory: the league thought it was a tool coaches could use to coax good players into coming off the bench.) But if this was the motivation behind creating this award, the league screwed it up pretty quickly.

In the inaugural year of the award Bobby Jones won. Who is Bobby Jones? A four time NBA All-Star, that’s who. It seems strange to have an award seemingly designed to award a non-star to go to a multiple time All-Star. Want to know who won it the next two years? Seven time All-Star and Hall of Famer Kevin McHale. In fact, of the 25 guys who have won the award, 11 of them played in All-Star games. And then you had players like Toni Kukoc who never made an All-Star team, but once averaged over 18 ppg, 5 apg, and 7 rpg. What I am saying is, simply coming off the bench is a lame distinction to use in giving out an award. It makes is easy to determine who is eligible, but it doesn’t really mean anything.

This is not to say that non-stars are unimportant. We all know it is quite the opposite. And the 6th Man Award has gone to some good non-stars like Eddie Johnson and Dell Curry. In fact, between the ‘98-‘99 season and the ‘02-‘03 season, it looked like the award was serving its purpose. Guys like Darrell Armstrong, Aaron McKie, and Bobby Jackson won. But then the Mavericks had to come along and screw it up.

They had Antawn Jamison, a two time All-Star who has averaged more than 20 ppg five different seasons in his career, coming off the bench. Jamison was one of two Mavs to play all 82 games, but only started two of them. That year, Shawn Bradley and Eduardo Najera both started more games than Jamison did. Now I understand the strategy in having a guy like Jamison come off the bench, so you can’t actually blame Don Nelson and the Mavs for screwing up the award (I will find something else to blame on Mark Cuban later). A lot of teams have decided to go the same route in recent years and the results can be seen in the winners of the 6th Man Award with guys like Manu Ginobili and Jason Terry (Mavs again!) winning it. But doesn’t this make the award pretty meaningless again? Shouldn’t there be an adjustment so we can honor someone who is a non-star, but still makes his team better? And what should this award be called? I present to you the O.G. Award.

(What does O.G. mean? I’m glad you asked. I hate the term role player. Everyone on a team has a role. Even superstars have roles. No one player can do everything, so technically, everyone has a role. Some are bigger than others (no Trevor, I am not calling you fat), but everyone has a role. Also, I hate the term specialist. Just about everyone is a specialist too. Dwight Howard plays defense, Kevin Durant scores, and Rajon Rondo certainly isn’t on the court to shoot the ball. There are a few guys who seem to be able to do a little bit of everything, but isn’t that their specialty? And there are only a few guys ever who could do everything well and were not specialists (i.e. Oscar and LeBron). Because of my disgust towards these terms, I started thinking of other words we could use to describe someone like Shane Battier. It came down to “extras” or “other guys”. I went with “other guys” or O.G. cause it has street cred and I need to rep my ‘hood.)

The O.G. award has some guidelines and they are not as cut and dried as, “the player must come off the bench to be eligible for this inane award”. First, this player cannot be an All-Star. Not now, not ever. If you become an All-Star at any point in your career, you rescind your O.G. status. Frankly, we all have a pretty good idea of who has All-Star potential and who does not. This rule is to make sure that guys like Manu and Jet are not stealing the O.G. Award.

Second, you cannot be one of your team’s best three or four players. This means that someone like Lamar Odom (this year’s version, not the candy-eating, inconsistent dude from the last few years) would not be eligible, but Derek Fisher, Shannon Brown, or Matt Barnes would be. Yes this guideline means the team you are on matters. On a bad team, some “other guys” may be the third best player and that means that cannot win the award that year. However unfair, let’s not pretend the quality of your team doesn’t play into the allocation of other awards (i.e. MVP). We’re simply staying consistent in our biases.

Lastly, when you are on the bench you must cheer like Temple Grandin at a petting zoo. Who doesn’t love the guy who jumps off the bench when his team makes a big play or comes running out to do a flying chest bump with his teammate when the other team takes a timeout? This is a must-have quality of a true O.G.

So, who are some of the best O.Gs. ever? Robert Horry is probably the prototypical O.G. He never averaged more than 12 ppg, but he won 7 rings. Guys like Bruce Bowen, Steve Kerr, and Derek Fisher would be in the all-time discussion too. The last five or six years’ best O.Gs. are guys like Shane Battier, Tayshaun Prince, and James Posey. Players like Glen Davis, Mickael Pietrus, and Andy Varejao currently wear those shoes. Ultimately, I guess my hope is to make 2010 less unfortunate than 1982 in the world of NBA Awards. That way, my kid will have a birth year legacy that isn’t so useless.

Survey Says? Oden was the right pick

Take yourself back to June 2007. If you were about to watch the draft, you already knew the outcome of the first 2 picks… Greg Oden from The Ohio State University would go #1, followed by Kevin Durant from Texas. This was a given. Every GM in the league would’ve drafted that way unless they had Yao, Shaq, or Dwight Howard on their team… and even then they probably would’ve drafted Oden and then tried to trade his rights.

Fast-forward to today, November 19, 2010, and Greg Oden is out for the season…. Again. In just his 4^th year in the Association, Mr. Oden has missed nearly 3 of them (2 microfracture surgeries, one on each knee, and a fractured patella in his 3rd season.) His career total for games is sitting at 82. If you read the previous post by Mr. Harris, you will know that Kevin Durant’s career has been slightly more scintillating.

Why bring all of this up? Am I trying to rile up the TrailBlazer fans? Absolutely not. In fact, I’m lending support. Greg Oden was the correct pick in the 2007 Draft.

Obviously if you knew what would happen, you would never have drafted Oden over Durant, but if we all knew what would happen, we’d be billionaire stock brokers driving Maseratis and enjoying KC and the Sunshine Band on our solid gold iPods.

Greg Oden was THAT good in his prep/college career that the choice wasn’t even a choice for the Blazers. How many players have been Gatorade National Player of the Year twice during high school? Two, Mr. Oden and that fellow with the talents in the South Beach. In his one year at tOSU, Oden not only carried the Buckeyes to the National Title Game, he did so while effectively making other fairly good college players look like NBA 1^st Round talent, as was evidenced by Mike Conley Jr. going 4^th (FOURTH!) overall and Daequan Cook going 21^st overall. I’m not sure you’ve noticed, but these guys aren’t exactly 1^st Round players. They should be sending Greg ‘Thank-You’ cards every 1^st and 15^th for his largess. Throughout high school and college, Mr. Oden never lost a home game. Even in a losing effort in the National Title Game, Oden put up 25 points, grabbed 12 boards, and blocked 4 shots… going against Al Horford and Joakim Noah, who joined him as Top 10 picks in the draft that year, both living up to their billing (unlike Oden’s Buckeye teammates). So what if he looked ridiculous doing chin-ups every time he dunked the basketball? He was allowed to be silly, he absolutely dominated games on the defensive end and was a great teammate. So what if he looked 47 and walked with a slight limp? Dominant Centers are hard to find, and here was one NBA ready (talent-wise), unlike Darko or Bargnani, projects who each went Top 3 in recent drafts. The Blazers couldn’t say “Oden!” fast enough.

The TrailBlazers were the “it” team. The up-and-comers, the equivalent to today’s Thunder (is that irony? Yeah… I think that is irony). Young guns Brandon Roy and Lamarcus Aldridge just needed that big man in the middle, that defensive anchor, and they would be ready to challenges the Lakers, Mavs, and Spurs of the West. Oden fell into their laps (they had just a 5.3% chance of winning the 1^st Pick) It should’ve been a good story from there, but the injuries mounted quickly, and we are here today, with Oden on the sideline and the Blazers once again struggling with depth at the Center position.

In between the injuries, during those rare healthy games, flashes of his potential were seen, scoring in the 20s, pulling down double-digit rebounds, and altering shots and controlling the paint. An alternate history might have been much kinder to the Rose City, but it was not to be.

Too many look at it now and think that the Blazers made a bad choice…. but they didn’t.

Why Durant Won't Be the Face of the NBA

Kevin Durant is really good. In fact, he may turn out to be one of the best players to ever play the game of basketball. Lately, people have been talking about whether he can and will become the next face of the NBA despite playing in a small market. He may become wildly successful by NBA standards (MVPs and Rings, i.e. Duncan, Shaq, and Kobe), but he will not become the face of the NBA.

There have been plenty of uber-talented players that have not ascended to NBA-Face status. It seems to take more than sheer ability or exposure to get to that echelon. The NBA-Face player has to win, be made for the highlight reel, and possess a rap battle-esque, narcissistic swag. Kevin Durant is great, but I am not sure he hits all of those points.

For now, he hasn’t won anything. And I don’t mean that he has to win a ring (look at LBJ, his zero rings, and his time as NBA-Face), but he needs to lead his team to a playoff win and, ultimately, the Finals. I suspect that the Thunder will advance past the first round of the playoffs this year and will challenge for a spot in the finals in the next 5 years, but there are no guarantees. It seems like his team is headed in the right direction and, even after a slow start this year, are still traveling down that road. But I do think you have to worry about the McGrady corollary.

T-Mac was (I was sad to see him get hurt again last night) a freakishly talented dude. He had height, hops, and handles (the “3 H’s”?). In 2002-2003, when he was 23 years young, he averaged 32.1 ppg, shot 45.7% from the field, 38.6% from 3, averaged 5.5 apg, and 6.5 rpg. Last year, when he was 21, Durant averaged 30.1 ppg, shot 47.6% from the field (1.9% better than T-Mac), 36.5% from 3 (2.1% worse than T-Mac), averaged 2.8 apg (2.7 less than T-Mac), and 7.6 rpg (1.1 more than T-Mac). These years are eerily similar. I am not saying that Durant is T-Mac. I think it is safe to say he will be more successful (making it past the first round in the playoffs this year will seal that deal), but don’t you have to at least entertain the possibility that Durant is a great scorer and that he won’t necessarily be the type of player that propels his team to rings despite his crazy offensive skills? Admittedly, this is the weakest part of my argument, but I think it bears mentioning.

Also worth mentioning, I got to see Durant in person for the first time this week. I took my wife who is 8.5 months preggers with me. We currently live in Utah, so we didn’t get too many strange looks. Anyway, it was only one game in person, but add that to the other times I have watched him in the NBA and one thing has stood out: he is not made for ESPN, relatively speaking (by this I mean compared to other potential NBA-Facers). On Monday night, he scored an even 30 points on 17 fga. That is an effective game. I think most teams would take a performance like that on almost any night. (In fact, it is performances like this one that make the previous two paragraphs seem as pointless as anything a Kardashian has ever uttered. Especially, “I do.” Sorry Lamar). But in that game, the most exciting thing he did was miss a dunk. He made some really nice jump shots that nerds like me enjoy, but those don’t translate to the sexy highlights we see almost every game from guys like LBJ or Wade or the younger Kobe. And even those beautiful j’s are not as jaw-dropping as what the current Kobe does after 14 seasons in the NBA because Durant is so much taller and longer. He doesn’t have to do as much dancing to get off a wet jumper (i.e. Dirk). Basically, the result is a splash, but the move is not. He runs low on OSMs (Moments that make you sit up and think, “Oh S***!”). He will undoubtedly have some OSMs, but to be the NBA-Face don’t you have to be in the top 2 or 3 players people are youtubing for highlights? And with so much of his game geared towards getting himself to the free throw line, I just don’t see the same highlight reel potential for Durant as I do for the aforementioned guys.

Lastly, Durant is too nice. He is a humble, mild-mannered kid. This is great for team chemistry and for the NBA brass (aka White Guys), but it doesn’t fit the mold of the NBA-Face. The integration of the NBA and hip-hop culture has been covered (and covered and covered) and Durant’s personality seems to put him on the outside. He does not have that kind of swag. He may turn out to be deserving of a place in the “best player of his generation” argument, but that doesn’t mean he will be the NBA-Face. Just ask Tim Duncan after his 2 MVPs and 4 Rings. Actually, Durant’s personality and his on-court manner reminds me much more of Timmy’s than guys who actually became this decade’s NBA-Facers (Shaq, Kobe, LBJ, Wade).

To me, the fact that Durant plays in a small market is not the thing that will hold him back from becoming the NBA-Face. It has much more to do with these other factors. I would bet he will make the not winning point moot and he will do so pretty quickly. He is really good individually and he has a team with well-above average management to help him get his pawns. But the final two obstacles to becoming NBA-Face worthy are not easily fixable. In short, greatness does not equal NBA-Faceness.