Magic must seek help on the boards

Published by http://www.dailybasketball.com/ on 08/09/2008

link: http://www.dailybasketball.com/2008/09/09/magic-must-seek-help-on-the-boards.html

After the Orlando Magic were defeated by the Detroit Pistons in the second round of the playoffs, it was clear that Dwight Howard needed help on the frontline. So what did the Magic do in the offseason to address the problem? They drafted a shooting guard (Lee) and signed a point guard and small forward in free agency (Johnson/Pietrus). So once again it appears as though Howard will have to shoulder the bulk of the inside work for the Magic this coming season.

He did that and more this year with averages of 20.7 points, 14.2 rebounds and 2.2 blocks per game. Starting forwards Rashard Lewis and Hedo Turkoglu, despite both being 6-10, were unable to contribute much in the rebounding department with averages of 5.4 and 5.7 rebounds respectively. Both are more likely to be found at the 3-point line, as opposed to mixing it up in the paint.

Teaming Howard up with a pair of offense-minded shot-happy small forwards places huge responsibility on the young man’s shoulders. If they’re not careful, the extra workload could lead to injury or, at the very least, frustration. Not the best way to treat your young superstar and franchise player.

Currently, the Magic have Tony Battie, Adonal Foyle, James Augustine and Marcin Gortat as the only other big men on the roster. Together with Rashard Lewis masquerading as the starting power forward, and this will simply not get it done against quality playoff teams.

One of the main offseason priorities for Magic GM Otis Smith should have been to acquire a suitable power forward to play alongside Howard. That player would be someone who is willing to do the dirty work, rebound, defend and protect Howard’s back. Although he re-signed with San Antonio, Kurt Thomas would have fit the bill perfectly.

But the Magic’s best (and cheapest) opportunity to address this need came on draft day in the form of Memphis strongman Joey Dorsey. Whilst their first round selection of Courtney Lee was a good one, they had ample opportunities to trade back into the draft to select Dorsey. Between their pick at 22 and pick 33 when Dorsey was selected, there were 5 trades, meaning teams were more than willing to part with their draft pick. Had they been prepared to dangle the little-used J.J. Redick, or future draft picks, there is no doubt that Dorsey could be wearing an Orlando uniform today.

Fact is, they didn’t and they blew it. Dorsey would have been the perfect compliment to Howard. He’s a rebounding machine, a tough defender and can finish around the rim, sort of a young Ben Wallace. Bringing the rebound-focused Dorsey off the bench to play the power forward position, would have allowed Howard to concentrate on other areas of his game, such as individual defense and shot blocking.

If Dorsey wasn’t available, players such as D.J. White (29), Nathan Jawai (41), Richard Hendrix (49) and Darnell Jackson (52), could have filled a similar role and should have been given strong consideration.

If the Magic wish to compete against Eastern Conference powers Boston and Detroit, they must provide Howard with help on the boards. Teams such as Toronto (O’Neal) and Philly (Brand), who the Magic will be in direct competition with, have added muscle to their frontline in the offseason. If the Magic don’t address this problem during the season, expect to see another early playoff exit.

Will Duncan be worth $21.3m in 2012?

Published by http://www.dailybasketball.com/ on 03/09/2008

Link: http://www.dailybasketball.com/2008/09/03/will-duncan-be-worth-213m-in-2012.html

Tim Duncan is the greatest power forward the game has ever seen. He is a perennial Allstar and MVP candidate. He has won four championship rings and will be inducted into the Hall of Fame. But will Tim Duncan be worth $21.3 million in 2012? The short answer - no.

During last season Duncan signed an extension that will see him don the Spur’s silver and black until 2012. At the time the general consensus was he did the Spurs a favour, by electing not to sign for the maximum allowable amount. However, the fact remains that he will be owed $62 million from 2010 to 2012, with a whopping $21.3m owed in the final year.

If Duncan really was genuine in his desire to assist with rebuilding he should have negotiated an extension that would pay him max money over the next year or two, then gradually decrease, so by 2012 his salary would be $12-13 million. This would have allowed the Spurs to re-tool around their aging, but relatively inexpensive big man.

As great as he still is, there is no doubt that by 2012 the Spurs will regret the extension that allows a 36 year old Duncan to eat up a third of their entire salary. Case in point, Shaquille O’Neal. When Shaq was traded to the Miami Heat in 2004, a year later at the age of 33 he signed a massive five year extension totalling $100 million. Seemed like the smart thing to do at the time, but two years and one championship later, they tried desperately to rid themselves of his rapidly diminishing skills and cap-killing contract. Fortunately for them, Phoenix took the bait and is now stuck with him for two more years at $40 million. Whilst it is unlikely that Duncan will meet the same fate as Shaquille O’Neal, due to the respect afforded to him by the city of San Antonio (and rightfully so), the San Antonio Spurs will ultimately suffer as a result.

One would have to assume that Duncan’s play will gradually fall off over the coming years, and by 2012 there is little doubt he will be nearing the end. But such a decline is natural, especially when you consider the amount of basketball his body has endured over the last decade.

So why did the Spurs feel it was necessary to pay him top dollar over the next five years, when his game is sure to decline? My guess, it was more of a ‘thanks for the memories’ gift, rather than good basketball business.

Over the last decade the Spurs have prided themselves on making smart basketball decisions both on and off the floor, which has directly led to their success. However, through the trading of Luis Scola, the passing up of legitimate talent in the 2008 Draft (Arthur, Greene, Chalmers, Chris Douglas-Roberts), and the overly generous extension to Duncan’s contract, it seems as though complacency has finally crept in to the San Antonio front office. These decisions will haunt the Spurs over the coming years and will ultimately lead to their gradual decline.

The NBA's six most underpaid

Published by http://www.probasketballnews.com/ on 23/07/2008

Link: http://www.probasketballnews.com/todd_072308c.html

While overpaid players are a dime a dozen in the NBA, you have to look hard to find one that is ‘underpaid’. Not underpaid as in struggling to feed their family (hello Latrell Sprewell), but in relation to their talent, productivity, and in comparison to what players of similar ability are earning.

I have compiled a list of what I believe to be ‘the 6 most underpaid players in the NBA’. I have taken into consideration how much a player would fetch on the open market, if he were to become an unrestricted free agent today. I have excluded those players who are on rookie contracts, the parameters of which are set by the league.

1. Hedo Turkoglu, Orlando
07-08 Salary: $6.3m
Remaining: 2yr @ $14.2m

The first Turkish-born player in NBA history is finally fulfilling his potential. The 6-10 swingman with eight years of NBA experience, put up career highs in 2008 earning him the NBA’s Most Improved Player Award. He averaged 19.5 points, 5.7 rebounds and 5.0 assists during the season. In the 2008 playoffs he maintained his strong performance, with averages of 17.5 points, 6.4 rebounds and 5.5 assists. With his recently acquired reputation as a clutch performer, Turkoglu would likely command $8-10m per year as an unrestricted free agent.

2. Manu Ginobili, San Antonio
07-08 Salary: $9.1m
Remaining: 2yr @ $20.6m

Who would have thought that a guy picked 57th (second to last) in the 1999 NBA Draft would have such a significant impact on the game. Manu Ginobili is an elite player in the NBA and has the numbers/accolades to prove it. While nagging injuries hampered him in the 2008 playoffs, he still had a fantastic season winning the Sixth Man Award, whilst averaging 19.5 points, 4.8 rebounds and 4.5 assists. With his unorthodox play, rugged defense and knack for the clutch shot, Ginobili has been a central figure in the Spur’s championship runs. There is no doubt that if Manu Ginobili became available on the open market, teams would be falling over themselves to secure his services. It is possible that he could receive offers approaching a maximum contract.

3. Kendrick Perkins, Boston
07-08 Salary: $4.4m
Remaining: 3yr @ $12.7m

The fifth year pro has slowly become a very solid NBA player. Perkins was the starting center on a star-studded Celtics team, and he certainly held up his end of the bargain. He meshed seamlessly with frontcourt mate Kevin Garnett, providing toughness, steady defense and occasional scoring. His finest performances came against the Detroit Pistons in the Eastern Conference Finals, where he averaged a very respectable 9.3 points and 9.2 rebounds. As quality big men are hard to come by in today’s NBA, Perkins would receive a hefty pay raise as an unrestricted free agent, somewhere in the vicinity of $6-8m annually.

4. Grant Hill, Phoenix
07-08 Salary: $1.8m
Remaining: 1yr @ $1.9m

For almost $2m per year, Grant Hill is a bargain for the Phoenix Suns. His 07/08 averages were 13.1 points, 5.0 rebounds and 2.9 assists. You will not get better production on the dollar than this in the NBA. However, Mike D’Antoni’s short rotation during the regular season resulted in the notoriously injury-prone Hill logging an average of 31.7 minutes per game. Inevitably, Hill broke down towards the end of the season and his playoff performance suffered as a result. He only averaged 3.7 points and 5.3 rebounds in the first round loss to the San Antonio Spurs. Regardless, if used properly (in short bursts), Grant Hill can still impact an NBA game, and his true value would be around $3-5m per year.

5. John Salmons, Sacramento
07-08 Salary: $4.7m
Remaining: 3yr @ $16.4m

On July 24 2006, the Sacramento Kings signed John Salmons to a multi-year contract. Since that time Salmons has made tremendous strides for the Kings. He is a supremely talented offensive player who averaged 12.5 points, 4.4 rebounds and 2.6 assists during the 07/08 season. He played in 81 games and started 41 of those. When given the opportunity, Salmons showed an ability to consistently post 20 points or more per game. In fact, as a starter Salmons averaged 17.5 points, 5.4 rebounds and 3.5 assists. With the possible departure of Ron Artest, expect to see continued improvement from the low-key Salmons. Given his relatively young age (28) and recent production, it is possible that Salmons could command $7-9m annually.

6. Rafer Alston, Houston
07-08 Salary: $4.5m
Remaining: 2yr @ $10.1m

How quickly things change in the NBA. You have a well reported reputation as an overpaid malcontent, and then suddenly you’re being labelled as a solid veteran who is crucial to the team’s success. Such is life for Rafer Alston, the former New York street basketball legend. The 07/08 season was clearly Alston’s best, with averages of 13.1 points and 5.3 assists. Alston was a key contributor in the 22 game win streak and was superb in the playoffs, averaging 14.3 points and 4.5 assists. His value to the Rockets was clearly evident when they struggled mightily in his absence during games 1 and 2 of the first round match-up with Utah. With the current need for quality point guards, Alston would likely fetch $6-7m annually if he hit the open market.

The value of the NBA veteran

Published by http://www.probasketballnews.com/ on 23/07/2008
Link: http://www.probasketballnews.com/todd_072308b.html

The day the Boston Celtics signed P.J. Brown, was the day they became legitimate title contenders. That may sound like an overstatement, but for a team with championship aspirations, a strong veteran presence can mean the difference between winning and losing.

Up until that point the Celtics did not resemble a championship-caliber team. I recall a game back in February earlier this year, the Suns versus Celtics in Phoenix. After a tight first half the Celtics were steam-rolled in the second and despite the final margin of 8 points, they were never in it. Sure, team’s lose on the road and even suffer the odd heavy defeat, but this performance had a deeper meaning. I remember thinking at the time, unless they acquire veterans who possess deep playoff experience, their impressive 2007/08 campaign would ultimately fall short.

The Phoenix loss exposed two key weaknesses for Boston, a lack of depth and a lack of veteran leadership. Sure, the ‘Big 3’ of Garnett/Pierce/Allen had all reached conference finals individually, but more often than not their teams landed in the lottery. The Phoenix defeat indicated a desperate need for added muscle upfront, as they simply couldn’t handle the size and skill-set of Stoudemire and O’Neal. Apart from Garnett, the Boston front line consisted of the inexperienced Kendrick Perkins, Leon Powe, Glen ‘Big Baby’ Davis and Brian Scalabrine. Together with their lack of a true back-up point guard, it was obvious that the roster in its current form was not going to get it done in late May/June.

Fortunately for the Boston Celtics, GM Danny Ainge had a plan. Enter P.J. Brown, who despite a long lay-off was a sure bet to be the first big off the bench come playoff time. P.J. Brown is the ultimate professional who leads by example, but more specifically, it was his steady defence they coveted. His impressive performances in the playoffs proved his worth and then some.

You don’t have to look far to see the true value of a veteran come playoff time. For the Spurs in 2007 and the Heat in 2006, their championship victories would not have been possible if not for the timely contributions of their veterans. For the Spurs it was Bowen, Finley, Horry and Barry, and for the Heat it was Payton, Mourning and Posey. All made crucial plays during the championship games. Also, with Boston’s Finals opponent the Los Angeles Lakers, you cannot go past Derek Fisher as a major reason for their remarkable turnaround this year. His steady presence in the backcourt solidified their team and instantly took the pressure off Kobe. This allowed Bryant the freedom to play off the ball and, crucially, trust his team-mates.

The P.J. Brown addition to the Celtics was a stroke of genius by Danny Ainge, and quite possibly the final piece to their championship puzzle. The signing of Sam Cassell was also a shrewd move. Despite his inconsistent play, his championship experience gave added confidence to the team.

Make no mistake, while the superstars soak up all the attention, it is the presence of veteran players like P.J. Brown, Sam Cassell and James Posey (only 31 but plays like a seasoned vet), that solidifies a team and makes an NBA Championship reality rather than a dream.

Still room for improvement in NBA

Published by www.probasketballnews.com on 23/07/2008
Link: http://www.probasketballnews.com/todd_072308.html

No one loves NBA basketball more than I do, but there are certain aspects of the game I would characterize as ‘ugly’. They slow the game down, suck the excitement from a close contest, and otherwise detract from the unique spectacle that is an NBA game.

Let’s examine the culprits:

Timeouts
It has reached the point where I would rather tape a live game and watch it later, so as to avoid the endless timeout breaks. Each team has a total of 8 timeouts per contest - 6 x 100 second and 2 x 20 second timeouts. Do the math and that’s 16 potential stoppages in play, which doesn’t include TV timeouts, quarter time breaks and interruptions from fouls and substitutions. Also, it’s not uncommon for the final minutes of a tight game to be drawn out to 20-25 minutes. Whilst I do understand the commercial aspect of timeouts (revenue through adverts), it’s borderline ridiculous and the game is suffering as a result.

Too often a game is brought to a halt so that a coach can instruct his players exactly where to go and what to do. Wouldn’t it be more exciting if players could make their own decisions during a game, especially in the closing moments? Isn’t that what practice is for, to prepare players for different scenarios? Heck, a coach can call plays on every possession if he so desires, but why continually interrupt the game through timeouts?

There are numerous solutions to the problem. You could simply reduce the number of timeouts allowed per team, or, eliminate them altogether and replace with TV timeouts at specific stages each quarter (9 min/6 min/3 min). However, something tells me ($$$) this aspect of the game will never change. It’s a shame.

‘Penalty' free throws
Nothing is more boring in an NBA game than watching players shoot free throw after free throw. I would liken it to watching paint dry or grass grow. But we are regularly subjected to this facet of the game through the ‘penalty’ rule. Under this rule, each team is allowed to commit 4 fouls in each quarter with no penalty. On the 5th team foul committed that quarter, that team is in the penalty, and thus, free throws are awarded to the opposing team. If a team commits more than 1 foul in the last 2 minutes of a quarter, this also results in a ‘penalty situation’.

In combination with timeouts, penalty free throws can stifle a game of basketball and reduce it to a crawl. Solutions - raise the limit by 2 fouls (from 4 to 6), or award a player 1 free throw instead of 2. Either way, alternative solutions must be sought to speed up the game.

Flopping
The flopping issue has generated significant discussion recently, but it is something the league must address. ‘Flopping’ is the act of feigning physical contact when little or no contact is made. In essence it is cheating. Whilst this behaviour is accepted in some sports, it shouldn’t stand in the NBA. The best floppers in the game today are arguably Manu Ginobili (Argentina) and Anderson Varejao (Brazil). Not surprising, when you consider that South Americans do have a reputation for ‘play acting’ on the soccer field. But I am not saying that only non-Americans flop, many players do it and it seems to be becoming more prevalent.

A policy of ‘naming and shaming’ the offender would go a long way towards stamping out the behaviour. Its one thing to be accused of flopping from time to time, but to be publicly outed and fined would make many second guess the action. I propose that a panel of officials review each game, and if there is a clear case of flopping (unanimous agreement), the player would receive a small fine and the details made public. If a player is caught 3 times they would receive an immediate suspension – 2 games perhaps. Although it is extremely difficult for a ref to make this judgement during a game (it is called in soccer), they would be given the power to penalise a player who 'flops', by calling a technical foul. The after-match panel would review the game and fine that player if they determine the call to be correct. If the player was deemed not to have flopped, a public retraction would be made.

This seems like a radical step to take, but such action is necessary in order to eliminate this unsportsmanlike behaviour from the game.

Whining
Watching grown men continually harass a referee by whining and complaining is not an attractive part of the game. In fact, it’s annoying. I know it’s an emotional game and tempers flare, but there is no excuse for this childish behaviour. There was an attempt 2 years ago to tighten up the rules, but as far as I can see it hasn’t worked, with both players and coaches returning to bad habits.

I am not aware of any other sport that allows this level of complaining at a referee to occur, so why is it tolerated in basketball? The rules should allow for a player/coach to express an immediate emotional reaction to a call/play, but it's the continued badgering of a referee well after the play has concluded, that must have a 'zero tolerance’ policy.

I think refs earn every penny they get, and maybe even deserve a pay rise. How would you like to be the object of continual abuse whilst trying to perform your day job?

Quarter-time coach interviews
Please, do us all a favor and can this idea! It is obvious to everyone that the coach doesn’t want to be there. They typically provide minimal answers to the questions posed, and it adds no new insight to the game that hasn’t already been covered by the commentators. Instead, show the quarter time huddle and the coach’s address to the team.

Yes, coaches do get paid a lot of money so we shouldn’t feel bad about wanting our pound of flesh, but why persist with it when there is no entertainment value?

Hack-a-Shaq
While on some level I don’t mind seeing woefully bad free throw shooters exposed, the hack-a-shaq strategy does give the impression of bad sportsmanship at play. The hack-a-shaq strategy is the repeated intentional fouling of an individual every time his team takes possession of the ball, in order to force that player to shoot free throws.

Most recently the strategy was used against Shaq during the Spurs/Suns series in the first round of this year’s playoffs. Whilst successful, it did leave a very bad taste in the mouth at the conclusion of the already spiteful series.

Fact is the rules allow it, and in today’s NBA where coaches are under a tremendous amount of pressure to succeed, they will do whatever is necessary to get the job done. Therefore, the rules must be changed. The solution is simple. A technical foul should be awarded for any such transgression (fouling off the ball), with the team receiving free throws and possession of the ball. Problem solved.

The NBA is such a great game, but with a few changes, it could be even better.

Without big men, what's the point?

Published by www.probasketballnews.com on 09/07/2008
Link: http://www.probasketballnews.com/todd_070908.html

Quick. Name a team that has won an NBA championship in the last 15 years with a dominant point guard as its centerpiece?

Having trouble? That’s because there are none.

So why are we consistently hearing now that the NBA is a point guard’s league, when history tells us otherwise?

The theory seems to have arisen because of the stellar play of third-year point guards Chris Paul and Deron Williams, who have not only had tremendous individual success, but team success as well.

But can a team led by a dominant point guard win the ultimate prize? Let’s examine recent history.

Since 1999, eight of the 10 NBA championships have involved either Shaquille O’Neal or Tim Duncan, two of the greatest post players to ever play the game. The two exceptions are the 2008 Boston Celtics and the 2004 Detroit Pistons. Both teams relied on a combination of physical defense and balanced offense to beat the odds and claim a title.

OK, let’s go back even further. During the 1990’s, the Michael Jordan-led Chicago Bulls won six NBA championships (1991-93 and 1996-98), the Houston Rockets won two (1994-95) and the Detroit Pistons one (1990).

The Bulls championship teams of the 90's did not have a dominant post player or point guard, but let’s take a look at their strategy. Phil Jackson’s Triangle offense creates regular post-up opportunities for versatile wing players, and with Jordan and Scottie Pippen filling that role, they were unbeatable.

On the other hand, the Rockets' championships were due in large part to another
Hall of Fame post player, Hakeem Olajuwon (two-time Finals MVP).

So we have to go back almost 20 years to 1990 to find a Hall of Fame point guard in Isiah Thomas who led the Pistons to an NBA championship (and gained a Finals MVP).

As for San Antonio point guard Tony Parker ... well, he is a tremendous player and top three point guard in the league. But let’s face it, he’s more of a complementary player who feeds off the brilliance of Tim Duncan. Yes, Parker won the Finals MVP in 2007, but generally speaking, he’s not consistently dominant like Paul or Williams. It's true that Parker is only 26-years old, and he may yet develop that type of consistency, particularly as Duncan’s play begins to decline. But he hasn't yet.

The 2008 Finals featured two teams with role-playing point guards. The Celtics started second-year point man Rajon Rondo, who is extremely talented but still very much a work in progress. The Los Angeles Lakers went with trusty veteran Derek Fisher in the backcourt, but in reality he’s more of a combo guard than a pure point guard. Thus, both teams reached the grand stage without being heavily reliant upon dominant point guard play.

Rather, offensively speaking, Boston relied on the inside-outside versatility of Kevin Garnett and Paul Pierce, while the Lakers fed off Kobe Bryant’s dominance. Garnett is capable of being a dominant post scorer in stretches, but because of the limited amount of time he plays in the post he cannot be labelled an elite post player.

Steve Nash won the league MVP in both 2005 and 2006, yet was still unable to lead a talented Phoenix Suns team to the Finals. When it’s all said and done, Nash will be remembered as one of the all-time great point guards, but his inability to win a title will tarnish his legacy, as with other Hall of Fame players who come up short (Charles Barkley, Karl Malone, Patrick Ewing, etc.). With the current situation in Phoenix, one has to wonder how long Nash's championship window will remain open.

In regard to the most recent NBA draft, as expected the Bulls selected Memphis point guard Derrick Rose with the first pick. There is no doubt that the Bulls will improve with Rose running the point, but until they acquire a reliable low-post scorer they will not contend for a championship. There is a reason why talented teams like the Bulls and New Jersey Nets drastically fell away this past season, mostly due to their complete lack of low-post scoring and total reliance on jump shooters.

It’s actually quite simple if you think about it. A low-post scorer by definition sets up close to the basket, thus making it an easier shot. Jump shooters, on the other hand, attempt shots that are further away from the basket, making it more difficult and less reliable.

Call me old-fashioned, but if given the choice of drafting a Dwight Howard or Greg Oden, or Chris Paul or Deron Williams, I would choose big over small every time.

I have no doubt that Paul and Williams are headed for superstardom -- but until proven otherwise, I will hold onto the belief that together with solid defense, an NBA championship is won through great post play or legendary brilliance.

Thoughts on the Draft

Published by http://www.dailybasketball.com/ on 28/06/2008
Link: http://www.dailybasketball.com/2008/06/28/thoughts-on-the-draft.html

San Antonio Spurs
What do the Spurs have against promising young power forwards? First, they trade away Luis Scola, and then pass on Kansas forward Darrell Arthur in the draft. It’s not as if they are stacked at power forward. In fact, I believe it’s their weakest position, with Matt Bonner, Fabricio Oberto and Ian Mahinmi the only guarantees to return next season. A guy with a diverse skill-set like Arthur would have been perfect to develop alongside Tim Duncan. Let’s remember, Arthur had 20 points and 10 rebounds in the victory over Memphis that gave Kansas the NCAA title. Even with concerns over a kidney issue he was worth the risk. Instead, they give a valuable first round contract that is guaranteed to IUPUI guard George Hill. Not only was he absent from most mock drafts, he was not even listed in the 224 page NBA Draft Guide. At best, he will be Tony Parker’s back-up. A puzzling choice by the Spurs.

Indiana Pacers
Instead of being thrilled to grab the steal of the draft at No. 11 (Bayless), the Pacers immediately sent him packing to Portland in exchange for role players. Brandon Rush will be a solid pro but will back-up Danny Granger and Mike Dunleavy, whilst Jack will sub for T.J. Ford. Jerryd Bayless was tipped to go fourth to the Sonics because he is a potential 20ppg scorer and Allstar. It seems as though the Pacers are content with mediocrity. Either that, or Larry Bird has no idea what he is doing.

Boston Celtics
With the 30th pick the Celtics should have grabbed crafty Memphis swingman Chris Douglas-Roberts. CDR would have immediately brought extra scoring off the bench, and may have been an eventual replacement for the aging Ray Allen. Whilst I do approve of the Celtics taking a risk and trading for Bill Walker in the second round, selecting CDR at No. 30 would have been a steal for the champs.

Portland Trail Blazers
You’ve got to hand it to the Blazers, they sure know how to manipulate the draft. To come away with Jerryd Bayless and Nicolas Batum when their roster is already stacked with young stars, is very impressive. GMs around the league could learn a great deal from watching Portland’s Kevin Pritchard operate on draft day (are you listening Larry Bird?).

* See link above for comments

Win/Win trades that could actually work

Published by http://www.dailybasketball.com/ on 24/06/2008

Link: http://www.dailybasketball.com/2008/06/24/winwin-trades-that-could-actually-work.html

Most trades in the NBA produce a winner and a loser. But it doesn’t always have to be that way. I propose 4 blockbuster trades that could be beneficial for both teams.

I haven’t just plucked these names out of the air. These trades actually do work under current salary cap restrictions.

BULLS get: Lamar Odom
LAKERS get: Ben Gordon (assuming he signs 1 year

qualifying offer), Andres Nocioni

BULLS get: Elton Brand, Brevin Knight
CLIPPERS get: Kirk Hinrich, Drew Gooden, Tyrus Thomas

CHI: These blockbuster trades would give the Chicago Bulls a team that is capable of contending in the East next year. The benefits are obvious. Young, quick, long, athletic, together with the solid low post force of Brand. Put this all together and you have a situation that is tailor made for Derrick Rose’s hometown Chicago debut.
Projected starting 5 (PS5): Rose, Deng, Odom, Brand, Noah

LAL: This is the big one. For me, Lamar Odom just doesn’t have it. Toughness, grit, performing under pressure, he always seems to come up short. Gordon is a flat-out scorer (18.6 ppg) who could thrive in the triangle alongside Kobe. Nocioni’s three point shooting at the small forward position would provide a more balanced line-up next to Gasol and Bynum, but crucially, his toughness would be huge for the Lakers. Therefore, this trade would allow the Lakers to fill the two holes that were exposed in the 2008 NBA Finals; toughness and a reliable second scoring option.
PS5: Gordon/Fisher, Bryant, Nocioni, Gasol, Bynum

LAC: In the strong Western Conference the Los Angeles Clippers must rebuild around exciting 2008 rookie Al Thornton. This trade would be a good start. Gooden’s expiring contract will give financial flexibility going forward, and Hinrich and Thomas will add to their young and promising nucleus.
PS5: Hinrich, Eric Gordon (draft?), Thornton, Gooden/Thomas, Kaman

BLAZERS get: Manu Ginobili, Matt Bonner, Ian Mahinmi
SPURS get: 2008 1st Round Pick (no. 13), Travis Outlaw, Jarrett Jack, Martell Webster,

Channing Frye

POR: For the Portland Trail Blazers this trade would catapult them into the top tier of the Western Conference as an immediate contender. Enough said.
PS5: Blake, Roy, Ginobili, Aldridge, Oden

SAS: Firstly, I want to stress the point that this trade would not have been necessary if the Spurs hadn’t traded away the rights to Luis Scola. But as they did, they need to get younger and quickly. Therefore, the obvious choice for trade is Ginobili because his scoring can be replaced. This trade would inject much needed youth and athleticism into the line-up, as well as more scoring options. In a year or two, the Spurs should be back in contention with a more balanced attack.
PS5: Parker, Webster, Outlaw/Bowen, Oberto/Frye, Duncan

CAVS get: Vince Carter, Trenton Hassell
NETS get: 2008 1st Round Pick (no. 19), 2009 1st Round Pick, Anderson Varejao, Eric

Snow, Damon Jones

CLE: The King finally gets a legitimate running mate in Carter. His scoring is exactly what the Cavaliers need.
PS5: West, Carter, James, Wallace, Ilgauskas

NJN: Lets face it, Vince Carter did not deserve a 4 year $61.8 million extension last summer after choking in the 2007 playoffs. The New Jersey Nets are going nowhere with him as their franchise player, so they must get value for him now before his skills diminish further. This trade would greatly assist the Net’s rebuilding effort by clearing cap room (Snow and Jones’s expiring contacts) and adding young pieces in Varejao and a pair of first rounders in 2008 and 2009 (ex. Brandon Rush or Chris Douglas-Roberts?). It would also allow them to take a high risk/high reward player with their No. 10 selection, perhaps Anthony Randolph, DeAndre Jordan or Danilo Gallinari.
PS5: Harris, CDR (draft?), Jefferson, Varejao, Krstic/Boone

* See link above for comments

Pacers must overhaul roster

* Not published

* This article was written in May 2008

Some teams take the long route by rebuilding with youth (ex. MIN/SEA), others look to add a few new pieces to reach the playoffs (ex. PORT/GS) and some are searching for that one last player to complete their championship puzzle (ex. UTAH/CLEV). And then there is the Indiana Pacers, seemingly doing neither.

The Pacers do not have a franchise calibre player to build around. They don’t have a collection of young players that would offer hope for the future. Nor do they have a group of veterans that would make any significant difference between winning and losing. The Pacers are a team made up of players that are either a) grossly overpaid in relation to their talent, or b) not talented enough to get the job done. The only exception to this is Danny Granger.

Danny Granger is a terrific young player that is gradually becoming a star in this league. However, his style of play is more suited to that of a complimentary role on a successful team. He would therefore be most effective when used as a team’s third option, á la Lamar Odom with the Lakers.

Besides Granger, the core of the team consists of Jermaine O’Neal (2 years at $44m), Mike Dunleavy (3 years at $29m), Troy Murphy (3 years at $33m), Jamaal Tinsley (3 years at $21m) and Marquis Daniels (2 years at $14m). Mike Dunleavy is probably the most useful player of the bunch, but his salary indicates that he should be a viable second or third option. However, his talent would be best utilized as a fourth or fifth option. Both O’Neal’s and Murphy’s salary are atrocious as they don’t produce nearly enough, O’Neil because of injury and Murphy due to a lack of talent.

So what should they do? Apart from Granger, I believe they should explore trade opportunities for the entire team. History has told us that no one is untradable in the NBA (ex. Larry Hughes, Ben Wallace, Shaq), even so, unloading these players and their contracts won’t be easy. The reality is, these players will not fetch young talent in return, but may bring back expiring contracts or second round draft picks. If I were sitting in Larry Bird’s chair I would be content with this strategy as a means of rebuilding. The sooner they realise they must take one giant step back in order to move forward, the better. One thing’s certain, the status quo of consistent mediocrity is unacceptable.

Their pick in this year’s draft is crucial (No. 11). They cannot afford to select another player who fails to produce and must not risk the pick on a project type player (ex. DeAndre Jordan, Kosta Koufos or Donte Greene). Rather, they should be looking at players who can contribute immediately, or at the very least in two or three year’s time. DJ Augustin, Darrell Arthur, Brandon Rush or Chris Douglas-Roberts would fit the bill and team with Danny Granger to form a solid foundation for the future.

If they are successful in unloading the majority of their bad contracts, make no mistake about it, the next two to three years will be extremely tough and require tremendous patience. But such a process is necessary if they wish to rebuild this team. Who knows, a couple of high draft picks in 2009 and 2010 could put them back on track with a collection of young, talented players who possess the right attitude to succeed, and in the process win back the Indiana faithful (ex. Portland).

One thing is sure, they cannot go on blaming the Ron Artest incident as a reason for their woes, but instead must immediately get on with the job of rebuilding this once proud franchise. Larry Bird, it’s time to earn your pay check.

Stephen A. Smith - Heart Over Head?

Published by http://www.dailybasketball.com/ on 20/06/2008
Link: http://www.dailybasketball.com/2008/06/20/stephen-a-smith-heart-over-head.html

ESPN’s resident NBA analyst Stephen A. Smith could never be accused of ‘sitting on the fence’. He is opinionated, passionate and forthright when discussing issues that relate to the NBA. But just how accurate are his predications?

During his segments on ESPN’s Sportcenter, NBA Shootaround and the halftime show, Stephen A. often berates other panelists for having an opinion different to his own. He tends to talk in a manner that suggests his opinion is fact and the only one that counts. But during these rants, I can’t help but cast my mind back to three of his predictions, that were not only cringe-worthy at the time, but downright embarrassing today.

Prediction 1
At the 2006 NBA Draft, Stephen A. heavily criticized (ridiculed almost) Portland Trailblazers GM Kevin Pritchard for making a series of draft day trades that netted them LaMarcus Aldridge and Brandon Roy. Today, these two guys are arguably the best players to emerge from the entire 2006 draft (along with Rudy Gay), and would both be in the top 10 most promising young players in the league. They form the foundation of a Blazers team (along with Greg Oden) that will, barring major injury, contend for a title in the coming years.

Prediction 2
At the 2007 NBA Draft, upon hearing that the New York Knicks traded for Zach Randolph, Stephen A. went on to proclaim that the Knicks would drastically improve and be a contender in the East. At the time I thought, “what planet is this guy living on?” Zach Randolph has never helped a team in the win column, is a poor defender and has had numerous off-the-court and on-the-court issues. Not to mention that they already had a guy on their roster who was eerily similar (Eddy Curry). Yet Stephen A. proclaimed him to be the savior of the Knicks, even though his price tag was $60 million over four years, further constricting them financially. In a long line of bad trades, this was another terrible trade for the Knicks. I don’t need to remind anyone how this situation turned out.

Prediction 3
Prior to the 2007/08 season, when asked who he thought were NBA title contenders, Stephen A. confidently predicted the Denver Nuggets. On what basis, I am still not sure. The Nuggets were beaten easily by the Spurs in the first round of the 2007 Playoffs (4-1). The only additions to their roster were Chucky Atkins and an injury plagued Kenyon Martin, hardly enough to get them by the elite teams in the West. I found it beyond belief that a person with Stephen A’s basketball background could predict that a team such as Nuggets, who are totally deficient defensively, could win the NBA championship, especially when it has never been done before. In my opinion, he grossly overestimated Carmelo Anthony’s ability to do what was necessary to lead his team to victory.

Look, I don’t expect media analysts to be 100% accurate with their predictions and in fact, I do believe that most of what Stephen A says is bang on. However, being way off the mark with the above predictions does make me question his credibility at times.

Don’t get me wrong, I don’t dislike the guy, in fact I love his passion for the game of basketball. However, in this instance with the New York Knicks and Denver Nuggets, I believe it demonstrates that on occasion Stephen A’s heart rules Stephen A’s head.

* See link above for comments