I have previously opined upon Andrew Wiggins and determined that he is an "inefficient scorer" type of player who is deficient in rebounding, assists and defense. So, he is basically a bad Dale Ellis or a bad 32 year old Carmelo Anthony. Glen Rice's name came up.
For some reason, there is suddenly a very spirited debate on Twitter that consists of two primary groups:
-- Andrew Wiggins is a complete bust
-- Andrew Wiggins is a future superstar and the second coming of Kobe Bryant.
If you do not agree with either camp, you are immediately lumped into the other camp. You say, "Hey, look, Wiggy is no Kobe...never will be..." Reply, OH SURE! YOU CLAIM HE IS A BUST! 20 points a game scorer, HORRIBLE BUST!
You say, "I haven't completely given up on Wiggy as a player. He is young...." Reply, OH SURE!! CAN WE WAIVE THE WAITING PERIOD AND ELECT HIM TO THE HALL OF FAME TODAY!?!? NOT QUICK ENOUGH FOR YOU?!?
The primary problem with evaluating Andrew Wiggins is he just turned 22 and he is really streaky, so he has some games where he looks great and some games where as a Wolves fan if you see one more horrid "possession of Wiggy" you'd like to take a gun and shoot yourself.
His game, overall, is remarkably inefficient. His defense, rebounding and assist stats are terrible, and he has never been on a winning team. He has poor WS, WS/48 and VORP stats. On the other hand, he has impressive scoring stats and he is an OK shooter who gets to the line a fair amount.
So, the issue really comes down to -- is he "good" and if so, how "good"? Well, if you look for guys who are high Usage (25.9% or higher) and low WS/48 players (.100 or lower) and not super great defenders (104 or higher DRtg), you get the following list of guys who have played at least 8,500 minutes in the NBA:
Jerry Stackhouse
Pete Maravich
Glenn Robinson
Antoine Walker
Ray Williams
Ben Gordon
(The Less Good) Cliff Robinson
JR Rider
Darrell Griffith
Super John Williamson
Michael Beasley
"San" Quintin Dailey and
Andrew Wiggins
Now, Wiggy is at the bottom of the list because he has the fewest WS of anyone on the list. It should be noted, however, that someone like Pete Maravich has roughly double the WS/48 that Wiggy has. So Wiggy ain't Pete Maravich yet, or, for that matter, Jerry Stackhouse.
But the real question to be asked here is -- are these guys "good"? Are they, or were they, "good" NBA players. It all depends upon what you want, correct? Every guy on the list was a pretty effective scorer. There are some all-star appearances on the list. Maravich is a Hall of Famer and ESPN has him as a top 100 NBA player. So what you really need to evaluate is 1) whether you consider these guys to be "good" and 2) whether if Wiggins ends his career equal to these guys, would you be happy with that?
I'd say that if Wiggy ended up as good as Stack or Maravich or Big Dog or Antoine Walker or Ray Williams that most people would consider that as "good" and be fairly happy.
Ben Gordon and Darrell Griffith - probably not as happy
Robinson and Super John -- unhappy
Rider, Beasley, Dailey -- very unhappy.
But let's put to bed the fiction that there is any realistic chance that Wiggy will ever be Kobe or Durant. When Kobe was 21 he had a PER of 22 and accounted for almost 11 Win Shares, got 6 rebounds, 5 assists and 2.5 steals + blocks a game. His Defensive Rating was 98 (Wiggy is 114).
Durant at age 21 has a 26 PER and put up 16 WS. He would have won the MVP had LeBron not been having an insanely great season (18.5 WS, .299 WS/48).
So, is Andrew Wiggins an absolute Kwame-Brown-esque bust? No. Has he demonstrated ANYTHING close to being or becoming a Kobe or a Durant (two of my top 25 players of all-time)? Certainly not. Will Wiggy ever approach these players' career. I say no, and I say no confidently. That will never happen. Could he become a Glen Rice or a Glenn Robinson or maybe a poor man's Carmelo Anthony or DeMar DeRozan? Certainly. So you need to ask yourself - is that "good"? Would you consider Wiggy to be "good" if he reached that level of play?
I cannot make that judgment for you -- but that is where the truth lies; Wiggy could be kinda disappointing, or he could be a couple time all-star. It is up to him. Whether you consider that "good" or not, is an entirely subjective call.
And your response to this item should start with "OH SURE!"
Friday, March 31, 2017
Tuesday, March 21, 2017
Aaron Hernandez Killed a Guy For a Spilled Drink
https://www.yahoo.com/sports/news/witness-ex-nfl-star-shot-men-spilled-drink-180005313--nfl.html
Was concerned he was considered as "soft."
Yikes.
Well, let this be a life lesson to you young men out there. If you are in a "club" where huge men congregate and where you kind of get the feeling that the law does not apply, be extremely careful with what occurs.
Now, I have never once entered a "gentlemen's club" or "strip bar" or "strip joint," but here is what I have learned from independent third-party accounts: 1) many of the gentlemen in the establishment are not actually "gentlemen" in the common understanding of the word; 2) they are, instead, often people with nothing to lose; 3) they are there to drink a lot and establish their general overall dominance over someone; 4) they'd really like to kick someone's ass if at all possible.
Based upon these reports, I would suggest that if someone comes up to you at 11PM or later in such an establishment and suggest that you "get the fuck out of here" that you do not hesitate to leave forthwith. You do not inquire as to why. You do not engage the person in conversation. You leave.
There are certain places in the world (southern Waffle House after midnight for example) where you are dealing with people who generally have very, very little to lose. They are angry, and you happen to be in the way. Get out of the way. When this gentleman spilled a drink on the enormous Aaron Hernandez, he should have immediately apologized, offered to do whatever it took to get in Hernandez's good graces, and, failing that, have left ASAP.
Was concerned he was considered as "soft."
Yikes.
Well, let this be a life lesson to you young men out there. If you are in a "club" where huge men congregate and where you kind of get the feeling that the law does not apply, be extremely careful with what occurs.
Now, I have never once entered a "gentlemen's club" or "strip bar" or "strip joint," but here is what I have learned from independent third-party accounts: 1) many of the gentlemen in the establishment are not actually "gentlemen" in the common understanding of the word; 2) they are, instead, often people with nothing to lose; 3) they are there to drink a lot and establish their general overall dominance over someone; 4) they'd really like to kick someone's ass if at all possible.
Based upon these reports, I would suggest that if someone comes up to you at 11PM or later in such an establishment and suggest that you "get the fuck out of here" that you do not hesitate to leave forthwith. You do not inquire as to why. You do not engage the person in conversation. You leave.
There are certain places in the world (southern Waffle House after midnight for example) where you are dealing with people who generally have very, very little to lose. They are angry, and you happen to be in the way. Get out of the way. When this gentleman spilled a drink on the enormous Aaron Hernandez, he should have immediately apologized, offered to do whatever it took to get in Hernandez's good graces, and, failing that, have left ASAP.
Wednesday, March 15, 2017
Russell Westbrook, Chandler Parsons and KAT Call the NBA Offices
https://theringer.com/ringer-video-nba-referee-hotline-karl-anthony-towns-russell-westbrook-chandler-parsons-1c583e45570d#.l1b7ei3c1
Of the 3, KAT is best, then Parsons close behind. Russ by far the worst.
Of the 3, KAT is best, then Parsons close behind. Russ by far the worst.
Russell Westbrook's Usage Rate Explosion
Russell Westbrook has always been a guy who had a high "Usage Rate". Usage Rate, broadly defined, is the % of your team's plays that you are involved in while you are on the floor. Even more broadly stated, it measures how much of a ball hog you are. Because if you are not touching the ball, you are not "using" the possession.
The guys who tend to have the ball all of the time and dribble around wildly and either pass for an assist or shoot are the guys with big Usage.
So, going onto the 2016-17 season, the top 6 all-time ball hogs were:
6. Carmelo
5. LeBron
4. Allen Iverson
3. Kobe
2. Dwyane Wade
1. Michael Jordan
Obviously, it helps to be really talented to be on this list, because no matter how much you WANT to possess the ball, if you suck, your coach will eventually not allow you to possess the ball.
This is, of course, why the pairing of Wade and LeBron was such an awful idea. You generally don't want to pair two super high usage players. In Year 1 of that experiment, LeBron reduced his Usage 2 points in the regular season and 4+ points in the playoffs, deferring to Wade. The LeBron/Wade experiment only worked after Wade reduced his Usage, LeBron jacked his back up, and LeBron became a far more efficient player.
Anyway, moving on. The Holy Grail of seasonal Usage was accomplished by Kobe in 2005-06. In 2004-05 the Lakers had missed the playoffs with Kobe at his typically high 31.7 Usage. Kobe went bazonkers (technical term) in 2005-06 and raised his Usage by 7% to an NBA record 38.7%.
Kobe's ball hogging during the 2005-06 season was so legendary that, after he was criticized for shooting too much in Game 6 of the First Round playoff series against the Suns, Kobe went into full tank mode and REFUSED to shoot in the second half of Game 7, thus insuring a Lakers loss. One of the most vile and childish acts ever seen from an NBA all-star: http://www.travelgolf.com/blogs/chris.baldwin/2006/05/11/kobe_bryant_s_game_7_no_shot_pout_the_mo
In any event, having witnessed the ballhoggery of the 27 year old Kobe (at the height of his physical powers and his mental selfishness) I really never felt his Usage mark would ever be challenged.
But then came Russell Westbrook without Kevin Durant. In 2014-15 Durant was hurt for a substantial stretch of games, and Westbrook went Usage mad, taking his mark up from around a career median of 32 to a shocking 38.4. Only a late season lack of physical energy kept Russ from reaching Kobe's magical 38.7% mark. In 2015-16 Durant returned and Westbrook's usage went down to a still-high but rational 31.5 for a season. Then Durant left.
Russell Westbrook is 28 years old. So one would imagine that while he might challenge Kobe's mark that it would be at least a close contest. It has not been a close contest. Russ is at a 42.1% Usage. He is shattering Kobe's mark. No one this season even approaches this level of Usage. No one in history approaches this level of Usage.
Westbrook's Usage in 2016-17 has been so high that he has gone from 7th place all-time in career Usage to SECOND. He trails only Jordan. This year he has passed such Usage greats as Carmelo, LeBron, Iverson, Kobe, and Wade. If he has a similar year in 2017-18, Russ will move ahead of Jordan for career Usage %.
What Russ is doing is really a tribute to his mental and physical endurance and his "don't give a fuck" attitude. I really never thought anyone could combine these three attributes like Kobe. But Russ has gone Kobe plus 9%.
To give some perspective, in 2014-15 when LeBron James was playing in the playoffs with Cleveland and basically any decent Cav was hurt, his Usage for the playoff stretch was only 37.6. In the Finals, when the Cavs were basically running "23 stand" where LeBron held the ball for 23 seconds and then tried to make a play, LeBron's Usage was only 40.8. LeBron would complain after every game that he knew this was not close to the correct way to play basketball, but he had no real choice if he wanted a chance to win.
Westbrook has registered a 42.1 (versus Finals LeBron 40.8) and Russ has done it for an entire season. So, Kudos to Russ. I just hope we never have to see this again.
The guys who tend to have the ball all of the time and dribble around wildly and either pass for an assist or shoot are the guys with big Usage.
So, going onto the 2016-17 season, the top 6 all-time ball hogs were:
6. Carmelo
5. LeBron
4. Allen Iverson
3. Kobe
2. Dwyane Wade
1. Michael Jordan
Obviously, it helps to be really talented to be on this list, because no matter how much you WANT to possess the ball, if you suck, your coach will eventually not allow you to possess the ball.
This is, of course, why the pairing of Wade and LeBron was such an awful idea. You generally don't want to pair two super high usage players. In Year 1 of that experiment, LeBron reduced his Usage 2 points in the regular season and 4+ points in the playoffs, deferring to Wade. The LeBron/Wade experiment only worked after Wade reduced his Usage, LeBron jacked his back up, and LeBron became a far more efficient player.
Anyway, moving on. The Holy Grail of seasonal Usage was accomplished by Kobe in 2005-06. In 2004-05 the Lakers had missed the playoffs with Kobe at his typically high 31.7 Usage. Kobe went bazonkers (technical term) in 2005-06 and raised his Usage by 7% to an NBA record 38.7%.
Kobe's ball hogging during the 2005-06 season was so legendary that, after he was criticized for shooting too much in Game 6 of the First Round playoff series against the Suns, Kobe went into full tank mode and REFUSED to shoot in the second half of Game 7, thus insuring a Lakers loss. One of the most vile and childish acts ever seen from an NBA all-star: http://www.travelgolf.com/blogs/chris.baldwin/2006/05/11/kobe_bryant_s_game_7_no_shot_pout_the_mo
In any event, having witnessed the ballhoggery of the 27 year old Kobe (at the height of his physical powers and his mental selfishness) I really never felt his Usage mark would ever be challenged.
But then came Russell Westbrook without Kevin Durant. In 2014-15 Durant was hurt for a substantial stretch of games, and Westbrook went Usage mad, taking his mark up from around a career median of 32 to a shocking 38.4. Only a late season lack of physical energy kept Russ from reaching Kobe's magical 38.7% mark. In 2015-16 Durant returned and Westbrook's usage went down to a still-high but rational 31.5 for a season. Then Durant left.
Russell Westbrook is 28 years old. So one would imagine that while he might challenge Kobe's mark that it would be at least a close contest. It has not been a close contest. Russ is at a 42.1% Usage. He is shattering Kobe's mark. No one this season even approaches this level of Usage. No one in history approaches this level of Usage.
Westbrook's Usage in 2016-17 has been so high that he has gone from 7th place all-time in career Usage to SECOND. He trails only Jordan. This year he has passed such Usage greats as Carmelo, LeBron, Iverson, Kobe, and Wade. If he has a similar year in 2017-18, Russ will move ahead of Jordan for career Usage %.
What Russ is doing is really a tribute to his mental and physical endurance and his "don't give a fuck" attitude. I really never thought anyone could combine these three attributes like Kobe. But Russ has gone Kobe plus 9%.
To give some perspective, in 2014-15 when LeBron James was playing in the playoffs with Cleveland and basically any decent Cav was hurt, his Usage for the playoff stretch was only 37.6. In the Finals, when the Cavs were basically running "23 stand" where LeBron held the ball for 23 seconds and then tried to make a play, LeBron's Usage was only 40.8. LeBron would complain after every game that he knew this was not close to the correct way to play basketball, but he had no real choice if he wanted a chance to win.
Westbrook has registered a 42.1 (versus Finals LeBron 40.8) and Russ has done it for an entire season. So, Kudos to Russ. I just hope we never have to see this again.
Thursday, March 09, 2017
Sam Bradford Checking on the Vikings' Offensive Line Progress
Sam Bradford checking in on the Vikings' offseason o-line progress pic.twitter.com/O2kyv6fRyt
— xtina (@cyvonne1229) March 9, 2017
Tuesday, February 28, 2017
Friday, February 17, 2017
The Top 36 NBA Players of All-time
I have these spread out throughout my Blog, but so you have it in one spot:
1. Michael Jordan
2. Wilt Chamberlain
3. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
4. LeBron James
5. Tim Duncan
6. Magic Johnson
7. Karl Malone
8. Bill Russell
9. Shaquille O'Neal
10.George Mikan
11.Jerry West
12.Oscar Robertson
13. Larry Bird
14. David Robinson
15. Hakeem Olajuwon
16. Moses Malone
17. Bob Pettit
18. Kobe Bryant
19. Julius Erving
20. Elgin Baylor
21. Charles Barkley
22. Kevin Garnett
23. Dirk Nowitzki
24. John Stockton
25. Kevin Durant
26. Chris Paul
27. Rick Barry
28. Ray Allen
29. Clyde Drexler
30. Steve Nash
31, Dwyane Wade
32. John Havlicek
33. Patrick Ewing
34. Reggie Miller
35. Gary Payton
36. Scottie Pippen.
There you go - that is the definitive list.
1. Michael Jordan
2. Wilt Chamberlain
3. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
4. LeBron James
5. Tim Duncan
6. Magic Johnson
7. Karl Malone
8. Bill Russell
9. Shaquille O'Neal
10.George Mikan
11.Jerry West
12.Oscar Robertson
13. Larry Bird
14. David Robinson
15. Hakeem Olajuwon
16. Moses Malone
17. Bob Pettit
18. Kobe Bryant
19. Julius Erving
20. Elgin Baylor
21. Charles Barkley
22. Kevin Garnett
23. Dirk Nowitzki
24. John Stockton
25. Kevin Durant
26. Chris Paul
27. Rick Barry
28. Ray Allen
29. Clyde Drexler
30. Steve Nash
31, Dwyane Wade
32. John Havlicek
33. Patrick Ewing
34. Reggie Miller
35. Gary Payton
36. Scottie Pippen.
There you go - that is the definitive list.
Andrew Wiggins -- Many Thoughts On How to Improve
With Wiggy's recent scoring and shooting tear, his advanced stats are slowly improving. His Net Rating is now only -6 (Ortg 108, DRtg 114) and he has (as of today) a VORP of 0; his best ever (versus a replacement player, he is exactly as good - contributes no extra wins and no extra losses).
So, I ask myself, how can Wiggy possibly look so good at times and yet (on an overall season long statistical basis) contribute virtually nothing to his team? I mean, certainly his scoring should be adding something, and are his other stats where he really struggles (4 rebounds, 2.5 assist per game, terrible defense) really that awful to drag him down so far?
So I looked at players who played at least 1,500 minutes in a season and averaged similar stats to Wiggy -- over 23 points per game and under 4.5 rebounds and under 2.9 assists. http://bkref.com/tiny/numGS
Of note, these sort of seasons appear to be EXTREMELY rare. If you are a little guy and a scorer, you generally get more than 3 assists a game. It is hard not to. Similarly, if you are a big guy and can score 23 ppg, you generally play a lot and can garner either 3 assists or 5 rebounds a game.
Wiggy's inability to contribute either as a rebounder or assist man is almost unprecedented. If you look at 2016-17, there are only 6 guys total in the league who play much and play as poorly as Wiggy on the defense, rebounding and assist metrics. None of the 5 competitors plays nearly as much as Wiggy does. So his poor play on a per minute basis in these areas of the game is unmatched.
So, if you go back and ask yourself what type of player Andrew Wiggins has been this year, your answer will be (going back to list #1)
Dale Ellis
Michael Redd
Glen Rice
Kiki Vandeweghe
Kevin Martin
Ricky Pierce
31 year old George Gervin
and
Super John Williamson
What do all of these players have in common? They were all known as "one-dimensional scorers".
Now, if you would simply say that Wiggy could get to both 4.5 rebounds and 2.9 assists per game, he could be at the absolute bottom of this much better list of players: http://bkref.com/tiny/JibbB roughly equivalent to a 32 year old Carmelo Anthony (Wiggy would also have to drop his DRtg by two points to 112 to reach Carmelo - Carmelo is a BETTER defender!).
So, Wiggy is (today) a bad 32 year old Carmelo. If you look at the above link, if Wiggy could double his performance in both rebounding and assists, or, for example, triple his rebounds or assists, he would be amongst the best players in the league! That, of course, would be tough to do given that Wiggy already plays huge minutes and has shown no signs of significant improvement per year in any of these categories.
Another concern for Wiggins and his supporters is that even if you go back to the "one-dimensional scorers" list and look at the 15 similar seasons, Wiggy is likely to end up 13th or 14th in Win Shares and ranks poorly in every shooting category:
8th in 2-point percentage
10th in field goal percentage
11th in 3 point %
11th in Effective FG %
13th in True shooting % and
15th in free throw %.
So Wiggy right now is a one-dimensional scorer..........and he isn't particularly efficient in that role.
So, baby steps:
1) get your rebounds and assists up to 32 year old Carmelo levels (6.2 rebounds, 2.9 assists)
2) get your defensive rating down to a Carmelo-ian 112.
3) improve your 3 point shooting and FT shooting to more elite scorer levels.
At that point, you would be a good player (top 40 in the league).
then Wiggy needs to find some way to get to
23-6-5 (Jimmy Butler) or maybe 27-5-4 (DeMar Derozan).
It is hard to imagine that Wiggy will improve so much that he could ever reach the rebounds and assist numbers that The Greek Freak or LeBron have. And he is never going to have a defensive rating of 102 like Kawhi Leonard (who gets 2.5 steals+blocks to Wiggy's current 1.3).
But what is clear is that right now Wiggy is like a bad version of Kevin Martin, Michael Redd and Dale Ellis. Start with being a good version of them, work your way up to equaling an old Carmelo, and then, from there, see what your upside really could be.
HM
So, I ask myself, how can Wiggy possibly look so good at times and yet (on an overall season long statistical basis) contribute virtually nothing to his team? I mean, certainly his scoring should be adding something, and are his other stats where he really struggles (4 rebounds, 2.5 assist per game, terrible defense) really that awful to drag him down so far?
So I looked at players who played at least 1,500 minutes in a season and averaged similar stats to Wiggy -- over 23 points per game and under 4.5 rebounds and under 2.9 assists. http://bkref.com/tiny/numGS
Of note, these sort of seasons appear to be EXTREMELY rare. If you are a little guy and a scorer, you generally get more than 3 assists a game. It is hard not to. Similarly, if you are a big guy and can score 23 ppg, you generally play a lot and can garner either 3 assists or 5 rebounds a game.
Wiggy's inability to contribute either as a rebounder or assist man is almost unprecedented. If you look at 2016-17, there are only 6 guys total in the league who play much and play as poorly as Wiggy on the defense, rebounding and assist metrics. None of the 5 competitors plays nearly as much as Wiggy does. So his poor play on a per minute basis in these areas of the game is unmatched.
So, if you go back and ask yourself what type of player Andrew Wiggins has been this year, your answer will be (going back to list #1)
Dale Ellis
Michael Redd
Glen Rice
Kiki Vandeweghe
Kevin Martin
Ricky Pierce
31 year old George Gervin
and
Super John Williamson
What do all of these players have in common? They were all known as "one-dimensional scorers".
Now, if you would simply say that Wiggy could get to both 4.5 rebounds and 2.9 assists per game, he could be at the absolute bottom of this much better list of players: http://bkref.com/tiny/JibbB roughly equivalent to a 32 year old Carmelo Anthony (Wiggy would also have to drop his DRtg by two points to 112 to reach Carmelo - Carmelo is a BETTER defender!).
So, Wiggy is (today) a bad 32 year old Carmelo. If you look at the above link, if Wiggy could double his performance in both rebounding and assists, or, for example, triple his rebounds or assists, he would be amongst the best players in the league! That, of course, would be tough to do given that Wiggy already plays huge minutes and has shown no signs of significant improvement per year in any of these categories.
Another concern for Wiggins and his supporters is that even if you go back to the "one-dimensional scorers" list and look at the 15 similar seasons, Wiggy is likely to end up 13th or 14th in Win Shares and ranks poorly in every shooting category:
8th in 2-point percentage
10th in field goal percentage
11th in 3 point %
11th in Effective FG %
13th in True shooting % and
15th in free throw %.
So Wiggy right now is a one-dimensional scorer..........and he isn't particularly efficient in that role.
So, baby steps:
1) get your rebounds and assists up to 32 year old Carmelo levels (6.2 rebounds, 2.9 assists)
2) get your defensive rating down to a Carmelo-ian 112.
3) improve your 3 point shooting and FT shooting to more elite scorer levels.
At that point, you would be a good player (top 40 in the league).
then Wiggy needs to find some way to get to
23-6-5 (Jimmy Butler) or maybe 27-5-4 (DeMar Derozan).
It is hard to imagine that Wiggy will improve so much that he could ever reach the rebounds and assist numbers that The Greek Freak or LeBron have. And he is never going to have a defensive rating of 102 like Kawhi Leonard (who gets 2.5 steals+blocks to Wiggy's current 1.3).
But what is clear is that right now Wiggy is like a bad version of Kevin Martin, Michael Redd and Dale Ellis. Start with being a good version of them, work your way up to equaling an old Carmelo, and then, from there, see what your upside really could be.
HM
Tuesday, February 14, 2017
The 15 Worst Efforts By Starters In an NBA Finals Games During the Past 30 Years
There were some criteria imposed. First, the game had to be in the www.basketball-reference.com database. Second, the game had to be in a loss (playing in a win means that, arguably, you did something at some point in the game to help your team win -- these guys did not help a team win). Third, you had to be a starter. I am not going to criticize players like Bob McAdoo or Rasheed Wallace who are on their last legs and have a shitty game when they are 100% washed up.
Finally, I am going to judge by "Game Score" which is allegedly a function of your game productivity.
One might argue, for example, that John Starks' horrendous gunning of 2-18 and 0-11 from 3 should be the worst game, instead of only the 14th worst. But statistically it was somehow better on Game Score. Look, everyone who was a fan of the losing team will think that their guy sucked the worst, so we will let the computer give the objective Game Score and then you can subjectively evaluate the terrible performance.
With that in mind, I give you the 15 statistically worst starter efforts in a Finals loss:
13th
9th
8th
5th
2nd Worst
Finally, I am going to judge by "Game Score" which is allegedly a function of your game productivity.
One might argue, for example, that John Starks' horrendous gunning of 2-18 and 0-11 from 3 should be the worst game, instead of only the 14th worst. But statistically it was somehow better on Game Score. Look, everyone who was a fan of the losing team will think that their guy sucked the worst, so we will let the computer give the objective Game Score and then you can subjectively evaluate the terrible performance.
With that in mind, I give you the 15 statistically worst starter efforts in a Finals loss:
15th worst (so, the best of this awful bunch)
Paul Pierce, Age 30, 2008 NBA Finals -- 32 MP 2 for14 FGs (0-4 from 3) NEGATIVE 3.1 Game score.
The Celtics would go on to defeat the Lakers in the series anyway.
14th
John Starks Age 28 1994 Finals 42MP went 2-18 from the floor (0-11 from 3) NEGATIVE 3.4
Game Score
Starks single-handedly cost the Knicks the NBA title as his shameless gunning simply would not stop. The Knicks lost to Houston, making Hakeem a legend and tarnishing Ewing's NBA legacy.
13th
Larry Johnson Age 30 1999 Finals 37MP 2-8 (0-3 from 3) NEGATIVE 3.4
The Knicks were overmatched and lost to the Spurs in 5.
12th
Chris Dudley Age 34 1999 Finals 24MP 0-3 NEGATIVE 3.6
Look, the computer says that Dudley started for the Knicks and (as we all know) he sucked. No wonder they lost in 5.
11th
Tyrone Hill Age 33 2001 Finals 26MP 1-7 NEGATIVE 3.8
It was an utter miracle when the Sixers got Game 1 off the Lakers -- their success lasted all of....one game. They lost in 5, thanks, in part, to this Ty Hill effort.
10th
Robert Parish Age 32 1986 Finals 25MP 3-15 NEGATIVE 4.5
Smoked in this game by Hakeem and Ralph Sampson, but the Rockets would fall to Parish's Celts 4-2 in the series.
9th
Sam Perkins Age 29 1991 Finals 43MP 1-15 (0-3 from 3) NEGATIVE 4.5
Perk hit a huge shot to win Game 1. That would be the only game the Lakers won, as Michael's Bulls steamrolled Magic and his pretty mediocre crew 4-1. Ended up being Magic's last Finals as he contracted HIV the next year.
Ralph Sampson Age 25 1986 Finals 27MP 1-13 NEGATIVE 3.9
Ralph was truly awful this game, and he really was never thought of the same as an NBA player after this series was over. Rockets lost the series to Parish and the Celts.
7th
Harrison Barnes Age 24 2016 Finals 16MP 0-8 (0-5 from 3) NEGATIVE 5.1
We jump right over the negative 4s and end up with this wretched effort from Mr. Barnes, who, despite being left WIDE OPEN every possession could not make a shot and who was so ineffective he was forced to the bench with only 16 MP. Warriors blew a 3-1 lead and lost to Cleveland in 7. The result cemented LeBron James' legacy as a top 5 player, as he earned his 3rd title and 3rd Finals MVP.
6th
Tony Parker Age 21 2003 Finals 31MP 1-12 (0-2 from 3) NEGATIVE 5.3
Few recall that there were serious efforts by the Spurs to dump Parker after this series and acquire Jason Kidd. The Spurs won the series, but largely no thanks to Parker, who was generally terrible throughout. Pretty sure Tony was forced to split minutes with Speedy Claxton.
5th
Kenyon Martin Age 25 2003 FInals 39MP 3-23 (0-2 from 3). NEGATIVE 6.0
Do you know how difficult it is to go 3-21 from 2-point range when you are 6'9" tall? Very, very hard. And the level of stubbornness that it requires is remarkable. KMart was able to do it, nonetheless, helping his Nets lose the series despite the generally poor play of Tony Parker on the other side.
4th
Ray Allen Age 34 2010 Finals 42MP, 0-13 (0-8 from 3) NEGATIVE 6.9
Despite an injured Kevin Garnett, the Celts were in a spot to win another title, but that effort was not helped by this historically terrible Ray Allen effort. The 4th worst Finals game of the past 30 years. Kobe went 6-24 in Game 7, yet was awarded with a curious MVP decision despite being outplayed by his own teammate Pau Gasol.
3rd Worst
Byron Scott Age 30 1991 Finals 43MP 0-8 (0-3 from 3) NEGATIVE 7.2
Byron Scott Age 30 1991 Finals 43MP 0-8 (0-3 from 3) NEGATIVE 7.2
Now, Byron Scott was never a great overall player; he was a very good scorer. So for him to play 43 minutes and provide ZERO made baskets and yet stay on the floor that long indicates how overmatched the 1991 Lakers were that Finals and how finely Magic had honed his scoring, rebounding and assist games by 1991. Jordan had a better team and was a slightly better player than Magic at that time. Bulls won in 5.
2nd Worst
Harrison Barnes Age 23 2015 Finals 19MP 0-8 (0-1 from 3) NEGATIVE 7.3
In an eerie preview of the 2016 Finals, Barnes' terrible play would allow LeBron to singlehandedly gain a lead for the crippled Cavs. The Warriors were able to regain their balance and overcome the "LeBron and almost no one else" Cavs, in part because Barnes' generally poor play was overcome by the play of controversial Andre Iguodala who became the second consecutive Finals MVP awarded the honor because he could at least bother LeBron James and could make a wide open shot. Warriors won in 6.
THE WORST -- #1
Mario Chalmers Age 273 June 11, 2013 NBA Finals, MIA at San Antonio 20MP, 0-5 (0-1 from 3)
Chalmers somehow managed to put up a NEGATIVE 7.4 Game Score in 20 minutes, helped by the fact that he had only 2 rebounds, 1 assist to 4 turnovers and committed 4 fouls while the opponent was +19 while he was on the floor. He was certainly not alone, as the Heat lost by 36 in Game 3 to fall behind 2-1. The Heat would rally and actually get an OK game from Rio in Games 2 and 6, taking the series in 7. The only time a Tim Duncan team was ever defeated in the NBA Finals series
Friday, January 20, 2017
My Thoughts as We Begin the Trump Era
As we have inaugurated a man who is clearly unqualified for the job, and who has demonstrated no desire or ability to learn the job, and who has appointed as cabinet members (primarily) people who are likewise unqualified, let me offer my thoughts:
1) I still prefer Trump to the likes of Ted Cruz or Jeb Bush or Marco Rubio or Mike Pence. For Pence, it is because he is apparently even dumber than Trump and because I really do not care to have my nation turned into a theocracy. For the other three guys, it is because I have seen the George W. Bush Administration, and I really do not care to re-live that 8 years. At least with Trump there is the slight hope that he may be so unstable and unprincipled that he may occasionally do the right thing by accident. It is like if you lined people up on a road with 5 being your best friends and 5 being your worst enemies, and told the drive to drive. With Trump, he will swerve wildly all over the road and may hit some you like and some you do not like. With the 4 other guys, you can be sure that they would kill your 5 best friends and leave your 5 worst enemies alive. Even if Trump kills all 10, that is a better result.
2) Trump's cabinet appointees are beyond awful. You would have hoped that a guy who was not beholden to the Rich Wing of the GOP would at least have selected a few wild card entries who might actually, say, be qualified? You would be wrong.
3) My hope for Trump is that he, in fact, does what he said in his speech at the inauguration and a) tries to bring back more high-paying jobs for the Rush Belt; and b) punishes corporations for trying to send jobs and money overseas; c) uses federal resources to stamp out crime and decay in the inner cities; and d) pay all sorts of money to upgrade U.S. infrastructure to 2020 standards. That would be great - "Please proceed, President Trump."
However, I don't see how he can promise to do any of those things while at the same time:
-- doesn't support unions
-- doesn't support a higher minimum wage
-- wants to get rid of ObamaCare and deny those same worker health insurance
-- wants to give corporations and the very wealthiest people enormous tax cuts
-- has expressed no plan for helping the inner cities other than ending the "carnage"
-- has not identified any spending program or tax increase that would accomplish any infrastructure improvements, but, in fact, has proposed an enormous tax cut that would make it impossible to fund any such infrastructure program,
Would it be great if Trump kept us out of all foreign wars and put "America First"? Sure. But how do you square such an idea with his constant complaints that Obama was too weak or that our navy must be built up to some ridiculous level? Are we just going to use our million new aircraft carriers to patrol our harbors? Are we expecting an "Independence Day 2" type of invasion? We are going to build our military resources to a point where no one fucks with us -- and if they do -- I assume we will use our resources, right? So isn't that the opposite of staying out of wars?
So, on my hope level, with Clinton as a 9 and Obama as a 9 and GWB as a 2, I place Trump as a 4. I hope that he does some of the things he claims he will do (another example, replace ObamaCare with something that gives every American health care -- hey great! That is called "single payer" or Medicare for All").
On my fear indicator, with Clinton as a 1 and Obama as a 2, and GWB as a 7; I gotta give Trump a 9. He is so unstable and lacking in basic knowledge or desire to work hard that I really fear that he becomes a WORSE version of a typical GOP President. He tells people horrid lies about what he will do (some of which is positive), and then just allows the people he hangs around to make decisions that do the exact opposite and cause extreme harm. Plus who knows when he nukes Mexico or Iran or Russia or China? It is a real chance (it is likely to be a country where he doesn't have a hotel, so maybe Iran and North Korea are the leading contenders).
If I were Trump, I would hold off on giving the Congress their huge tax cut for the wealthy until after they have done whatever else he wants done. Once he gives them the tax cut for the wealthy, they could not give a fuck whether he lives or dies. So he can best protect himself from impeachment by saying, "Look, gotta do A, B, C., D then we will turn to the tax cut...."
They have always said that the key to success was intelligence and hard work. If Trump succeeds as President, he will be the exception that proves the rule.
Recall -- Dow at 19,800, unemployment at 4.9%, gas prices in Minneapolis about 2.35 a gallon for regular.
Good luck. As I said, there are a bunch of things you say you will do that would be great. We shall see if they get done.
Monday, January 16, 2017
Wednesday, January 04, 2017
The No-Win Situation That is Gopher Football
I used to coach town-team "traveling basketball" and AAU basketball, both for boys and girls. We would have long practices before the season started and try to develop the kids' skills and stamina and knowledge of the game. Then we'd think "OK -- team is ready to play."
But sometimes you would show up for your first tournament and the other team would just, literally, beat the living hell out of you. Hold, push, elbow, grab - every possible illegal move. And the refs would call nothing. So once you complained for a quarter or so and got no help, you were left with two options: 1) lose; or 2) fight back and cheat also. As a coach, I always took option 2. I remember one game where at halftime I noted that we could either be the hammer or the nail, but I would think it would be better to be the hammer. One girl went out and committed two very hard fouls after halftime and looked over at the bench. We shared a smile.
The point is, we would all like the world to be wonderful. It would be great if people let you in when you are trying to merge in traffic. It would be great if your boss were reasonable. And it would be great if your college basketball team featured 12 athletes who were all 4.0 scholars and who stayed all 4 years and led the team to 4 national championships. The world, unfortunately, does not work like that.
You generally have 5-10 teams in either college football or college basketball who are truly contenders to win it all based upon coach or pedigree. Football -- Alabama, USC, Ohio State, Michigan, Florida State. Basketball -- Duke, Kentucky, UCLA, Kansas, UConn
Now, this is not to say that these teams cannot fuck it up -- I mean, all of these teams have suffered at least brief bumps in the road (cough, UNC under Matt Doherty) but they have something to sell -- the nameplate. "We are _____ and we have won a BUNCH of titles! Now, do you want to come play here and continue that tradition, or do you want to go to some school and hope to get a few votes for top 25?"
And there have been very, very serious efforts at re-writing the script and making new great teams. I mean HUGE amounts of booster money have been spent at Oregon and Oklahoma State. Spurrier made Florida great for a while. UNLV rose to prominence. Wisconsin is trying to become a constant Top 10 force. Tony Bennett has become a regular season force in Virginia and hopes to turn that into tourney success.
But let's face it. For most college football teams and college basketball teams, there are two real options -- accept your lot in life, or cheat a lot. If you are NC State or Clemson in basketball, you generally will be 5th-8th in the ACC depnding upon how hard the other teams fighting for those spots are cheating. If you are BC or Syracuse in football after 1986, you are going to be fooling around with .500, maybe 2 games over, maybe two games under. You may get lucky and go 9-4. You may get unlucky and go 4-8.
Faced with this option, a lot of teams that want to win cheat. And if they don't cheat, they look the other way, and I mean 180 degrees the other way. Do you remember when Peyton Manning was kicked out of Tennessee for tea bagging the school employee? Or when Tennessee investigated allegations that its employees wrote student papers and found itself guilty and shut down the program? Or when UNC agreed not to play in last year's NCAA tourney because of rampant academic fraud in its men's basketball program? Or when Oklahoma State sanctioned itself when finding out that Dexter Manley could not read? Remember those profiles in courage? No? That is because THEY DID NOT HAPPEN. Remember Cam Newton and Jameis Winston's stated scandals and how they resulted in forfeiture of all games they ever played in? No? Again -- schools looked into it - found they did nothing wrong.
The coaches and the administrations of these schools determined that (like me coaching basketball) they were not going to discourage conduct occurring outside of the rules if that it what it took to win games. UNC's ridiculous claim that its WOMEN'S basketball program was primarily to blame for the decades of academic cheating is perhaps the low point of all legal or factual arguments ever made. Yet it has stymied the NCAA for what appears to be at least 2 years!!! UNC set up and operated an academic fraud system for 20+ years that was designed to help a women's team who was almost never any good? Talk about a desire to comply with Title IX!! How noble.
Against this background, we have the state of Minnesota and the University of Minnesota. I grew up in Western NY. I moved to Minnesota in 1989. Here is my observation about Minnesota sports fans -- there really aren't very many. If you live in the Eastern time zone, you are taught as a kid that sports are everything, you live and die for them and that is your identity. "I am a ________ fan." Acceptable responses: "Fuck you, I am a _________ fan" and "So I am, let's be friends." I would say of the guys I grew up with that 90% were avid sports fans. I gave a speech in Philly 15 years ago where I started with "and I am an alum of Duke - with our three national titles" huge applause line (with a few muttered "fuck yous" included). If I gave that same speeech in Minnesota, people in the audience would wonder why I would ever mention Duke basketball.
In my years in Minnesota, I would say that I have met maybe 100 people who are truly avid sports fans. When my son played Little League baseball (or whatever they call it here), the dads would gather around at functions. Here were the primary topics: 1) drinking, 2) the cabin, 3) boating, 4) fishing, 5) hockey. So, I figured, well, at least I am pretty up (at the time) on the NHL - let's discuss that. Nope, it was YOUTH hockey they were discussing! I was at a baseball party and literally no one was talking baseball, football or basketball.
And these are the dads who care enough about sports to have their sons in sports. Now imagine the level of sports fandom from moms or from dads whose kids were not in sports. This explains why Minnesota for many, many years struggled to get a new stadium for sports while places like Cleveland and Cincicnnati and Pittsburgh were building new stadiums after voter referenda. In those cities, people love sports. In Minnesota, most people can take or leave sports. This is an attitude shared, from what I can tell, only in cities like L.A. and Seattle. Minnesota lost its hockey team to DALLAS!! The only sport in which Minnesotans have a modicum of interest (at least on the youth level) was lost because Minnesotans would not spend money to renovate Target Center to house both the Wolves and North Stars. The water freezes in Dallas roughly 10 days a year. They stole our team. The Twins in 2001-02 were about to be contracted back into the MLB. No one really cared all that much. The Twins' threats to simply take money to dissolve got them a new stadium in.......2010.
This brings us to the Gophers.
The Minnesota Golden Gophers play football against high Division I competition. I have talked to people with Division I connections. The player stories they tell are eye opening even for a 52 year old guy who has seen a lot. If you enjoy watching high D-1 sports, do not ever have an honest conversation with someone who has played or been around high D-1 sports. Suffice to say, the Gophers play against teams who cheat in recruiting, don't send their kids to class, pay players, hire hookers for their players, cheat on player drug tests, etc., etc. That is their competition. (side note on drug testing -- I asked my source, "well if they don't take their tests, why do they sometimes get caught?" the answer was that if the coaches were angry enough with you, they'd make you take your own test, knowing you would fail).
People in Minnesota, for whatever reason, feel that the Gophers should be really good at football. Why? That is a great question. I wish I knew. The Gophers have not been to the Rose Bowl in 50 years. The Gophers have one 10-win season....ever. They have never, for example, been 14-0, 13-0, 13-1, 12-2, 12-1. 11-3, 11-2. So why would anyone expect that level of play? I mean, you can HOPE for that level of play, and I can HOPE that tomorrow People Magazine will tell me that if I drop 25 pounds I will take over for The Rock on its "Sexiest Man Alive" cover. But is that really a reasonable expectation? I have never won a beauty contest or even been thought of as particularly handsome. Would it be nice? Sure. Should my wife chide me if I fail to achieve the goal? No.
The Gophers play in a metro area of around 3 million people. They have a nice 60,000 stadium. Big Ten teams from large metro areas -- Ohio State and Michigan -- have 110,000 seat stadiums. Wisconsin (80,000+) and Iowa (70,000+) have stadiums bigger than Minnesota's. They play in the huge cities of Madison and Iowa City. There is nothing about Minnesota's "facilities" that would make you think that they are supposed to be awesome at football.
But the biggest impediment to success in Gopher football is that the University feels a great need to self-report and "self-find-itself-guilty." I mean, I kid you not, after the Gophers self-guilted themselves on the "we write papers for players" issue, Tennessee employees came out and said "oh yeah, we do that too, always have". Tennessee investigated -- "nope, never happened, we are innocent."
Look at the latest Gophers "scandal." If you read the 80-page report, multiple Gophers football players had sex with a 21-22 year old woman. They said it was consensual, she said it was not. Her story is littered with credibility issues. (There are many - she said she was drunk, though not overly drunk and had stopped drinking hours before....or maybe dehydrated.....she asked her first rapist what had happened to her, then later claimed to the University a very specific knowledge of the events that occurred....the report itself finds that the first alleged rapist did not, in fact, rape her).
Add in a specific misidentification of one player. The University actually found that this error (a pretty big error -- "he did it....OK, I guess not....") INCREASED the victim's credibility:
But sometimes you would show up for your first tournament and the other team would just, literally, beat the living hell out of you. Hold, push, elbow, grab - every possible illegal move. And the refs would call nothing. So once you complained for a quarter or so and got no help, you were left with two options: 1) lose; or 2) fight back and cheat also. As a coach, I always took option 2. I remember one game where at halftime I noted that we could either be the hammer or the nail, but I would think it would be better to be the hammer. One girl went out and committed two very hard fouls after halftime and looked over at the bench. We shared a smile.
The point is, we would all like the world to be wonderful. It would be great if people let you in when you are trying to merge in traffic. It would be great if your boss were reasonable. And it would be great if your college basketball team featured 12 athletes who were all 4.0 scholars and who stayed all 4 years and led the team to 4 national championships. The world, unfortunately, does not work like that.
You generally have 5-10 teams in either college football or college basketball who are truly contenders to win it all based upon coach or pedigree. Football -- Alabama, USC, Ohio State, Michigan, Florida State. Basketball -- Duke, Kentucky, UCLA, Kansas, UConn
Now, this is not to say that these teams cannot fuck it up -- I mean, all of these teams have suffered at least brief bumps in the road (cough, UNC under Matt Doherty) but they have something to sell -- the nameplate. "We are _____ and we have won a BUNCH of titles! Now, do you want to come play here and continue that tradition, or do you want to go to some school and hope to get a few votes for top 25?"
And there have been very, very serious efforts at re-writing the script and making new great teams. I mean HUGE amounts of booster money have been spent at Oregon and Oklahoma State. Spurrier made Florida great for a while. UNLV rose to prominence. Wisconsin is trying to become a constant Top 10 force. Tony Bennett has become a regular season force in Virginia and hopes to turn that into tourney success.
But let's face it. For most college football teams and college basketball teams, there are two real options -- accept your lot in life, or cheat a lot. If you are NC State or Clemson in basketball, you generally will be 5th-8th in the ACC depnding upon how hard the other teams fighting for those spots are cheating. If you are BC or Syracuse in football after 1986, you are going to be fooling around with .500, maybe 2 games over, maybe two games under. You may get lucky and go 9-4. You may get unlucky and go 4-8.
Faced with this option, a lot of teams that want to win cheat. And if they don't cheat, they look the other way, and I mean 180 degrees the other way. Do you remember when Peyton Manning was kicked out of Tennessee for tea bagging the school employee? Or when Tennessee investigated allegations that its employees wrote student papers and found itself guilty and shut down the program? Or when UNC agreed not to play in last year's NCAA tourney because of rampant academic fraud in its men's basketball program? Or when Oklahoma State sanctioned itself when finding out that Dexter Manley could not read? Remember those profiles in courage? No? That is because THEY DID NOT HAPPEN. Remember Cam Newton and Jameis Winston's stated scandals and how they resulted in forfeiture of all games they ever played in? No? Again -- schools looked into it - found they did nothing wrong.
The coaches and the administrations of these schools determined that (like me coaching basketball) they were not going to discourage conduct occurring outside of the rules if that it what it took to win games. UNC's ridiculous claim that its WOMEN'S basketball program was primarily to blame for the decades of academic cheating is perhaps the low point of all legal or factual arguments ever made. Yet it has stymied the NCAA for what appears to be at least 2 years!!! UNC set up and operated an academic fraud system for 20+ years that was designed to help a women's team who was almost never any good? Talk about a desire to comply with Title IX!! How noble.
Against this background, we have the state of Minnesota and the University of Minnesota. I grew up in Western NY. I moved to Minnesota in 1989. Here is my observation about Minnesota sports fans -- there really aren't very many. If you live in the Eastern time zone, you are taught as a kid that sports are everything, you live and die for them and that is your identity. "I am a ________ fan." Acceptable responses: "Fuck you, I am a _________ fan" and "So I am, let's be friends." I would say of the guys I grew up with that 90% were avid sports fans. I gave a speech in Philly 15 years ago where I started with "and I am an alum of Duke - with our three national titles" huge applause line (with a few muttered "fuck yous" included). If I gave that same speeech in Minnesota, people in the audience would wonder why I would ever mention Duke basketball.
In my years in Minnesota, I would say that I have met maybe 100 people who are truly avid sports fans. When my son played Little League baseball (or whatever they call it here), the dads would gather around at functions. Here were the primary topics: 1) drinking, 2) the cabin, 3) boating, 4) fishing, 5) hockey. So, I figured, well, at least I am pretty up (at the time) on the NHL - let's discuss that. Nope, it was YOUTH hockey they were discussing! I was at a baseball party and literally no one was talking baseball, football or basketball.
And these are the dads who care enough about sports to have their sons in sports. Now imagine the level of sports fandom from moms or from dads whose kids were not in sports. This explains why Minnesota for many, many years struggled to get a new stadium for sports while places like Cleveland and Cincicnnati and Pittsburgh were building new stadiums after voter referenda. In those cities, people love sports. In Minnesota, most people can take or leave sports. This is an attitude shared, from what I can tell, only in cities like L.A. and Seattle. Minnesota lost its hockey team to DALLAS!! The only sport in which Minnesotans have a modicum of interest (at least on the youth level) was lost because Minnesotans would not spend money to renovate Target Center to house both the Wolves and North Stars. The water freezes in Dallas roughly 10 days a year. They stole our team. The Twins in 2001-02 were about to be contracted back into the MLB. No one really cared all that much. The Twins' threats to simply take money to dissolve got them a new stadium in.......2010.
This brings us to the Gophers.
The Minnesota Golden Gophers play football against high Division I competition. I have talked to people with Division I connections. The player stories they tell are eye opening even for a 52 year old guy who has seen a lot. If you enjoy watching high D-1 sports, do not ever have an honest conversation with someone who has played or been around high D-1 sports. Suffice to say, the Gophers play against teams who cheat in recruiting, don't send their kids to class, pay players, hire hookers for their players, cheat on player drug tests, etc., etc. That is their competition. (side note on drug testing -- I asked my source, "well if they don't take their tests, why do they sometimes get caught?" the answer was that if the coaches were angry enough with you, they'd make you take your own test, knowing you would fail).
People in Minnesota, for whatever reason, feel that the Gophers should be really good at football. Why? That is a great question. I wish I knew. The Gophers have not been to the Rose Bowl in 50 years. The Gophers have one 10-win season....ever. They have never, for example, been 14-0, 13-0, 13-1, 12-2, 12-1. 11-3, 11-2. So why would anyone expect that level of play? I mean, you can HOPE for that level of play, and I can HOPE that tomorrow People Magazine will tell me that if I drop 25 pounds I will take over for The Rock on its "Sexiest Man Alive" cover. But is that really a reasonable expectation? I have never won a beauty contest or even been thought of as particularly handsome. Would it be nice? Sure. Should my wife chide me if I fail to achieve the goal? No.
The Gophers play in a metro area of around 3 million people. They have a nice 60,000 stadium. Big Ten teams from large metro areas -- Ohio State and Michigan -- have 110,000 seat stadiums. Wisconsin (80,000+) and Iowa (70,000+) have stadiums bigger than Minnesota's. They play in the huge cities of Madison and Iowa City. There is nothing about Minnesota's "facilities" that would make you think that they are supposed to be awesome at football.
But the biggest impediment to success in Gopher football is that the University feels a great need to self-report and "self-find-itself-guilty." I mean, I kid you not, after the Gophers self-guilted themselves on the "we write papers for players" issue, Tennessee employees came out and said "oh yeah, we do that too, always have". Tennessee investigated -- "nope, never happened, we are innocent."
Look at the latest Gophers "scandal." If you read the 80-page report, multiple Gophers football players had sex with a 21-22 year old woman. They said it was consensual, she said it was not. Her story is littered with credibility issues. (There are many - she said she was drunk, though not overly drunk and had stopped drinking hours before....or maybe dehydrated.....she asked her first rapist what had happened to her, then later claimed to the University a very specific knowledge of the events that occurred....the report itself finds that the first alleged rapist did not, in fact, rape her).
Add in a specific misidentification of one player. The University actually found that this error (a pretty big error -- "he did it....OK, I guess not....") INCREASED the victim's credibility:
"RS misidentification of A10 demonstrates that RS memory of the events in the apartment may be faulty at times However, RS report about her misidentification also demonstrates her willingness to admit that she initially remembered something incorrectly...."
Prosecutors (whose job it is to investigate and charge crimes) felt the story wasn't very compelling. Her civil lawyer settled her lawsuit.
And let me address another thing about the findings of the EOAA Report. A great deal has been made of the fact that the Report had to use the "predonderance of the evidence" standard so the players had to lose. This argument is wrong. If Mr. X has 35 people come and testify that something happened, and Mr. Z has 1 person come and testified that it did not happen, and Mr. Z also has a video showing that one thing the 35 witnesses said happened pretty clearly did not happen, Mr. Z is very likely to win on the "preponderance of the evidence" standard, properly applied. What happened here, in my opinion, is that the EOAA applied what I would call a "summary judgment" standard. Under a summary judgment standard, if we believe everything that the claimant says and nothing that the defendants say, could claimant win? I mean, that is what basically happened. Every error by defendants (the report notes that one defendant, when quizzed, got the order of sex wrong, thus indicating that he was probably lying) is used against them and every positive inference is made in favor of the claimant (she misidentified one guy entirely, but that shows she is willing to admit her errors).
So this is the scandal. Several of these players were defendants in a civil suit. The civil suit sought to enjoin the players from being IN THE STADIUM while this woman worked at games because she was afraid of them. Now imagine that a lawsuit of this type had been filed in Tuscaloosa or Columbus. "Judge, I need you to sit out the two starting corners for the Tide/Buckeyes because a woman fears that they may assault her at the game....." Imagine that idea. Imagine that. Now imagine how quickly that request for extraordinary judicial relief gets denied. This Minnesota court motion was granted - the two starting corners for the Gophers were, without ever receiving an evidentiary hearing, enjoined from entering the stadium on the off chance that they might, presumably while in uniform and on the field, assault this woman.
After allowing these same players to play most of the season, Eric Kaler and Mark Coyle eventually suspend all 10 players involved and then lie to the players and tell them Tracy Claeys (their coach) was responsible for the suspensions.
Now, what would have been the appropriate thing to do?
1) Read the report -- geez guys, you guys looks like sexual predators out to have sex with any vulnerable woman you can find, do you have a response?
2) Yes, we have filed an appeal and we think we will win because of ____________.
3) OK, well, you are entitled to privacy and due process, so we are going to let you play the Holiday Bowl, but if you lose your appeal you are done.
People who are convicted of crimes often remain out of jail pending appeal! Corporations who are found guilty of fraud and have a $40,000,000 judgment entered against them don't have to pay if they file a bond. What was the requirement that the University suspend these guys? None. Again, the administration knew what these guys were accused of for MONTHS and allowed them to play football. But they suddenly suspend the players, lie about who did the suspending, and then face a player boycott and a coach backlash.
This would have never happened at any traidtionally top 20 program. I mean, my lord, what was the punishment for Michael Floyd's DUI at Notre Dame? Was he ever tossed out of school? Suspended for a couple games? Nope. He lost his team captain status. I am sure opposing coaches feared him less without the C.
Here is what would have happened at a top 20 program:
1) Report to the police - police take a report, advise no charges. Prosecutors do not charge.
2) Civil suit filed. Motion for restraining order denied.
3) Booster approaches claimant - provides large amount of money through scholarship and free housing and duffel bags of cash.
4) EOAA office determines that they will agree with prosecutors and find no violation. Claimant deemed to be not credible.
By contrast, Minnesota just HAS to constantly self-report and self-find-itself guilty. Thus the ultimate result is that it loses many players and fires a winning coach whose team loves him and who has a record of academic success with his players. The guy went 9-4 at Minnesota, won a bowl game and has a LOT of good players on defense who will return in 2017. That is the upside of the coach. The downside? When given the opportunity to suck Eric Kaler's dick, he chose not to do so.
The Minnesota press and Minnesota citizens both continue to search for the elusive set of 60 football scholar-athletes who will bring the team to a deserved 14-0 back-to-back title seasons; players who spend their Friday and Saturday evenings helping old women across the street and freeing scared cats from trees. These 60 saints in football garb will want to attend Minnesota because Minnesota (despite no Rose Bowls in 50 years) deserves the best players in America. I am not certain that this will occur, but I guess hope springs eternal.
A Final Note on Mark Coyle:
This is a guy who spent one year at Syracuse as AD under Jim Boeheim, oops, sorry, I meant "with" Jim Boeheim. I grew up 80 miles from Syracuse. I have met Syracuse residents and Syracuse cops. I have heard their stories. Suffice to say, if Mark Coyle spent a year at Syracuse, he knows what a northern school's program does to "compete at the highest level". I would suggest that even in his brief tenure at the 'Cuse that Coyle saw how it is done. He didn't want to do it, or be the AD while it was being done. So what did he do? He came to Minnesota. For his travles, he got a football team accused of gang rape. Whether rightfully or wrongfully accused, you have to figure that Coyle thought "I thought I left this behind." So when he got the choice to keep or fire Tracy Claeys, he fired him.
Coyle will now take the position that he will hire a coach who is squeaky clean and who will uphold the Minnesota ideal (he wants a coach who "knows what Minnesota is") of all guys who get 4.0s and hang out in the Christian Science Reading Room in their spare time. Good luck. I think Gerry Faust is still alive.
So this is the scandal. Several of these players were defendants in a civil suit. The civil suit sought to enjoin the players from being IN THE STADIUM while this woman worked at games because she was afraid of them. Now imagine that a lawsuit of this type had been filed in Tuscaloosa or Columbus. "Judge, I need you to sit out the two starting corners for the Tide/Buckeyes because a woman fears that they may assault her at the game....." Imagine that idea. Imagine that. Now imagine how quickly that request for extraordinary judicial relief gets denied. This Minnesota court motion was granted - the two starting corners for the Gophers were, without ever receiving an evidentiary hearing, enjoined from entering the stadium on the off chance that they might, presumably while in uniform and on the field, assault this woman.
After allowing these same players to play most of the season, Eric Kaler and Mark Coyle eventually suspend all 10 players involved and then lie to the players and tell them Tracy Claeys (their coach) was responsible for the suspensions.
Now, what would have been the appropriate thing to do?
1) Read the report -- geez guys, you guys looks like sexual predators out to have sex with any vulnerable woman you can find, do you have a response?
2) Yes, we have filed an appeal and we think we will win because of ____________.
3) OK, well, you are entitled to privacy and due process, so we are going to let you play the Holiday Bowl, but if you lose your appeal you are done.
People who are convicted of crimes often remain out of jail pending appeal! Corporations who are found guilty of fraud and have a $40,000,000 judgment entered against them don't have to pay if they file a bond. What was the requirement that the University suspend these guys? None. Again, the administration knew what these guys were accused of for MONTHS and allowed them to play football. But they suddenly suspend the players, lie about who did the suspending, and then face a player boycott and a coach backlash.
This would have never happened at any traidtionally top 20 program. I mean, my lord, what was the punishment for Michael Floyd's DUI at Notre Dame? Was he ever tossed out of school? Suspended for a couple games? Nope. He lost his team captain status. I am sure opposing coaches feared him less without the C.
Here is what would have happened at a top 20 program:
1) Report to the police - police take a report, advise no charges. Prosecutors do not charge.
2) Civil suit filed. Motion for restraining order denied.
3) Booster approaches claimant - provides large amount of money through scholarship and free housing and duffel bags of cash.
4) EOAA office determines that they will agree with prosecutors and find no violation. Claimant deemed to be not credible.
By contrast, Minnesota just HAS to constantly self-report and self-find-itself guilty. Thus the ultimate result is that it loses many players and fires a winning coach whose team loves him and who has a record of academic success with his players. The guy went 9-4 at Minnesota, won a bowl game and has a LOT of good players on defense who will return in 2017. That is the upside of the coach. The downside? When given the opportunity to suck Eric Kaler's dick, he chose not to do so.
The Minnesota press and Minnesota citizens both continue to search for the elusive set of 60 football scholar-athletes who will bring the team to a deserved 14-0 back-to-back title seasons; players who spend their Friday and Saturday evenings helping old women across the street and freeing scared cats from trees. These 60 saints in football garb will want to attend Minnesota because Minnesota (despite no Rose Bowls in 50 years) deserves the best players in America. I am not certain that this will occur, but I guess hope springs eternal.
A Final Note on Mark Coyle:
This is a guy who spent one year at Syracuse as AD under Jim Boeheim, oops, sorry, I meant "with" Jim Boeheim. I grew up 80 miles from Syracuse. I have met Syracuse residents and Syracuse cops. I have heard their stories. Suffice to say, if Mark Coyle spent a year at Syracuse, he knows what a northern school's program does to "compete at the highest level". I would suggest that even in his brief tenure at the 'Cuse that Coyle saw how it is done. He didn't want to do it, or be the AD while it was being done. So what did he do? He came to Minnesota. For his travles, he got a football team accused of gang rape. Whether rightfully or wrongfully accused, you have to figure that Coyle thought "I thought I left this behind." So when he got the choice to keep or fire Tracy Claeys, he fired him.
Coyle will now take the position that he will hire a coach who is squeaky clean and who will uphold the Minnesota ideal (he wants a coach who "knows what Minnesota is") of all guys who get 4.0s and hang out in the Christian Science Reading Room in their spare time. Good luck. I think Gerry Faust is still alive.
Friday, December 30, 2016
Some Thoughts on the 11-22 Timberwolves.
The Wolves were 5-13 when I last complained about them. They have since gone 6-9 (5-4 in their past 9). Not that good, but better.
Of all of my ideas, the Wolves have done the one that is most important. They now run a ton of stuff through Karl-Anthony Towns. They run him into the post early and often and force the opponents to defend him in there. They run a ton of high ball screen action for Towns and Wiggy or Towns and Lavine. The increase in Towns' usage has led to a better team overall.
My concept that the Wolves should dump Rubio has not come to fruition and they still play Kris Dunn over Tyus Jones. I don't appreciate that. You can definitely see why Thibs, a defensive coach, wants to play Dunn. Dunn is a +++ defender for a point guard. He rebounds, gets his hands on balls, helps out powerfully and aggressively on defense. And he is a + athlete from a speed and leaping standpoint.
But Dunn is simply brutal at running an offense, and he is one of the reasons the Wolves' bench is at the bottom of the league in bench scoring. I would suggest that the Wolves' bench lineup should be Tyus/Dunn/Shabazz or Lavine/Aldrich/Bheli (or Payne). It is a small bench lineup, but what NBA clubs have high scoring big guys off the pine? Not many.
Jordan Hill -- should never play.
Thibs has somewhat calmed down, but that may be an offshoot of the fact that the Wolves started 6-18. I mean, you are expected to go 41-41 and you start 6-18. Everything has gone so shitty that basically there are now nearly no expectations on you as a club. It is unlikely that you will (after playing at a 20-62 pace) suddenly go 35-23 and make the playoffs. So you can just go out and play the game. You suck, you are a doormat again. no one expects anything from you. (In the parking garage elevator after one Wolves home loss an opposing fan told me "Gee, I don't think your team is that bad after all, they kept it close.") It hurts to be patronized. This is basically, "HM, you really aren't THAT fat and ugly. I'd consider telling my less attractive niece to think about dating you."
THINGS I SEE THAT I LIKE
1) The coaching staff has settled down by a factor of 25%. It needs to gear back another 25%, but at least there is not panic and screaming on every single play.
2) The staff has some fun out of bounds plays that actually work.
3) The staff has a funky defensive free throw alignment where they line up the SF and SG in the scoring corners and then have the PG race the ball right up the middle. Opponents have terrible trouble with this play and it generally results in a layup or a wide open 3.
4) Lavine has played well. His offensive rating is around 117. He has learned not to dribble greater than 3 times in a possession. He is brilliant at maneuvering to get open 3s and he has very long range. He is a terrible defender (115 DRtg) so he needs to improve greatly there. The guy can touch 12 feet, there is no way he shouldn't get more steals and blocks and maybe even some defensive rebounds.
5) Wiggy is TRYING to improve his rebounding. I mean, look, the guy has terrible hands. They are either super small or they have grease on them or he just never played catch growing up. So it is not only lack of interest/energy that keeps Wiggy at 3-5 RPG, he is also not a gifted rebounder even when he tries. That said, I can see that the coaches are trying to get him to square up the ball between his shoulders, high-point the ball, and rebound with two hands. That way, when the ball squirts out of his hands (as it inevitably often does) the ball is likely to drop right in front of Wiggy and his body can shield the dropped ball from opponents.
6) The Wolves are valuing Gorgui's 17 foot jumper as a weapon. Gorgui, like former Wolf center Mark Blount, has a deadly 15-20 foot jumper when left alone. And he is often left alone. When the Wolves wre good (and yes they once were) Sam Mitchell was the grizzled vet who stood 15-20 feet out, waited for the ball, and drilled the jumper at the shot clock buzzer. Gorgui can do that as well and we are seeing it more.
THINGS I AM SEEING THAT I DO NOT ENJOY
A) The Wolves are pussies. When an opponent has a physically imposing big man who plays hard, the Wolves almost always lose and they almost always give us 115--120 points. If, however, an opponent has no big strong post presence (or that presence is a dog ala Dwight Howard) the Wolves can beat anyone (played GState close, had Houston beat). Your chances of winning should not be based upon whether opponents can manhandle you. An opponent should never manhandle you.
B) The Wolves play harder in some games and less hard in others. Tonight Wiggy wanted to be thought of more highly than his draft classmate Jabari Parker. So we got the great Wiggy (6 asssits, shut down the Greek Freak). But then he will go to Denver and cannot guard anyone or even try to do so. This was a trait of J.R. Rider - J.R. would light up Mitch Richmond and then give up 40 to Eddie Jones.
C) Wolves have almost no bench play. Kris Dunn's PG skills appear to be roughly 15% better than the PG skills that made Lavine into a full time off guard. Offense aboslutely grinds to a halt with Dunn. And his jumper? It is like the shooting equivalent of a random number generator - could be left, right, long, short, air, or it could go directly into the basket. He could make 4 in a rown or airball 4 in a row and neither would surprise anyone. Imagine getting into your car every day and the heater works 100 times out of 300, but sometimes 4 in a row and sometimes not at all for 9 times and some times it causes second-degree burns to you finger when you hit the on button. That is what watching Kris Dunn shoot a basketball feels like for me.
D) Speaking of - after starting the year with a newly-crafted jumper with perfect shot rotation, Wiggins now appears to be back to his old ways of side spinning the ball so it is a swish or nothing. He likes to come across it in a curveball spin.
D) Wolves still don't really understand what they are trying to do on defense. I think the newest strategy on pick and rolls is to show and recover more. I think. It is bad when you cannot tell exactly what the strategy is by watching 99% of the play (as I do either live, on TV live, or on tape).
E) Wolves are really, really, really bad at running shooters off the 3-point line. I mean, my lord, if I have to watch anorther team's 2-3-4 man stand and stare at the Wolf defender for 3 seconds and then hit a three, I will lose my mind. Get up under him or on his shooting hand and make him at least dribble. Yes, if the guy has 11 moves to get a 3 (like Curry or Lavine) it may not work. But allowing a guy to stand, do nothing, then hit an open three in your face? That has to stop.
OK -- all for now. At 11-22 there is some hope of improvement at least. They are at least building toward their 29 win pace of last year. And if they are on pace for 29 wins with 20 to play, they could pick up 4-6 more games as teams try to tank for draft picks.
We shall see.
Of all of my ideas, the Wolves have done the one that is most important. They now run a ton of stuff through Karl-Anthony Towns. They run him into the post early and often and force the opponents to defend him in there. They run a ton of high ball screen action for Towns and Wiggy or Towns and Lavine. The increase in Towns' usage has led to a better team overall.
My concept that the Wolves should dump Rubio has not come to fruition and they still play Kris Dunn over Tyus Jones. I don't appreciate that. You can definitely see why Thibs, a defensive coach, wants to play Dunn. Dunn is a +++ defender for a point guard. He rebounds, gets his hands on balls, helps out powerfully and aggressively on defense. And he is a + athlete from a speed and leaping standpoint.
But Dunn is simply brutal at running an offense, and he is one of the reasons the Wolves' bench is at the bottom of the league in bench scoring. I would suggest that the Wolves' bench lineup should be Tyus/Dunn/Shabazz or Lavine/Aldrich/Bheli (or Payne). It is a small bench lineup, but what NBA clubs have high scoring big guys off the pine? Not many.
Jordan Hill -- should never play.
Thibs has somewhat calmed down, but that may be an offshoot of the fact that the Wolves started 6-18. I mean, you are expected to go 41-41 and you start 6-18. Everything has gone so shitty that basically there are now nearly no expectations on you as a club. It is unlikely that you will (after playing at a 20-62 pace) suddenly go 35-23 and make the playoffs. So you can just go out and play the game. You suck, you are a doormat again. no one expects anything from you. (In the parking garage elevator after one Wolves home loss an opposing fan told me "Gee, I don't think your team is that bad after all, they kept it close.") It hurts to be patronized. This is basically, "HM, you really aren't THAT fat and ugly. I'd consider telling my less attractive niece to think about dating you."
THINGS I SEE THAT I LIKE
1) The coaching staff has settled down by a factor of 25%. It needs to gear back another 25%, but at least there is not panic and screaming on every single play.
2) The staff has some fun out of bounds plays that actually work.
3) The staff has a funky defensive free throw alignment where they line up the SF and SG in the scoring corners and then have the PG race the ball right up the middle. Opponents have terrible trouble with this play and it generally results in a layup or a wide open 3.
4) Lavine has played well. His offensive rating is around 117. He has learned not to dribble greater than 3 times in a possession. He is brilliant at maneuvering to get open 3s and he has very long range. He is a terrible defender (115 DRtg) so he needs to improve greatly there. The guy can touch 12 feet, there is no way he shouldn't get more steals and blocks and maybe even some defensive rebounds.
5) Wiggy is TRYING to improve his rebounding. I mean, look, the guy has terrible hands. They are either super small or they have grease on them or he just never played catch growing up. So it is not only lack of interest/energy that keeps Wiggy at 3-5 RPG, he is also not a gifted rebounder even when he tries. That said, I can see that the coaches are trying to get him to square up the ball between his shoulders, high-point the ball, and rebound with two hands. That way, when the ball squirts out of his hands (as it inevitably often does) the ball is likely to drop right in front of Wiggy and his body can shield the dropped ball from opponents.
6) The Wolves are valuing Gorgui's 17 foot jumper as a weapon. Gorgui, like former Wolf center Mark Blount, has a deadly 15-20 foot jumper when left alone. And he is often left alone. When the Wolves wre good (and yes they once were) Sam Mitchell was the grizzled vet who stood 15-20 feet out, waited for the ball, and drilled the jumper at the shot clock buzzer. Gorgui can do that as well and we are seeing it more.
THINGS I AM SEEING THAT I DO NOT ENJOY
A) The Wolves are pussies. When an opponent has a physically imposing big man who plays hard, the Wolves almost always lose and they almost always give us 115--120 points. If, however, an opponent has no big strong post presence (or that presence is a dog ala Dwight Howard) the Wolves can beat anyone (played GState close, had Houston beat). Your chances of winning should not be based upon whether opponents can manhandle you. An opponent should never manhandle you.
B) The Wolves play harder in some games and less hard in others. Tonight Wiggy wanted to be thought of more highly than his draft classmate Jabari Parker. So we got the great Wiggy (6 asssits, shut down the Greek Freak). But then he will go to Denver and cannot guard anyone or even try to do so. This was a trait of J.R. Rider - J.R. would light up Mitch Richmond and then give up 40 to Eddie Jones.
C) Wolves have almost no bench play. Kris Dunn's PG skills appear to be roughly 15% better than the PG skills that made Lavine into a full time off guard. Offense aboslutely grinds to a halt with Dunn. And his jumper? It is like the shooting equivalent of a random number generator - could be left, right, long, short, air, or it could go directly into the basket. He could make 4 in a rown or airball 4 in a row and neither would surprise anyone. Imagine getting into your car every day and the heater works 100 times out of 300, but sometimes 4 in a row and sometimes not at all for 9 times and some times it causes second-degree burns to you finger when you hit the on button. That is what watching Kris Dunn shoot a basketball feels like for me.
D) Speaking of - after starting the year with a newly-crafted jumper with perfect shot rotation, Wiggins now appears to be back to his old ways of side spinning the ball so it is a swish or nothing. He likes to come across it in a curveball spin.
D) Wolves still don't really understand what they are trying to do on defense. I think the newest strategy on pick and rolls is to show and recover more. I think. It is bad when you cannot tell exactly what the strategy is by watching 99% of the play (as I do either live, on TV live, or on tape).
E) Wolves are really, really, really bad at running shooters off the 3-point line. I mean, my lord, if I have to watch anorther team's 2-3-4 man stand and stare at the Wolf defender for 3 seconds and then hit a three, I will lose my mind. Get up under him or on his shooting hand and make him at least dribble. Yes, if the guy has 11 moves to get a 3 (like Curry or Lavine) it may not work. But allowing a guy to stand, do nothing, then hit an open three in your face? That has to stop.
OK -- all for now. At 11-22 there is some hope of improvement at least. They are at least building toward their 29 win pace of last year. And if they are on pace for 29 wins with 20 to play, they could pick up 4-6 more games as teams try to tank for draft picks.
We shall see.
Happy 32nd Birthday, LeBron James
www.basketball-reference.com, which is the greatest website ever invented, will allow you to search for players by age. They define "age" as how old you were on February 1 of a particular season. So, if you were born February 1, 1985, this would be your "age 32" season. But if you were born February 2, 1985 this would still be your "age 31" season. I suppose Feb. 1 is selected because it is roughly the midpoint of the season.
Anyway, this will be LeBron's "age 32 season" so to see where he fits with other 32 year old careers, you need to search.
Since you'd like to see stats like VORP. that means you need to do a couple different searches, because Oscar Robertson and Wilt, for example, have no VORP (the site doesn't keep that stat that far back) and you need to account for the fact that Kareem only has VORP for part of his career (as does Bird and Magic, etc.).
Anyway, here is one search http://bkref.com/tiny/S8kA2
Here is another to get the guys without VORP -- http://bkref.com/tiny/ria7b
Now, might I be a bit off using just these two searches? Yes. But, here is the best info I have on LeBron's rankings as a 32 year old. This also assumes that he will not ever play another game this year and that he will record no positive or negative stats from now until the end of the season.
VORP - 1st
Points - 2nd
Win Shares - 2nd
Turnovers - 2nd
Games Started - 2nd
Minutes Played - 3rd
FG - 3rd
FGA - 3rd
Games Played - 4th
FTA - 4th
PER, WS/48, 3PA, FTM -- all 5th place
Assists - 7th
3P made -- 9th
He is also 13th in steals.
Maybe the most amazing stat -- 3rd in MP, 13th in steals, 78th in fouls (meaning he almost never gets called for a foul).
Not so great categories:
Effective FG% - 19th
3P% - 21st
TS% - 26th
Blocks - 36th
FG% - 40th
Total rebounds - 42nd
Free Throw Percentage - 74th.
With another 1 WS he will pass Wilt for #1 on the age 32 and under WS list. With another 325 points he will pass Kobe for the #1 32 and under scorer. With another 118 minutes he will pass Garnett for #2 in MP, needs 628 to pass Kobe.
Happy birthday, LeBron. For longevity purposes, keep in mind that to get in the top 5 for points and top 5 in assists he will need to play 5+ more years. He already has played the 34th most minutes of any player, so playing 12,000 more minutes would place him in the top 3 all-time in minutes played. At some point you expect to see diminishing returns.
Anyway, this will be LeBron's "age 32 season" so to see where he fits with other 32 year old careers, you need to search.
Since you'd like to see stats like VORP. that means you need to do a couple different searches, because Oscar Robertson and Wilt, for example, have no VORP (the site doesn't keep that stat that far back) and you need to account for the fact that Kareem only has VORP for part of his career (as does Bird and Magic, etc.).
Anyway, here is one search http://bkref.com/tiny/S8kA2
Here is another to get the guys without VORP -- http://bkref.com/tiny/ria7b
Now, might I be a bit off using just these two searches? Yes. But, here is the best info I have on LeBron's rankings as a 32 year old. This also assumes that he will not ever play another game this year and that he will record no positive or negative stats from now until the end of the season.
VORP - 1st
Points - 2nd
Win Shares - 2nd
Turnovers - 2nd
Games Started - 2nd
Minutes Played - 3rd
FG - 3rd
FGA - 3rd
Games Played - 4th
FTA - 4th
PER, WS/48, 3PA, FTM -- all 5th place
Assists - 7th
3P made -- 9th
He is also 13th in steals.
Maybe the most amazing stat -- 3rd in MP, 13th in steals, 78th in fouls (meaning he almost never gets called for a foul).
Not so great categories:
Effective FG% - 19th
3P% - 21st
TS% - 26th
Blocks - 36th
FG% - 40th
Total rebounds - 42nd
Free Throw Percentage - 74th.
With another 1 WS he will pass Wilt for #1 on the age 32 and under WS list. With another 325 points he will pass Kobe for the #1 32 and under scorer. With another 118 minutes he will pass Garnett for #2 in MP, needs 628 to pass Kobe.
Happy birthday, LeBron. For longevity purposes, keep in mind that to get in the top 5 for points and top 5 in assists he will need to play 5+ more years. He already has played the 34th most minutes of any player, so playing 12,000 more minutes would place him in the top 3 all-time in minutes played. At some point you expect to see diminishing returns.
Thursday, December 22, 2016
Naismith Hall of Fame Candidates for 2017
http://www.hoophall.com/news/naismith-memorial-basketball-hall-of-fame-announces-eligible-candidates-for-the-class-of-2017/
I will not purport to claim a great knowledge of the other categories (though I do love Jennifer Azzi). So I will concentrate on the American male players category.
I will drop guys who are coaches or contributors or someone like Geese Ausbie who was a great Globetrotter. I mean, how do you evaluate that? Did the fans like him more? Did the Washington Generals have more trouble stopping him?
My goal here will be to identify no more than 6 male player Finalists.
As I have opined in the past, there are a lot of clunkers in the Basketball Hall of Fame, so I really cannot concentrate on things like "Is he better than Calvin Murphy or Guy Rodgers or Mitch Richmond?"
I am not going to say "Well, Ralph Sampson is in, so...." That is not a true HOF test. Instead, we will look at my criteria for NBA players:
Was he any of the following:
1) a top 3 starter on a championship team;
2) a couple times first-team all-NBA;
3) top 10 in MVP balloting at least 2 times;
4) possessed with some otherworldly skill that deserves recognition (10 times all-defense, 3 times defensive POY, rebounding champ 4+ times, etc.); or
5) top 10 all-time in one particular positive stat of note.
Let's look at the list:
Guys who have been left out forever (10):
Paul Westphal, Jack Sikma, Sidney Moncrief, Kevin Johnson, Marques Johnson, Bobby Jones, Mo Cheeks, Terry Cummings, Swen Nater, Junior Bridgeman
Guys who have been left out for a some time (5):
Tim Hardaway, Mark Price, Steve Smith, Mark Aguirre, Muggsy Bogues
Newer Candidates (4):
Tracy McGrady, Chris Webber, Ben Wallace, Glenn Robinson
We have 19 Guys and I am trying to knock the list down to 6.
In Fairness, Let's Use my Criteria to Identify Guys Who Don't Meet the Bare Minimum Qualifications.
Mo Cheeks, Terry Cummings, Swen Nater, Junior Bridgeman, Steve Smith, Mark Aguirre, Muggsy Bogues, Glenn Robinson are all out. (I do not consider Cheeks to be a top 3 Sixer or consider his 10th place finish in steals per game to be enough, even with his 4x all-defense awards).
That leaves 11 guys for 6 spots.
Westphal
Sikma
Moncrief
Kevin Johnson
Marques Johnson
Bobby Jones
Tim Hardaway
Mark Price
Tracy McGrady
Chris Webber
Ben Wallace
All 11 are excellent players and deserving of consideration.
Category A -- The 2 Locks
McGrady and Ben Wallace.
1) Tracy was 2x first-team all-NBA, 6X in the top 10 in MVP voting, 7X all-star. He had a season with 16 WS. He is in.
2) Big Ben is #1 all-time in Defensive Box Score Plus-Minus. #1. Ever. DPOY, 5X first-team all-defense. Starter on a title team and a great team that went to 7 games in the Finals. He is in.
Category B -- The 4 Guys Who Don't Deserve It
Best to Worst -- Mark Price , Tim Hardaway, Kevin Johnson, Marques Johnson
These are all "very, very good" players, but they were all guys who were elite for only 3-4 years. Not to say that they could never get in, but I couldn't skip them forward in the line while others stayed out.
They have a combined 3 first-team all-NBAs and a combined 11 times being voted top 10 in MVP voting. Between the 4 guys.
That leaves us with 5 guys for 4 spots -- Westphal, Sikma, Moncrief, Bobby Jones, Chris Webber.
Category C - Left Out In the Cold
Poor Jack Skima. He was great as a champion Sonic, very good as a Buck, and he has 112 Win Shares - the most by anyone on the list. He was 7X all-star, tied for most of anyone on the list. But if you put a gun to my head and said, "rank the 5 guys left" I'd say Moncrief, Westphal, Jones, Webber, Sikma.
Jack was never first-team all-NBA or first-team all-defense. He only finished top 10 in MVP balloting twice. Despite playing forever, he is not really well known for any great particular skill or statistical achievement.
So he is out, but I would not cry if he got in.
Category D -- They Get My 3rd Through 6th Votes
3rd -- Sidney Moncrief -- the fact that Sidney Moncrief is not in the HOF should be mentioned to every HOF voter every day of his or her life until the problem is remedied. Sid is 4x all-defense, 5x top 10 in all-NBA balloting. He personally stopped Moses' quest for Fo-Fo-Fo. Top 7 player in the league 5 or 6 years. Only 1X first-team all-NBA, but it is a joke he is not in HOF.
4th -- Paul Wetsphal -- this will not be a popular take, but stick with me. Paul Westphal was first-team all-NBA 3 times. First-team. He was one of the 2 best guards in the league 3X. 5X all-star. Took his team to the NBA Finals. One would find his career roughly the same or similar to Spencer Haywood. I just don't think you can have a HOF where you say "sure you were deemd one of the best guys for 3-5 years, but fuck you." Is hurt by only having 62.7 career WS.
5th Bobby Jones -- he was great in the ABA, great in the NBA, played on the great Sixers teams. He was 9X first-team all-defense. 9X. And none of those were fluke all-defense awards. He was great on the ball, great off the ball, great on chase down blocks. He shot a high percentage, moved the ball, was a good teammate, his teams always won. He was just a great overall player.
6th Chris Webber -- now, if someone came up to me and said "Webber is out and Sikma or Mark Price is in" I would not lose a great deal of sleep. Chris was 1X first-team all-NBA and 5X top 10 in the MVP balloting. Chris was great with Sacto, not so great with anyone else. For more thoughts on Webber, see my old entry. http://hoopramblings.blogspot.com/2013/09/the-difficult-hall-of-fame-case-for.html
I will not purport to claim a great knowledge of the other categories (though I do love Jennifer Azzi). So I will concentrate on the American male players category.
I will drop guys who are coaches or contributors or someone like Geese Ausbie who was a great Globetrotter. I mean, how do you evaluate that? Did the fans like him more? Did the Washington Generals have more trouble stopping him?
My goal here will be to identify no more than 6 male player Finalists.
As I have opined in the past, there are a lot of clunkers in the Basketball Hall of Fame, so I really cannot concentrate on things like "Is he better than Calvin Murphy or Guy Rodgers or Mitch Richmond?"
I am not going to say "Well, Ralph Sampson is in, so...." That is not a true HOF test. Instead, we will look at my criteria for NBA players:
Was he any of the following:
1) a top 3 starter on a championship team;
2) a couple times first-team all-NBA;
3) top 10 in MVP balloting at least 2 times;
4) possessed with some otherworldly skill that deserves recognition (10 times all-defense, 3 times defensive POY, rebounding champ 4+ times, etc.); or
5) top 10 all-time in one particular positive stat of note.
Let's look at the list:
Guys who have been left out forever (10):
Paul Westphal, Jack Sikma, Sidney Moncrief, Kevin Johnson, Marques Johnson, Bobby Jones, Mo Cheeks, Terry Cummings, Swen Nater, Junior Bridgeman
Guys who have been left out for a some time (5):
Tim Hardaway, Mark Price, Steve Smith, Mark Aguirre, Muggsy Bogues
Newer Candidates (4):
We have 19 Guys and I am trying to knock the list down to 6.
In Fairness, Let's Use my Criteria to Identify Guys Who Don't Meet the Bare Minimum Qualifications.
Mo Cheeks, Terry Cummings, Swen Nater, Junior Bridgeman, Steve Smith, Mark Aguirre, Muggsy Bogues, Glenn Robinson are all out. (I do not consider Cheeks to be a top 3 Sixer or consider his 10th place finish in steals per game to be enough, even with his 4x all-defense awards).
That leaves 11 guys for 6 spots.
Westphal
Sikma
Moncrief
Kevin Johnson
Marques Johnson
Bobby Jones
Tim Hardaway
Mark Price
Tracy McGrady
Chris Webber
Ben Wallace
All 11 are excellent players and deserving of consideration.
Category A -- The 2 Locks
McGrady and Ben Wallace.
1) Tracy was 2x first-team all-NBA, 6X in the top 10 in MVP voting, 7X all-star. He had a season with 16 WS. He is in.
2) Big Ben is #1 all-time in Defensive Box Score Plus-Minus. #1. Ever. DPOY, 5X first-team all-defense. Starter on a title team and a great team that went to 7 games in the Finals. He is in.
Category B -- The 4 Guys Who Don't Deserve It
Best to Worst -- Mark Price , Tim Hardaway, Kevin Johnson, Marques Johnson
These are all "very, very good" players, but they were all guys who were elite for only 3-4 years. Not to say that they could never get in, but I couldn't skip them forward in the line while others stayed out.
They have a combined 3 first-team all-NBAs and a combined 11 times being voted top 10 in MVP voting. Between the 4 guys.
That leaves us with 5 guys for 4 spots -- Westphal, Sikma, Moncrief, Bobby Jones, Chris Webber.
Category C - Left Out In the Cold
Poor Jack Skima. He was great as a champion Sonic, very good as a Buck, and he has 112 Win Shares - the most by anyone on the list. He was 7X all-star, tied for most of anyone on the list. But if you put a gun to my head and said, "rank the 5 guys left" I'd say Moncrief, Westphal, Jones, Webber, Sikma.
Jack was never first-team all-NBA or first-team all-defense. He only finished top 10 in MVP balloting twice. Despite playing forever, he is not really well known for any great particular skill or statistical achievement.
So he is out, but I would not cry if he got in.
Category D -- They Get My 3rd Through 6th Votes
3rd -- Sidney Moncrief -- the fact that Sidney Moncrief is not in the HOF should be mentioned to every HOF voter every day of his or her life until the problem is remedied. Sid is 4x all-defense, 5x top 10 in all-NBA balloting. He personally stopped Moses' quest for Fo-Fo-Fo. Top 7 player in the league 5 or 6 years. Only 1X first-team all-NBA, but it is a joke he is not in HOF.
4th -- Paul Wetsphal -- this will not be a popular take, but stick with me. Paul Westphal was first-team all-NBA 3 times. First-team. He was one of the 2 best guards in the league 3X. 5X all-star. Took his team to the NBA Finals. One would find his career roughly the same or similar to Spencer Haywood. I just don't think you can have a HOF where you say "sure you were deemd one of the best guys for 3-5 years, but fuck you." Is hurt by only having 62.7 career WS.
5th Bobby Jones -- he was great in the ABA, great in the NBA, played on the great Sixers teams. He was 9X first-team all-defense. 9X. And none of those were fluke all-defense awards. He was great on the ball, great off the ball, great on chase down blocks. He shot a high percentage, moved the ball, was a good teammate, his teams always won. He was just a great overall player.
6th Chris Webber -- now, if someone came up to me and said "Webber is out and Sikma or Mark Price is in" I would not lose a great deal of sleep. Chris was 1X first-team all-NBA and 5X top 10 in the MVP balloting. Chris was great with Sacto, not so great with anyone else. For more thoughts on Webber, see my old entry. http://hoopramblings.blogspot.com/2013/09/the-difficult-hall-of-fame-case-for.html
Wednesday, December 21, 2016
Top 75 in ABA/NBA Stats and Top 50 in ABA/NBA Stats - Look at Kevin Garnett!
Per www.basketball-reference.com, the greatest site in the world, it currently takes the following stats to be Top 75 on the combined NBA/ABA lists:
Points -- 17,770
Rebounds - 8059
Assists -- 4612
The guys who have reached all of those levels?
Kareem, Wilt, Karl Malone, Kevin Garnett, Julius Erving (counting ABA stats), and Larry Bird
I looked -- Oscar is short a couple hundred rebounds and Magic is short like 10 points.
Top 50 in all categories:
Points -- 19,528
Rebounds - 9,443
Assists - 5,314
Those who meet all three criteria?
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (1st in points, 4th in rebounds, 41st in assists).
Kevin Garnett (20th in points, 10th in rebounds, 47th in assists).
For those, like me, who loved KG as a player, this is a very impressive Group of Two for him to be in and it indicates that for longevity and versatility KG should maybe be moved higher on the all-time lists..
For those of you wondering -- Bird is short on rebounds to be Top 50. Wilt, Karl, Doc all are short on assists to be top 50.
Points -- 17,770
Rebounds - 8059
Assists -- 4612
The guys who have reached all of those levels?
Kareem, Wilt, Karl Malone, Kevin Garnett, Julius Erving (counting ABA stats), and Larry Bird
I looked -- Oscar is short a couple hundred rebounds and Magic is short like 10 points.
Top 50 in all categories:
Points -- 19,528
Rebounds - 9,443
Assists - 5,314
Those who meet all three criteria?
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (1st in points, 4th in rebounds, 41st in assists).
Kevin Garnett (20th in points, 10th in rebounds, 47th in assists).
For those, like me, who loved KG as a player, this is a very impressive Group of Two for him to be in and it indicates that for longevity and versatility KG should maybe be moved higher on the all-time lists..
For those of you wondering -- Bird is short on rebounds to be Top 50. Wilt, Karl, Doc all are short on assists to be top 50.
Thursday, December 15, 2016
LeBron moves up the List of Those With 40,000+ Points/Rebounds/Assists
http://hoopramblings.blogspot.com/search?q=40000 shows the old list.
LeBron is now at 41,631 total units and is #16, having passed Dan Issel. LeBron is still roughly 2,000 units behind Dirk and Hakeem, and roughly 3,000 behind Artis Gilmore, Oscar, Michael Jordan and Shaq.
Taking games off won't help LeBron reach top 10 status this year. But if he plays 50 games and averages 25/7/8 he will add 2,000 and get into striking distance of the top 10 for next season.
Paul Pierce is currently at 38,528. He has only registered 35 total units so far this year, so, yeah....
Vince Carter, who played when Jesus was a carpenter, has not reached 35,000 total units. Tony Parker and Chris Paul are not even at 30,000 total units.
It is a big man's world in this stat category.
LeBron is now at 41,631 total units and is #16, having passed Dan Issel. LeBron is still roughly 2,000 units behind Dirk and Hakeem, and roughly 3,000 behind Artis Gilmore, Oscar, Michael Jordan and Shaq.
Taking games off won't help LeBron reach top 10 status this year. But if he plays 50 games and averages 25/7/8 he will add 2,000 and get into striking distance of the top 10 for next season.
Paul Pierce is currently at 38,528. He has only registered 35 total units so far this year, so, yeah....
Vince Carter, who played when Jesus was a carpenter, has not reached 35,000 total units. Tony Parker and Chris Paul are not even at 30,000 total units.
It is a big man's world in this stat category.
Monday, December 12, 2016
For you Fans of Fat Lever
http://bkref.com/tiny/HLHJx
So, you know -- Wilt, Michael, Magic, Oscar, Havlicek...............Fat Lever!!!!
So, you know -- Wilt, Michael, Magic, Oscar, Havlicek...............Fat Lever!!!!
Monday, December 05, 2016
Barry White Sings Live -- 1974
The big fella. Love Unlimited Orchestra.
I enjoy singing this at karaoke.
When I visited London, the street performers and I sang a little duet (quietly). RIP, big guy. HM
I enjoy singing this at karaoke.
When I visited London, the street performers and I sang a little duet (quietly). RIP, big guy. HM
Thursday, December 01, 2016
What I Would Do to Help the Timberwolves (There May Be No Easy "Fix" Right Now)
Tom Thibodeau has a 5 year deal to run all basketball operations of the Timberwolves. He is not going away. So far he has been far less successful than Sam Mitchell. That is a bad thing. In a scarier vein, he has seemingly demoralized Karl-Anthony Towns. In October, that would have seemed to be nearly impossible to do. But he has managed.
Thibs' constant screaming and whining at every referee call is not conducive to leading a young team. He has to learn to limit his bitching and whining to, say, 25% or less of all plays.
Some general thoughts on suggested changes other than that:
1) Karl-Anthony Towns is your #1 player. He should be announced last at home. It is a small thing, and a very petty thing, and KAT would never ask for or demand it. But there is no way Andrew Wiggins should be announced last. KAT is your best guy, he gets announced last. Go through the Wolves' advanced stats and see if it makes any sense to say Andrew Wiggins is your star. Answer - it does not. Just accept that.
2) Your offense must be focused on KAT. The Wolves once went 40-42 just absolutely force feeding the ball to Kevin Love. You can do that with KAT, and KAT is a better passer, better dribbler, and much bigger than Love. He is not quite the shooter Love was the year he was 2nd team all-NBA, but KAT is 21 years old.
You can run the occasional stuff for LaVine. And Wiggy has his moments where he is hot. But KAT is your best player, recognize that and run stuff mostly for him.
3) You have to have some buy-in defensively. I honest to god cannot tell what the Wolves are trying to do defensively. This indicates to me that the Wolves players also do not know the answer. Allowing Rodney Hood to get to his left hand? Allowing Boris Diaw to spin to a right-hand hook? George Hill dribble a full 180 degree plus wheel with his right hand and finish at the rim? They don't put a body on anyone, and are regularly also outjumped for the ball on rebounds.
If things are so, so bleak, what you need is a sitdown with your club and just a statement of what you are trying to accomplish. "Guys, today we keep Boris Diaw to zero made hook shots." "Guys, if you see George Hill get more than 120 degrees dribbling to his right, go ahead and double team. He isn't passing." Hayward - make him drive. Melo 0 same. Hood - same.
If your guys cannot even understand or execute these very basic defensive elements, then go to Plan B. "Guys, what do YOU think you can execute defensively? Would you like to press? Trap? Play some 1-2-2, some 1-3-1? Is there anything we can run that you might enjoy? Double all ball screens and rotate? I mean, the Bucks double a ton and then cut off the next pass - it isn't a 100% faulty strategy necessarily.
But you cannot send guys out for 48 minutes and leave the crowd saying "what in the hell are we doing?" Even if your strategy is "wildly double the post and rotate" at least that is a strategy and it should at least take away post-ups. To steal from Neal Page, Thibs' strategy in 2016 "is a miracle," it seemingly takes away absolutely nothing that the opponent wants to do.
4) Rid Yourself of Rubio and Play Some Combo of Dunn/Tyus -- I was not a fan of drafting Kris Dunn, but I will tell you this -- Kris Dunn is a REALLY high end defender. Now, he may be the worst person I have ever seen at trying to run an offense. His penchant for dribbling to just inside the corner of the free throw line and picking up the ball is unnerving. But if you played Kris Dunn 20 mpg he would be disruptive defensively and he would kickstart a little offense off deflections and steals and guard rebounding. He isn't hopeless.
Tyus Jones is a great floor general, and his young teammates seemingly like him and want him to play. Watch Tyus and KAT on the bench. KAT talks to Tyus, even when Tyus isn't playing, and it is clearly about the game.
Tyus will never be a plus defender. But he is willing to try, and he wants to play and he wants to win. He is not afraid. Someone some day will play him 30 mpg and he will do very well in the NBA.
Rubio has become Tom Brookens. Tom Brookens played 12 years for the Detroit Tigers, had an OPS+ of 83 (100 is average) and yet rolled up roughly 4,000 at bats for the Tigers as an above-average fielding STARTING 3rd baseman. He was the best they had most years, so he always played. He just wasn't very good. Every year the Tigers would have a prospect to try to take his job, and he couldn't displace Brookens. But Brookens was just not very good. In fact, for hitting, he was very poor.
(Notably, in 1984 Brookens was NOT the starter and was made a utility player -- the Tigers won the title. The next year he returned to third base).
Anyway - my point? Ricky may have the edge right now over Dunn and Tyus, but if Ricky is your PG, you ain't going anywhere. And as long as he is around, he will probably be your PG, because he will look better than the young guys you have behind him.
You gotta rid yourself of Ricky. You are 5-13, you aren't making the playoffs. Just jettison him for whatever you can get. Play the other two guys. In fact, play Dunn and Tyus together some. Dunn can take on the best guard and Tyus can handle the ball.
The Spanish National Team still doesn't play Ricky much. Is there any other coaching staff in the world who knows more about Ricky? Sorry, Ricky, my daughter loves you, but you gotta go. Play all of the young guys, let them sink or swim together.
5) Establish Some Sort of Team Identity -- Hey, guys, we are going to go play Minnesota tonight, so be aware that they will _________________. Our identity when I assistant coached boys was that we would run great set offense and we would run multiple defenses. Drove opponents crazy. We weren't athletic or big, and everyone knew it, but you didn't like playing us, and opposing fans LOVED watching us. (In a state tourney, I had a 6'5" fan from the inner city approach me on the bench and say "are you an assistant coach of this team?" Sure. "Let me shake your hand - that is how basketball should be played." We knew what we were and we played that way. In 8th grade we were #4 in the state.
When I coached girls we would press full court then press half court and try to beat you up. We were more athletic than my boys had been. The word was that we were hard to play against because we fouled all of the time. We were 6th in the state in 8th grade.
Anyway - the point - you need to "be" something. If your team has no identity, 97% of the time you will suck. What are the Wolves? Well, hey have good young players. So....Do they run? No. Do they press? No. Force turnovers? No. Do they play fast? No.
OK - they have a highly skilled big man, SOOOOO....Do they play slow and use the shot clock? Go post up every play? Nope. Play physical defense? No. Outrebound you? No. Outwork you? Certainly not.
If you go across their Team Stats line, the Wolves are not noticeably better or worse than their opponents through 18 games at any significant stat. I don't view that as a plus. A team that is a poor shooting team and a great defensive team can win games because it always plays D. A team that shoots a ton of free throws might win a bunch of games it shouldn't. A team with great 3 point shooting might not rebound much at all. But all of these teams have a strength to fall back upon.
A team with no discernible strength has nothing to fall back upon, which is one reason the Wolves are chokers. When things are going poorly, they cannot say "toss it to _____ he'll draw a foul" or "sure we haven't scored in 4 minutes, but they won't score either." Or "let's run our pet play for KG where he posts on the left block and distributes."
Anyway - I could go on and on and on. But those are your basic building blocks. Start with those, and maybe by the time you are 10-30 overall, you will have a team that can go 21-21 the rest of the way?
HM
Thibs' constant screaming and whining at every referee call is not conducive to leading a young team. He has to learn to limit his bitching and whining to, say, 25% or less of all plays.
Some general thoughts on suggested changes other than that:
1) Karl-Anthony Towns is your #1 player. He should be announced last at home. It is a small thing, and a very petty thing, and KAT would never ask for or demand it. But there is no way Andrew Wiggins should be announced last. KAT is your best guy, he gets announced last. Go through the Wolves' advanced stats and see if it makes any sense to say Andrew Wiggins is your star. Answer - it does not. Just accept that.
2) Your offense must be focused on KAT. The Wolves once went 40-42 just absolutely force feeding the ball to Kevin Love. You can do that with KAT, and KAT is a better passer, better dribbler, and much bigger than Love. He is not quite the shooter Love was the year he was 2nd team all-NBA, but KAT is 21 years old.
You can run the occasional stuff for LaVine. And Wiggy has his moments where he is hot. But KAT is your best player, recognize that and run stuff mostly for him.
3) You have to have some buy-in defensively. I honest to god cannot tell what the Wolves are trying to do defensively. This indicates to me that the Wolves players also do not know the answer. Allowing Rodney Hood to get to his left hand? Allowing Boris Diaw to spin to a right-hand hook? George Hill dribble a full 180 degree plus wheel with his right hand and finish at the rim? They don't put a body on anyone, and are regularly also outjumped for the ball on rebounds.
If things are so, so bleak, what you need is a sitdown with your club and just a statement of what you are trying to accomplish. "Guys, today we keep Boris Diaw to zero made hook shots." "Guys, if you see George Hill get more than 120 degrees dribbling to his right, go ahead and double team. He isn't passing." Hayward - make him drive. Melo 0 same. Hood - same.
If your guys cannot even understand or execute these very basic defensive elements, then go to Plan B. "Guys, what do YOU think you can execute defensively? Would you like to press? Trap? Play some 1-2-2, some 1-3-1? Is there anything we can run that you might enjoy? Double all ball screens and rotate? I mean, the Bucks double a ton and then cut off the next pass - it isn't a 100% faulty strategy necessarily.
But you cannot send guys out for 48 minutes and leave the crowd saying "what in the hell are we doing?" Even if your strategy is "wildly double the post and rotate" at least that is a strategy and it should at least take away post-ups. To steal from Neal Page, Thibs' strategy in 2016 "is a miracle," it seemingly takes away absolutely nothing that the opponent wants to do.
4) Rid Yourself of Rubio and Play Some Combo of Dunn/Tyus -- I was not a fan of drafting Kris Dunn, but I will tell you this -- Kris Dunn is a REALLY high end defender. Now, he may be the worst person I have ever seen at trying to run an offense. His penchant for dribbling to just inside the corner of the free throw line and picking up the ball is unnerving. But if you played Kris Dunn 20 mpg he would be disruptive defensively and he would kickstart a little offense off deflections and steals and guard rebounding. He isn't hopeless.
Tyus Jones is a great floor general, and his young teammates seemingly like him and want him to play. Watch Tyus and KAT on the bench. KAT talks to Tyus, even when Tyus isn't playing, and it is clearly about the game.
Tyus will never be a plus defender. But he is willing to try, and he wants to play and he wants to win. He is not afraid. Someone some day will play him 30 mpg and he will do very well in the NBA.
Rubio has become Tom Brookens. Tom Brookens played 12 years for the Detroit Tigers, had an OPS+ of 83 (100 is average) and yet rolled up roughly 4,000 at bats for the Tigers as an above-average fielding STARTING 3rd baseman. He was the best they had most years, so he always played. He just wasn't very good. Every year the Tigers would have a prospect to try to take his job, and he couldn't displace Brookens. But Brookens was just not very good. In fact, for hitting, he was very poor.
(Notably, in 1984 Brookens was NOT the starter and was made a utility player -- the Tigers won the title. The next year he returned to third base).
Anyway - my point? Ricky may have the edge right now over Dunn and Tyus, but if Ricky is your PG, you ain't going anywhere. And as long as he is around, he will probably be your PG, because he will look better than the young guys you have behind him.
You gotta rid yourself of Ricky. You are 5-13, you aren't making the playoffs. Just jettison him for whatever you can get. Play the other two guys. In fact, play Dunn and Tyus together some. Dunn can take on the best guard and Tyus can handle the ball.
The Spanish National Team still doesn't play Ricky much. Is there any other coaching staff in the world who knows more about Ricky? Sorry, Ricky, my daughter loves you, but you gotta go. Play all of the young guys, let them sink or swim together.
5) Establish Some Sort of Team Identity -- Hey, guys, we are going to go play Minnesota tonight, so be aware that they will _________________. Our identity when I assistant coached boys was that we would run great set offense and we would run multiple defenses. Drove opponents crazy. We weren't athletic or big, and everyone knew it, but you didn't like playing us, and opposing fans LOVED watching us. (In a state tourney, I had a 6'5" fan from the inner city approach me on the bench and say "are you an assistant coach of this team?" Sure. "Let me shake your hand - that is how basketball should be played." We knew what we were and we played that way. In 8th grade we were #4 in the state.
When I coached girls we would press full court then press half court and try to beat you up. We were more athletic than my boys had been. The word was that we were hard to play against because we fouled all of the time. We were 6th in the state in 8th grade.
Anyway - the point - you need to "be" something. If your team has no identity, 97% of the time you will suck. What are the Wolves? Well, hey have good young players. So....Do they run? No. Do they press? No. Force turnovers? No. Do they play fast? No.
OK - they have a highly skilled big man, SOOOOO....Do they play slow and use the shot clock? Go post up every play? Nope. Play physical defense? No. Outrebound you? No. Outwork you? Certainly not.
If you go across their Team Stats line, the Wolves are not noticeably better or worse than their opponents through 18 games at any significant stat. I don't view that as a plus. A team that is a poor shooting team and a great defensive team can win games because it always plays D. A team that shoots a ton of free throws might win a bunch of games it shouldn't. A team with great 3 point shooting might not rebound much at all. But all of these teams have a strength to fall back upon.
A team with no discernible strength has nothing to fall back upon, which is one reason the Wolves are chokers. When things are going poorly, they cannot say "toss it to _____ he'll draw a foul" or "sure we haven't scored in 4 minutes, but they won't score either." Or "let's run our pet play for KG where he posts on the left block and distributes."
Anyway - I could go on and on and on. But those are your basic building blocks. Start with those, and maybe by the time you are 10-30 overall, you will have a team that can go 21-21 the rest of the way?
HM
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)