This blog has stood abandoned for almost 6 months. During that time, I've almost never even had the urge to write anything. I started blogging in 2004, which seems like a lifetime ago when it comes to the sports blogosphere. Eventually, my own malaise and burnout with sports caught up with me, and I gave the site the heave-ho. Since then, there have been any number of topics that might have been worth writing about.

Tonight, I don't even know what to say. Ever since Howard Schultz sold the Supersonics, a part of me knew this day was coming. Even after the city (and then Schultz) filed lawsuits, I could never get really optimistic. There was too much money at stake, and at least the perception of too-little fan interest to make a protracted battle attractive for the city.

Still, through it all, I maintained at least a shred of hope that someone would come to their senses. That David Stern, the owners, or someone in the NBA would realize that even if Oklahoma City deserves an NBA franchise, this is the wrong way to do it. That allowing such a blatant act of larceny to receive the NBA's seal of approval would strike someone as wrong (and bad long-term business). That fans en masse would realize that by continuing to ignore it when an owner hijacks a team with the league's consent, it merely ensures that it will happen again and again (maybe even to bring a new team to Seattle).

I don't even know what to be most upset about. Is it the loss of Kevin Durant after just one year? That he may turn out to be a Hall of Famer, with his time in Seattle being little more than a curious historical tidbit? The fact that if I choose to raise a family here, I'll never be able to share my love for basketball with my children? Or just the fact that I'll never be able to watch an NBA game again (a league which used to be my favorite) without at least some serious heartache?

In the end, tonight at least I'm mourning more for the past then the future. My mom broke her foot jumping up and down when the Sonics won the 1979 NBA Championship. I learned the game of basketball from watching Ricky Pierce, Nate McMillan, and the rest of the early 90s teams. I learned that man was not bound by gravity from watching Shawn Kemp, learned that perhaps the greatest joy in sports was watching your guy utterly humiliate another player by dunking on him, and then gloating about it over their prostrate body. I learned that a man can play Hall of Fame basketball while never shutting up from watching Gary Payton, and I learned that life can give you great heartache (the Nuggets in 1994) and great joy (the Jazz in 1996). All along, I knew that if given my choice, I'd take a Sonics title over any other. I wasn't born the first time it happened, and now it will never happen again.

Look, I understand that sports are a business, and that while owners, leagues, and players pay lip service to fans they know that we'll support teams no matter what. For every fan the NBA lost in Seattle today (or over the last few years), they've certainly made themselves plenty in Oklahoma City. And fans of the other 29 teams might feel some sympathy for my cause, but that's not going to keep them from showing up, even when the OKC team comes to town.

The vengeful part of me wants the team to fail miserably in Oklahoma City. While I have nothing against the players in particular, I wouldn't exactly shed tears if Kevin Durant lost a leg in a combine accident tomorrow. Furthermore, you'll get no sympathy out of me if the team struggles in Oklahoma, as they're likely to do unless Sam Presti really does know more than just about everyone. The team, and the league, falling flat on their face would perhaps be the final piece of evidence we need to see that the NBA's business model flat out sucks. The Sonics may have just moved, but Memphis, New Orleans, Sacramento, Indiana, Minnesota, Charlotte, Atlanta, and others could easily join them in the not-to-distant future.

However, a large part of me is just flat-out done. The anger is there, but tempering it is a pervasive feeling of powerlessness. In the end, my fandom didn't mean dick to the NBA, to Clay Bennett, or even to the City of Seattle. All the times I cursed a bad call, cheered a great play, ran through trades on RealGM, or did any of the other things that make us fans no longer have any meaning. We follow sports because they allow us to, for a time, suppress all the pressing issues of our lives: for 2 1/2 hours, we live and die with our surrogate warriors. Sure, it could be argued that such escapism is wasteful, sophomoric, or even damaging, but in the end sports can bring us a kind of joy that few other things (or so I've been told). While the Mariners or Seahawks may someday win a title, the joy I'll feel at that moment will be tempered by the fact that I know I'm settling for less than my dream.

Of course, the NBA might return to Seattle one day, whether by expansion, re-location, or even Howard Schultz's lawsuit. But like a spouse who's been cheated on, nothing will ever be the same. Sure, I might one day care for an NBA team again. I might even get to experience that joy of seeing them win a championship. But nothing is ever as good as your first love, and today that love died.

Posted by Zachary Geballe at 2:36 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Yes, I know this would be where the NFC Report would go, but honestly the only interesting thing in the NFL this week is that Patriots-Colts matchup you might have heard of (and which Ben will cover tomorrow), so it's time for a little NBA preview. So let's look at a few of the storylines that are running through this season.

Who can unseat the Spurs?

Here are your choices if you'd like to see someone other than Tim Duncan holding up the Larry O'Brien Trophy: Phoenix, Dallas, or Utah. Phoenix came close last year, and if not for a cheap shot to Steve Nash's nose and some silly decision making by Amare Stoudemire and Boris Diaw, they might have won that series. Still, it feels like the window for the Suns is closing, rapidly. Shawn Marion's griping could be an issue, and they dealt away Kurt Thomas for nothing. Steve Nash is still the best point guard out there, and as long as he's in the lineup they can make things happen.

Dallas is obviously dealing with the emotional baggage from last year's first-round collapse, but they did beat the Spurs in the West Finals in 2005, so it's clearly possible. They can spread the Spurs out defensively and shoot over them, and obviously Nowitzki is a very tough matchup for anyone.

Utah is more of a gamble, obviously, but they've got the talent to give the Spurs all kinds of trouble. Carlos Boozer is the second-best low-post player in the West, Deron Williams is emerging as one of the best point guards in the league, and Mehmet Okur can stretch the defense with his outside shooting. The big X-factor is Andrei Kirilenko. Yes, he's having issues with Jerry Sloan, and his play has been declining a bit over the last few years, but he is one of the few guys who can cause problems on the perimeter with his athleticism and can play defense on Ginobili.

Where is Kobe going?

I've been saying for years that Chicago is the most likely destination for Kobe should the Lakers trade him, and they still appear to be the odds-on favorite. The hold up is Luol Deng: the Lakers want him, the Bulls want to keep him, and Kobe wants to play with him.

The entire subject of Chicago trading for Kobe raises questions about how you win a title in this day and age. Certainly, the last 30 years of basketball seem to indicate that to win a championship you need at least one superstar. Only one team in that time frame has won without one: the 2004 Detroit Pistons. So far, the Bulls have done an excellent job of assembling a good young team which should remain competitive for years. The question is, can a team like that win a title?

I tend to think not. One of the weaknesses of this Chicago team is an inability to win close games. Now, Kobe isn't some magic panacea for this problem, but he does give them a clear focus late in games. For the last few years, Ben Gordon was that guy in Chicago, but he's not really good enough. Now, Deng is emerging as perhaps the option, but perhaps it's better to trade for the sure thing instead of waiting to see if Deng (or someone else) becomes it.

How good will the Celtics be?

I'm not buying into the NBA Finals hype. Kevin Garnett is legitimately one of the best 5-10 players in the league, but both Paul Pierce and Ray Allen are living off their reputation to some extent. Neither guy is all that efficient, and of course teaming them up raises the question of how the shots will be distributed. Furthermore, Allen particularly is a miserable perimeter defender. The only year the Sonics went to the playoffs with him is when Antonio Daniels turned into a lockup defender, as every other year Allen's weakness (combined with Rashard Lewis) gave back a lot of the advantage earned on the offensive end.

This Celtics team is going to be good, and they could be the best team in the East. still, the window of opportunity is this year and next. None of their three best players is improving, and Allen and Garnett might be declining (mostly due to nagging injuries). This was a move that had to be made in order to make the team relevant again, but that doesn't mean it will pay off.

Ok, so who else is worth watching in the East?

Forget the Cavaliers. Last year was a fluke, and until they can surround LeBron with more talent they're going to be overtaken by several other teams in the East, namely New Jersey, Chicago, and a surprise. I've already talked about the Bulls, so let's look at the Nets.

Jason Kidd had an all-time great season last year, something that he's done several times in the past. It's amazing that a guy who can not shoot at all has become one of the best 5-6 point guards in NBA history. Despite leading New Jersey to a pair of Finals trips earlier this decade, Kidd has become something of an afterthought in the league, which is a shame, considering he's the only player on Steve Nash's level right now, matching him in passing prowess and surpassing him defensively. Vince Carter is yet another overrated high-volume scorer, but he's certainly explosive. Richard Jefferson seems redundant with Carter on the roster, and I'm tired of waiting for him to live up to Ben's hype (and to stay healthy). Nenad Krstic, however, might be the real deal. Sure, he looks like a pipe cleaner with crappy facial hair, but he puts the ball in the basket. With a bevy of big bodies to surround him with, the Nets are a dangerous squad.

Why is Gilbert Arenas so awesome?

It's all about attitude, like my dad (or maybe that was some generic Little League coach) used to say. In this day and age, most athletes act like the fans don't exist. Oh sure, they give lip service to the people who, in a convoluted sense, pay their salaries, but they'd just as soon play in an empty gym (or not at all, as long as they're getting paid). The few who do seem to care are mostly angry (think Ron Artest) or Canadian (Nash). Sure, Shaq is funny, and enjoyable, but too much of what he does seems carefully constructed, almost as if someone got to him after the forgettable Kazaam/Shaq-Fu days and said "let's think about this for a sec." Not Arenas, who seems more real than anyone else in the Association. It's not enough to say that we'd like to believe that we'd be like Gil if we made the League, it's just that there doesn't seem to be much of a boundary between Agent Zero and the rest of us. He's the kind of guy who'd buy you a beer if you found him in a bar, or would talk trash at you while playing Halo 3. Most of all, he seems to embrace that always-alluring dualism: he loves being famous but has a whole mess of unresolved childhood issues. Plus he's pretty good at hoop.

What happens to the Sonics?

On the court? Not much good, besides seeing Kevin Durant develop. Off it? I'm actually more sanguine than I've been since the team was sold. The city, and the state, seem to be rallying around the idea of finding a solution to the arena issue, and the court system doesn't appear to be letting the team leave before the lease is up. There's a long way to go, but for now things appear to be heading in the right direction.

Which is good, because the basketball side of things is looking real positive. The team will struggle this year, but they've assembled several talented young players, and with five first round picks in the next three years they'll be positioned to add several more. Plus, new GM Sam Presti gives Seattle perhaps its smartest GM to date (not that competing with Bill Bavasi is that hard).

So who wins it all?

The Spurs. Sorry, it's boring, but the truth usually is.

Posted by Zachary Geballe at 1:58 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

So the NBA's Las Vegas Summer League is set to start today. This year, 21 NBA franchises (including every Western Conference team except Utah) will send teams, as will the Chinese National squad. While every team will have its share of players hoping to make the squad, rookies trying to earn playing time, and a few guys who you were sure would stick in the league but somehow didn't. Truehoop's got a nice rundown of the major story lines to watch, but in my mind the only one that really matters is this:

No team in Summer League history has had more riding on their team than the Sonics this year

Why do I say that? Well, the franchise sits at a major crossroads. First of all, there's the unsettled future in Seattle. Having lost the two most well-known players on the team this offseason is a poor way to generate fan interest heading into a crucial season, but a strong showing from Kevin Durant and Jeff Green would certainly help fans get over the bitterness at seeing Ray Allen and Rashard Lewis leave.

However, this Summer League has long-term consequences for the franchise no matter where they end up playing in the future. Right or wrong, Sam Presti has decided to rebuild around Durant and Green, and in doing so has jettisoned two All-Stars in order to clear the deck. Now, I happen to think he made the right move in trading Allen, and while I'm sad to see Rashard go the amount of money he's getting from Orlando is more than I'd pay him. Presti's future in the league is going to be largely dependent on whether the moves he made pay off.

Certainly, the hope is that Durant and Green form the core of a championship contender for the next decade or beyond. While a poor showing in the Vegas Summer League wouldn't necessarily shatter that dream, the franchise needs Durant (and to a lesser extent Green) to be good right away. So far, there's been a surprisingly low level of discussion about how good Durant will be in this city, in part because the team has been so active, and because Durant's felt like a Sonic ever since the draft lottery. I think once people get a chance to see Durant in green and gold, and really get a close-up look at how good he really is, Ray Allen and Rashard Lewis will be distant memories.

Still, it's hard for me to imagine another franchise having as much riding on a bunch of 18-21 year olds as the Sonics do. Other teams (like Portland) may have highly touted rookies on their rosters, but obviously none of those teams have the same uncertain future Seattle has. Plus, without Lewis and Allen, who exactly is the name guy on this team? Kevin Durant. At least Portland has Brandon Roy (who won't be playing in Vegas). That's why this (and the Utah league) summer is so important. Start strong, and everyone can begin to dream...but struggle, and the Sonics just might find themselves being written off before training camp even begins.

Posted by Zachary Geballe at 2:29 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

So I got home from work tonight and saw the rather disappointing news: Rashard Lewis is apparently signing with Orlando. While obviously I knew he was an unrestricted free agent and thus able to go anywhere he chose, it's still tough to see him leave.

Rashard has been my favorite Sonic for a while now, at least since Gary Payton was traded. I still remember the moment the Sonics took him with the 32nd pick of the 1998 NBA Draft*: he was a scared and miserable teenager stuck in the green room long after everyone else who'd started the night with him was gone. Sonics fans saw him grow into an All-Star, and even if he never rebounded or defended like we hoped he might he was still a damn good player.

Of course he still hasn't actually signed a contract (and can't until July 11), which means that he could still come back (if the Sonics were willing to match the deal, which I doubt) or leave via the sign-and-trade. But with his departure likely imminent, I suppose it's time to prepare for the jersey retirement ceremony.

Yes, I have a Rashard Lewis jersey. It's actually the only Sonics jersey I've ever owned. Unlike Ben, who has a long and storied tradition of buying jerseys only to have his guy leave (Keyshawn Johnson, Santana Moss, Keith Van Horn, etc.), I've been fairly lucky...it also helps that a good number of my jerseys don't have any name on the back.

As for the Sonics, losing Lewis, even if it was halfway expected, is a harsh blow, especially with nothing coming back in return. Lewis is arguably a better player than Ray Allen and still in the prime of his career, so replacing his production will be mighty tough. It's looking more and more like next year might be a bit trying for everyone involved.

*A weird note about the 1998 NBA Draft. The first five players (Ansu Sesay, Ruben Patterson, Lewis, Jelani McCoy, and Shammond Williams) picked in the second round all ended up playing for the Sonics, as well as the seventh player (Jerome James). I'm not sure what it means, but I kind of hoped that the Sonics would sign Bruno Sundov (the 36th pick that year) to a 10-day contract just so I could expand the list to seven players

So readers, the question I ask you is, what now-useless jerseys do you have hiding in your closet? Do you ever wear them?

Posted by Zachary Geballe at 2:24 AM | Permalink | Comments (7) | TrackBacks (0)

Sonics fans everywhere seem to be freaking out about the trade of Ray Allen to the Celtics for Wall Szczerbiak, Delonte West, and Jeff Green. SuperSonicSoul says "the Sonics have somehow managed to turn what should have been one of the greatest days in team history into one of the worst." Sonics Central adds "they have absolutely killed my enthusiasm.

I say what? Why all this sentiment for a guy who spent four years in Seattle and made one playoff appearance? Ray's a great guy and a pretty good player, but he's owed a ton of money over the next three years and will turn 32 soon. The odds of him living up to the money are slim at best. Even if he does stay healthy (which he didn't last year, playing just 55 games) he's a one-dimensional player who, yes, is superior at that one dimension to Wally but also needs the ball in his hands a ton. Somehow, trying to pair that with Kevin Durant just doesn't work in my mind.

Look, as soon as it became clear that Durant was going to be a Sonic Allen's days were numbered. There's no way you build a team around a 32-year-old ball-hogging shooting guard and an 18-year-old who's the best offensive player to come out of the draft in a long time. I'm not high on Green, but he fits with the Sonics better than he would have with any of the other lottery teams: especially if they also resign Rashard Lewis, they won't need him to score as much as to rebound, pass, and defend, all things Green does very well. Plus, I really like Delonte West moving forward, and having him frees them up to deal Luke Ridnour and/or Earl Watson.

I know that Sonics fans (myself included) are anxious about the team leaving, and trading away the most recognizable (but not best) player may seem like a questionable move. And hey, it may all be a ploy by Clay Bennett to make moving the team easier. But it also makes basketball sense, and if the goal is to have the team stay here long term I'd rather do it by building around Durant and Green than keeping a 31-51 team intact out of some misplaced sense of loyalty.

Posted by Zachary Geballe at 3:23 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Despite the fact that perhaps the biggest day in Sonics history is just around the corner, I've been surprisingly quiet on this whole NBA Draft topic. No more! Here, in a mostly-uncollected fashion, are my thoughts on tomorrow's spectacle.

-Greg Oden should be and likely has always been the first pick. Bill Simmons be damned, the truth of the matter is that out of the last nine NBA champions, eight have been led by big men (Duncan four times, Shaq three, and Ben Wallace once). You might quibble with Big Ben (and Simmons does, erroneously attributing the championship to Rip Hamilton and Chauncey Billups, but Wallace led the Pistons that year. Furthermore, Shaq was on the ninth team, even if you could contend that Dwayne Wade had more to do with the title than O'Neal. Whatever the numbers, it's clear that a dominant big man is quite nearly a prerequisite to a title. Now, there's no guarantee that Oden equals Duncan or O'Neal, but he's the most likely candidate to enter the league since, well, Duncan. Even if Kevin Durant is the best roster fit for the Blazers, the decision to take Oden is something of an easy one. Dan Shanoff asked the question the other day if fans really want titles or just entertainment. I guess that's an easy question for a guy who shamelessly passes himself off as a big Florida Gators fan (despite having just recently married into that fan base). Allow a true sports fan to respond: give me the goddamn parades.

-The Blazers taking Oden is bad news for the Sonics. With Oden, they become a threat in the West immediately. Even if you figure he'll struggle offensively his first year or two, no one doubts that Oden will have a huge impact defensively from Day One. A big interior presence solves so many woes for the Sonics it makes me almost disappointed to get Durant.

-So much of what the Sonics do depends on whether they think they can resign Rashard Lewis or not. While he might not be quite worth max money, Rashard is a valuable player: he posted a Win Score Rating (for an explanation, see this piece (check the comments)) that ranked among the league's elite players last year. While I don't think he's the centerpiece of a championship team, I do think he can play along Durant, especially if Durant grows into his body a bit and can spend time at the 4. If Lewis is likely to leave (whether via sign-and-trade or simply free agency) then the Sonics are better off blowing up (to some extent, at least) their roster. Assuming Oden goes at #1, Durant is of course a fantastic addition, but he's 18. Furthermore, if the Luke Ridnour deal (bringing back the 11th pick) is a go, that's presumably 40% of the starting lineup next year handed to rookies. While I'd love to see teams try and defend Ray Allen, Rashard, and Durant on the perimeter, that team is still a ways from being a title contender. While Danny Ainge (and my dad) may love Robert Swift, he's a big question mark in my book, even if he wasn't coming back from serious knee surgery. While I wouldn't be pushing Ray out the door, I'd certainly listen to offers: if the Sonics can add, say the #5 pick in the draft, they can take Mike Conley if he slides past the Grizzlies (somewhat unlikely) or flip the pick to a team like the Warriors who are desperate to take Yi Jianlian (or even take him themselves). Allen was a great pickup when they got him, but now's the time to cut bait: his WSR of 1.33 last year wasn't worth a max deal, and he's not getting any younger.

-I don't understand why Atlanta is so willing to deal their picks away. This is the deepest draft in a good long while, and they've got two lottery picks. See if you can get Memphis to flip picks for a guy like Hakim Warrick, or if not take either Conley or Al Horford, and then wait and see who lasts until 11. Ridnour's a decent player, but I think they could do better than that for the 11th pick.

-Guys who I like in the draft: Corey Brewer (Hollinger's numbers scare me a bit, but I'm trusting my eyes on this one), who would be the guy I'd be advocating for if the Sonics didn't have the second pick. Mike Conley, not exactly a bold proclamation, but I'd laugh if yet again the Hawks pass up a franchise point guard. Brandon Wright, everyone is backing off him, and I agree that his passivity is a bit of a concern, but he's more than just an athlete, he has a lot of solid offensive game: if he makes it to the Bulls, he's a natural fit. Joakim Noah, not to be a star, but to be a very useful player for a decade (ala Shane Battier).

-Guys I don't like in this draft: Jeff Green, who did next to nothing in Georgetown's final two games and is an ordinary athlete at best. Acie Law, I doubt his shooting ability and just don't see him being more than a decent point guard at the pro level, which makes him useful but not a lottery pick. Spencer Hawes, who I saw plenty of at the UW and was underwhelmed by: he's got a nice finesse game but was too easily overwhelmed by smaller players. Nick Young, who's a wonderful story but never managed to wow me in college (and I watch a lot of Pac-10 ball). Al Thornton, who's got the lowest ceiling of any of the lottery hopefuls. Sean Williams, a suspension waiting to happen.

-My mock lottery:

1. Blazers - Oden
2. Sonics - Durant
3. Hawks - Conley
4. Grizzlies - Horford
5. Celtics - Brewer
6. Bucks - Green
7. Timberwolves - B. Wright
8. Bobcats - Noah
9. Bulls - Jianlian
10. Kings - Rodney Stuckey
11. Hawks - Hawes
12. 76ers - Thornton
13. New Orleans - Julian Wright
14. Clippers - Young

Posted by Zachary Geballe at 12:07 PM | Permalink | Comments (23) | TrackBacks (0)

So everyone's been all a-twitter about LeBron James the last two days, and justifiably so. The performance he put on the Pistons in Game Five is perhaps the single most amazing thing I've seen as a basketball fan. I don't have as big a frame of reference as most writers: being born in 1983 will do that to you. It's at the very least the best post-Jordan game I've seen.

What was most amazing about it is how inevitable LeBron's baskets seemed. This was against the best defensive team in the league, and against one of the two or three best perimeter defenders in the league (Tayshaun Prince). Yet with the game on the line, James just blew right by Tayshaun for an insane dunk. Seriously, watch it again and look at where he takes off from, and how he's almost past the backboard when he reaches back to stuff it. Then remember that this is the game-tying basket with under ten seconds left in regulation.

As of that bucket (and his dunk the possession before it) weren't enough, he scores the game winner by driving through the entire Pistons team on his way to a lay-up. Every time I see that play it becomes more amazing, and I was blown away by it when I watched it live.

Then, the startling thing is what happens next. He goes over to the bench, and whether out of exhaustion or relief or something else starts crying on Drew Gooden's shoulder. Of course, there's still time on the clock, but this wasn't Adam Morrison or JJ Redick crying at the end of a (college) career-ending loss, this was (I think) a 22-year-old who had pushed himself further than he's ever gone.

While I wouldn't necessarily go as far as Bill Simmons, this certainly had the feeling of a game which could alter the NBA landscape for a few years. And while most people seem to be criticizing Flip Saunders for not double teaming LeBron, for the last 15 minutes of the game the entire Pistons team was shading towards James. It just didn't matter. James was so good, so determined, that he made the defense irrelevant. That, in the end, is what sticks with me. This wasn't a great shooter like Reggie Miller shooting from further and further away and still hitting: yes, James took some jumpers, but he also went past Prince, or Chauncy Billups, or Rip Hamilton on the dribble and got right to the rim.

Still, tonight's game feels almost as important. LeBron doesn't need to duplicate this performance (at least Cleveland better hope not), but he needs to carry his team. It's clear that the rest of the team is either too much in awe or just not good enough to score consistently, so it will once again be up to James to create shots for his teammates. One place to start would be benching Zydrunas Ilgauskas, who's been a massive liability on both ends of the court. Donyell Marshall is nothing special, but he's at least mobile, and that's a start.

Oddly enough, the pressure seems to be on the Cavaliers. Even though they've got the Pistons on the ropes, they need to close this series out tonight. Sure, Detroit seems vulnerable, but you don't want to have to win a Game 7 on the road.

Right now, I fully believe in LeBron. I'm expecting a 33 point, 9 assist, 7 rebound game and a date with the Spurs in the Finals. Now if you'll excuse me, I have some highlights to rewatch.

Posted by Zachary Geballe at 5:03 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

Well, things have gotten interesting in the NBA marketplace, haven't they? There's been plenty of talk about this year's free agent crop (mostly Rashard Lewis), but now comes the biggest news of them all: Kobe Bryant has requested a trade.

First off, the Lakers are behind the eight-ball here. While trading Kobe would be terrible for them on a number of fronts (there's no way they get back equivalent talent, and it's going to hurt their ticket sales and public standing a ton), they probably have no choice. The good news is that there should be no shortage of suitors for the Mamba's services.

First off, the Knicks will no doubt be mentioned as a possible destination, but there's no way in hell that happens. The Rashard Lewis for Jamal Crawford and Nate Robinson rumors are insane enough (why would the Sonics want a pair of shooting guards when they already have Ray Allen?), but the Knicks just don't have anywhere near enough talent to make this work.

But if Kobe wants to go to a major market, and the Lakers want him out of the West, then I think Chicago is the natural destination. Luol Deng, Ben Gordon, a sign-and-trade with PJ Brown, and the #9 pick in the draft might get the deal done. I understand that Chicago is loathe to part with Deng, but this isn't Pau Gasol or another borderline star, this is Kobe. He's going to turn you into the best team in the East right away, and possibly a title contender, and that's something that Chicago can't pass up.

Boston might also be able to swing something, perhaps Paul Pierce, the #5 pick, and whichever young player the Lakers want. The move might keep the Lakers a bit more competitive in the short term, but I think the Bulls are a better option, since Deng has a chance to be special down the road.

The one other possibility is Portland. They've got the best set of young talent, and while they wouldn't part with the first pick in the draft, they could certainly send Brandon Roy, LaMarcus Aldridge, Jarrett Jack, and, say, Jamaal Magloire on a sign-and-trade. I'm not sure if the Lakers would want to do that, but they'd be getting three good young players at the very beginnings of their career.

In any case, it should be fascinating to watch the Lakers try and turn this situation into something positive.

Posted by Zachary Geballe at 1:07 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

Well, the euphoria has somewhat worn off, replaced with nothing more than a heightened sense of well-being that hopefully won't be disappearing any time soon. For now, I'm willing to table the discussion about whether the team will stay in Seattle or not and merely look at the 2007-2008 Seattle SuperSonics.

Of course, we won't know for sure who will be sitting there at #2 on June 28th, but the most likely scenario is Greg Oden going to Portland and Durant being a Sonic.

The major question that's been raised in Seattle today is how the Sonics will handle Rashard Lewis, who is expected to opt out of the final two years of his contract on July 1 and become a free agent. Lewis has manned the small forward spot here for almost a decade, but Durant projects to play that position at the pro level. Thus, there are two parts to the question of Lewis's future: first, does he want to resign with the Sonics and second, if he does, how can they play him, Durant, and Ray Allen together?

Some folks seem to favor signing and trading Lewis, while a few want to trade the draft pick. However, my belief is that the way you win in the NBA is by creating matchup problems for your opponent, and how on Earth would a team guard Ray Allen, Rashard Lewis, and Kevin Durant on the perimeter?

As we've seen the last few years with Phoenix, Dallas, and Golden State, the conventional 1-5 designations for players mean less and less when you've got seven-footers who can shoot threes. If the Sonics want to, they can team those three players with Luke Ridnour and Chris Wilcox to create a freakishly athletic team that can shoot the lights out and run most other NBA franchises off the court. Plus, they've got a wide array of decent big men (Nick Collison, Robert Swift, Johan Petro) to use against the few teams in the league who feature talented centers.

I can't pretend to know what Rashard Lewis wants to do, and if he's disinterested in coming back to Seattle then there's really nothing left for the Sonics but to try and work a sign-and-trade. But if he does want to come back, then by all means they should be facilitating a contract extension immediately.

The point guard position is another area of concern, as Luke Ridnour has failed to develop and Earl Watson still can't shoot with any degree of accuracy or consistency. While the general sentiment is that the team needs to make a move to secure a better point guard, I disagree. I think that Ridnour can be an effective player on the right type of team, and the Sonics with Durant, Allen, and Lewis are that type of team. Ridnour can focus on facilitating the offense and distributing the ball and not worry about his mediocre jump shot. Additionally, all the defensive focus on those three players should give Luke room to penetrate.

In any case, this team looks like a legitimate playoff team with Kevin Durant (or Greg Oden, I suppose) in tow (plus two early second-round picks). With the simultaneous revival of the Blazers, I'm thrilled for what looks like a solid decade of Pacific Northwest NBA dominance. And to everyone on the East Coast who bemoaned the fact that they'll have to stay up late to watch Oden and Durant, I say: too freaking bad.

Posted by Zachary Geballe at 1:17 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Today, all things are possible. Today, the preposterous can become real. Today, all those things that I've never even dared to dream can be made into glorious reality. Today, the Sonics live again.

Posted by Zachary Geballe at 3:53 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

So it's all come down to this. Tonight, at 4:30 local time, I'll be sitting in front of my television waiting to find out if the Sonics will remain in Seattle past this year. And no, I'm not talking about watching a town hall meeting or something like that.

The Supes have 88 chances out of a thousand to land the top pick in this year's NBA draft (and similar odds at landing the second pick), and it seems that only the addition of Greg Oden or Kevin Durant can save the franchise. With the plans for a new arena in total disarray (it turns out that the team didn't even own the land they were talking about building the new facility on, and the state legislature refused to even discuss the issue) it's only a matter of time before Clay Bennett and crew try to get out of their lease so they can move the team (though no one really knows where they'd be able to move it to).

Seattle has been a fantastic basketball city in my lifetime (and before), but a decade of incompetence on the court and in the front office has turned all but the most hard-core fans off from the team. It's not like in Portland, where the fans gave up on a team that was still somewhat successful but seemed more intent on breaking the law than fast breaks. In a league where more than half the teams make the playoffs each year, a meager three playoff appearances (and only one series win) in the last nine years has served to reduce most Sonics fans to a state of apathy.

But in the NBA, salvation is only one ping-pong ball away. Landing Oden or Durant would have a huge impact on the team right away. First of all, they'd be almost guaranteed a playoff spot (as long as everyone stayed relatively healthy). If they get Oden in particular, and he's as good as he seems, they could be a darkhorse contender, because his interior presence could largely make up for the fact that the Sonics seriously lack perimeter defenders. With Durant, they could have three elite offensive players on the court at the same time, causing massive matchup problems for opposing teams (like how do you guard not one, but two 6'10" swingmen who have 25-foot range and can take the ball to the hole).

But almost as important as the on-the-court impact would be the off-the-court impact. Nationally, the Sonics would reappear on the NBA radar as more than just a franchise on the move. Locally, people would actually be looking forward to this season, not viewing it as one elongated send-off to a team they don't think they'll miss. The Sonics would see a spike in ticket sales, merchandise, and most of all public interest, and at this point the only thing that's going to save them (besides a lack of viable alternatives to Seattle) is a groundswell of support.

Bill Simmons thinks the Sonics are the most deserving team of all, and I certainly can't argue with that. All I know is that by 5 pm tonight, I'll know if they'll be in Seattle past next year. So yeah, a fair amount is riding on those 88 ping-pong balls.

Posted by Zachary Geballe at 1:08 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

It wasn't just the Gators who went back-to-back yesterday. Your favorite editor-in-chief nailed down the title for the second consecutive year, buoyed by a perfect Final Four and a correct championship game. I was so accurate this year I almost nailed the final score (I had Florida winning 84-77).

Last year, I won the Sportszilla pool, but that was more because I managed to get fewer things wrong. No one picked Florida, so having UCLA in the championship game was good enough to lock up first place for me.

Not so this year. It started with my quest to get a better understanding of how to make picks. To do so, I looked at the results of each tournament since the NCAA expanded to 64 teams (in 1985). From there, I figured out what percent of the time a given seed won a game in a given round. The results can be found here, but I'll briefly summarize: picking upsets is bad for business. Sure, it's fun to say you were the only one in your pool who picked that 14-seed to win, but if the purpose of entering the pool is to win it, picking upsets is wasteful. My bracket was fairly chalk-heavy, and while picking next to no early upsets meant I didn't have anything to brag about, it also put me in first place almost from Day One.

But the real truth is, before the tournament even started I knew I was going to pick Florida. I knew that if they played at their highest level they would be next to unbeatable. Once I saw that Ohio State was in the other half of the bracket, I knew what my championship game was going to look like. From there, it was a matter of filling out the rest of the Final Four. I wasn't going to pick all the first seeds to advance, and both UCLA and Georgetown jumped out at me: UCLA of course had proven their talent level last season, while Georgetown was fortunate enough to be grouped with the weakest (because of inexperience) #1 seed, North Carolina.

With that foundation in place, the rest of the bracket became fairly simple. I didn't get everything right, but I also didn't put myself in a situation where I had to go way against the odds in order to be right: nothing but top-four seeds made my Elite 8. Sure, I was wrong about Texas A&M and Texas (damn that state!), but neither miss cost me much.

In short, I took down the pool for the second straight year. If I manage the three-peat (don't worry Riley, your royalty check is on the way), I may very well have to retire from the pool. But even if I don't, I'm happy to go down as the single greatest dynasty in Sportszilla history.

Posted by Zachary Geballe at 12:37 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

So after spending a fair amount of time and energy trying to figure out who the best player in the NBA is (or at least the most valuable), I decided to go in a completely opposite direction for my next basketball post. In general, athletes are a boring bunch. Sure, they probably come from interesting backgrounds, and they certainly live glamorous lives. But the fact is, the vast majority of them are basically interchangeable. But a select few stand out, not so much for their on the court presence but for the fact that they appear to be the kinds of guys who might actually be worth talking to even if they didn't make millions of dollars for playing a game in shorts. There's no one overarching theme to my picks, other than that they seem like guys who would, as I said, provide an interesting conversation. The players are listed in alphabetical order.

Gilbert Arenas - Washington Wizards

Agent Zero is easily my favorite NBA player, and for good reason. First, he blogs, regularly. That's a winner in my book, especially when your blog contains tidbits like these:

On his trampoline dunk in the All-Star game: "I used to practice those trampoline dunks back at Golden State. I can flip and everything. But I didn’t want to flip and crack my neck."

On the females in Los Vegas: "There’s a lot of women here. I’m going to try to throw that fishing pole out there and see what I can get. As long as I don’t get a tire…or a boot."

On busting out the one-handed shot (in response to his unbelievably compelling shooting challenge against DeShawn Stevenson) in the 3-Point Shootout: "You know, I looked up at the scoreboard and I was down nine and a full rack is only a possible six so I figured I might as well throw a couple one handed for my YouTubers."

Plus, the guy started wearing the number zero because that's how many minutes people said he'd play at Arizona, he's vowed revenge on the coaches who snubbed him from the US National team (though that didn't go so well against Portland), and he said he'd be willing to give up an entire NBA season to play against Duke (so he could get revenge on USA Basketball head coach Mike Krzyzewski). Basically, he's a modern day Edmond Dantes, except instead of sword fights he engages in shootouts.

Honestly, he might be crazy. He says "Hibachi!" whenever he shoots, he took a half-time shower in full uniform, plays video poker during halftimes, throws his jersey into the stands after every game, and calls himself "The Black President" and "The East Coast Assassin."

Oh, and he gives away $100 for every point he scores at home. Seriously, how can you not love a guy like that?

Brent Barry - San Antonio Spurs

First off, Barry is the son of one of the greatest players in NBA history, Rick Barry. As a fan of the early NBA and ABA, I'd have plenty I'd want to talk with him about. He's also the only white guy to ever win the slam dunk contest, shot his free throws underhanded (like his dad) until he reached the NBA, and is an avid surfer. During his time with the Sonics, he was always an interesting post-game interview: you never knew what he was going to say.

Kobe Bryant - Los Angeles Lakers

For a long time, I hated Kobe. Oddly enough, I only started liking him after everyone else stopped. He's got plenty working for him as an interviewee though. He grew up in Italy, thus giving him a much greater perspective on the world than your typical NBA player. His father, like Barry's, was a pro basketball player, so he grew up in that world as well. Bryant followed Kevin Garnett in taking the prep-to-pro path before it was well-trod, and he ascended to NBA stardom at a freakishly early age. He's one of the best players in the league, and he voluntarily nicknamed himself "The Black Mamba." Oh, and then there's the whole issue over what may or may not have happened in a hotel room in Colorado. In any case, I doubt we'd run out of things to discuss.

Luol Deng - Chicago Bulls

Talk about an interesting childhood. Deng was born into the Dinka tribe of Sudan. When a civil war broke out, his family moved to Egypt, where he met Manute Bol, who first introduced him to basketball. From there, the family moved to England, where Deng played for both the soccer and basketball under-15 national teams. He then attended high school in America where he teamed with Charlie Villanueva. After a year at Duke, he entered the NBA, where he was the seventh pick in the draft by the Bulls. Again, I can't imagine running out of things to talk about.

Adonal Foyle - Golden State Warriors

Foyle is widely considered one of the smartest guys in the NBA. He's a published poet and a political activist, and in 2001 he founded Democracy Matters as a way to increase awareness and interest in politics among young people. Even if David's pissed that Foyle is vastly overpaid, at least you know that he's probably spending his $42 million wisely. He also holds the NCAA record for blocked shots, so, you know, there's always that.

Dan Gadzuric - Milwaukee Bucks

The guy on this list I'm least interested in. But he's another guy with a somewhat interesting international background. He was born in The Hague (cool enough) and then went on to play his college ball at UCLA. During his time as a Bruin, Gadzuric played with a ton of future NBA players, including Jerome Moiso, Earl Watson, Baron Davis, Jason Kapono, Matt Barnes, and Dijon Thompson. Yet those UCLA teams never made it past the Sweet Sixteen in the NCAA Tournament.

Desmond Mason - New Orleans/Oklahoma City Hornets

Dez has been a favorite of mine since he was drafted by the Sonics back in 2000. Sadly, they had to part with him in the Ray Allen trade, but I'll fondly remember him winning the dunk contest in 2001 (he's the only Sonic to do so, though both Terrance Stansbury and Shawn Kemp were robbed). But the reason I put him on this list is because Mason is an accomplished artist. He's had shows of his paintings in both Seattle and Milwaukee. I'm a big art fan, so it would be quite a thrill to be able to talk art with a guy who can also dunk a basketball (since I'll never get to meet Jasper Johns).

Shaquille O’Neal - Miami Heat

Come on, the Big Aristotle was a must-have on this list. He's managed to be the most engaging star of his generation, a rare feat for a big man, most of whom have been more removed from the press (and fans). Still, whether he's chasing down criminals as a member of the Miami Police Department, busting a move with LeBron James and Dwight Howard at the All-Star Game, or just talking about himself in the third person, Shaq's always good for a laugh. Oh, and he once did this. But I'd have to ask him what he was thinking when he agreed to do Kazaam (not to mention Steel, Shaq Diesel, Shaq Fu, and the host of other horrific movies/albums/video games he's foisted upon an unsuspecting public during his career). I just hope he doesn't have me arrested.

Scot Pollard - Cleveland Cavalier

Just because of the hair.

Etan Thomas - Washington Wizards

Thomas, like Foyle, is a published poet and political activist. He's spoken at anti-war rallies and written for the Huffington Post. He's also gotten into fights at practice with Brendan Haywood the last few years, so he's clearly not an utter pacifist.

So there's the list. Anyone else worth talking to in the NBA?

Posted by Zachary Geballe at 8:49 PM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)

With All-Star Weekend upon us, my thoughts turn towards the NBA. With the Sonics unwilling to either make a pseudo-playoff run or utterly tank, it's only natural that my interest in the league has been sporadic this season. Still, I always enjoy the NBA All-Star Weekend, so I'm excited.

Of course, this is the time when the talk turns towards who the league's most valuable player is. Well, it would be if it were not for all the talk about John Amaechi. Until an active player comes out, I don't really care, because there's really nothing at stake for Amaechi except selling some more books.

Anyhow, the MVP talk is mostly swirling around a half a dozen or so players: the usual suspects like Duncan, Nowitski, Nash, Bryant, and a few newcomers like Gilbert Arenas and Dwyane Wade. While there are of course any number of ways to evaluate which of those players are the "most valuable," there's one metric that I'm particular partial to: Win Score.

Developed by the authors of the wonderful book "The Wages of Wins," Win Score is both easy to calculate (the formula is Points + Rebounds + Steals + ½Assists + ½Blocked Shots – Field Goal Attempts – Turnovers - ½Free Throw Attempts - ½Personal Fouls) and correlates quite well with wins. In general, it's better than metrics like the NBA's Efficiency Rating because it correctly treats possessions like the most precious commodity in the game (much like outs are in baseball, though there's not as strict a limit on them in basketball). Thus, players who use up possessions (either by turning the ball over or taking shots) had better be making up for that (by scoring or assisting on scores, or by securing possessions by rebounding or stealing the ball).

But of course raw Win Score (a cumulative total for the year) might not tell you who's the most valuable. Much like in baseball, certain positions are generally more productive than others. Thus, the discrepancy between an All-Star level power forward and an average one is smaller than the discrepancy between an All-Star level point guard and an average one. In the book, the authors do the math and come up with a median per minute score by position (.13 points per minute for guards, .15 points per minute for small forwards, .21 points per minute for power forwards, and .22 points per minute for centers). With this information in hand, it was easy to calculate the Win Score Above Average (WSAA) for a host of players.

Of course, this metric is far from perfect. As a cumulative award, it tends to reward players who've played more minutes (though of course that's part of the point: a guy who's hurt part of the season probably wasn't as valuable as a guy who played all 82 games). I've also included another stat, WSAA/48 which evaluates each player's value over average per 48 minutes to help smooth out that bump.

So without further ado, here are the players (in alphabetical order - stats are through 2/14/07):

Carmelo Anthony

Win Score: 250.5
Win Score Above Average: 42.3
Win Score Above Average per 48: 1.5

Gilbert Arenas

Win Score: 357.5
Win Score Above Average: 94.1
Win Score Above Average per 48: 2.2

Carlos Boozer

Win Score: 604
Win Score Above Average: 261.3
Win Score Above Average per 48: 7.7

Kobe Bryant

Win Score: 429
Win Score Above Average: 176.5
Win Score Above Average per 48: 4.4

Tim Duncan

Win Score: 642.5
Win Score Above Average: 254.8
Win Score Above Average per 48: 6.6

Kevin Garnett

Win Score: 744.5
Win Score Above Average: 325.4
Win Score Above Average per 48: 7.8

Dwight Howard

Win Score: 647.5
Win Score Above Average: 229.5
Win Score Above Average per 48: 5.8

Josh Howard

Win Score: 340
Win Score Above Average: 132
Win Score Above Average per 48: 4.3

Allen Iverson

Win Score: 183.5
Win Score Above Average: -12.9
Win Score Above Average per 48: -0.4

LeBron James

Win Score: 456.5
Win Score Above Average: 149.4
Win Score Above Average per 48: 3.5

Jason Kidd

\Win Score: 587.5
Win Score Above Average: 338.2
Win Score Above Average per 48: 8.5

Shawn Marion
Marion is a tough case, because his position is somewhat vague. The first set of numbers assumes he's a small forward, while the second set (in parentheses) gives him an adjustment halfway between that of a small forward and a power forward.

Win Score: 707
Win Score Above Average: 407 (347)
Win Score Above Average per 48: 9.8 (8.3)

Steve Nash

Win Score: 465
Win Score Above Average: 253.6
Win Score Above Average per 48: 7.5

Dirk Nowitzki

Win Score: 679.5
Win Score Above Average: 287.4
Win Score Above Average per 48: 7.4

Emeka Okafor

Win Score: 636
Win Score Above Average: 225.9
Win Score Above Average per 48: 5.8

Amare Stoudemire

Win Score: 570
Win Score Above Average: 212
Win Score Above Average per 48: 6.1

Dwyane Wade

Win Score: 446
Win Score Above Average: 218
Win Score Above Average per 48: 6.0

So now a few lists:

Top Ten by Win Score

10. Steve Nash (465)
9. Amare Stoudemire (570)
8. Jason Kidd (587.5)
7. Carlos Boozer (604)
6. Emeka Okafor (636)
5. Tim Duncan (642.5)
4. Dwight Howard (647.5)
3. Dirk Nowitzki (679.5)
2. Shawn Marion (707)
1. Kevin Garnett (744.5)

This list is clearly dominated by big men. Just two guards crack the top ten, and not surprisingly this looks a lot like the list of the best centers/power forwards in the game. Howard has emerged as one of the best post players in the NBA, and Emeka Okafor, though not as flashy, is a damn good player in his own right.

Top Ten by Win Score Above Average

10. Dwyane Wade (218)
9. Emeka Okafor (225.9)
8. Dwight Howard (229.5)
7. Steve Nash (253.6)
6. Tim Duncan (254.8)
5. Carlos Boozer (261.3)
4. Dirk Nowitzki (287.4)
3. Kevin Garnett (325.4)
2. Jason Kidd (338.2)
1. Shawn Marion (407)

Here we see a bit more variety position-wise, though of course this list is still big-man heavy.

Top Ten by Win Score Above Average per 48 minutes

10. Tie - Emeka Okafor and Dwight Howard (5.8)
9. Dwyane Wade (6.0)
8. Amare Stoudemire (6.1)
7. Tim Duncan (6.6)
6. Dirk Nowitzki (7.4)
5. Steve Nash (7.5)
4. Carlos Boozer (7.7)
3. Kevin Garnett (7.8)
2. Jason Kidd (8.5)
1. Shawn Marion (9.8)

For all the talk about some of the other guys on the list, it's clear to me that the two top MVP candidates are Shawn Marion and Jason Kidd. Marion's numbers look superior, but the numbers in these lists assume he's a small forward. Having watched Phoenix several times this year, I'd lean more towards considering him a hybrid small/power forward. If you use those numbers, he's a close second behind Jason Kidd.

Yes, that means that I'd give my MVP vote to a nearly 34-year-old point guard on a team that's 25-29, a guy scoring all of 14.3 points per game. The vote works for me on two levels. The first is that the numbers bear out the fact that Kidd is among the most valuable players in the league. The second is that he's long deserved an MVP, and while I'm confident he won't actually win the 2007 NBA MVP award he sure deserves a good deal of consideration, certainly far more than will be accorded guys like Carmelo Anthony, Allen Iverson, and Gilbert Arenas.

Posted by Zachary Geballe at 1:31 AM | Permalink | Comments (8) | TrackBacks (0)

Last March, I attempted to spot trends in NBA player development that could inform how teams should approach the draft. The resulting research, thinking, and discussions with Zach led me to devise rules of thumb for basketball drafting, at least one of which flies in the face of what GMs try to do every year. To quote from the original piece:

The best player in the long term is likely the best player at the time of the draft. This applies more to blocs of players than it does to individual one to one player comparisons, but the best way to explain this principle is a one to one comparison. Aaron McKie was not as good as Jason Kidd at the time of their draft, and he still isn’t as good. That's just how basketball improvement works in the NBA. Even comparing high school guys to college guys to overseas guys, the best player at the time of the draft is likely to be the best in the future.

Last time around, I included tables to illustrate the point. Here is what the first round of the 1996 NBA Draft looks like in line graph form, with each player measured by PER. As explained in the old column, I laid out the PER of each player that played at least 500 minutes in a given season. The graph is very messy, and includes the never-weres along with the Kobes and the Pejas. Don't worry. We'll clean it up shortly.

(You can click the graphs to view slightly larger versions.)

Let's parse this data a bit. In the above graph, note how everyone who had a PER above 15 in 2006 also had PER above 15 in 2000, except for Ilgauskas, who was injured, Steve Nash, and Jermaine O'Neal. I'll get to those last two guys in a moment. That year, the fourth for this class, all the players above 15 PER, in order, were:
Kobe
Marbury
Ray Allen
Abdur-Raheem
Iverson
Camby
Jerome Williams (DNP 2006)
Antoine Walker (14.4 PER in 2006)
Kittles (DNP 2006)
Peja

Let's remove the never-weres and the guys of lesser consequence.

This much cleaner, yet still pretty cluttered, graph cuts the draft in half. Kerry Kittles is the only player who could reasonably have been described as an "impact player" at some point that I ended up cutting. I think his talent and production warrant representation, but injuries are not something I'm ready to discuss right now, so I removed him from the data. Health concerns are legitimate when thinking about the draft, but I'll put that thought on hold for now. I've included Delk and Fisher as the steady, dependable, "hey, why not?" guys.

Look at how those lines trend! I find it easiest to read the graph when I look at the beginning of each line and then its end, and then I take in a general sense of where the line goes from year to year. Don't try to closely examine multiple lines at the same time. It'll make your head hurt. In any case, from my examination, there is one case of a player leapfrogging his competition, there are two other players who display an abberant developmental curve, and then there's Erick Dampier's contract year.

First, the leapfrogger: Kobe Bryant's PER was only slightly better than Tony Delk's their rookie season, but you'd be hard-pressed to find anyone who thought, from watching that season, that Delk was anywhere near as good. Bryant started only 7 games his first two seasons in the league, even though he was probably ready. In season four, 2000, his second as a starter, PER has him as the best player of his class. In other words, the numbers don't tell the whole story because Bryant was used in an unusual manner by Del Harris.

Now, the abberations: Steve Nash was who he was until two separate occasions boosted his value. First, in 2001, Dirk Nowitzki became a full fledged star. Chicken-Egg arguments aside, the two probably helped each other. Second, the move to Phoenix and Mike D'Antoni's style has kept his career going because the Suns play the way Nash was born to play. Instead of being asked to run a more conventional half-court offense, Nash's up-tempo freewheeling has found a home.

With Jermaine O'Neal, we can only speculate on what the hell was going on in Portland, because as soon as he went to Indiana and was deemed a starter, he blossomed. Like Kobe, but a much more extreme case, O'Neal was probably ready right away and was simply not given a chance to succeed.

All in all, using equal parts PER and subjective impressions, the basic idea is clear: The best players at the time of the draft are the best players in the long term. Drafting Patrick O'Bryant and paying him to get up to NBA speed makes no sense. Drafting Mouhamed Sene and paying him to get up to NBA speed makes no sense. Hilton Armstrong or Josh Boone, as feeble as their numbers make them out to be, would have been more useful to the Warriors and Sonics. The very fact of their regular participation in games, and O'Bryant's and Sene's lack of participation, is damning of the latter two guys. The only hope for them is that their coaches are Jermaine O'Neal-ing them, which, after seeing O'Bryant's college numbers and seeing Sene completely lost on the court in person, doesn't seem entirely likely.

I hope someone with more time and better information can expand on what I've started here.

PER was gathered from Basketball-Reference.com

Posted by David Arnott at 8:02 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

After reading Ben's piece about Isiah Thomas, I realized that when it comes to chronicling bad general managers in basketball, someone's name doesn't come up nearly that often. You can have Thomas, or Billy King, or Danny Ainge. I'll take my guy any day of the week and twice on Draft Day.

My pick for the worst GM in basketball? Kevin McHale. On the surface, there are some similarities between he and Thomas: both were great players in the 80s, both are Hall of Famers, and both have utterly crippled their franchises through a series of bone-headed maneuvers. But at least in Thomas' case, he both inherited a mess and has added a couple of good players via the draft. McHale? Not so much.

It's strange, too, because McHale's tenure started off on a great note. His first major move after being promoted to GM in 1995 was to draft a tall, skinny kid out of Farragut Academy in Chicago by the name of Kevin Garnett. That's worked out ok for the Timberwolves. After that point, however, things start going down hill.

The next year, McHale dealt the fifth pick in the draft (Ray Allen) and a first round pick in 1999 or 2000 for the fourth pick (Stephon Marbury). Marbury's play was inconsistent, as was to be expected from a kid who spent just a year in college. The Coney Island native never adjusted to life in Minneapolis and was shipped out after just a few years with the team. Still, at least Marbury was an impact player at one point, even if the T-Wolves would have been much better off with Allen and an additional first round pick.

In 1997, the Wolves drafted Paul Grant. I don't know who he is either. But it's the 20th pick, you say, how much can rightly be expected? Fair enough. In 1998 the Wolves took Rasho Nesterovic. Again, a decent player, though a guy like, say, Rashard Lewis (not to mention Al Harrington, Nazr Mohammed, or Cuttino Mobley) might have helped them a lot more than the massive, virtually immobile Nesterovic.

The 1999 draft should have served as the foundation for a championship contender for years to come. With the 5th and 14th picks, the Wolves could add a pair of talented players to team with Garnett as they challenged the Spurs and Lakers for the Western Conference title. Instead, the Wolves added a one-dimensional scorer in Wally Szczerbiak (who wasn't even that good a scorer) and a point guard who flat out sucked in William Avery. Imagine how much better they'd have been if they'd drafted Rip Hamilton and Ron Artest instead. Or or Andrei Kirilenko, or Andre Miller, or Shawn Marion, or Jason Terry, or Corey Maggette, or Manu Ginobili. This draft, as much as anything up to this point, is the reason why the Wolves have had one good season with Garnett. Sure, drafting isn't a science. But to whiff so badly on two picks has to speak to McHale's ability somehow. Plus, he later decided to sign Szczerbiak to a big contract extension even though it was clear he was a marginal starter in the first place.

If 1999 was a bad year for McHale, 2000 was even worse. The team didn't have a first round pick thanks to the Marbury deal, meaning that for another year they were unable to infuse their team with young talent. But that pales in comparison to what happened when McHale got busted by commissioner David Stern for trying to make deals under the table with Joe Smith. Basically, Smith signed a series of one-year deals with the team with the understanding that when more money became available, he'd sign a multi-year deal for more money. First of all, McHale was an idiot for breaking the rules. But second of all, this was Joe Freakin' Smith! He's not worth breaking the rules for! If McHale had been busted paying Garnett under the table in order to keep him in Minnesota, I could at least understand the rationale. But not for Joe Smith. As a penalty, the Wolves lost their first-round picks in 2001, 2002, and 2004. Considering how poorly McHale did in the draft, I suppose that's not as crippling a blow as otherwise, but still, it deprived the team of young, cheap talent that again might have helped lift them to contention.

2003 was another bad year to be Kevin McHale. He used the team's first first-round pick in three years on high schooler Ndudi Ebi, who played a grand total of 15 games in the league. Taken almost immediately after Ebi? Leandro Barbosa and Josh Howard, who are key players on the two best teams in the league. Beyond that, guys like Jason Kapono, Luke Walton, Steve Blake, Willie Green, Zaza Pachulia, and Kyle Korver have all gone on to have impact in the NBA. As if that wasn't bad enough, McHale also signed former top pick Michael Olowokandi to a massive contract despite the fact that the Kandi Man was already considered one of the biggest busts in NBA draft history.

2004 is the one year that stands out. By adding Sam Cassell and Latrell Sprewell (though more because of Cassell) the Wolves emerged as one of the top teams in the league. For the first time in franchise history they won a playoff series before falling to the Lakers in the conference finals. Yet even with Garnett in the prime of his career (he was the 2004 NBA MVP), that success was short-lived as Cassell was cast off and the T-Wolves failed to make the playoffs.

Now, the Wolves are once again a fringe playoff team despite Garnett having another great year. At some point it seems inevitable that either Garnett will request a trade or the Wolves will decide that they're better off getting young talent back for KG while he's still got immense trade value. Of course, if McHale is still in charge than you can fully expect the team to either deal him way too late or get way too little in exchange.

The reason I think McHale is the worst GM in basketball is because with Garnett he's already got way more to work with than guys like Thomas, Ainge, and King. If he had just kept Ray Allen the next year we might be talking about the Wolves as winners of multiple championships. Instead, the team hasn't come close to a player of Allen's talent in the draft, they've mostly crapped the bed in free agency, and they've wasted the prime of one of the all-time greats. For that, McHale gets the coveted nod for Sportszilla's Worst GM in Basketball.

Posted by Zachary Geballe at 12:40 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

At the start of the season, the New York Knicks were supposed to be an open and shut case.

The Isiah Thomas reign had hit an all time low in 2006, and most fully expected this current season would be his last. To call the Knicks of last season a disappointment would have been the understatement of the century.

They were an overpaid, over hyped punch line to a joke everyone else in the league was laughing at. For a team that had employed the likes of Scott Layden, another well known punch line, that was not something easy to do.

Finally when the Knicks started off poorly at home and ended up in a brawl with the Denver Nuggets after an embarrassing defeat in front of the Garden faithful, the vultures began to circle. Some wondered whether Thomas would make it to the New Year, let alone the end of the season.
Oh how things have changed in a little over a month and a half.

The Knicks are still not a playoff team in anything but the division they play in. They are a sub .500 squad, the symbol of inconsistency in the NBA. They can look like chumps, getting outscored 40-12 in the first quarter by the Miami Heat without Dwayne Wade and Shaq. Then less than a week later, they can slam the Heat with both Wade and Shaq by 20 points.

John outlined this inconsistency somewhat in his latest post, but said that Thomas and Marbury need to go. However, while you can still certainly make an argument for that, there now is a legitimate case for Thomas continuing on. And John actually helps make that case, saluting some Isiah guys including two who were blasted upon arrival, Eddie Curry and Quentin Richardson.

Don’t laugh. Let’s look at this Knicks roster as currently constituted, now that all of these guys are Thomas’.

How about Channing Frye and David Lee being on the team? While Frye has been up and down this season, Knick fans are generally happy with that selection given he has all the tools to have a bright future. Lee, meanwhile has become a fan favorite with his hard work and hustle on the boards. He is an early contender for sixth man of the year with a Rodman-esque presence on the boards (averaging 10.8 RPG). He doesn’t have much of an offensive game, but is huge for the Knickerbockers. With Eddie Curry’s poor prowess on the glass, Lee has helped the Knicks make up the difference.

And let’s talk for a moment about Mr. Curry. I was one of the people who laughed when that trade went down, and figured it was another reason for Isiah to be canned. As it turns out though, Curry appears to be out of the woods with his heart condition (appears because one can never be 100% sure) and has blossomed into a very good offensive big man. He’s averaging 19.3 points a game and seven boards. He still has the ability to be a 20/10 guy but even if he doesn’t reach that point, there’s a better chance he’s going to be contribute to the Knicks than Tyrus Thomas, Michael Sweetney and yes, even Greg Oden. (How many can’t miss prospects have missed over the years?)

Zeke swapped Kurt Thomas for Quentin Richardson while replacing Thomas with Lee. Which combo would the Knicks rather have? Jamal Crawford isn’t a great player, but on the other hand, neither are any of the players the Knicks gave up for him. It’s not about getting under the cap with the Knicks; so don’t bring that into the equation. Not to mention Crawford’s contract isn’t a cap breaker.

Is Isiah a good G.M.? Probably not. Is he average? That is certainly possible. One thing is certain, even if he is canned at the end of the season, he has left the Knicks in a better position than Scott Layden ever did. Layden turned the Knicks into the league’s dumping ground for bad contracts. Shandon Anderson, Howard Eisley, Glen Rice; nothing but other people’s trash that Layden took on while receiving little in return.

Say what you want about Thomas; the worst contract he took on was Stephon Marbury’s. The off guard is overpaid, but he is still a solid contributor who makes the Knicks better. That’s more that can be said about the Layden acquisitions. Oh and that Layden could not draft to save his life. Don’t use the excuse about where the Knicks picked, he’s the guy who traded Nene (the number seven pick) and Marcus Camby for Antonio McDyess. Channing Frye is a better player than Michael Sweetney. David Lee was taken at the end of the first round.

And Isiah the coach also isn’t bad either. For all the accolades Larry Brown gets, the Knicks were a disgrace to the NBA last year. The blame was dropped at the feet of Thomas, but 2007 has shown that it was largely misplaced. This year the Knicks are 19-27. Last season the Knicks were 23-59! That means for Isiah to equal Brown, the Knicks would have to go 4 – 32 the rest of the way.

Folks, that’s how bad Brown was as a coach last year. Knick fans should be outraged that he actually got compensation for that joke of a job. Pick an average Joe off the street and they’d have a difficult time equaling that disaster.

You can rip the players who the general manager Thomas brought in, but then Thomas the coach is an all time great because he’s going to take largely the same roster to 10- 14 more wins this year. Or Brown is a really bad coach who should be arrested for larceny.

The truth is somewhere in the middle. Thomas is a better coach for the Knicks than Brown was because Isiah had a plan in mind. He wanted to play an up tempo, shoot first, light defensive scheme. Brown doesn’t do that. Rather than adapt, Brown stuck to his guns, trying to ride Marbury out of town. (Enter Steve Francis) He didn’t play the rookies because Brown never does (see how he nearly destroyed Darko Milicic’s career before it even began) and the Knicks were caught in limbo. They had players who didn’t fit the system and never would, while the coach wouldn’t play the guys who he could mold to make it work.

I have no inside information, but I cannot see how Thomas can be blamed for this. I do not believe he signed off on Brown; that was James Dolan wanting the name. That is likely the reason why Isiah got this last one last chance to clean it up. Dolan realized he brought the wrong guy in, and decided to let Isiah give it a shot. What did he have to lose after last season?
Isiah isn’t perfect by any stretch of the imagination. Jared Jeffries was a terrible signing, beaten only by Jerome James a year before. But there are plenty worse.

Bill Simmons loves to rip Isiah whenever he gets the chance, but Thomas would be a step up from Danny Ainge. If you want to see a GM take bad contracts, look no further than Wally Sczerbiak, who is making more than Eddie Curry. He’s also making more than Jamal Crawford or Quentin Richardson. Or how about Theo Ratliff, who is also making more than any of those three guys? Let us not also forget the fact Ainge traded the seventh pick in this last year’s draft for a 5’10 (maybe) point guard with no jump shot. Brilliant!

I don’t write this to say Isiah Thomas is a legendary general manager. I certainly would not want him running the Nets over Rod Thorn. However, Thomas is simply not the butcher New York wants to make him out to be. He had a vision, and believe it or not, it can be exciting and entertaining to watch.

Are the Knicks going to be world champions soon? Are they going to be ever under Isiah? That is certainly up for debate. The Knicks, judging by the fact their best young player on that Layden constructed team was Frank Williams or Sweetney, there’s actually probably little argument they have a brighter future.

I’m not even saying that Thomas should stay. All that is being said here is that for all the bad Zeke did with the Knicks in his tenure, he’s done about as much good. Unlike what many thought to start the year, firing Thomas and replacing him with anyone could actually make this franchise worse.

And to borrow what I said in response to John’s original post; that is an upset on its own.

Posted by Ben Valentine at 6:56 PM | Permalink | Comments (6) | TrackBacks (0)

It’s back.

When the New York Knicks and Denver Nuggets finished up their game Saturday night with a heated brawl which ended in ten ejections along with suspensions and fines galore, it sadly reared its ugly head again. No, I’m not talking about the wild, chaotic thug nature in the NBA, though it does have something to do with that perception.

Once again, race has returned to the forefront of sports discussion.

A brawl that has been over hyped and overplayed as “an embarrassment” and “joke” was anything but. There was a lot of shoving and grabbing with one lousy punch thrown. I’ve seen baseball fights that had more shots delivered in the first ten seconds than that one had in its entirety.

But then the media deserves a ton of blame for making more of this than it was. They wanted to re-create the riot in Detroit to sell papers and get ratings for their programs, so they painted it along the lines of “here we go again; another black eye for the NBA.”

“Black” being the operative word.

This wasn’t anywhere near the Pistons/Pacers brawl. It wasn’t an arena wide riot with players trading punches with fans in the stands and on the court. As far as brawls go, it was pretty tame; only five players ever were really involved. But when the media compares it to that infamous scene, people buy it because it once again sells to the image of over aggressive black men going at it because of some thug mentality.

They don’t tell it as it actually is; that this is a base human instinct. Fighting does happen, and occasionally, small fights do become brawls. Has anyone ever watched major league baseball? Bench clearing scuffles happen at least three times a season.

Yet I don’t remember calling the Angels/A’s fight this season another “black eye” for baseball, nor did anyone dub John Lackey and Jason Kendall “thugs.” Did Ozzie Guillen deserve to be fired for telling his pitcher to drill an opposing player and then yanking the guy and sending him to minors when he didn’t?

In the NFL, it seems as though players are getting picked up weekly for something. Just last week, the body guard for the Bears Tank Johnson, whose own house was raided by police a few days earlier, was shot and killed. How many Bengals have been arrested this season alone? Does anyone ever say this is an image problem for the NFL?

No, because the NFL, despite it’s actual make up, is not known as a black league.
I say actual make up, because very few of the big time stars in the NFL are white. LaDanian Tomlinson, Reggie Bush, Michael Vick; the biggest names in the league are black. But there is still a visible spot for white players, the quarterback position. So because there are still the Manning Brothers, Carson Palmer and to a lesser extent Chad Pennington and Matt Leinart, it’s not identified as black league.

By the way, is Leinart a thug because he’s been in the league for three months and already has an illegitimate child with a USC student while he was having a relationship with Paris Hilton? No? Why not?

It deals with perception once again. The image of the black thug sells in America; the wild, untamed, almost animalistic African American has been paraded through our culture since Reconstruction. Without question one of the most damaging things America has ever done, it has been lessened as time goes on. However, it has not disappeared completely and the resulting fear and suspicion remain.

So we have the NBA, a sport that is well liked by both blacks and whites. However whites for the most part have the dollars; big companies (mostly owned by white people) buy the luxury boxes after all. But they are put in a difficult position, akin almost to Gladiatorial Games in Ancient Rome; they are rooting for, cheering and enjoying a group of men society has told them are not their equals. The picture has been painted that these men are of the lowest denominator of human being, men whom these CEO’s and stockbrokers would never ever think of hiring for their companies.

When that happens, brawls are not a “rare occurrence” that happen from time to time. Brawls are just “thugs being thugs” even if they happen with Black athletes in the NBA as often they do with White, Black, Hispanic and Asian athletes on the baseball diamond, or predominantly White athletes on the hockey rink. Even if there have been as many brawls with players fighting fans in basketball (one) in the last ten years as there have been in baseball (Chad Kreuter in Wrigley) and hockey (Tie Domi).

And so we return to the media. They are guilty for not squashing such thoughts and for reveling in it. Rather than dissuade that perception, they sell it. Not once did any one on the local coverage say that it was no where near the chaos that happened in Detroit. (Between black players and a mostly white crowd by the way. Are those white people not as uncivilized and savage as the players? No? Why not?)

But then why should we be shocked; as I said, this is a media that has sold that image for over 140 years now. Why would it turn away from the ability to milk it some more?
It can’t, not when race still rules America. Unfortunately, no matter how we might try to forget, sports are part of America, and thus race controls them as well.

It’s why Barry Bonds is a surly, unlovable teammate for being nasty to media, but Babe Ruth is a lovable icon for sleeping with his teammates’ wives.

It’s why Ron Artest is an animal for trying to punch someone, but Marty McSorley is currently employed as a color guy for the San Jose Sharks despite attacking a black man with a weapon on the ice. (To give credit to the NHL, they threw McSorely out of the game for that.)

It’s why Brett Favre holding the Packers hostage is okay, but Terrell Owens doing it to the Eagles is a travesty that needs to be reported on 24/7. Why Jeremy Shockey gets a newspaper column and Kellen Winslow Jr. gets blasted.

It’s race in America; a problem that has existed since the country’s inception and one that will not be going away any time soon. We can try to cover our eyes and ears to forget it exists, but it will always be there.

Even in sports.