The Cavs have the #1 pick (never have the ping pong balls been so predictable). The consensus best prospect in the draft is Joel Embiid, whom I suspect the Cavs are planning on drafting with that pick. I'm sure they're exploring a possible trade for Kevin Love or some such big shot but I'm guessing the odds are better than 50/50 the Cavs end up with Embiid. But let me suggest another avenue for the Cavs.
Trade the #1 pick to the Bucks for the #2 pick, the #31 pick, Milwaukee's 2015 1st round pick (top 3 protected), Milwaukee's 2017 1st round pick and (just for good measure) Milwaukee's 2nd round picks for 2016, 2018 & 2019. Milwaukee takes Joel Embiid.
Then trade the #2 pick to the Sixers for the #3 pick, the #10 pick and Philly's 2017 & 2019 2nd round picks. Philly takes Andrew Wiggins.
Then trade the #3 to the Jazz for the #5 pick, the #35 pick and the Jazz 2015 1st round pick (top 3 protected) and Alec Burks. Utah takes Jabari Parker.
Orlando takes Dante Exum,
After that keep calling whoever wants the #5 pick. Who wants Julius Randle?
Will the Celtics throw in the expiring contract of Brandon Bass and a future 1st rounder along with the #6 pick or will they settle for Noah Vonleah? The Lakers would love to swap #7 but the Lakers don't have much to have to sweeten the pot (seems to me). Would the Kings be willing to toss in the expiring contract of Derrick Williams or a future pick to move up from #8? Would the Bobcats be willing to throw in a future pick along with the #9 pick?
If one of those teams bites, then keep trying to trade down. If you can't trade the pick, then select whoever is available: say, Randle at #5, Gordon at #6, Vonleh at #7, Harris at #8 or Smart at #9. Then take the best pick at #10 (say, Doug Mcdermott). With the 3 early 2nd round picks, draft whomever you've got your eye on (Deandre Daniels, PJ Hairston or Jarnell Stokes, for example) or nab Europeans that can be stashed overseas.
The Cavs could turn that #1 pick into 2 top ten picks, 2 early 2nd round picks, 2 lottery picks in 2015, a 1st round pick in 2017, six 2nd round picks over the next 5 years, and Alec Burks--and maybe more. (Way more if they're willing to throw Waiters, Thompson and Varejao into the trade talks) This is one of the most anticipated drafts of my lifetime and while it may be the most overrated, it seems to me that the #1 pick has extraordinary value. And so does the #2 pick and the #3 pick and the #4 pick. If the Cavs are smart and/or lucky they could maximize the hype of this draft by wringing future considerations out of one single pick.
Would that new GM rather build steady growth through the careful use of a trove of draft picks or just hope Joel Embiid is as good as advertised? Or that Kevin Love is worth the big big money you're gonna have to lay out for him? Incidentally the plan for the #1 pick I just laid out could be undertaken by whoever ends up with the pick; perhaps Minnesota could flip Kevin Love for the right the future draft picks of a half dozen other teams.
Is it better to have Kevin Love, Joel Embiid or 14 random players? In basketball you'd rather have the best individual talent than the most 'nice' players. Every NBA team has a lot of 'nice' players and in this scenario you'd like your chances of getting a good player in the future but its so more tempting to grab the good player that is in front of you right now.
Sunday, May 25, 2014
Monday, May 19, 2014
Playoff Prediction: Heat over Pacers in 6
5.19.14 -- The Pacers are exactly where they expected to be all year long. They really stunk up the joint for the last coupla months of the regular season, played some uninspiring ball against the Hawks in the 1st round (good in game 6, really good in game 7, otherwise...meh), were good enough to beat the Wizards (only played really well in game 6). Though they haven't dressed too impress in a while, how can we even be sure the Pacers have any clothes at all?
All right here's the scenario: the Pacers gut it out against the Heat, do what they have to do against the Spurs/Thunder, hoist the trophy and write books about how they had it together the whole time. Could be. Could be they've just been coasting to this point because they knew they could. The Wizards played two truly horrible games (3 & 6) and failed to make the most of their chances down the stretch in two others (2 & 4). Now the Pacers played well in game 6, played their game as well as they have since the All-Star break. But otherwise I thought the other 5 games were about the Wizards. When the Wizards figured it out and had their game on, they trounced the Pacers. And when the Wizards couldn't get it together, the Pacers were able to pull it out. The Pacers bested the Wizards on veteran smarts. They bested the Hawks on pure talent because the Hawks (w/out Al Horford) just don't have enough to really challenge even in the East. Will either of these elements impress the Heat? No, I don't suppose it will.
The Heat are in a groove these days but they haven't had to play great. The Bobcats were the perfect 1st round tune up (hard working, athletic but not a lot of talent) and the Nets had one game of hot shooting but not much else to challenge the defending champs. So we haven't seen the Heat really play their game yet, aren't they coasting just like the Pacers? I mean, the Pacers dropped a few along the way (haven't even played well at home) while the Heat are 8-1 but have the Heat really had to work any harder than the Pacers did to get here? No. And this Heat squad doesn't strike me as good as last year.
I think Bosh is the only Heat player that took a step forward this year, maybe Birdman Anderson. Lebron is great but this was not one of his better career years. Wade (*) is good for a handful of 20-footers and some bashing into somebody for free throws but he's also good for bad turnovers, cold streaks and tight hamstrings. Chalmers hasn't gotten demonstrably better over the years, he's still a nice helper of a player but not one with any some veteran danger about him, you know? (Chalmers is not the guy in the R-rate movie, he's the guy in the PG-rated movie, you feel me?) Battier, Ray Ray, Rashard and Haslem are all just about done. Is anyone expecting anything out of Oden (is he even on the roster now?) or Beasley? I thought they played well with James Jones, but I'm not sure he matches well with the Pacers.
So its up to Lebron and Bosh to carry this team with a supporting cast that is the same as last year (but older). It won't be easy for the Heat but I think the Heat supporting cast will enough highlights to under gird Lebron's efforts and Bosh's heroics. That said, the Pacers are pretty much the same as last year too. The Pacers had their chances last year, not sure they'll get as many chances this year. I think Lebron and co. can get enough past the Pacer defense to keep the lead and the momentum.
The Pacers took game 1 and looked good. I thought the Heat made some moves that played into the Pacers' hands (Spoelstra tried to play defense instead of offense, don't think that's how the Heat beat hte Pacers) but I expect the Heat to take that first shot like a boxer that likes to get hit a little bit. If the Pacers play perfect every night, I think they are thick enough to beat the Heat; but I think they have to play perfect every night to win 4 out of 7. I think the Heat win 4 of the next 5 games.
* Personally I think Dwyane Wade's game is a snooze, I think he's been wildly overrated most of his career, and just for good measure I don't like him, though I rarely have opinions on personalities of any kind. And he beat Kentucky in the tournament, okay there's that too. But his game is jump shots and free throws. Yawn. I'm not even into his highlights, they remind me of Jim Edmonds: hot-dogging lucky shit more than gifted athletic displays. I'm not like this, normally I don't have any kind of feelings for celebrities. They're just clusters of electrons on a screen to me, I like the sports, I like the art of it but I am not one to be overwhelmed by the artists themselves. So I rarely love them, I rarely hate them. But, yeah, Dwyane Wade, I don't like that guy, I don't like his game and I think at this point he's that most annoying combination of unreliable and bulletproof.
5.28.14 -- Well I picked the Heat to win 4 of the next 5 after game 1. If I'd thought it through I would've picked them to win game 5 back in Indy. This one's on target. The Pacers are good but not great, the Heat are not quite great but clearly better than the Pacers. They can't stop Lebron, they can't stop Wade, they're not even stopping Ray Allen; meanwhile, Rashard Lewis is stopping them...I mean come on now....
Can the Pacers come back and win 3 of the next 4 games? No. Flat out no. Not gonna happen. By far that would be the biggest NBA upset I've ever seen. I'll take the Pacers to win game 5 back in Indy but I fully expect the Heat to contest that game and then crush them in game 6 back in Miami.
All right here's the scenario: the Pacers gut it out against the Heat, do what they have to do against the Spurs/Thunder, hoist the trophy and write books about how they had it together the whole time. Could be. Could be they've just been coasting to this point because they knew they could. The Wizards played two truly horrible games (3 & 6) and failed to make the most of their chances down the stretch in two others (2 & 4). Now the Pacers played well in game 6, played their game as well as they have since the All-Star break. But otherwise I thought the other 5 games were about the Wizards. When the Wizards figured it out and had their game on, they trounced the Pacers. And when the Wizards couldn't get it together, the Pacers were able to pull it out. The Pacers bested the Wizards on veteran smarts. They bested the Hawks on pure talent because the Hawks (w/out Al Horford) just don't have enough to really challenge even in the East. Will either of these elements impress the Heat? No, I don't suppose it will.
The Heat are in a groove these days but they haven't had to play great. The Bobcats were the perfect 1st round tune up (hard working, athletic but not a lot of talent) and the Nets had one game of hot shooting but not much else to challenge the defending champs. So we haven't seen the Heat really play their game yet, aren't they coasting just like the Pacers? I mean, the Pacers dropped a few along the way (haven't even played well at home) while the Heat are 8-1 but have the Heat really had to work any harder than the Pacers did to get here? No. And this Heat squad doesn't strike me as good as last year.
I think Bosh is the only Heat player that took a step forward this year, maybe Birdman Anderson. Lebron is great but this was not one of his better career years. Wade (*) is good for a handful of 20-footers and some bashing into somebody for free throws but he's also good for bad turnovers, cold streaks and tight hamstrings. Chalmers hasn't gotten demonstrably better over the years, he's still a nice helper of a player but not one with any some veteran danger about him, you know? (Chalmers is not the guy in the R-rate movie, he's the guy in the PG-rated movie, you feel me?) Battier, Ray Ray, Rashard and Haslem are all just about done. Is anyone expecting anything out of Oden (is he even on the roster now?) or Beasley? I thought they played well with James Jones, but I'm not sure he matches well with the Pacers.
So its up to Lebron and Bosh to carry this team with a supporting cast that is the same as last year (but older). It won't be easy for the Heat but I think the Heat supporting cast will enough highlights to under gird Lebron's efforts and Bosh's heroics. That said, the Pacers are pretty much the same as last year too. The Pacers had their chances last year, not sure they'll get as many chances this year. I think Lebron and co. can get enough past the Pacer defense to keep the lead and the momentum.
The Pacers took game 1 and looked good. I thought the Heat made some moves that played into the Pacers' hands (Spoelstra tried to play defense instead of offense, don't think that's how the Heat beat hte Pacers) but I expect the Heat to take that first shot like a boxer that likes to get hit a little bit. If the Pacers play perfect every night, I think they are thick enough to beat the Heat; but I think they have to play perfect every night to win 4 out of 7. I think the Heat win 4 of the next 5 games.
* Personally I think Dwyane Wade's game is a snooze, I think he's been wildly overrated most of his career, and just for good measure I don't like him, though I rarely have opinions on personalities of any kind. And he beat Kentucky in the tournament, okay there's that too. But his game is jump shots and free throws. Yawn. I'm not even into his highlights, they remind me of Jim Edmonds: hot-dogging lucky shit more than gifted athletic displays. I'm not like this, normally I don't have any kind of feelings for celebrities. They're just clusters of electrons on a screen to me, I like the sports, I like the art of it but I am not one to be overwhelmed by the artists themselves. So I rarely love them, I rarely hate them. But, yeah, Dwyane Wade, I don't like that guy, I don't like his game and I think at this point he's that most annoying combination of unreliable and bulletproof.
5.28.14 -- Well I picked the Heat to win 4 of the next 5 after game 1. If I'd thought it through I would've picked them to win game 5 back in Indy. This one's on target. The Pacers are good but not great, the Heat are not quite great but clearly better than the Pacers. They can't stop Lebron, they can't stop Wade, they're not even stopping Ray Allen; meanwhile, Rashard Lewis is stopping them...I mean come on now....
Can the Pacers come back and win 3 of the next 4 games? No. Flat out no. Not gonna happen. By far that would be the biggest NBA upset I've ever seen. I'll take the Pacers to win game 5 back in Indy but I fully expect the Heat to contest that game and then crush them in game 6 back in Miami.
Playoff Prediction: Spurs over Thunder in 7
The Spurs play the best kind of team basketball and when facing another team (say, Pacers or Clippers) I think the Spurs would beat any of them in 7 games, there's not a 'team' in the world that could best the Spurs right now. But I think the Spurs are susceptible to star power, to one guy going above and beyond the Spurs' rational estimates, one guy so efficient that he carries his team to victory. The Thunder have two guys like that, the Heat have one (yes, one, did I stutter? 2005 Dwyane Wade's not walking through those doors, folks), so I won't say it'll be a cakewalk for the Spurs. The two squads in the world that could compete with the Spurs are both still out there. Durant and Westbrook are the holders of all future in this series. The Spurs will be predictably brilliant, but if Durant and Westbrook both get hot, they can outrun the Spurs.
I started to take the Thunder in 7. Tough to go against the Spurs--I wouldn't be at all surprised if the Spurs win in 4--but I think in the final moments of the final game the Thunder have the two guys I'd rather have at the close. The Spurs are a machine, a unit that thrives on doing the little things, capitalizing on the most opportunities; but they're not 'clutch', they don't have a bunch of guys that can take over a game. The Spurs grind, they do what they do and they do it again and again with better efficiency and consistency than anyone else. They already treat every possession like a hunk o' gold, they can't want more than they already want (the Cordelia of the NBA), they don't have another gear to go to (I would say the same of Chris Paul), they're already at 11, there's no higher 11 out there for that push over da cliff. When the chips are down, I'm taking Durant #1 and Westbrook #2. That's why the Thunder would win in game 7.
Wait....Serge Ibaka's out. That changes things. Ibaka's absence means 2-3 extra offensive rebounds for the Spurs, one or two Spur shots that don't get blocked, one or two drives to the basket that don't get contested. The Spurs will maximize those marginal opportunities. Ibaka's 10-12 points on the other end are now in the hands of (rookie) Steven Adams or (*shudder*) Jeremy Lamb or (*SHUDDER*) Derek Fisher. That could be the difference between the Thunder raging back in the 4th quarter or being down by 20 or it could draw the Thunder into a free throw shooting contest which would be disastrous to their offensive and defensive flow.
The Thunder can be there in game 7--they could even pull it out. But without Ibaka I think the Spurs have too much for the Thunder to keep up with. Spurs in 7.
5.28.14 -- 2-2 after 4 games. The Spurs dominated the first two games in San Antonio (w/out Serge Ibaka), the Thunder dominated the next two games in OKC (w/ Serge Ibaka). The outcomes are not surprising, save that the Spurs just handled in back-to-back games which hasn't happened in a while; they did drop games 2 & 3 against the Mavs but in those games I'd suggest that the Spurs played well, Mavs played better, but the Spurs never really looked in either of the last two games against OKC. That said, not a real shock that its 2-2 after 4, so folks that are changing their picks based on early Spur momentum or recent Thunder momentum.
We all remember two years ago when the Spurs went up 2-0 then dropped 4 straight to OKC. But that OKC team had James Harden (who was money in that series) whereas this current OKC squad has a rotation of Jeremy Lamb and Caron Butler. The Spurs, on the other hand, are wiser not older with a better bench. This is one of the Series where the home team dominates because the bench is more effective at home and the refs are a little more friendly to the home squad. I wouldn't have thought that would've swung so many 20-point victories but oh well, these are two well-oiled offenses and when given those two hometown factors, I guess efficiency just busts out.
Resting Ibaka for the first two games looks now like a marvelous gambit: hey, the home team is probably gonna win anyway and since the Spurs are rolling, why don't we just give 'em those games and see if we can't play with their heads a little bit. Ehh, I'm not sure the headgames really hold up against a disciplined veteran squad like the Spurs (but I'm in awe of trying to play Jedi mind tricks on Coach Pop...yeah, good luck wit dat) but giving Ibaks a week off in the middle of the playoffs looks like a pretty good idea. Ibaka looks good out there, good footwork, good on-ball reaction, looks sparky around the rim.
Am I changing my pick? Well, my pick was predicated on Ibaka not being there in game 7, but I'll stick with the Spurs in 7. I'll stick with the home game dynamic. Seems like its holding up well so far.
Wait....Serge Ibaka's out. That changes things. Ibaka's absence means 2-3 extra offensive rebounds for the Spurs, one or two Spur shots that don't get blocked, one or two drives to the basket that don't get contested. The Spurs will maximize those marginal opportunities. Ibaka's 10-12 points on the other end are now in the hands of (rookie) Steven Adams or (*shudder*) Jeremy Lamb or (*SHUDDER*) Derek Fisher. That could be the difference between the Thunder raging back in the 4th quarter or being down by 20 or it could draw the Thunder into a free throw shooting contest which would be disastrous to their offensive and defensive flow.
The Thunder can be there in game 7--they could even pull it out. But without Ibaka I think the Spurs have too much for the Thunder to keep up with. Spurs in 7.
5.28.14 -- 2-2 after 4 games. The Spurs dominated the first two games in San Antonio (w/out Serge Ibaka), the Thunder dominated the next two games in OKC (w/ Serge Ibaka). The outcomes are not surprising, save that the Spurs just handled in back-to-back games which hasn't happened in a while; they did drop games 2 & 3 against the Mavs but in those games I'd suggest that the Spurs played well, Mavs played better, but the Spurs never really looked in either of the last two games against OKC. That said, not a real shock that its 2-2 after 4, so folks that are changing their picks based on early Spur momentum or recent Thunder momentum.
We all remember two years ago when the Spurs went up 2-0 then dropped 4 straight to OKC. But that OKC team had James Harden (who was money in that series) whereas this current OKC squad has a rotation of Jeremy Lamb and Caron Butler. The Spurs, on the other hand, are wiser not older with a better bench. This is one of the Series where the home team dominates because the bench is more effective at home and the refs are a little more friendly to the home squad. I wouldn't have thought that would've swung so many 20-point victories but oh well, these are two well-oiled offenses and when given those two hometown factors, I guess efficiency just busts out.
Resting Ibaka for the first two games looks now like a marvelous gambit: hey, the home team is probably gonna win anyway and since the Spurs are rolling, why don't we just give 'em those games and see if we can't play with their heads a little bit. Ehh, I'm not sure the headgames really hold up against a disciplined veteran squad like the Spurs (but I'm in awe of trying to play Jedi mind tricks on Coach Pop...yeah, good luck wit dat) but giving Ibaks a week off in the middle of the playoffs looks like a pretty good idea. Ibaka looks good out there, good footwork, good on-ball reaction, looks sparky around the rim.
Am I changing my pick? Well, my pick was predicated on Ibaka not being there in game 7, but I'll stick with the Spurs in 7. I'll stick with the home game dynamic. Seems like its holding up well so far.
Real Madrid 86-98 (OT) Maccabi Tel Aviv
http://www.foxnews.com/sports/2014/05/19/jubilant-israel-celebrates-maccabi-tel-aviv-unlikely-european-basketball-title/
(Note that that link is not Fox Sports but Fox News, so no game report--not even a final score! But apparently the Euroleague Final was watched by 1/3 of all Israelis, including bigwigs like Netanyahu and Peres. Interesting)
I watched the 2nd half and OT of this game, it was good stuff. Tyrese Rice was the PG for Maccabi that made all the plays down the stretch. Maccabi looked like an all-American squad: tatted up African American kids that looked more like Morningside Heights than the Golan Heights. I love the international game, I love that people all over the world wanna play this game that I wanna watch.
Though Maccabi has performed well over the years in this League (I believe this is their 9th title), it was Real Madrid that was the obvious favorite. They featured Rudy Fernandez, one of those guys that NBA-ers expect to become a star, and Nikola Mirotic, who I think will be wearing a Chicago Bull uni next year (and I believe they expect him to start). Mirotic impressed me but Fernandez came up short too much from outside.
It was a good game, very similar to high level NBA-style offensive sets, good athleticism, good refs, coaches that prowled the sideline looking busy (they looked more like soccer coaches than basketball coaches to me), it had all the familiar features of high level ball. I also watched a bit of the runner-up game: Barcelona dueled CSK Moscow for about 3.5 quarters and then ran away with the game behind their star, Joey Dorsey (you may remember him from Memphis's loss to Kansas in the 2006 NCAA). Good stuff, man, I hope I remember to catch this again next year (thank you, ESPN3).
(Note that that link is not Fox Sports but Fox News, so no game report--not even a final score! But apparently the Euroleague Final was watched by 1/3 of all Israelis, including bigwigs like Netanyahu and Peres. Interesting)
I watched the 2nd half and OT of this game, it was good stuff. Tyrese Rice was the PG for Maccabi that made all the plays down the stretch. Maccabi looked like an all-American squad: tatted up African American kids that looked more like Morningside Heights than the Golan Heights. I love the international game, I love that people all over the world wanna play this game that I wanna watch.
Though Maccabi has performed well over the years in this League (I believe this is their 9th title), it was Real Madrid that was the obvious favorite. They featured Rudy Fernandez, one of those guys that NBA-ers expect to become a star, and Nikola Mirotic, who I think will be wearing a Chicago Bull uni next year (and I believe they expect him to start). Mirotic impressed me but Fernandez came up short too much from outside.
It was a good game, very similar to high level NBA-style offensive sets, good athleticism, good refs, coaches that prowled the sideline looking busy (they looked more like soccer coaches than basketball coaches to me), it had all the familiar features of high level ball. I also watched a bit of the runner-up game: Barcelona dueled CSK Moscow for about 3.5 quarters and then ran away with the game behind their star, Joey Dorsey (you may remember him from Memphis's loss to Kansas in the 2006 NCAA). Good stuff, man, I hope I remember to catch this again next year (thank you, ESPN3).
Monday, May 5, 2014
Playoff Prediction: Spurs over Blazers in 7
5.7.14 -- I never know what to say about the Spurs. They're the Spurs. They play their game and some night they just don't have it (notoriously awful on back-to-back nights) but when they bring their A game they win most of the time. But in the last series against the Mavs, the Spurs pretty much did their thing in game 3 and game 6 and still lost. Game 2 was one of those 'didn't have it' nights but the other two Mav victories struck me as amazing gut-check basketball from Dirk and co. (Curious to see which free agents make their way to Dallas this summer) Does this mean the Spurs can fall to Portland, a team more efficient in its offense and defense than Dallas? No, I'm expecting the Spurs to beat (just about) anybody four out of seven games, so I'm expecting them to beat the Blazers.
I took the Blazers to get game 7 because Aldridge (underrated for years) and Lillard are better than ever this year and that'll make Ginobli and Parker change up at least a little. The Blazers (not unlike the Spurs) are the Blazers, man. They're good but not great every year. They can score, they can defend, they can rebound, they can move the ball, they can pile up points quickly, they can sneak in at the end and snatch a victory or...sometimes they can't. But the Blazers are a good team and they're playing well right now, I expect them to acquit themselves admirably against the Spurs. The supporting cast knows its role, knows how to support and augment its stars. And the Blazers feel like a team that likes each other, that matters in the playoffs (just ask the Pacers).
Yes, I already let game 1 sneak past me but I figured the Spurs would win at home. I suspect the home team wins every game in this series. I'll take the Spurs in 1,2,5,7 while the Blazers stand tall at home. I was a little surprised at the ease with which the Spurs handled the Blazers but on second thought I can imagine each game being a decisive win for whoever wins. Back in Portland, I expect Lillard to get hot, the supporting cast to make better contributions and the Spurs to mail it in (oh yeah, the Spurs can mail it in with the best of 'em); but in San Antonio I reckon the Spurs will play crisp basketball and exploit ever opportunity. So while I expect this to be a long series it wouldn't surprise if not a single game was really competitive. It may be boring basketball to some but I look forward to it just the same. I think that's what I think for now.
5.11.14 -- Okay, I was right about the first two games: Spurs smothered the Blazers, neither game was a blowout but the Spurs comfortably controlled both contests. My assumption was that going back to Portland would be a boon to the Blazer bench and the Spurs would play well, come up short, prepare for game 4. Instead the exact opposite transpired: the Spurs bench was humming (Ginobli +22, Mills +15, Diaw +22) while the Blazer gave nothing, man, nothing. If the Blazers can't win at home...well, then...I mean...they're not gonna win a game. Even with a 2-0 lead I didn't think the Spurs would sweep but now, how can you bet against it? Aldridge and Lillard weren't efficient but they weren't bad, but without some bench help, the Blazers cannot keep up with the wave after wave of Spurs machine-like offense.
Man, the Spurs are good. They look like they could do anything anywhere against anybody right now. They look like they could win an opera. (Swan Lake? Not any more, sucka. Its Spur Lake now) Send them to Congress, let them solve our problems. This team is smart--you can talk about analytics or statistics all you want, the Spurs are LIVING it; they're not trying to conform to some statistical model of the world, they're trying to conform to the WORLD. And they're doing just fine.
I don't see how the Clippers could hang with the Spurs; with the Thunder and Heat its just a matter of riding their stars as far as they take you. Only unpredictable star power (Lebron, KD, Westbrook really the only three I would even consider) can catch the Spurs off guard. It won't be a concerted team effort that beats the Spurs, their team is better than yours and you will lose that way; no, only herculean performances by the biggest stars could fell them. I thought the Spurs looked this good last year but Tony Parker came up hurt in the Finals and Ginobli really wavered down the stretch; but everyone's looking healthy now and the bench is deeper, more effective than last year. Hard to pick against them at all right now.
(I certainly hope Tim Duncan isn't thinking about retiring, he's still got 2 or 3 good years left. Also, since I would take whatever the Spurs are rolling off the bench any given night over Jamal Crawford, does that mean Greg Popovich should've won 6th Man of the Year?)
I took the Blazers to get game 7 because Aldridge (underrated for years) and Lillard are better than ever this year and that'll make Ginobli and Parker change up at least a little. The Blazers (not unlike the Spurs) are the Blazers, man. They're good but not great every year. They can score, they can defend, they can rebound, they can move the ball, they can pile up points quickly, they can sneak in at the end and snatch a victory or...sometimes they can't. But the Blazers are a good team and they're playing well right now, I expect them to acquit themselves admirably against the Spurs. The supporting cast knows its role, knows how to support and augment its stars. And the Blazers feel like a team that likes each other, that matters in the playoffs (just ask the Pacers).
Yes, I already let game 1 sneak past me but I figured the Spurs would win at home. I suspect the home team wins every game in this series. I'll take the Spurs in 1,2,5,7 while the Blazers stand tall at home. I was a little surprised at the ease with which the Spurs handled the Blazers but on second thought I can imagine each game being a decisive win for whoever wins. Back in Portland, I expect Lillard to get hot, the supporting cast to make better contributions and the Spurs to mail it in (oh yeah, the Spurs can mail it in with the best of 'em); but in San Antonio I reckon the Spurs will play crisp basketball and exploit ever opportunity. So while I expect this to be a long series it wouldn't surprise if not a single game was really competitive. It may be boring basketball to some but I look forward to it just the same. I think that's what I think for now.
5.11.14 -- Okay, I was right about the first two games: Spurs smothered the Blazers, neither game was a blowout but the Spurs comfortably controlled both contests. My assumption was that going back to Portland would be a boon to the Blazer bench and the Spurs would play well, come up short, prepare for game 4. Instead the exact opposite transpired: the Spurs bench was humming (Ginobli +22, Mills +15, Diaw +22) while the Blazer gave nothing, man, nothing. If the Blazers can't win at home...well, then...I mean...they're not gonna win a game. Even with a 2-0 lead I didn't think the Spurs would sweep but now, how can you bet against it? Aldridge and Lillard weren't efficient but they weren't bad, but without some bench help, the Blazers cannot keep up with the wave after wave of Spurs machine-like offense.
Man, the Spurs are good. They look like they could do anything anywhere against anybody right now. They look like they could win an opera. (Swan Lake? Not any more, sucka. Its Spur Lake now) Send them to Congress, let them solve our problems. This team is smart--you can talk about analytics or statistics all you want, the Spurs are LIVING it; they're not trying to conform to some statistical model of the world, they're trying to conform to the WORLD. And they're doing just fine.
I don't see how the Clippers could hang with the Spurs; with the Thunder and Heat its just a matter of riding their stars as far as they take you. Only unpredictable star power (Lebron, KD, Westbrook really the only three I would even consider) can catch the Spurs off guard. It won't be a concerted team effort that beats the Spurs, their team is better than yours and you will lose that way; no, only herculean performances by the biggest stars could fell them. I thought the Spurs looked this good last year but Tony Parker came up hurt in the Finals and Ginobli really wavered down the stretch; but everyone's looking healthy now and the bench is deeper, more effective than last year. Hard to pick against them at all right now.
(I certainly hope Tim Duncan isn't thinking about retiring, he's still got 2 or 3 good years left. Also, since I would take whatever the Spurs are rolling off the bench any given night over Jamal Crawford, does that mean Greg Popovich should've won 6th Man of the Year?)
Playoff Prediction: Thunder over Clippers in 7
5.7.14 -- I think its funny all the shit that Scott Brooks takes for his laissez-faire style of coaching. Dude, if Adolph Rupp rose up out of the ground and felt like preaching basketball, he'd be the first to tell you that Durant and Westbrook are great players and the team would be best served by giving them the ball and getting out of their way. So what is it you want Soctty to do? Shore up the D? Well, the Thunder D is pretty solid. Don't like him playing Perkins and Fisher? I suspect those guys play because Durant likes them and wants them around; I think Durant is sensitive to the vicissitudes of stardom and having veterans around that can be lightning rods on and off the court is invaluable to him; and besides Durant's production makes up for a lame center or back-up shooting guard (truthfully its the amount of money that Perkins earns that is insufferable). He wins when his guys are right, he can't win without them anyway so when they go down, what's the coach supposed to do about it?
All the writers really need from Scotty is to be a charismatic presence. If he were jocular and funny like Joe Madden of the Rays, then the writer's would sing his praises. Check it out, their careers are pretty similar: sometimes overachieving, sometimes under, but generally good in the regular season, spotty in the playoffs depending on the health of his stars, made one championship and lost it. Ask a sportswriter who is the better coach and they'd laugh at the question. Scotty, the path is clear: make funny comments! Be funny and cryptic, say weird things about 'the game of basketball' and then smile like Mona Lisa and those writers'll think you're the bees' knees.
When Durant and Westbrook play well, the Thunder win just about every game; when Durant and Westbrook don't play well, the Thunder lose just about every game. The games in between are where a coach or a different supporting cast might be able to make a difference but not really because you're always gonna favor Durant and Westbrook right to the end even if it costs you your job (just ask that guy that left Pedro in one inning too long at Yankee Stadium). Whoever the coach is this team will go as far as Durant and Westbrook take them.
Durant didn't play well against the Grizzlies. Is it he hitting the wall after an MVP season? Could be. But Durant is one of the last superstars in sports that I root for, his game is so exciting to watch and he seems like such a lovable guy that you want him to succeed. So I certainly hope he is as right as he needs to be to carry on. Westbrook seems healthy which is important because his game is all about volume and intensity. He's not at his most efficient right now but he's playing well enough and a healthy Westbrook is tough for anyone to deal with. (The only thing holding them back from a championship is Scotty Brooks starting Kendrick Perkins--oh, when will this abomination cease? *sarcasm*)
The Clippers are a good team playing well right now after having their best season yet. This team is hungry to win now. But, man, I just can't see Chris Paul going too deep into a season. He works too hard and stresses so much that I just can't see his body holding out for extending minutes against the best teams in the league night after night. And as much as I like the steps forward that Griffin and Jordan and the general supporting cast, I don't like them more than Durant and Westbrook playing well. Basketball is a team game but the great players can maximize their individual efforts to make the team stronger. I don't think Chris Paul is that kind of great player in the sense that I think he has to work too hard to will a team to that many wins. It burns him from the inside out, whereas Durant and Westbrook can bring it again and again and again.
Unlike the Spurs-Blazers, I do not think the home team has any great advantage in this series. I can see all 7 games going to the road team. These two teams are gonna play grudge matches and I think that favors the away team: you wanna sludge down your opponent and that can be tough to do in front of the home fans that are expecting you to make their children all responsible and shit. These types of matches are won by the sleazier guy, the bad guy, the heavy, the out-of-towner, the interloper, the hamburglers of the world. I think the Thunder win game 7, all that nice guy stuff goes out the window then, but otherwise I wouldn't be surpised if the Clippers went back to LA with 2 game lead and the Thunder snatch the home advantage back. That is perhaps a bit severe, these teams are both good and play with pride wherever they are, but I can see swings in momentum ahead in this series.
All the writers really need from Scotty is to be a charismatic presence. If he were jocular and funny like Joe Madden of the Rays, then the writer's would sing his praises. Check it out, their careers are pretty similar: sometimes overachieving, sometimes under, but generally good in the regular season, spotty in the playoffs depending on the health of his stars, made one championship and lost it. Ask a sportswriter who is the better coach and they'd laugh at the question. Scotty, the path is clear: make funny comments! Be funny and cryptic, say weird things about 'the game of basketball' and then smile like Mona Lisa and those writers'll think you're the bees' knees.
When Durant and Westbrook play well, the Thunder win just about every game; when Durant and Westbrook don't play well, the Thunder lose just about every game. The games in between are where a coach or a different supporting cast might be able to make a difference but not really because you're always gonna favor Durant and Westbrook right to the end even if it costs you your job (just ask that guy that left Pedro in one inning too long at Yankee Stadium). Whoever the coach is this team will go as far as Durant and Westbrook take them.
Durant didn't play well against the Grizzlies. Is it he hitting the wall after an MVP season? Could be. But Durant is one of the last superstars in sports that I root for, his game is so exciting to watch and he seems like such a lovable guy that you want him to succeed. So I certainly hope he is as right as he needs to be to carry on. Westbrook seems healthy which is important because his game is all about volume and intensity. He's not at his most efficient right now but he's playing well enough and a healthy Westbrook is tough for anyone to deal with. (The only thing holding them back from a championship is Scotty Brooks starting Kendrick Perkins--oh, when will this abomination cease? *sarcasm*)
The Clippers are a good team playing well right now after having their best season yet. This team is hungry to win now. But, man, I just can't see Chris Paul going too deep into a season. He works too hard and stresses so much that I just can't see his body holding out for extending minutes against the best teams in the league night after night. And as much as I like the steps forward that Griffin and Jordan and the general supporting cast, I don't like them more than Durant and Westbrook playing well. Basketball is a team game but the great players can maximize their individual efforts to make the team stronger. I don't think Chris Paul is that kind of great player in the sense that I think he has to work too hard to will a team to that many wins. It burns him from the inside out, whereas Durant and Westbrook can bring it again and again and again.
Unlike the Spurs-Blazers, I do not think the home team has any great advantage in this series. I can see all 7 games going to the road team. These two teams are gonna play grudge matches and I think that favors the away team: you wanna sludge down your opponent and that can be tough to do in front of the home fans that are expecting you to make their children all responsible and shit. These types of matches are won by the sleazier guy, the bad guy, the heavy, the out-of-towner, the interloper, the hamburglers of the world. I think the Thunder win game 7, all that nice guy stuff goes out the window then, but otherwise I wouldn't be surpised if the Clippers went back to LA with 2 game lead and the Thunder snatch the home advantage back. That is perhaps a bit severe, these teams are both good and play with pride wherever they are, but I can see swings in momentum ahead in this series.
Playoff Prediction: Heat over Nets in 5
5.5.14 -- The Nets swept the Heat in the season series and while that is a generally predictive stat I'm not buying that the Heat are that much worse than the Nets so I'm inclined to throw out this fact as an outlier. The Heat could easily win the next four games and the Nets could easily look horrible in all four.
The Heat smoked the Jefferson-less Bobcats in four games. An easy call: the Heat are the defending champs, the Bobcats are the spunky upstarts. Without Big Al the Bobcats just did not have enough scoring to even compete a little bit with the Heat, so the Heat took the opportunity to rest by dispatching the Bobcats quickly. The Nets, on the other hand, went 7 games with the Raptors (both teams exactly the same amount of points over 7 games) and still had to pull it out on the last play of the last game (if Patterson gets that loose ball instead of Lowry, I think he gets a better chance to get past Pierce; obviously the play was drawn up for Lowry and he'd put all that work into getting to the basket you can't fault him for not dishing--and Patterson's look wouldn't have been ideal--but I think Patterson could've gotten around Pierce whereas Lowry was stuck going straight into him), in a series that was a text book example of veteran smarts sneaking past the young talented newcomers; I thought the Raptors had enough to get by the Nets and I was almost right. It took every ounce of energy the Nets could muster to best the Toronto Raptors, does anyone think they can muster enough to beat the Heat? "Mustering" is relative: each game is its own environment and how teams/players react is based on what they're encountering in each specific ecosystem.
When the Nets made their big move last year bringing in Pierce and KG, I thought it was a disaster for the team; I thought that Pierce and KG were both done or at least enough past their primes to make the deals nothing but ruinously expensive. Pierce surprised me this season, being a lot more of an effective floor leader than I would thought him capable; and KG, well, he's good in the playoffs. Are the Nets wildly better than last year? No but they are better. They're also older in the good ways and the bad ways. And this is the match-up the Nets were built for. The Heat, though, are the defending champs and even though they haven't looked as dominant this season, they haven't had to.
Pierce is the bedrock leader of the team and he's a good one to have going into a tough playoff series. KG is done (has been done for a while) but in a game-to-game situation he can still be effective (came up big in game 7 against the Raptors). Deron Williams has moments where he looks like the old Deron but just as often struggles with his shot and his defense. Joe Johnson is a filler-upper that can occasionally look unstoppable but he's also slow and prone to cold streaks. Alan Anderson is the wild card on this team: he's not as good but he's young and feeling himself and could create a big difference because his unpredictability. Andray Blatche has his moments but against some rotation of Lewis, Oden, Anderson, Bosh he's gonna have to play a lot of defense and probably won' get much of the weak-side action he needs to make plays. Livingston is the guy that could really shine out in this series; up against Chalmers and Beasley he'll get chances to make plays and be pesky on defense. Kirilenko disappeared against the Raptors, is he rested and ready or out of the rotation? Marcus Thornton had a big game 7 but I don't see that happening again. I've never been impressed with Teletovic, never seen enough of him to really know his game.
Is all of the above enough to beat the Heat? No. To me the one to keep an eye on is Shaun Livingston, he will either make a big difference off the bench or...he won't. If he gets eaten up by Beasley and Chalmers then he will have accomplished nothing; but if he comes in and moves the offense, then he could keep the Nets in games that they might be falling out of.
I'll take the Nets to take game one in Miami. I'll take the Heat in the next four games. Heat in 5. The Heat are faster, smarter, more efficient than the Nets. When it comes time to win I think the Heat will step up and handle their business and the Nets won't be able to hang.
The Heat smoked the Jefferson-less Bobcats in four games. An easy call: the Heat are the defending champs, the Bobcats are the spunky upstarts. Without Big Al the Bobcats just did not have enough scoring to even compete a little bit with the Heat, so the Heat took the opportunity to rest by dispatching the Bobcats quickly. The Nets, on the other hand, went 7 games with the Raptors (both teams exactly the same amount of points over 7 games) and still had to pull it out on the last play of the last game (if Patterson gets that loose ball instead of Lowry, I think he gets a better chance to get past Pierce; obviously the play was drawn up for Lowry and he'd put all that work into getting to the basket you can't fault him for not dishing--and Patterson's look wouldn't have been ideal--but I think Patterson could've gotten around Pierce whereas Lowry was stuck going straight into him), in a series that was a text book example of veteran smarts sneaking past the young talented newcomers; I thought the Raptors had enough to get by the Nets and I was almost right. It took every ounce of energy the Nets could muster to best the Toronto Raptors, does anyone think they can muster enough to beat the Heat? "Mustering" is relative: each game is its own environment and how teams/players react is based on what they're encountering in each specific ecosystem.
When the Nets made their big move last year bringing in Pierce and KG, I thought it was a disaster for the team; I thought that Pierce and KG were both done or at least enough past their primes to make the deals nothing but ruinously expensive. Pierce surprised me this season, being a lot more of an effective floor leader than I would thought him capable; and KG, well, he's good in the playoffs. Are the Nets wildly better than last year? No but they are better. They're also older in the good ways and the bad ways. And this is the match-up the Nets were built for. The Heat, though, are the defending champs and even though they haven't looked as dominant this season, they haven't had to.
Pierce is the bedrock leader of the team and he's a good one to have going into a tough playoff series. KG is done (has been done for a while) but in a game-to-game situation he can still be effective (came up big in game 7 against the Raptors). Deron Williams has moments where he looks like the old Deron but just as often struggles with his shot and his defense. Joe Johnson is a filler-upper that can occasionally look unstoppable but he's also slow and prone to cold streaks. Alan Anderson is the wild card on this team: he's not as good but he's young and feeling himself and could create a big difference because his unpredictability. Andray Blatche has his moments but against some rotation of Lewis, Oden, Anderson, Bosh he's gonna have to play a lot of defense and probably won' get much of the weak-side action he needs to make plays. Livingston is the guy that could really shine out in this series; up against Chalmers and Beasley he'll get chances to make plays and be pesky on defense. Kirilenko disappeared against the Raptors, is he rested and ready or out of the rotation? Marcus Thornton had a big game 7 but I don't see that happening again. I've never been impressed with Teletovic, never seen enough of him to really know his game.
Is all of the above enough to beat the Heat? No. To me the one to keep an eye on is Shaun Livingston, he will either make a big difference off the bench or...he won't. If he gets eaten up by Beasley and Chalmers then he will have accomplished nothing; but if he comes in and moves the offense, then he could keep the Nets in games that they might be falling out of.
I'll take the Nets to take game one in Miami. I'll take the Heat in the next four games. Heat in 5. The Heat are faster, smarter, more efficient than the Nets. When it comes time to win I think the Heat will step up and handle their business and the Nets won't be able to hang.
Playoff Prediction: Wizards over Pacers in 5
5.5.14 -- Are the Pacers done struggling? Was game 7 that come-to-jesus moment where they figured it all out or were they just that much better than the Hawks that it didn't even matter if the light came on? Just remember: when the Pacers have their come-to-jesus moment they will be very good and competitive with the best in the league, but until that moment they're only slightly better than the Atlanta Hawks.
Were the Wizards that dominant against the Bulls or had the Bulls just come farther than they should have? I'm gonna say both. The Wizards are playing their best basketball of the season right now; their starting lineup and bench rotation are as clear and effective as they have been all season; this is a team that knows who they are and that they can be good. Wall has speed that few teams can deal with, Nene is reminding everyone that when he's not hurt he's actually really good, Beal has flashes of brilliance, Gortat, Webster, Ariza, Andre Miller are solid role players. This is a good team and perhaps the Bulls were overworked or overachieving, but the Wizards were better than the Bulls, no disputing that. The Bulls don't get worked very often but they were indeed worked by the Wizards, take that for what its worth.
The Pacers feature the same 5 guys playing all the minutes, and at times those 5 have been untouchable, but not lately. In my gut I wanna take the Wizards in 5. Here's the scenario: Wiz take game 1 in Indy, then take 3 & 4 back in Washington. If Indy is down 3-1 after 4 games then they're gonna need their come-to-Jesus moment and if they don't get it, they lose in 5. If they do get it, the Pacers storm back, win in 7 and we get the Heat-Pacers series we were hoping for all year long.
The season series had the home team winning all 3 games rather handily; the Wizards roster changed radically throughout the 3 games while the Pacers pretty much had the same starting 5 and bench play in all 3 games. I think the Wizards are a more defined team now and the Pacers will adapt to this squad and no one should be able to get any clear upper hand on the other because they're both so good.
It seems absurd that this series would be anything other than really competitive. So this series goes 7 games, right? Its up to Jesus. I laid out two scenarios (Wiz in 5, Pacers in 7) which one am I going with? I'll take the wacky one: Wizards in 5. I'm taking John Wall over Jesus.
5.7.14 -- The more I think about this series, the more I agree with myself. I'm gonna amend my prediction and take the Wizards to win tonight. The Wizards are playing their best basketball of the year and the Pacers are not. Its absurd to expect the Pacers to win like they did in November when they're not playing like they did in November. The Wizards are a good team playing better than usual now, even when the Pacers were playing their best basketball, they easily could've lost to this Wiz team. So why wait for a light to come on? Even if it does come on that's no guarantee the Pacers have enough to beat the Wiz.
I suggested in the last update that if the Pacers get their shit together by game 5 then they could win in 7; two months I wouldn't have given the Wizards a shot to get 7 games on the Pacers so my above scenario has a patina of plausibility: for most of the year we've watched the Pacers be better than the Wizards. But now I can't see how the Pacers get to 7 games on the Wizards! So even if the light does come on (and I'm not seeing Thomas Edison walking through those doors, folks), I think the Wizards are better than the Pacers right now. I'll stick with 5 games but I'm getting to that point where I'd be kinda shocked if the Pacers won this series.
Were the Wizards that dominant against the Bulls or had the Bulls just come farther than they should have? I'm gonna say both. The Wizards are playing their best basketball of the season right now; their starting lineup and bench rotation are as clear and effective as they have been all season; this is a team that knows who they are and that they can be good. Wall has speed that few teams can deal with, Nene is reminding everyone that when he's not hurt he's actually really good, Beal has flashes of brilliance, Gortat, Webster, Ariza, Andre Miller are solid role players. This is a good team and perhaps the Bulls were overworked or overachieving, but the Wizards were better than the Bulls, no disputing that. The Bulls don't get worked very often but they were indeed worked by the Wizards, take that for what its worth.
The Pacers feature the same 5 guys playing all the minutes, and at times those 5 have been untouchable, but not lately. In my gut I wanna take the Wizards in 5. Here's the scenario: Wiz take game 1 in Indy, then take 3 & 4 back in Washington. If Indy is down 3-1 after 4 games then they're gonna need their come-to-Jesus moment and if they don't get it, they lose in 5. If they do get it, the Pacers storm back, win in 7 and we get the Heat-Pacers series we were hoping for all year long.
The season series had the home team winning all 3 games rather handily; the Wizards roster changed radically throughout the 3 games while the Pacers pretty much had the same starting 5 and bench play in all 3 games. I think the Wizards are a more defined team now and the Pacers will adapt to this squad and no one should be able to get any clear upper hand on the other because they're both so good.
It seems absurd that this series would be anything other than really competitive. So this series goes 7 games, right? Its up to Jesus. I laid out two scenarios (Wiz in 5, Pacers in 7) which one am I going with? I'll take the wacky one: Wizards in 5. I'm taking John Wall over Jesus.
5.7.14 -- The more I think about this series, the more I agree with myself. I'm gonna amend my prediction and take the Wizards to win tonight. The Wizards are playing their best basketball of the year and the Pacers are not. Its absurd to expect the Pacers to win like they did in November when they're not playing like they did in November. The Wizards are a good team playing better than usual now, even when the Pacers were playing their best basketball, they easily could've lost to this Wiz team. So why wait for a light to come on? Even if it does come on that's no guarantee the Pacers have enough to beat the Wiz.
I suggested in the last update that if the Pacers get their shit together by game 5 then they could win in 7; two months I wouldn't have given the Wizards a shot to get 7 games on the Pacers so my above scenario has a patina of plausibility: for most of the year we've watched the Pacers be better than the Wizards. But now I can't see how the Pacers get to 7 games on the Wizards! So even if the light does come on (and I'm not seeing Thomas Edison walking through those doors, folks), I think the Wizards are better than the Pacers right now. I'll stick with 5 games but I'm getting to that point where I'd be kinda shocked if the Pacers won this series.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
