Up to 71 debuts this year now including Tyler Johnson (Heat), James McAdoo (Warriors), JaMychel Green (Spurs), Larry Drew (Sixers), Langston Galloway (Knicks) and Elijah Millsap (Jazz)
Julius Randle has slipped to 28th in Rookie MPG, let's look at the top 16: Wiggins (33.6), Noel (30.1), Galloway (29.6), Parker (29.5), Payton (27.7), McDaniels (26.1), LaVine (22.8), Bogdanovic (22.4), Smart (22.2), Napier (20.8), Papanikolau (20.0), Millsap (19.9), Exum (19.7), Drew (19.6), Ingles (19.6) and Hood (18.3)
Three eye-opening additions to the Rookie MPG list: Langston Galloway in only 10 games has already risen to 3rd in Rookie PPG and at a pretty good percentage, looks like a legit scorer for the Knicks; Elijah Millsap in only 12 games for the Jazz is already getting more usage than Exum, Ingles and Hood...ouch!; Larry Drew is getting minutes for the Sixers (well, it was either another rookie or go find an actual NBA player) but I'm not seeing anything in his numbers that indicate that he'll remain long on this list.
Wiggins, Noel and Payton are still firmly ensconced as the top three (remaining) ROY candidates with Jabari Parker still hanging in at 4th place in MPG.
McDaniels and LaVine are two slow starters that have cemented their rotations spots (McDaniels by being a high energy athlete on a very young roster; LaVine by getting the lion's share of injured Ricky Rubio's minutes).
Smart is rising again in MPG. With Rondo and Green (and hell even Jameer Nelson and Nate Robinson) out of the way, Smart has plenty of minutes to himself. I expect he'll get even more, as he's shown himself to be a surprisingly effective 3pt shooter and a pretty good assist/turnover ratio.
Bogdanovic, Papanickolau and Napier are firmly in their rotations as they have been pretty much since the beginning of the year.
I'm a little surprised that Mirotic (#18) and Hairston (#24) aren't higher, seems like those guys are always playing whenever I check out the Bulls and Hornets.
And Aaron Gordon is fully back from his injury, even getting starter minutes for the Magic, so I expect his MPG will be higher by year's end.
As of now your 2014-15 Rookie of the Year belongs to Andrew Wiggins (Wolves). Barring injury (of course) the award is his to lose. Noel and Payton are good solid players but Wiggins has really become a dynamic offensive player, a guy you wanna watch night after night. I still think Jabari Parker may well be the most impressive player (and will probably get some votes despite playing only 25 games) but Wiggins is going to log the minutes and accumulate the stats to net him the award, it looks like.
Friday, January 30, 2015
Kobe's future
Its been a coupla days since Kobe had successful shoulder surgery, followed by the announcement he'd be out for 9 months (just in time for pre-season). Kobe hasn't played much the last few years (kinda like Derrick Rose) and folks are starting to wonder if he'll ever be back. With 1yr/$25m left on his deal, I'd say its a foregone conclusion he'll be back next year. And with Karl Malone's scoring record in his sites, I say he plays hard. Will he play another year? Will he got another contract? I say he does keep playing....and not necessarily with the Lakers.
Look, man, Kobe's been a pro baller since he was a little kid, he's done nothing but basketball for virtually his entire life. His workouts are legendary, he's the fiercest competitor on the court since MJ, he's never wanted anything but success on the court, his dedication to the game has been life-consuming. Not to the game of basketball but to HIS game. And that is entirely the product of ego, which isn't aging as fast as his shoulders and ankles. As long as his body holds out, why would he ever leave the game?
Will Kobe be a coach? I doubt it, he knows his own game inside and out but I'm not sure how he helps anyone else's game get better. Will Kobe be a GM? I doubt it, I don't think I'd have much faith in his ability to mix and match talent on the court. Will Kobe be an owner? I can see that, but there's plenty of time for Kobe to slide comfortably into the easy life of a vapid LA celebrity. But success as an owner won't feel as good to him, he'll feel removed from the action, perhaps painfully so. So what is Kobe gonna do?
Kobe's gonna play until he absolutely cannot play any more. Tom Brady just said he wants to play til he's 45, don't you think Kobe's thinking the same thing? Given his legendary fitness, he may well last another ten years. I can totally see Kobe signing 2 or 3 more contracts before he has to whip out two canes to walk on. He wants to break records, he wants to keep doing what he does, he wants to catch Karl Malone (and then Kareem). Some would laugh at this notion, but I can see Kobe doing the hired gun thing, sitting out til the All-Star break, picking the right fit, playing hard for 40-50 games. If he can still make shots, get paid and contribute to a good team, why would he ever leave? He's got plenty of time to hang around Beverly Hills just being famous all day, I suspect he's in no hurry to get that point.
But the Lakers won't keep him for 10 more years. The team is in a bad spot right now and $25m for Kobe probably seems like a bargain since he's the only real asset they have. But they'll be good again soon enough and Kobe will be more of a luxury than they can afford. Weird to see Kobe in another uni but I think it will happen. Where does he go? I say the Sixers. They could use an SG with some swagger, some experience, preferably familiar with the fickle Philly fans. The Sixers are a notoriously skinflint team but overpaying a hometown Kobe making buckets isn't necessarily a waste of money. $15m of Kobe might net them $30m in ticket sales and ancillary markets. And the Sixers are gonna be under the salary cap for the foreseeable future, even an overpaid Kobe wouldn't be too much of a burden to this squad. And face it: the Sixers aren't getting Durant or Love or Kyrie or Westbrook or anybody that would be any better. Why not send Kobe out there to catch Karl Malone while the youth movement continues on. (Remember: I'm not convinced that any of the recent Sixer shenanigans are actually designed to win games, indeed I think they're willing to sacrifice W's forever if it means positive revenue; so bringing in Kobe doesn't get them closer to a championship...so?)
Kobe to the Sixers. Gonna happen. And when it does, it'll seem so natural, so perfect.
Look, man, Kobe's been a pro baller since he was a little kid, he's done nothing but basketball for virtually his entire life. His workouts are legendary, he's the fiercest competitor on the court since MJ, he's never wanted anything but success on the court, his dedication to the game has been life-consuming. Not to the game of basketball but to HIS game. And that is entirely the product of ego, which isn't aging as fast as his shoulders and ankles. As long as his body holds out, why would he ever leave the game?
Will Kobe be a coach? I doubt it, he knows his own game inside and out but I'm not sure how he helps anyone else's game get better. Will Kobe be a GM? I doubt it, I don't think I'd have much faith in his ability to mix and match talent on the court. Will Kobe be an owner? I can see that, but there's plenty of time for Kobe to slide comfortably into the easy life of a vapid LA celebrity. But success as an owner won't feel as good to him, he'll feel removed from the action, perhaps painfully so. So what is Kobe gonna do?
Kobe's gonna play until he absolutely cannot play any more. Tom Brady just said he wants to play til he's 45, don't you think Kobe's thinking the same thing? Given his legendary fitness, he may well last another ten years. I can totally see Kobe signing 2 or 3 more contracts before he has to whip out two canes to walk on. He wants to break records, he wants to keep doing what he does, he wants to catch Karl Malone (and then Kareem). Some would laugh at this notion, but I can see Kobe doing the hired gun thing, sitting out til the All-Star break, picking the right fit, playing hard for 40-50 games. If he can still make shots, get paid and contribute to a good team, why would he ever leave? He's got plenty of time to hang around Beverly Hills just being famous all day, I suspect he's in no hurry to get that point.
But the Lakers won't keep him for 10 more years. The team is in a bad spot right now and $25m for Kobe probably seems like a bargain since he's the only real asset they have. But they'll be good again soon enough and Kobe will be more of a luxury than they can afford. Weird to see Kobe in another uni but I think it will happen. Where does he go? I say the Sixers. They could use an SG with some swagger, some experience, preferably familiar with the fickle Philly fans. The Sixers are a notoriously skinflint team but overpaying a hometown Kobe making buckets isn't necessarily a waste of money. $15m of Kobe might net them $30m in ticket sales and ancillary markets. And the Sixers are gonna be under the salary cap for the foreseeable future, even an overpaid Kobe wouldn't be too much of a burden to this squad. And face it: the Sixers aren't getting Durant or Love or Kyrie or Westbrook or anybody that would be any better. Why not send Kobe out there to catch Karl Malone while the youth movement continues on. (Remember: I'm not convinced that any of the recent Sixer shenanigans are actually designed to win games, indeed I think they're willing to sacrifice W's forever if it means positive revenue; so bringing in Kobe doesn't get them closer to a championship...so?)
Kobe to the Sixers. Gonna happen. And when it does, it'll seem so natural, so perfect.
Wednesday, January 14, 2015
Random Nate Robinson Question
Where does Nate Robinson go now? The Celtics just acquired Robinson from the Nuggets for Jameer Nelson (man, Nelson had a good thing going in Dallas, now he's been jettisoned twice and stuck in Denver and the Broncos already lost, sucks) and all expectations are that the Celtics will waive him. So where does he go?
I say the Hawks. The Hawks are rolling pretty good right now. Barring injury (pretty much ought to be inserted in any sentence about sports) the Hawks have everything they need to compete: the PG doesn't turn it over, the SG is one of the best in the league, the C is unconventional but solid, the PF is balling, the bench does their thing, the coach looks like he knows what he's doing, they've got wing D, inside D, good rebounding. I don't mean to suggest that they are invincible but its not hard to see them going deep in the playoffs. Any changes might unravel what they've got going.
But as we come up on the trade deadline, teams are primed (or at least the fans are) to make a trade or a free agent signing just to show confidence. They don't need a star, they don't even need another role player. They don't need to upgrade, they need to minimize depreciation. What the Hawks need is a guy that can be relied upon for 5-10 minutes at a time. I suggest Nate Robinson is that guy. He can control the ball, score a little, make a play on the defensive end, get the crowd excited, then be back to the bench before you know it. That's what the Hawks need, not a go-to guy or a defensive stopper or a veteran looking for a ring. Just go get Nate Robinson for the rest of the year, ride him into the playoffs, then let him go in the summer.
...Or I can see Robinson going to the Rockets. Just because. I don't think the Rockets particularly need him but they're such a rambling wreck of a team that Nate could probably slip in just fine there. He could maybe help them out with minimal investment and no worry about him blowing things up.
I say the Hawks. The Hawks are rolling pretty good right now. Barring injury (pretty much ought to be inserted in any sentence about sports) the Hawks have everything they need to compete: the PG doesn't turn it over, the SG is one of the best in the league, the C is unconventional but solid, the PF is balling, the bench does their thing, the coach looks like he knows what he's doing, they've got wing D, inside D, good rebounding. I don't mean to suggest that they are invincible but its not hard to see them going deep in the playoffs. Any changes might unravel what they've got going.
But as we come up on the trade deadline, teams are primed (or at least the fans are) to make a trade or a free agent signing just to show confidence. They don't need a star, they don't even need another role player. They don't need to upgrade, they need to minimize depreciation. What the Hawks need is a guy that can be relied upon for 5-10 minutes at a time. I suggest Nate Robinson is that guy. He can control the ball, score a little, make a play on the defensive end, get the crowd excited, then be back to the bench before you know it. That's what the Hawks need, not a go-to guy or a defensive stopper or a veteran looking for a ring. Just go get Nate Robinson for the rest of the year, ride him into the playoffs, then let him go in the summer.
...Or I can see Robinson going to the Rockets. Just because. I don't think the Rockets particularly need him but they're such a rambling wreck of a team that Nate could probably slip in just fine there. He could maybe help them out with minimal investment and no worry about him blowing things up.
Monday, January 12, 2015
Ohio St v. Oregon
Growing up in Kentucky I was not (as you can imagine) much of a college football fan. UK was never any good and while I loved the NFL, watching the college game never made any sense to me. There seemed to be a handful of teams wildly better than their pitiful opponents which made it not much fun to watch and the system to determine the champion just seemed capricious at best. Somewhere in the last 10 years or so I changed my tune. I guess I just grew up and had nothing better to do on Saturday than watch 'amateur' football. I grew to love watching the contests and I embraced the changes to the old system. Personally I dug the BCS, for all its flaws I think it generally did a pretty good job of filtering down to two final contestants. And we all knew that it would eventually lead to a tournament. Its a 4 team tourney now (all I need) but soon enough it'll get to 8 teams and I think in the end it'll get up to 16 (a long slog through the month of December).
In the old BCS system we would've ended up with Alabama and Florida State in the final, neither of whom survived their playoff tests. I watched a lot of Florida State this year (thank you, ESPN3) and they never dominated, doing only enough to come out on top, the most uninspiring undefeated team since that BYU team that won championship back in the 1980s (which is kinda where all this BCS stuff came from, if you think about it). So I'm glad Oregon and Ohio State were matriculated into the system especially since it feel like we've been waiting 10 years for an Alabama-Oregon final...well, that didn't happen this year either.
Oregon ripped through the Seminoles just as I thought they would. Some games are predictable, some games catch you by surprise, but Oregon's semi-final win over Florida State was in the latter camp. If I was a betting man (which strangely enough I am not) I would've thought nothing of putting money on the Ducks in the game. I'm not as confident in tonight's tilt because Ohio State has been surprising me non-stop lately. I didn't think they'd beat Wisconsin with a 3rd string QB and they won 59-0! I wasn't sure they'd be able to get past Alabama in the trenches but they handled themselves just fine. I feel like the Buckeyes can't hang with Oregon's team speed and the onslaught of the Duck attack...but, I dunno, maybe.
This game should be a good one, a great kickoff to the college football tournament we all knew was gonna happen someday. Both offenses look unstoppable, its a matter of which defense can plug the dyke long enough to compile more points. It'd be interesting if this turned into a sludgefest, a good ol' fashioned field position battle, but I don't see that happening. These teams both score a lot of points and I think they'll both score a lot tonight; I can easily see the losing team scoring 35 points. I've been going against the Buckeyes and losing but I'm gonna do it one more time: I'll take Oregon (-6.5) and the over (74.5).
In the old BCS system we would've ended up with Alabama and Florida State in the final, neither of whom survived their playoff tests. I watched a lot of Florida State this year (thank you, ESPN3) and they never dominated, doing only enough to come out on top, the most uninspiring undefeated team since that BYU team that won championship back in the 1980s (which is kinda where all this BCS stuff came from, if you think about it). So I'm glad Oregon and Ohio State were matriculated into the system especially since it feel like we've been waiting 10 years for an Alabama-Oregon final...well, that didn't happen this year either.
Oregon ripped through the Seminoles just as I thought they would. Some games are predictable, some games catch you by surprise, but Oregon's semi-final win over Florida State was in the latter camp. If I was a betting man (which strangely enough I am not) I would've thought nothing of putting money on the Ducks in the game. I'm not as confident in tonight's tilt because Ohio State has been surprising me non-stop lately. I didn't think they'd beat Wisconsin with a 3rd string QB and they won 59-0! I wasn't sure they'd be able to get past Alabama in the trenches but they handled themselves just fine. I feel like the Buckeyes can't hang with Oregon's team speed and the onslaught of the Duck attack...but, I dunno, maybe.
This game should be a good one, a great kickoff to the college football tournament we all knew was gonna happen someday. Both offenses look unstoppable, its a matter of which defense can plug the dyke long enough to compile more points. It'd be interesting if this turned into a sludgefest, a good ol' fashioned field position battle, but I don't see that happening. These teams both score a lot of points and I think they'll both score a lot tonight; I can easily see the losing team scoring 35 points. I've been going against the Buckeyes and losing but I'm gonna do it one more time: I'll take Oregon (-6.5) and the over (74.5).
Thursday, January 8, 2015
MLB Hall of Fame
There are four new members-elect of the Baseball Hall of Fame: Randy Johnson, Pedro Martinez, John Smoltz, Craig Biggio. Johnson absolutely was one of the best pitchers I ever watched, along with Nolan Ryan one of the only pitchers batters truly feared. Pedro was amazing, man, he was effortlessly brilliant at his peak, Koufax-like numbers, and, like Brazilian soccer, fun to watch whether he won or lost. Smoltz had a varied career, adapted himself to his opportunities as well as any player I can remember. Biggio was never what I thought of as a Hall of Famer when I saw him play but he was consistently above average for years and years and played on a lot of good teams, in baseball that matters a lot. No complaints on any of those guys but judging from the rest of the voting, I would make a much more lenient steward of the Hall.
The guys that didn't make it this year: Mike Piazza, Jeff Bagwell, Curt Shilling, Tim Raines, Roger Clemens, Edgar Martinez, Alan Trammell, Barry Bonds, Larry Walker, Gary Sheffield, Mike Mussina, Mark McGwire, Sammy Sosa, Don Mattingly, Nomar Garciaparra
Of the guys that didn't make it this year I think Mike Piazza will make it next year, should've been in by now frankly but I think his support increases plenty enough for him to make it.
I'm not sure if the election of longtime teammate Biggio makes it easier or harder for Jeff Bagwell. I'd think it'd be easier but maybe not. Bagwell struck me as the more dangerous of the two all that time they were together.
I'd vote for Tim Raines, like Biggio a good player for a long time, contributed to a lot of good teams over the years.
It appears that Curt Shilling will not make the Hall of Fame which is a joke. Shilling was easily one of the best pitchers I ever saw--that particular eye test is important in Hall of Fame I think, as much or more than the numbers. Did they seem like Hall of Famers when they played? For Shilling that answer is hell yeah, of course. Watching Shilling pitch with runners on base was one of my all time favorite things in all my years of baseball fanboyishness. Annoying jerk, sure. Political goofball, yup. Idiot businessman, I guess so. But his baseball playing was superior to a lot of guys in the Hall and he was one of the best I ever saw. The fact that he wasn't chummy with the press corps shouldn't keep him from the remembrance he deserves.
You know who else was one of the best I ever saw? Roger Clemens. Barry Bonds too. I don't care about steroids. Steroids don't make you good at anything, they only make you bigger (sorta, actually you still gotta do that on your own). Bigger is not necessarily better and there have been plenty of dudes busted for steroids that sucked at baseball. But they don't get called in front of Congress.
Mike Mussina is another criminally underrated pitcher. Not sure what the complaint against him is but he was a badass for a long time in the AL East, contributed to good teams, went deep in the playoffs, many time All Star, the guy was a badass. He wasn't Pedro or Clemens or even Shilling but, let's say he was the Craig Biggio of pitching. Still good enough to get into the Hall, it seems to me.
I'd vote for Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa, again my disdain for the media's self-appointed morality-in-baseball czar kinda makes me root for both of them to get in. Truth be told, I think McGwire is a borderline candidate, he had some monster years but for long stretches he was just Dave Kingman 2.0, but the argument against him inspires me to think him worthy. And Sosa mostly annoyed me as a player but his numbers are pretty badass. What? Are we suddenly not into numbers any more? I thought this was the golden age of statistical analysis...
I'm on the fence about Edgar Martinez (the sweetest right-handed swing of his generation), Alan Trammell (like Biggio, a good player for a long time), Larry Walker (great hitter but not sure he had the rich career of a Hall of Famer), and Gary Sheffield (had some monster years, good longevity, played on good teams, not a bad candidate).
Gotta give some love for Nomar Garciaparra who got enough votes to be invited back next year. He had a coupla all-time great years but didn't really do it for the long haul like you like to see in a baseballer. But still, the last Red Sox icon to get shooed away right before they win championships? Ouch! That's gotta be worth some pity votes.
I wouldn't vote for Lee Smith. He was the first real save guy, had some lights out years. But saves have had too many badasses since Smith to put him in the top tier.
I wouldn't vote for Jeff Kent, personally I always found him to be waaaay more of an irritating jerk than Barry Bonds...that's gotta mean something.
Although he was one of my favorite players back in the day, I couldn't vote for Fred McGriff. The Crime Dog had his days but I don't think he rose to that level.
Don Mattingly appeared on the ballot for the last time. Kinda weird to think he's not in the Hall of Fame. A great Yankee that everybody loved? How he is not in the Hall of Fame? I can see him getting put in by a veterans committee in the future.
Of the guys that didn't even survive the first cut, I got no complaints. Even though I always thought Carlos Delgado was a badass, I can't say I look back on him as a Hall of Famer. Nor the likes of Troy Percival, Aaron Boone, Tom Gordon, Darin Erstad, Brian Giles, Jason Schmidt, Cliff Floyd, Jermaine Dye, Rich Aurilia, Tony Clark or Eddie Guardado.
I would've put a lot more dudes into the Hall of Fame than the current gatekeepers. But then again I was always soft on drugs.
The guys that didn't make it this year: Mike Piazza, Jeff Bagwell, Curt Shilling, Tim Raines, Roger Clemens, Edgar Martinez, Alan Trammell, Barry Bonds, Larry Walker, Gary Sheffield, Mike Mussina, Mark McGwire, Sammy Sosa, Don Mattingly, Nomar Garciaparra
Of the guys that didn't make it this year I think Mike Piazza will make it next year, should've been in by now frankly but I think his support increases plenty enough for him to make it.
I'm not sure if the election of longtime teammate Biggio makes it easier or harder for Jeff Bagwell. I'd think it'd be easier but maybe not. Bagwell struck me as the more dangerous of the two all that time they were together.
I'd vote for Tim Raines, like Biggio a good player for a long time, contributed to a lot of good teams over the years.
It appears that Curt Shilling will not make the Hall of Fame which is a joke. Shilling was easily one of the best pitchers I ever saw--that particular eye test is important in Hall of Fame I think, as much or more than the numbers. Did they seem like Hall of Famers when they played? For Shilling that answer is hell yeah, of course. Watching Shilling pitch with runners on base was one of my all time favorite things in all my years of baseball fanboyishness. Annoying jerk, sure. Political goofball, yup. Idiot businessman, I guess so. But his baseball playing was superior to a lot of guys in the Hall and he was one of the best I ever saw. The fact that he wasn't chummy with the press corps shouldn't keep him from the remembrance he deserves.
You know who else was one of the best I ever saw? Roger Clemens. Barry Bonds too. I don't care about steroids. Steroids don't make you good at anything, they only make you bigger (sorta, actually you still gotta do that on your own). Bigger is not necessarily better and there have been plenty of dudes busted for steroids that sucked at baseball. But they don't get called in front of Congress.
Mike Mussina is another criminally underrated pitcher. Not sure what the complaint against him is but he was a badass for a long time in the AL East, contributed to good teams, went deep in the playoffs, many time All Star, the guy was a badass. He wasn't Pedro or Clemens or even Shilling but, let's say he was the Craig Biggio of pitching. Still good enough to get into the Hall, it seems to me.
I'd vote for Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa, again my disdain for the media's self-appointed morality-in-baseball czar kinda makes me root for both of them to get in. Truth be told, I think McGwire is a borderline candidate, he had some monster years but for long stretches he was just Dave Kingman 2.0, but the argument against him inspires me to think him worthy. And Sosa mostly annoyed me as a player but his numbers are pretty badass. What? Are we suddenly not into numbers any more? I thought this was the golden age of statistical analysis...
I'm on the fence about Edgar Martinez (the sweetest right-handed swing of his generation), Alan Trammell (like Biggio, a good player for a long time), Larry Walker (great hitter but not sure he had the rich career of a Hall of Famer), and Gary Sheffield (had some monster years, good longevity, played on good teams, not a bad candidate).
Gotta give some love for Nomar Garciaparra who got enough votes to be invited back next year. He had a coupla all-time great years but didn't really do it for the long haul like you like to see in a baseballer. But still, the last Red Sox icon to get shooed away right before they win championships? Ouch! That's gotta be worth some pity votes.
I wouldn't vote for Lee Smith. He was the first real save guy, had some lights out years. But saves have had too many badasses since Smith to put him in the top tier.
I wouldn't vote for Jeff Kent, personally I always found him to be waaaay more of an irritating jerk than Barry Bonds...that's gotta mean something.
Although he was one of my favorite players back in the day, I couldn't vote for Fred McGriff. The Crime Dog had his days but I don't think he rose to that level.
Don Mattingly appeared on the ballot for the last time. Kinda weird to think he's not in the Hall of Fame. A great Yankee that everybody loved? How he is not in the Hall of Fame? I can see him getting put in by a veterans committee in the future.
Of the guys that didn't even survive the first cut, I got no complaints. Even though I always thought Carlos Delgado was a badass, I can't say I look back on him as a Hall of Famer. Nor the likes of Troy Percival, Aaron Boone, Tom Gordon, Darin Erstad, Brian Giles, Jason Schmidt, Cliff Floyd, Jermaine Dye, Rich Aurilia, Tony Clark or Eddie Guardado.
I would've put a lot more dudes into the Hall of Fame than the current gatekeepers. But then again I was always soft on drugs.
Wednesday, January 7, 2015
Thoughts on Steven Gerrard to the LA Galaxy
http://www.espnfc.us/story/2231850/steven-gerrard-to-join-la-galaxy-from-liverpool-in-july-coach-bruce-arena-confirms
The MLS continues its history of luring Euro stars for a year or two in the States. I don't know how much he has left in the tank but personally Gerard has long been one of my favorite players. He has a calm about him, a control that only the great players have. He may do well in the MLS. He can handle the ball in traffic and shoot from distance, he can be deadly in the space between the midfield stripe and the top of the box. Good luck to him.
The MLS continues its history of luring Euro stars for a year or two in the States. I don't know how much he has left in the tank but personally Gerard has long been one of my favorite players. He has a calm about him, a control that only the great players have. He may do well in the MLS. He can handle the ball in traffic and shoot from distance, he can be deadly in the space between the midfield stripe and the top of the box. Good luck to him.
Thoughts on Two Trades
The Cavs upgraded considerably in two quick and painless moves. They brought in JR Smith and Iman Shumpert (for Dion Waiters, a 2nd round pick and two expiring contracts) and Timofey Mozgov (for 2 1st round picks that didn't even belong to them). I like both moves for the Cavs--add in the subtraction (of Waiters) and that's like double positive...or something. Shumpert will give them more perimeter D than Waiters and he'll score some points without hogging the ball and Smith will do what he does but as long as he hits the 3 or 4 shots they really really need from him in the playoffs, he'll be a success. Shumpert is a free agent at the end of the year, Smith has one year left at $5m, not a greal deal but not a backbreaker, especially is he scores at all. The 1st round picks the Cavs gave up came from OKC and Memphis and they still have Miami's 1st rounder this year; embarrassment of riches in Cleveland and they finally got a defensive stopper inside. I like Mozgov, big body guy that moves well, handles the ball okay, fiery personality, I think he'll fit well with Love and Lebron and Coach Blatt. Cavs pick up a big guy, a wing defender, and a 3-ball specialist and gave up the Waiters headache, a 2nd round pick and nothing else. Great deals for the Cavs.
Waiters goes to OKC which is probably a good spot for him. Waiters' problem is that he's a ballhog; playing with Westbrook and Durant should cure him of that habit; unfortunately that will also inhibit his scoring habit. As a 2nd string gunner I guess he's better than Roberson or Lamb (I feel like Perry Jones, when healthy, is probably tradeable). Waiters is a low risk investment and as for the 1st round pick and expiring contracts they gave up, well that's what they're there for. Good deal for OKC.
The Knicks get rid of Shumpert (wasn't gonna get re-signed anyway) and Smith (not a killer contract but not one the Knicks need) for 3 guys I assume they'll waive and pick up a 2nd round pick as a party favor. Remember when Jordan became GM of the Wizards? First thing he did was trade away anybody that made any money at all and cleared the books (he was doing a brilliant job...til we realized he was doing that so he could come back and pad stats for a coupla years; lame). That's where Phil is at with NYK: Melo is signed, everyone currently on the roster is expendable, every available player in the NBA is available to the Knicks, save money to spend money next year. Besides Phil might like to have his very own #1 pick to groom from clay, why bother to win games when losses are way more valuable? Good deal for the Knicks.
The rare win-win-win deal we never see enough of. *deep breath* Feels good.
Waiters goes to OKC which is probably a good spot for him. Waiters' problem is that he's a ballhog; playing with Westbrook and Durant should cure him of that habit; unfortunately that will also inhibit his scoring habit. As a 2nd string gunner I guess he's better than Roberson or Lamb (I feel like Perry Jones, when healthy, is probably tradeable). Waiters is a low risk investment and as for the 1st round pick and expiring contracts they gave up, well that's what they're there for. Good deal for OKC.
The Knicks get rid of Shumpert (wasn't gonna get re-signed anyway) and Smith (not a killer contract but not one the Knicks need) for 3 guys I assume they'll waive and pick up a 2nd round pick as a party favor. Remember when Jordan became GM of the Wizards? First thing he did was trade away anybody that made any money at all and cleared the books (he was doing a brilliant job...til we realized he was doing that so he could come back and pad stats for a coupla years; lame). That's where Phil is at with NYK: Melo is signed, everyone currently on the roster is expendable, every available player in the NBA is available to the Knicks, save money to spend money next year. Besides Phil might like to have his very own #1 pick to groom from clay, why bother to win games when losses are way more valuable? Good deal for the Knicks.
The rare win-win-win deal we never see enough of. *deep breath* Feels good.
Monday, January 5, 2015
ROY Update
Up to 65 debuts after welcoming Patrick Christopher (Jazz) and Adrein Payne (Hawks).
Julius Randle (14.0) is 23rd in MPG. Ahead of him: Wiggins (31.8), Noel (30.1), Parker (29.5), Payton (25.8), McDaniels (25.3), LaVine (25.1), Papanickolau (23.6), Bogdanovic (22.8), Napier (21.0), Smart (19.7), Exum (18.4), Mirotic (18.4), Hood (18.2), Ingles (16.7), Black (15.7), Rudez (15.4), Hairston (15.2), Gordon (15.0), Grant (14.9), Anderson (14.3), Ennis (14.1), Harris (14.0)
Bogdanovic has fallen off considerably in the last 3 weeks. LaVine is still hanging. Expect Smart's minutes to creep up. Tarik Black moves from the Rockets to the Lakers and his numbers don't fall at all. Good to see Gordon back up there, the Magic have a lot of guys that want minutes, not sure if he'll get up to 20 MPG. Grant, Anderson, Ennis and Harris are getting legit minutes.
Wiggins still the top candidate for ROY with Noel and Payton really the ones likely to get enough minutes to make a difference. Expect Parker to get votes, he may well end up looking like the best rookie. McDaniels, Mirotic, LaVine, Bogdanovic and Papanickolau should all get some love from the voters. That said, this really is a deep class, a lot of good young players that will play for a decade or more.
Julius Randle (14.0) is 23rd in MPG. Ahead of him: Wiggins (31.8), Noel (30.1), Parker (29.5), Payton (25.8), McDaniels (25.3), LaVine (25.1), Papanickolau (23.6), Bogdanovic (22.8), Napier (21.0), Smart (19.7), Exum (18.4), Mirotic (18.4), Hood (18.2), Ingles (16.7), Black (15.7), Rudez (15.4), Hairston (15.2), Gordon (15.0), Grant (14.9), Anderson (14.3), Ennis (14.1), Harris (14.0)
Bogdanovic has fallen off considerably in the last 3 weeks. LaVine is still hanging. Expect Smart's minutes to creep up. Tarik Black moves from the Rockets to the Lakers and his numbers don't fall at all. Good to see Gordon back up there, the Magic have a lot of guys that want minutes, not sure if he'll get up to 20 MPG. Grant, Anderson, Ennis and Harris are getting legit minutes.
Wiggins still the top candidate for ROY with Noel and Payton really the ones likely to get enough minutes to make a difference. Expect Parker to get votes, he may well end up looking like the best rookie. McDaniels, Mirotic, LaVine, Bogdanovic and Papanickolau should all get some love from the voters. That said, this really is a deep class, a lot of good young players that will play for a decade or more.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
