Houston at OKC Thoughts

If anyone needed a reminder on how good Russell Westbrook is, just watch the tape of last night's Rockets-Thunder tilt again. It's not that the Thunder lost. It's how they lost. After Durant, they were outclassed by every Houston player 2-7. It's how when the offense grinds to a halt, there is no threat of Russell careening to the rim and making something good happen. It's how the team, including Durant, was left taking hurried, pull-up Js (the same ones we criticize Russell for). It's how the Houston defense didn't get more creative than: you stick to Kevin and we'll cover the rest of the court.

There are effects that an injury like Danilo Gallinari's had on the Nuggets depth (more on that later), then there are these injuries that change the entire complexion of a team. And lest anyone forget, though the Thunder did win 3 straight games to start the series (the last without Westbrook), two of those were very close. This wasn't an easy series even with all of there guys. Now it's a dogfight. I still think OKC wins because it's still hard to beat someone four straight times, but the whole complexion of the team changes, and it certainly won't be easy. They looked barely better than a .500 team last night, a 6th seed at best. Is that the Russell Westbrook difference? Is he the difference between 50-60 wins? He's a top 10 player, right? Top 7? Surely not top 5?

I think the system has something to do with it. When the Bulls lost Derrick Rose, they adjusted to play harder defense and "ugly up the game," in the words of coach Thibbs. When the Heat lose Wade, they throw another 3-point shooter out (yeah and they have LeBron). But when Russell is down, the already unimaginative Thunder offense grinds even more to a halt. We are already used to seeing guys standing around in the fourth, Durant not able to get the ball, a lack of transition. Now without Russell's individual genius, the offense was even harder to watch. Kevin Martin was a cooked hot dog. Derek Fisher a ham sandwich. Deandre Liggins a tenderloin steamrolled by the Harden machine.

Finally, let's talk about the fouling. I thought it was absolutely the right thing to do. Team stagnant, down double digits, 5 minutes left, and they have a 56% guy there? Why not? But it went on too long. First, when a team shoots free throws, it's easier to set up the defense. Bye-bye, transition. And it completely took the crowd out of it. OKC has a fantastic crowd. You know how to get them involved? Make a shot, good defense and a rebound, another made shot, timeout Houston. Chesapeake would be rocking! But for too long (3 minutes in crunch time), there was no flow, no chance to run. The only times it flowed were when OKC missed and they didn't foul (beats me why). Finally, when it became pretty apparent that Asik's stroke didn't abandon him and that he'd make at least 1/2, the fouling should have stopped. 1 point / possession is pretty average NBA offense, but when you're up by 8-9 with only a few minutes to go, it's enough. After the Thunder cut the lead to 8-9, the fouling should have stopped.

It wasn't like OKC was struggling as a team defensively; it was the offense that needed help. Yeah the D on Harden was horrible. OKC needs to realize: a foul line off-the-dribble jumper is probably the worst shot he can take. He probably makes it at about the same % as when he rocks back for the three, but the three is worth 50% more points! And off-the-dribble Js are the worst in basketball. And he was 7-7 behind the line. And he looked wide open on several of those-the defender just wouldn't/couldn't/didn't close out. But outside of Harden, the defense was solid. You can live with Patrick Beverley Js or Francisco Garcia shooting. They just need to tighten the D on Harden.

The ironic thing is: if they keep Harden, they probably draw the Jazz in this series, and probably win even without Westbrook. Would a washed-up Kevin Martin really not be available during the summer? Regardless of the outcome of this series, where Houston has a real shot (35%?), the Thunder look like they screwed the whole Harden trade up. It's easy to have hindsight, but was trading a top 20 (15? 10?) player for a one year Kevin Martin rental, a lottery pick that can't get on the court (Liggins, Beverley, Chandler Parsons all played), and another pick in a weak draft really that good a deal?

Popovich is a Genius, But the Spurs Aren't the Same

Everyone knows the Spurs are well coached and well managed. Coach Popovich is universally regarded as a coaching and player development genius, having shepherded his squad to four NBA titles and made dozens of bit players into productive guys with big contracts. Over the past two years, he has read the league's tea leaves and transformed the team from a grind-it-out defensive team into a high-octane, high-possession, offensive force. Check out their pace stats: from 92.3 (14th in the league) in 2010/2011 to 92.9 (7th) in 2011/2012 and 94.1 (6th) in 2012/2013.

The other way that Pop has changed the offense is through a creative offense that either places the ball at the rim (in Tony Parker's case, a floater within 10 feet is basically at the rim) or in the hands of a three point shooter. Players make hard cuts and quick, decisive moves with the ball to ensure A) players are never out of position for a pass, B) the ball never stops, and C) the defense doesn't have time to re-balance following a ball swing. The coach of the year section of this piece by Grantland's Zach Lowe highlights some of these things that Popovich has done. This new offensive strategy has produced via a huge boost in the Spurs' assist stats. This year, the Spurs have assisted on 63.65% of baskets, third in the league, while their offensive efficiency of 107.0 (points per 100 possessions) is seventh. Their assist % compares favorable to other offensive juggernauts, as seen in the following chart:

2013 March Madness National Title Pick

My winner for the 2013 NCAA Division 1 Men's Basketball Tournament? Michigan. They have the best remaining player, and if he can do his thing, there is nothing Louisville can do. See you at the game (I wish)!

2012 Baseball Review, Part 3: A Comparison of Leagues

Google ate my earlier post, but it was saved in Word. Saved by Microsoft? Scroogled?

In my previous two posts on the 2012 MLB season, I looked at the best teams in each league, what made them successful, and how their strengths/weaknesses compared to the other teams in the playoff picture. All assessments were made on July 11, the day after the All-Star game when I started paying attention to baseball again. In this post, I will examine some broader trends regarding both leagues and reflect on the playoff matchups. Click here for the earlier posts on the specific leagues: AL and NL.

THE CONTENDERS

As explained in earlier posts, I used playoff % and point differential to sort out what I believed to be the contending teams in either league, as looking at all the teams would have been exhausting. The notable absence? The 2012 Baltimore Orioles, who are covered in the AL Post.

2013 March Madness: Elite Eight Review and Final Four Picks

Louisville over Duke: First: let’s all hope that Kevin Ware’s recovery from one of the worst injuries I’ve seen is quick and effective, and hopefully he becomes a better player from this experience. Now to the game: I wrote in my preview that Seth Curry may struggle in this game after only getting one day to rest his sore shin, and that the Duke secondary stars and role players would have to play the game of their lives for the Blue Devils to have a chance. Turns out, Seth may have been hampered by the shin, but even at full strength, I don’t know that it would have mattered against this great Louisville defense.

A lot of people will tell you how strong Louisville’s press is, how it has helped them throughout the tournament, and how it will be key against the smaller Wichita State guards in the Final Four (more on this in a bit). Rubbish. Sure, the press has helped them, especially in the early rounds, but theirs is a disciplined press, much more so that the Havoc system that VCU uses. They cover guards full-court, but only send a trap in the backcourt when the opposing big isn’t in a position to help. Against Duke, they bothered Quinn Cook and Tyler Thornton in the backcourt, but Duke didn’t have inordinate difficulty getting the ball into the frontcourt.

2013 MLB Opening Day!

I'll finish my review of 2012 soon, I promise! As well as get my Elite Eight review up. But to celebrate opening day and give you a teaser, my 2013 MLB WS picks are: Rays over Reds.

Nobody is ever right about these, and I don't care! Happy opening day!

Blast from the Past: Jazz add Al Jefferson in July 2010

This is an interesting draft post that never made publication. It contains my thoughts on the Jazz letting Carlos Boozer go and adding Al Jefferson in the summer of 2010. At the time, I thought it would be a three-year experiment, and though parts haven't gone at all like I thought (Sloan and Deron leaving), I think it is timely to revisit this given the Jazz are heading into a off-season of considerable uncertainty regarding their big man:

I think from the rumors I've heard that this trade is a done deal, so I'll go ahead an preemptively comment on it. Losing Carlos Boozer to add Al Jefferson? I like it.

Offensively, Jefferson was unstoppable in the post before his ACL injury. He had developed a nice series of offensive moves, both face-up and back-to-basket, though I'm not sure what his injury does to his athleticism and ability to overpower defenders. His offensive rating was 111 compared to Boozer's 112 (higher is better, score is points/100 possessions), and due to his youth, I think he has a lot of room to grow. Just take a look at his assist %: it looks the same as Boozer's did when Carlos was in Cleveland. Jerry Sloan took Boozer in and developed him into a post facilitator that could kick to shooters in the right places. Boozer's assist % jumped from 10.3% to 15.9% his first year in Utah, and his per-36 minute assist numbers increased almost 50% from ~2.0 to ~3.0. That may not be a big difference, but the threat of the pass keeps defenses more honest as well as generating good shots. Jefferson's assist % is currently 10.0%, and if he can make the same jump Boozer did, his lower turnover rate and similar true shooting % should make him a better offensive player than Boozer.

On defense, Jefferson is worse at 108 versus Boozer's 102. But I think Jefferson's ineffectiveness can be attributed somewhat to the system, or lack thereof, that Minnesota ran. In fact, his defensive rating was the best among any Timberwolf that played more than 5 minutes all season. I believe he was let down by his teammates in Minnesota and that Jerry Sloan can help me become a better defensive player.

Finally, you have to look at what the Jazz gave up. They fit Jefferson into the massive trade exception generated by the Boozer trade, meaning they got a starting-caliber big man for only two first round picks. I know picks are valuable assets, but are the Jazz really going to draft a starting center picking in the mid-first round as a lower-rung playoff team? His salary is also a bonus: expanding to ~$15mm over 3 years, that is a great level for a starting CENTER. He is younger and better, and gives the Jazz some flexibility to build around in the next three years.

2013 March Madness: Sweet 16 Review

I'm done posting screenshots of my bracket. You don't need to know much else other than: Duke is the only Elite 8 team I got right, and all of my Final Four is done already (I'm looking at you, Kansas, Indiana, Saint Louis, and New Mexico). According to Yahoo! Sports, where I submitted my "official" bracket, I'm in the 23rd percentile, which may indicate the quality of the analysis contained within this blog. My defense? March is Mad. Three years ago, during Duke's magical run to the title, I correctly picked them to win and also had Butler (!!!) and Syracuse in the Final Four (along with Kansas, which lost to Northern Iowa, so not perfect). After that ended up in the 99.9th percentile, my picks have gone sharply downhill, with percentages below 50 each of the last two years. March is Mad.

One thing I did learn: this year I really wanted to pick mid majors to go far. I was/am tired of feeling conflicted when a Big 6 school plays someone small (like Western Kentucky), and I root hard for the upset, but then take guilty pleasure in the end when my bracket survives along with the favorite. I wanted to have that feeling of picking a Cinderella again, like my Butler pick in 2010. Problem is: neither Saint Louis nor New Mexico can really be considered Cinderellas. They were both seeded too high. Ditto for VCU and Butler, each with obvious flaws. What I should have done was to pick Wichita State, a team I believed in (but not enough to beat Pitt, stupid, stupid) to come out of a weak region (or at least play OSU). If I'm going to pick true upsets, might as well go bolder.

I digress. How did the Sweet Sixteen play out? I watched at least half of every game. You know the drill:

2013 March Madness: Round 2 Review

I know that we are 4 minutes into the second half in Miami-Marquette, but better late than never, right? My defense? I was trying to finish work for a long weekend, and then the weather got good and my buddies and I took it to the outdoor court near the office for some pickup and shooting. I just ran out of time, kind of like Iowa State in their loss against Ohio State. Speaking of which, let's look at the second round, starting with the West:

March Madness: 1st Round Bracket Post-Mortem

What a great first round of games (it will always be the first round to me). Sure, there were blowouts, but I was impressed by how hard the teams competed, and believe the gap between the Big 6 conferences and the "Mid Majors" gets more narrow each year. For this year, that meant my picking more mid majors to go far than I have ever had. Sure, I like teams like Duke, Kansas, and Indiana. But some part of me said: this year, why not go outside of the box and mess with basketball hierarchy a little? Why not pick the Saint Louis Billikens to make it all the way to the title game? So that's the bias I filled my bracket out with, and after the First Round, here is the post-mortem on how it went.

I can't say my bracket is terrible. I went 24/32 in the first round, but went to two games at Energy Solutions Arena in Salt Lake City and managed to jinx both of the teams I saw. I had no business picking Belmont to beat Arizona, but I thought that New Mexico had a legitimate shot at the Final Four. Now my bracket has a legitimate hole in the Final Four spot from the West region. Any takers? I'm looking at you Ohio State. Then again, as long as that region is going down in flames, I might as well go big pick some Cinderella like Iowa or Wichita, right? So let's start in the West region, my worst, and see where it all went wrong.