web analytics
<

Transcendent Passing and Manu Ginobili

April 21, 2012 in by with 0 Comments

I could write something detailing the quiet dominance of the Spurs. I could write something explaining why Manu Ginobili is one of the most underrated Hall-of-Fame players in NBA history, and a walking testament to efficiency, production, and uniqueness. But tonight, Manu Ginobili’s pass would eclipse anything I wrote, and so would Matt Bonner’s perfectly understated layup (he’s great at those).

And there isn’t much I can say that Pau Gasol and Metta World Peace’s shared glance didn’t already scream in the form of facial expression.

A Season Of Restraints

April 20, 2012 in by with 0 Comments

I woke up one morning and I had plantar fasciitis. And that’s probably one of the—that was the worst injury that I’ve had. It kind of lingered on for 18 months, and I was never able to get over it. I had plantar fasciitis in both feet, so I couldn’t really train to play at the level I was playing.

You could still play, but it took longer. Everything. It took longer to get warmed up. If you sat down for five minutes it was worse than when you started, so it kept you from training. And when your feet hurt, your back hurts, your knees hurt. Everything hurts when your feet start to bother you. So I was never able to train like I was training to continue to play. Because I played the 2, 3, 4, and the 5 at certain points in my career, I had to be in tip-top shape to do the things that I was doing. And when you have that plantar fasciitis you can’t get up in the mornings and train like you want to.

via How A Career Ends: George Lynch Was Finished Off By Sore Feet | Deadspin (4/2/12)

Deadspin’s Tell Me When It’s Over series is a fantastic look at the sudden, painful, and blindsiding nature of retirement. In his interview, George Lynch explains his career-ending bout with plantar fasciitis. The human body is about equilibrium. As Lynch clearly explains, pain can trickle upwards. When one body part is injured, willpower can force other areas of the body to overexert in hopes of achieving a makeshift balance, but it’s never correct. It only leads to further damage.

His description of pain and its route of diffusion made me think of Derrick Rose and the unfortunate season he’s had. Rose’s foot problems became back problems which became groin problems which became knee problems which have become ankle problems. There’s no question that Rose will be playing in the playoffs, but it’s tough to be too effective when the lower half of your body is effectively broken.

In the latest news regarding Rose’s injury woes, CSNChicago.com’s Aggrey Sam made note of Rose’s frustration with the Bulls’ training staff over how they are choosing to treat his injured right ankle.

Among those issues is the fact that Rose’s most recent ailments-a sprained right ankle and sore right foot-were exacerbated by the team’s training staff’s insistence on taping his ankles, a practice Rose has consistently fought against, opting instead for ankle braces.

First reported during the nationally-televised broadcast of the Bulls’ Thursday-evening loss at Miami, Rose has suffered fluid build-up in his ankles, which the player himself acknowledged before the team’s Wednesday morning shootaround in Charlotte, but the cause is reportedly his ankles being taped too tightly.

via Did Ankle Taping Further Rose’s Injury? | CSNChicago.com

Rose definitely should have a say in how his body is treated, and he does have a point. In “Biomechanical and Neuromuscular Effects of Ankle Taping and Bracing,” an article published in the Journal of Athletic Training, certified athletic trainer Gary B. Wilkerson, Ed.D notes that “during the acute phase of ankle-sprain management, bracing offers advantages related to ease of repetitive removal and reapplication, adjustability of strap or lace tension, and structural features that may facilitate edema resolution.”

Ankle braces specifically address the problems Rose is currently having with ankle tape. The ability to easily adjust tension and keep fluid from building up within his ankles is where braces have distinct advantages over tape. However, research Wilkerson compiled suggests that taping helps the body develop and regain its own natural protective mechanisms while offering a similar degree of support.

It’s understandable for Rose to be frustrated. He’s one of best athletes in the world sidelined for reasons beyond his control. But his frustration and anticipation are calling for what could be a short-sighted solution. Ankle taping has been standard protocol for over a century, with modern trainers using a variation of the traditional basketweave taping method. It may not be an instant solution, and there aren’t many studies that show taping’s superiority over bracing (or vice versa), but it’s tough to blame the Bulls training staff for being cognizant of Rose’s future down the road if Wilkerson’s research holds any truth.

Medical article retrieved through PubMed.gov database.

 

Drafting, Tanking, and Incentivizing in the NBA

April 20, 2012 in by with 1 Comment

Image via sixthstation on Flickr

The purpose of the draft is to identify the best young talent from around the country and the world and siphon it into the league. The draft helps bad teams get better, and it tries to make sure that every team–if they play their cards right–has a fair shot at winning a title someday. For the most part, this system works. Teams do get better, and bad teams are rarely bad forever.

The NBA draft isn’t just about teams getting draft picks, though. It’s about teams staying competitive. Some do this by drafting the league’s new stars, and others do it through trading picks to acquire veterans. The NBA draft has gone through many mutations over the lifetime of the league. Age limits, lottery positions, two rounds: these are all modern adaptations of the draft. What’s to say a few more changes couldn’t make it work even better? Any change to the draft, however, needs to keep in mind the following things:

  1. Bad teams need to get better;
  2. Good teams need to be able to stay good;
  3. Assets need to be fungible (ie: teams can trade picks for other goods of what they deem to be equal value); and
  4. The new Collective Bargaining Agreement is going to make paying players more expensive down the road.

Some areas related to the draft and fungible team assets that will be addressed:

  1. Tanking (See also);
  2. Teams getting their title windows slammed shut because of the luxury tax; and
  3. The increasing relevance of the NBA Development League.

With all of these things in mind, I’ve got a solution that I think would work for all parties: teams good, bad, and mediocre; markets of all sizes. It’s obviously not perfect, and there are a lot of financial considerations of which I’m not aware, but I think this might be a good place to start.

Structure of the Draft

  • 60 picks
  • 3 Rounds, 20 picks per round
  • Round 1
    • Picks 1-14 will be distributed through the same draft lottery system as is currently in place
    • Picks 15-20 will distributed to teams with the best records after becoming mathematically eliminated from playoff contention
      • If the teams are eliminated in April, then award the picks to teams remaining with highest win percentage
    • Players’ contracts are guaranteed in the same manner as they are for today’s first round picks
    • If a team has two picks in the first round, instead of picking twice, the team can bundle the percentages of the two picks into one pick. In a year where a team is particularly interested in only acquiring one player, this will increase the team’s odds of acquiring the first pick. The freed pick spot will be distributed via 30-team lottery, all teams with the same odds. If a team is awarded the draft pick and does not want it, it can forfeit the pick in favor of Traded Player Exception or a Luxury Tax break in the amount of the average salary of all players drafted in the 1st round.
  • Round 2
    • Draft picks on 2-year contracts. First year guaranteed, second year is team option
    • Picks will be distributed via lottery, all teams with the same odds. Teams in the lottery will be all 14 non-playoff teams + all 8 first round playoff losers.
    • The two teams of the 22 that are not awarded picks will get a TPE or luxury tax break in the amount of the average salary of all players drafted in the 2nd round.
    • Teams can opt out of the second round in favor of being awarded the TPE/Tax break. If they opt out, the open spot is assigned randomly to one of the two teams not included in the round. If two or more teams opt out, a random even-team-odds assignment will be done for any remaining spots in the 2nd round.
  • Round 3
    • Eligible players can be 18+ years old
    • Even-odds lottery for all 30 teams, with the same opt-out ability as above
    • Same luxury tax/TPE benefit as above, but the amount will be for the average salary of the 3rd round
    • All players drafted are sent to the NBDL affiliate and can only be called up by drafted team, unless rights are traded
    • Players cannot be called up until they are 19
    • All contracts are guaranteed for at least the NBDL minimum salary, and they have the same call-up program and stipulations as currently exist.

This draft strategy keeps in mind the fact that not every team even wants a draft pick. Some teams would rather have the cap relief. This system also deters tanking because you get explicit benefits in the first and 2nd rounds for not tanking. One topic, which I’d like to delve into further (and where Sean has dabbled a bit) is in the use explicit use of the NBA Development League vis-a-vis the NBA draft. This would probably require a substantial investment in and expansion of the current NBDL, and it would require (or maybe it would encourage) the NBDL to be a true farm system for every NBA team.  These draft modifications also make the NBDL more relevant by eliminating one-and-done players in college and making them more accessible to the NBA. Fans and teams can see higher levels competition in the D-League, while still giving young NBA players a forum to play instead of college or overseas.

I’d written a previous post on modifying the structure of the draft, and I think these ideas are definitely not mutually exclusive. Will it work? Maybe. I don’t think it would shake up the league too much, aside from the increased investment in NBDL teams. Any suggestions or modifications are welcome in the comments. Have at it!

Expectations & Subversion: How The Spurs Let A Song Go Out Of Their Heart

April 19, 2012 in by with 3 Comments

Photo by Joost J. Bakker IJmuiden on Flickr

When it comes to comparing sports and music, there are few tropes as tired as linking jazz and basketball. Hell, I’ve done it. But as it goes with most clichés, it comes up again and again because there’s a kernel of truth in it, because it can be a useful way to see the game. Like a quintet on the bandstand playing a standard, the five players on the floor in basketball are working within a structure that allows for fluidity and improvisation. The things they’re doing are all interconnected, interdependent, and when one of them shifts his approach, it affects the entire fabric of the play. There’s initiative, understanding, recognition, response. The idea of basketball players as jazz musicians rewards our conception of the game as beautiful, a work of art, even.

But there are other ways to expand our sense of the game via music. What if we instead consider the plays a team runs as being akin to the basic units of pop music: the verse, the chorus, the bridge? After all, the cagiest pop songs play on our expectations with each new section, adding wrinkles and subverting convention, much like Steve Nash does with the basic pick and roll.

Consider, for example, the chorus of Christina Aguilera’s “What A Girl Wants,” which begins at 1:11 in the video below.

The chorus to the song is essentially the same refrain repeated twice, a common enough structure for the hook of a pop tune, but there’s something a little off-kilter about this particular one. The first time, the first line is a pickup into the chorus—that is, “What a girl wants” is sung so that it’s the word “wants” that falls on the first beat of the chorus. The second time through, the line lands slightly differently. It begins on the first beat and the word “wants” falls on the second beat of the chorus. It’s a little rhythmic trickery that keeps it from being repetitive.

And rhythmic trickery is more or less what defines the relationship between the pick and roll and the slip screen. Here’s Kobe Bryant and Pau Gasol running the pick and roll (excuse the ABBA—it’s just the cost of doing business):

Being one of the most fundamental basketball plays, the bread-and-butter pick and roll establishes expectations. The big man will set the pick and the guard will run his man into the pick, letting the big man roll to the hoop. It’s the first time through the chorus. But once the defense is anticipating the straight pick and roll, it’s time to bring out the slip screen. Here’s Bryant and Gasol running it:

As you can see, as soon as Cousins has bought the pick and roll and started hedging in an attempt to stop Bryant from turning the corner towards the middle, Gasol breaks for the bucket, gets the easy pass from Bryant, then feeds it to Lamar Odom under the hoop. This is the second time through the chorus, where a little wrinkle keeps us on our toes.

But that’s playing in a subtle way with expectations. In both music and basketball you can go with a giant misdirection. Consider a staple of hard rock dynamics, the quiet chorus after the bridge as demonstrated by the Smashing Pumpkins in “Bullet with Butterfly Wings” (bridge starts at 2:28 if you want to skip ahead):

At 3:06, just when the conclusion of the bridge seems to be building towards another full-blast chorus, everything except for guitar and vocals drops out, plus the vocals are down an octave from early iterations of the chorus. We’re primed for the big guns, but the song goes in a completely different direction.

Now take a look at the wide-open three-pointer Steve Novak managed to get at the end of the Bulls-Knicks game on Easter at the end of regulation:

Jared Dubin does a great job of breaking down this entire play right here, but the basic thing that made such an open look possible is that everyone was expecting it to go to Carmelo Anthony. Once Anthony gets the ball at the three-point line, he’s doubled, allowing Novak to float out to the opposite side of the floor. His shot, unfortunately, doesn’t go down, but regardless of that, it’s a great play, made possible because everyone’s expecting the big heroic chorus from ‘Melo. Instead, they get the quiet, guitars-and-vocals chorus from Steve Novak.

The thing about basketball, though, is that these patterns don’t happen in isolation, but rather overlap and affect each other over the course of the game. The pick is the foundation of several different plays and can also be part of a larger scheme in either a directly useful or misdirecting way. When it comes to layering motifs and patterns, there a few teams that do it better than the San Antonio Spurs and few bands that do it better than Menomena.

Menomena, from Portland, Oregon, compose their music in a fairly unique way. One of the members begins with a part that gets recorded and then looped while the other members add new parts that interlock with the original part. The early result is reams of rough material that is then shaped into songs as parts are pulled away or added. By the time the compositions are complete and ready to be recorded as full songs, they’re often staggeringly complex songs built from the simplest pieces. Here’s an example from their 2007 album Friend and Foe, a song called “Wet and Rusting”:

You can hear the song begins with a spare melody (“I made you a present …”) repeated twice, followed by a second part sung once (“It’s hard to take risks …”). Since these lines are barely accompanied it’s hard to conceive of them as verses or choruses—they’re just bits right now. The form begins to repeat, but then extends under the second part, this time backed by a guitar line instead of the ghostly piano that backed it the first time. When the piano returns with drums and bass in tow, the words evaporate. The middle instrumental section stays at home harmonically with the first two parts but explores new textures. When the initial lyrical part returns at the 2:21 mark, there’s a new vocal line laid in under it. As the song reaches its dynamic peak, it’s not achieved with new material, but rather by juxtaposing all the previously played parts against one another. It’s an unusual way to build a song, but it’s pretty standard for a basketball offense.

Take the San Antonio Spurs. In a recent game against the Lakers, they hammered the pick and roll with Tony Parker and either Tim Duncan or Tiago Splitter early, probably because the Lakers are notoriously weak defending it. They like to mix it up a bit, with Parker often dishing the ball off before running through the paint to emerge on the other side to receive it again and run the pick and roll. But eliminating transition baskets, the game on offense for the Spurs began with these three plays:

The first one is simple enough: Duncan steps out to set a screen, Parker gets separation from Ramon Sessions (who goes over the screen) and Andrew Bynum is too deep to defend the jumper. This is the first verse, the “I made you a present” of their sets. In the second play, Sessions tries going under the screen, but that still gives Parker room to shoot and he sinks it. This is the repeat of that first melody (“And when you unravel …”). In the third play, Splitter sets the pick and tries to roll, but Pau Gasol closes out and bothers the shot enough to force a miss. The Spurs have established the pattern and now the Lakers have reacted well enough to defend it.

So the next time they run a pick and roll, they run it a little differently:

Here, Splitter sets the pick twice and Bynum and Sessions both follow Parker while trying to shield Splitter from the pass as he roles. But in the meantime, Duncan has slipped away from his defender into the open space by the free throw line extended. He catches the pass from Parker and makes the jumper in rhythm. This is the development of the initial melody into the second melody, the “It’s hard to take risks” part of the Menomena song. It exists in the same general tonal world (that is, it’s not a key change or a big dynamic change), but it’s a little different approach, and just enough to throw us off guard.

But the Spurs haven’t forgotten about that first part. They go back to it, with Parker running a simple pick and roll again on the wing:

Sessions doesn’t want to leave Ginobili, so Parker has an open shot. It’s interesting to note that even as Parker makes the open jumper, Bynum has dropped too low in the post to defend Duncan if Parker had passed it off. This return to the fundamental pick and roll is not simply a rehash of the initial action, but instead is colored by the results of the earlier pick and rolls and Duncan’s made jumper. It is, effectively, the first melody supported by the xylophone and acoustic guitar from “Wet and Rusting.” It’s not just a play, but instead a play that’s been opened up by the plays preceding it.

As the game progresses and the Lakers try to counter the Spurs, the sets become more nuanced and layered. Look at these two possessions:

What begins as a pick and roll turns into multiple screens as the double comes on Parker. In both examples, Bonner’s initial pick is basically a decoy. It draws Gasol and Sessions to the ball and Bonner floats out to the three-point line on the opposite side of the floor. In the first clip, he dribbles closer before handing the ball off to Stephen Jackson and screening his man to allow Jackson the elbow jumper. In the second, Splitter steps out to set yet another pick that Gasol has to go around to get to Bonner, whom Bynum can’t effectively cover. Bonner drains the three. My favorite part of that second one is that Splitter’s screen is actually a slip screen and he’s rolling wide open to the basket as Gasol and Bynum try to close out on Bonner. If Bonner had wanted to, he could have dished it right to Splitter for an easy dunk or layup.

To me, this is the full development of what started as a basic pick and roll at the beginning of the game. That verse melody is now being layered against the secondary melody and a new melody on top of that while the rest of the band provides support. The Spurs have forced the Lakers to adjust and then adjusted to those adjustments. Looking at the second clip, by the time the play has gotten to this point:

… the Lakers are pretty much done for. Look at all the space that Bonner and Jackson have now on the right side of the floor. By the time it gets to here:

… Devin Ebanks has closed out on Jackson in the corner, creating space for Splitter to roll to the basket while Bonner lifts up for a three he’s more than capable of hitting. The Lakers have been manipulated into playing the Spurs’ game.

And by the end of “Wet and Rusting,” the listener has been suckered into Menomena’s game. We’ve heard each of the pieces that have come before in isolation and we’ve heard them pressed against each other, but by the time they all come together into a multiphonic rush of voices and instruments, we’re hearing something greater than the sum of its parts, something greater than that first melody, greater than a simple pick and roll.

Of Dwight Howard And End-All-Be-Alls

April 19, 2012 in by with 1 Comment

Photo from Oneras via Flickr

Dwight Howard hasn’t done a very good job of maintaining a strong reputation lately. Between the trade deadline debacle, his one man campaign to fire one of the best coaches in the league, and the herniated disk that has knocked him out of the remainder of the regular season and maybe even the playoffs, one might even say that the anti-Dwight train is as hot as Steve Novak after he goes to the beach, forgets to put on sunscreen, and then plays the Celtics on national TV.

That said, Dwight is still a pretty good basketball player, and we all still recognize this. The recent Dwightcapades have been enough for some voices to question his standing among the league’s elite, but statistically and subjectively, this is, at worst, a top 5 player in the world we’re talking about. If you want to go rogue with the ridiculous case that is Andrew Bynum being the league’s best center, be my guest, but I won’t be wasting your time with armchair psychology and unfair systems of penalization.

Speaking of unfair systems of penalization, back when Dwight Howard was still everybody’s friend, he lost the 2010-2011 MVP award to Derrick Rose. While it was a unique set of circumstances that led to the vote going how it went, the biggest knock against Howard – and the biggest boost for Rose – was how they performed in crunch time. Specifically, how Dwight’s terrible free throw shooting prevented him from performing in crunch time, because his team couldn’t afford to give him the ball.

While the effect is undeniably true – Dwight’s usage dropped from 24.2% to 17.5% in clutch situations (defined as games within 5 points with 5 minutes or less by NBA.com, who are to be thanked for all numbers in this piece) last season, similar to his 26.1% and 18.7% this year – it also strikes me as an odd parameter to decide an MVP race. Basketball is an intricate system of multiple skills, and no player can master all of them, but there are pretty much well-established ground rules on what deficiencies an elite player can and cannot afford. You can win MVP if you’re really bad at making 40 foot fadeaways; you cannot win MVP if you do this often.

Clutch free throw shooting’s placement in that second category makes intuitive sense. No part of the game is lionized like crunch time; it’s where the men separate themselves from the boys by virtue of random variation and confirmation bias. Similarly, no part of the skill set is lionized like free throw shooting; because it’s perceived as a skill that consists solely of the hours of practice you pour into it, poor free throw shooters are damned as lazy bums. Never mind that empiric evidence shows that free throw shooting is pretty much a given and rarely improves over the course of one’s career (Karl Malone notwithstanding). Fundamentally, we can’t take it.

And so it makes sense that the combination of the two would create a gigantic pit where rational discourse goes to die. It’s not that being a bad clutch free throw shooter isn’t a weakness – obviously, if two players are otherwise identical, the one who is better at it is also the better player overall. However, it is virtually impossible to isolate a single asset of the game to that degree. So when I see things like this, it gives me pause.

Passing out of double teams? That’s a huge part of the game. If you can’t do that, the defense has a way out every time you have the ball. Even a bad free throw shooter like Dwight will give you, on average, with his career 58% mark from the line, 1.16 points per possession if he’s intentionally fouled on every possession. That figure easily equates to the league’s best offense ever (though this season, with Dwight’s FT% taking a dip, that figure drops to 0.98 PPP, which is Detroit Pistons territory). Hack-a-Insert-Name is thus only effective sporadically, in crunch time as much as anytime; conversely, if sending a double team at a player ensures a victorious defense, it can be used whenever by whoever.

A little more delving into the numbers shows just how little crunch time free throw shooting has to do with how “good” a player is. Dwight Howard has played 2070 minutes this season; only 108 of them, for a whopping 5.21%, have been classified as crunch time. 2010-2011 shows a similar number, with 5.28% of Dwight’s minutes (155 of 2935) coming in the clutch last year.

Furthermore, it’s not as if Dwight has been a crunch time liability. The Magic have only played 5 clutch minutes without him this year, and 18 last year – it’s not like the guy’s free throws are keeping him out of the game. In fact, he’s not only stayed in – he’s been incredibly effective. With Dwight on the court in the clutch, the Magic have scored a whopping 119.4 points per 100 possessions, and have given up only 92.9, and have gone 17-10. Essentially, if the game is close, the clock is ticking down, and Dwight Howard is on the other team, he will make you look like the Bobcats while turning his team into the best offense in history. If you count all 113 Magic clutch minutes, including the 5 without Dwight, those numbers drop to 118 and 96.7 – still elite, but a pretty substantial downgrade, albeit one that draws from a very small sample. And that’s before accounting for the probably arbitrary win-loss record, which shows that the Magic have lost all 4 games in which there were clutch minutes that Dwight didn’t see.

The picture was similar last season. The defense wasn’t nearly as good with Dwight, at 107.1, but the offense was still amazing, at 116.1. Overall, counting both Dwight and Dwightless minutes, the Magic clocked in at 113.2 offensively, and 107.9 defensively.

It’s easy to see why. Dwight’s usage may drop in the clutch, but even as teams gladly give him more trips to the charity stripe (14 per 36 clutch minutes, vs. 9.9 per 36 minutes overall) so they can limit his usual looks (8.7 clutch field goal attempts per 36 minutes, vs. per 36 12.6 overall) his presence is still felt. And it’s felt whether he’s off the ball, demanding the defensive attention needed to free a shooter, or on the ball. From NBA’s statscube:

Dwight shoots worse in the clutch, but he basically stops turning the ball over, despite otherwise being a miscue machine. Perhaps accordingly, he registers far more assists. One suspects that this may actually have something to do with his free throw shooting – if Dwight gets the ball in the clutch, teams immediately collapse and try to foul, which means that A) Dwight doesn’t fall into the dribbling routine that can so easily lead to charges or lost balls, and B) if Dwight immediately swings the ball back out, somebody is open.

And defensively? Unless Stan Van Gundy uses them as an excuse to keep Dwight off the court – which minute totals show he hasn’t been doing – the free throws aren’t even a factor. This year’s inconsistent effort aside, Dwight is still one of, if not the, best defensive player in the league, whether he’s up 20 in the 2nd quarter or down 2 in the 4th.

Everything described above has come in very limited minutes, and must be taken accordingly, as is the case with every single attempt at crunch time analysis. But the picture drawn is a very clear one: if crunch time consists of just about 5% of a player’s overall contributions, and crunch time offense consists of just about half of those 5%, and in those minutes a guy’s team is much, much better offensively than at any other period in the game, maybe free throw weaknesses aren’t the end-all be-all of basketball skills. Maybe it’s just another small part of a game that has so many we can’t even count.

Whenever and wherever Dwight Howard takes an NBA court again, he will have to endure quite a bit of criticism. His inability to shoot from the line in the clutch will definitely be one of them, and justifiably so. It hurts his team, requires him to count on his unstable perimeter pals, and enables defenses to take shortcuts.

It also doesn’t stop Dwight from being a huge plus, both overall and in crunch time, and it doesn’t stop his team from doing very well in such situations. It’s a flaw, but one that it isn’t necessarily fatal. On a scale of undermining your coach to appearing in “Just Wright”, it’s just another thing that makes us not like Dwight anymore, and another thing we’ll forget when he wins the title with the 2016 Brooklyn Nets. It will be pretty funny when MarShon Brooks wins Finals MVP, though, so we still have something to look forward to.

Playoffs? We’re Talking About Playoffs??? Roundtable: The Wild West

April 18, 2012 in by with 8 Comments

The Western Conference is absolutely insane right now. The current 6-10 seeds are within 2.5 games of each other, and there are only three spots available in the dance. The Staples Center tenants are fighting for the Pacific Division crown and the 3-seed that comes with it. Oklahoma City and San Antonio are jostling for home court advantage throughout the playoffs. It seems like every possible Western Conference playoff team has a potential kryptonite match-up looming somewhere else in the bracket. What the heck is going on out West? I asked Matt Moore, Sean Highkin, Scott Leedy, Andrew Lynch, Clint Peterson and Connor Huchton some burning questions to help sort out the mess.

1. Dallas, Denver, Phoenix, Houston, Utah for three playoff spots… who ya got?

Matt Moore:  Dallas, Denver…Utah. I refuse to believe the Suns are a real thing beyond Nash and even he can’t pull this magic with that schedule. The dream ends Thursday on the back-to-back. Houston just can’t recover. Mavs’ lead is juuuuuuust enough with tiebreakers. Denver peaking right.

Sean Highkin: Mavs, Nuggets, and Jazz. One last playoff run in Phoenix for Nash before he inevitably goes to Miami next season is the storyline everyone’s rooting for, but they just aren’t good enough outside of him and Gortat. The Mavs have all the tiebreakers and the Nuggets just won two straight against the Rockets.

Scott Leedy: I’ll take Dallas, Denver, and Phoenix. Mostly because I like those teams, and math is hard.

Andrew Lynch: Dallas, Denver, Utah. The Mavs and Nuggets have a bit of a cushion between them and the eighth seed — for now — and the Jazz get to play the Trail Blazers in two of their last four games, as well as a matchup against a totally unpredictable Magic team. Their other remaining game? Against the Suns. This Phoenix ride has been fun, but I can’t help but think it’s about to come to a screeching halt.

Clint Peterson:  Three of these teams — Denver, Houston, and Utah — have something in common; none sports a superstar, instead relying on good coaching and team play to win games. It’s difficult to discount Dallas since only two defending NBA champions ever have failed to make the postseason, the 1968-69 Boston Celtics after player-coach Bill Russell retired, and the 1998-99 Chicago Bulls that were dismantled by their brass when Michael Jordan retired one of those many, many times. And you never ever discount a Steve Nash-led team. Superstar factor, remember?

FINGA GUNZ to my head, Dallas and Phoenix are in, plus Denver with the more experienced coaching and longer time together, despite JaVale McNugget.

Connor Huchton: Dallas, Denver, and Houston. Dallas has four games left to play, and are likely to win two of them (against GSW, and probably against one of Houston/Atlanta), enough to hold their current playoff spot margin. Utah is simply too far out to catch up, and doesn’t own enough head-to-head tiebreakers to make a run. Phoenix has the eighth spot currently, but they have the hardest remaining schedule – Five Western Conference (probable) playoff teams. So almost by default, Houston and Denver could earn two of the last three spots. Dallas-Houston and Denver-Phoenix are two games that could decide how the craziness settles.

2. Which state has the better chance of producing the Western Conference’s Finals rep: California or Texas?

Matt Moore: California, because Texas is going to have to face California and either way California wins.

Sean Highkin: California, easily. San Antonio has the same age concerns they have every year, and Dallas has been the most maddeningly inconsistent playoff team of the season. I’d feel much more confident about the Clippers or the Lakers in any series. More so the latter.

Scott Leedy: Hmmm, to me this question basically boils down Spurs vs. Lakers, I don’t really believe the Clippers, Mavericks, or Rockets have a chance. With that being the case I’ll take the Lakers over the Spurs. I love that frontline, I love the way Bynum is playing, and Gasol will not disappear like he did last year. Oh and they still have Kobe Bryant. The Spurs are so good, and they do everything so well but like Chicago I’m worried they don’t have another gear. For the Spurs what we’ve seen in the regular season is what we are gonna get; yes that’s still really good but will it be enough?

Andrew Lynch: I’ll take Texas. I don’t have much faith in either LA team’s ability to make the Finals, and I’m fully on board the Spurs bandwagon right now. California is probably the better answer, but screw probability! I’m all in on San Antonio.

Clint Peterson: Those aren’t autonomous countries?! This is a trick question.

Connor Huchton: I’ll give Texas the slight edge. The Spurs have been consistent all season and are the best team from the two states. Dallas is talented enough to make a run, despite their maddeningly inconsistent performance this season. I think both the Clippers and Lakers could make the Western Conference Finals, but both teams have enough weaknesses to give me significant doubts. But this’ll ultimately decided by the yet-decided Western Conference seedings.

3. The _____s really don’t want to see the _____s in a series because… 

Matt Moore: Spurs really don’t want to see the Lakers. Bynum smash. Bynum smash all over.

Sean Highkin: A Lakers-Grizzlies first-round series is probably the last thing LA wants at this point. Kobe might be rusty and/or still hurt in the first round. A team as relentless as Memphis isn’t someone you want to play until you have your bearings under you.

Scott Leedy: The everyones don’t want to play the Grizzlies because they are scary, they are good, and they have Tony Allen.

Andrew Lynch: I don’t think anyone wants to see the Lakers, particularly the Spurs and Thunder. I expect San Antonio and Oklahoma City to knock off the Lakers if they do end up in a series together, but could either team really be comfortable in a series where they have to figure out a way to shut down both Andrew Bynum and Pau Gasol? Kobe might be their only hope — or he might eviscerate his opponents. Either way, the specter of the Lakers should put a scare into the top two teams out West.

Clint Peterson: The Spurs really don’t want to see anyone because it’s their turn to get knocked off in a lockout year as the reigning old fogey favorites.

Connor Huchton: I don’t think the Lakers want to see the Clippers. This isn’t because the Clippers are a particularly tough matchup or a better team, but because Lakers’ fans wouldn’t know what to say if their fellow L.A. team, inferior for so long, claimed temporary dominance.

4. Who is the best bet for an unheralded player that swings a playoff series?

Matt Moore: Mareese Speights? Someone’s going to have to hit a jumpshot for the Grizzlies.

Sean Highkin: Randy Foye has swung several games for the Clippers lately. If he stays hot in the playoffs, the Clips will be a tough out.

Scott Leedy: Does Tony Allen count as unheralded? If not I’ll take Steve Novak if he can get hot he might be the difference for the Knicks in a first round upset.

Andrew Lynch: Whoever plays alongside Duncan for the Spurs, be it Tiago Splitter or Matt Bonner. The former has played very few minutes with Duncan on the floor this season, but San Antonio’s hand might be forced against the Lakers or Grizzlies. And if Bonner can be his usual sandwich-y self, most of the West is going to find itself struggling to cover the Spurs’ spacing.

Clint Peterson: Isn’t the answer to this question always Tony Allen?

Connor Huchton: Brandan Wright of the Mavericks. Wright has been a stellar surprise for the Mavericks, and can be the offensive weapon the team needs in certain situation. He’s a terrific at-the-rim finisher and athletic presence, and only struggles when facing opposing centers with overwhelming size. If the Mavericks play a team with post players that Wright matches up well with (like the Clippers), the series’ favorite could shift.

5. What’s your ideal conference finals match-up?

Matt Moore: Lakers-Clippers. Staples Series, good and evil, Lakers fans tripping over any insinuation the Clippers are relevant, VDN in the Conference Finals, empty seats for the WCF for an entire seven game series for the entire first quarter, Blake dunking on Pau.

Sean Highkin: Thunder-Grizzlies. That was an incredible second-round series last year, and Memphis was arguably the better team. They’ll be hungry for revenge, and this time there will be even more on the line for the Grizz.

Scott Leedy: For the Western conference I’ll take Grizzlies-Thunder. As for the Eastern conference, how about Boston Miami, because everytime those two meet it’s a whole lot of fun.

Andrew Lynch: Lakers/Clippers. All of the pageantry, all of the drama, all of the Chris Paul trying to jump up and pat Pau Gasol on the head. Yes, please.

Clint Peterson: I’d really like to see the Memphis Grizzlies get another shot at the Oklahoma City Thunder, a series that went the distance last year. In the East, it will never happen, but I’d really love to see the Philadephia 76ers pull it together in some kind of amazing Cinderella run, wreaking havoc and trail of dead contenders behind them on their way to an Eastern Conference Finals with the Miami Heat.

Connor Huchton: The Oklahoma City Thunder vs. the Los Angeles Clippers: Four stars, interesting role players, and possible late-scoring duels between Chris Paul and Kevin Durant.

6. Which Western Conference playoff team is the worst potential matchup for either the Bulls or Heat? 

Matt Moore: Clearly Phoenix because if that happens it means Steve Nash has entered the God Mode code and is invincible.

Sean Highkin: The Lakers would be a pretty bad matchup for the Bulls, mainly because of their bigs. Both teams have a dominant scorer, but would you rather have your frontcourt duo be Gasol and Bynum or Noah and Boozer?

The Heat would have a hell of a time beating either San Antonio or Memphis, for different reasons. For the Grizz, pure physicality. For the Spurs, three-point shooting prowess. LeBron and Battier will have their hands full with San Antonio’s shooters.

Scott Leedy: This is such a tough question, arguments could be made for the Lakers, Spurs, Grizzlies, and Thunder. But I have to stick with the Thunder. They are the most talented team, I mean Durant Westbrook and Harden?  C’mon how could you take anyone else? Then again their youth still worries me, young teams don’t win in this league. You know what I just talked myself out of my first answer, I’ll take the Lakers.

Andrew Lynch: For the Bulls, it’s the Thunder. They can stretch Chicago’s perimeter defense to its breaking point, and the Westbrook/Rose matchup could end up being a wash, or close to it.

For the Heat, it’s the Spurs. Watching San Antonio feast on open 3s thanks to their discipline and Miami’s aggressive rotations is a prospect that should keep Heat fans up at night.

Clint Peterson: For the Bulls it has to be the Thunder who are 3-2 versus the Derrick Rose-led Bulls over the last three seasons. For the Heat the only answer is the Utah Sundiata Millsaps.

Connor Huchton: The Thunder could be a problem for the Heat in the Finals, as the Thunder’s depth could overwhelm the Heat bench with talent. In the Eastern Conference, the solid Pacers could give a team like the Bulls a tough series, especially if Danny Granger finds a rhythm.

Pist-owned In Detroit

April 17, 2012 in by with 1 Comment

The Detroit Pistons beat the Cleveland Cavaliers earlier tonight 116-77 in a game that was not nearly as close as the score makes it seem. In case you missed the highlights, first of all, take a moment to congratulate yourself on a terrific life choice. Second of all, feel free to jump in the Hot Tub Time Machine and view the above video to relive a classic moment in WCW’s history which does an adequate job of summing up the roles these two teams played. Actually that’s not totally correct; in that match, Kevin Nash put up a better fight than the Cavs tonight.

I honestly don’t even know what three letter Internet abbreviation accurately describes this beat down. OMG? LOL? WTF? Let’s start by looking at the boxscore which is as NSFW as raw data can possibly be:

Before we get into breaking down the ridiculous numbers, it’s worth acknowledging that the Cavs played this game without Kyrie Irving, Anderson Varejao, Alonzo Gee, and Daniel Gibson due to various injuries. When healthy, that is 60% of the starting lineup plus the usual first guard off the bench sitting out. Be that as it may, the game was against the Detroit Pistons who entered tonight a scintillating 16 games under .500. Though the Pistons have a number of promising players, by no means is anyone mistaking them for the Thunder, Bulls, or Heat. On to the numbers…

  • The Cavs starting five was a combined -213. Minus two hundred thirteen. MINUS TWO HUNDRED THIRTEEN! Look, +/- can be an incredibly misleading stat, particularly in a one game sample size, but the fact remains that this is one of the most incredible things I have ever seen stats wise in a basketball game.
  • Conversely, the Pistons starting five countered with an equally staggering combined +/- of +205. Again, PLUS TWO HUNDRED FIVE. Rodney Stuckey only scored eight points, but led everyone in the game, league, and Universe tonight with a +46.
  • Antawn Jamison’s first game with the Cavaliers was a deplorable, hideous 0-12 from the floor effort that saw him missing from all over the floor as seen here:

Somehow, this game was worse. In 29 minutes of action, the 6’9” Jamison managed to pull down four rebounds, attempt 10 shots, and made exactly as many field goals as you and I did. The phrase “veteran leadership” has been a running joke among Cavs fans when watching Jamison and Anthony Parker  play this year. I’m going to go out on a limb and say nothing that occurred tonight is going to change that perception.

  • This is not to just rip on the Cavs; we need to give credit where credit is due. The Pistons were on fire tonight. The starting lineup for Detroit shot a sizzling 67% (29-43) from the field led by an unconscious 11-12 performance by Brandon Knight. As Jamison proved he could miss from anywhere on the floor, Knight was the polar opposite drilling jumpers from all over the Palace of Auburn Hills. Eight of Knight’s 11 field goals came from outside the paint as seen below:

I could continue to harp on this issue, but there are people far more clever than I who voiced their thoughts on the game on Twitter.

There are a number of Cavs fans that don’t mind losing games at this point in the season. At this point, the Cavs have been mathematically eliminated from the playoffs, and it’s a race for more ping pong balls in the lottery. The ideal scenario is that the Cavs play hard, compete, and lose by a couple points at the end. It’s efforts and games like this that drive fans nuts, and deservedly so.

An astute observation by both parties here. Manny Harris, Lester Hudson, Donald Sloan played a total of 73 game minutes tonight. If you’re reading this and are not from Northeast Ohio, chances are all you know about these players is that the first has the best full name in the NBA (Corperryale L’Adorable “Manny” Harris), the second enjoyed a Linsanity-Lite run as recently as earlier this month, and the third has the same last name as the romantic interest of E on Entourage. Harris actually led the Cavs with 18 points tonight. That’s good. Hudson and Sloan finished 5-18 from the field for a total of 13 points. That’s bad.

Usually, I’m an advocate of the “Go big or go home mentality.” Cleveland took this to a whole new level tonight. After three quarters, the score was 100-50. It’s rare to see a team score 100 points in three quarters. It’s rare to see a team score only 50 points in three quarters. It’s damn near impossible for both of those feats to be achieved during the same game. To quote Anchorman, “How’d you do that? Heck, I’m not even mad; that’s amazing.”

Our fearless leader at HP providing some perspective. Of course, “worst” is subjective. Matt is referring to 112-57 shellacking the Lakers put on the Cavs last year when Cleveland was in the midst of their record 26 game losing streak. Points wise, of course the 55 point deficit is greater than tonight’s 39 point catastrophe. However, I’d argue that tonight was worse since last year’s game was against a playoff team and at the time pushed LA to a 28-11 record. Detroit improved to 23-38 tonight.

As bad as this loss was, at the end of the day, whether a team loses by one point, 39 points, or 55 points, it only counts as one loss in the standings. There are no awards for failing spectacularly, no additional ping pong balls for extreme tanking. All the Cavs can do at this point is forget everything that happened tonight and put forth a better effort on Wednesday night against Philadelphia in Cleveland. Although  Cavs fans won’t resort to the the Fingerpoke of Doom that Hulk Hogan employed on Kevin Nash, I have a feeling there is another finger fans will be using to convey their feelings if there is a repeat performance of tonight’s effort ever again.

Statistical support for this story from NBA.com.

 

West’s Wet Willy Should Have Been A Wedgie. Or A Purple Nurple.

April 17, 2012 in by with 0 Comments

Photo by @drhadfield, grabbed from the Root Sports broadcast, via @saltcityhoops

As you’ve probably heard/read/seen/mindmelded by now, Delonte West got a little frustrated last night in Dallas’s loss to the Utah Jazz. From ESPNDallas.com’s Jeff Caplan:

West said there’s no hard feelings toward the Utah Jazz forward after West lost his cool late in the second quarter. West aggressively and unnecessarily flung his arm at Hayward well away from the ball to pick up his third foul with 3:40 to go in the first half. After the whistle, West followed Hayward and suddenly poked his index finger in the vicinity of Hayward’s ear.

via Delonte West and his odd ‘West willy’ – Dallas Mavericks Blog – ESPN Dallas.

The general reaction to the schoolyard prank is, “What was West thinking?” And it’s a fair question. He obviously was going to get a technical for it; it was extraordinarily unhygienic; and now I’m not entirely sure that West knows what Q-tips are for.

But the biggest problem with West fingerbanging Hayward’s ear is that it was extremely ineffective. If you’re going to pull an old school prank like that, then get your money’s worth, Delonte! You had so many other options, and you went with the weakest of the bunch. Hell, you’d have been better off putting a “Kick Me!” sign on the basketball and hoping that it would confuse Devin Harris into a dozen kicked ball violations.

As a service to West and all other NBA players, I’ve compiled a list for future reference of the most effective pranks for the basketball court. I don’t encourage using any of these, but if the temptation to turn to tomfoolery overtakes you, at least do yourself the favor of using one of these instead of a non-moistened wet willy.

Prank effectiveness is rated on a scale of 1-5 SUVs filled with popcorn.

—

Flat tire

Effectiveness: 

 

 

 

 

 

One of the few pranks that might not earn you a technical foul, the flat tire (where one steps on the back of another’s shoe, causing their heel to pop out of the back) can be made to seem like an accident. One would think that NBA players, wearing their shoes fairly tight, would be immune to the flat tire, but players lose their shoes on the court fairly frequently. The flat tire doubles as both a nuisance and an effective measure of defense; after all, a player without their shoe has to be limited in their ability to continue playing the game, right?

Ideal Scenario: Apparently, Thaddeus Young disagrees with the line of thinking that NBA players need shoes, so the ideal scenario for giving someone a flat tire is basically any time you’re not going up against Thad.

Snakebite

Effectiveness:

 

 

 

 

 

More commonly known as an “Indian burn,” we’ll use the less racially insensitive term (because we here at HP are nothing if not culturally sensitive), the snakebite, if used properly, can incapacitate a player’s dominant arm for as many as six seconds. Unfortunately, the capabilities of the snakebite as a weapon on the court are limited by the cumbersome process; a player would need the chance to wrap both hands around a player’s arm and twist in opposite directions, which would absolutely result in at least a personal foul and probably a technical, too.

Ideal Scenario: Convince Steve Nash to give you dap after one of his many made free throws — he’s a nice enough guy to high five his opponents, I’m sure — then quickly deliver the snakebite before he takes his second free throw. It’ll totally throw off his free throw stroke, as long as he’s not smart enough to wait for the “burn” to wear off.

Purple nurple

Effectiveness:

 

 

 

 

 

Now this prank, you could probably get away with. With all of the physical contact, especially in the post, all it would take is quick fingers and a quick wrist. Grab your opponent’s man mammary, twist and wait for the howls of pain and sensitivity that follows. This move is doubly effective if your opponent is suffering from runner’s nip.

Ideal Scenario: Boris Diaw.

Wedgie

Effectiveness:

 

 

 

 

 

Another prank that’s hard to pull off, the wedgie would provide a brief moment where your opponent is rendered less mobile and, if you’re Nikola Pekovic applying a super-atomic wedgie, blinded by the waistband of their own underwear being pulled over their eyes. The wedgie also doubles as a uniform violation, which could result in a technical foul called against the other team.

Ideal Scenario: 

Photo from the esteemed Greg Wissinger (@gwiss) of insideoutgame.com. Follow him on twitter!

Noogie

Effectiveness:

 

 

 

 

 

The go-to option of bullies and older brothers everywhere, the noogie would seem to be an effective prank in an NBA game. However, with the flagrant foul rules the way they are, a referee would likely interpret a noogie attempt as a blow to the head, resulting in two free throws and the ball out of bounds. Is it really worth a possible suspension and the free points for the other team to give someone a noogie?

Ideal Scenario: The answer is unequivocally yes, in one specific scenario. If Chris Paul were to jump onto Pau Gasol’s shoulders and deliver a retaliatory noogie for Gasol patting Paul on the head at the end of the Clippers/Lakers game on January 25th, it’d be the single greatest schoolyard prank in the history of the world.

The NBA’s New Board Game Based Movie: Jenga

April 17, 2012 in by with 0 Comments

Photo by emoflower via Flickr

Hollywood has a long and storied history of turning the board games of our childhood into blockbuster movies (and Clue*). The upcoming Battleship is set to beget a rash of board game-movies, from Ouija to Risk, which in turn will give rise to a dozen iPad apps bought by people wanting to play Candyland on their tablet, while the cardboard version rots in the closet.

*Which is apparently being remade, with a scheduled release date in 2013. This aggression against one of my favorite movies will not stand! How could one possibly improve on a movie with Tim Curry, Michael McKean and Christopher Lloyd?

Trick question; you can’t.

As the regular season winds down, the NBA is getting in on the live action-board game sensation: NBA Studios, in association with Western Conference Productions, presents Jenga.

—

In the transition month of April, when the hopes of early spring give way to the reality of summer, five professional basketball teams — the Mavericks, Nuggets, Suns, Rockets and Jazz — gather ’round the Table of Truth to determine whose season will end at 66 games and who will go forth into the world championships of woodblock stacking (and of basketball, too, I guess). In the middle, like a glimmering ivory tower made of particle board, stands the one true test of skill, Jenga. Every night, those five teams jostle for position and search for the best angles, taking turns extracting the building blocks of their dreams from a mangled mess of gaps and support and gently placing them atop a structure that they hope will be their scaffold to playoff heaven.

But the sinister forces of gravity and in-fighting threaten to render their hard work and careful planning all for naught. Sooner than later, this tower will collapse. With each move made by their counterparts, the options for any one team become slimmer and slimmer, and the prospect of failure for two of these teams comes into greater focus. As the Thunder, Spurs, Lakers, Clippers and Grizzlies play it safe and move their own pieces among the relative security of the upper echelons of the conference, they put more and more pressure upon the teams below them, particularly the Suns and Nuggets. With their top heavy schedules, Phoenix and Denver run the risk of running out of moves to make at the same time that the center of gravity moves higher up the tower.

No one has more than five games left before it all comes crashing down. We’ll soon know which teams will pull the pieces that push the tower over and push them out of the playoffs. And everyone else will breathe a sigh of relief, until someone insists on a rematch and the tower gets restored for the playoffs.

As a Suns fan, I always though Jenga was a stupid game, anyway.

CJ Watson? CJ Watson. CJ Watson!

April 17, 2012 in by with 0 Comments

With Derrick Rose sidelined by injuries for nearly half the season, the Chicago Bulls have had to get creative with their crunch time offense. Last night against the Washington Wizards, down by five points with under two minutes left in the game, Tom Thibodeau turned to Rose’s backup, C.J. Watson, on three different sideline out of bounds plays.

The first play starts with Watson taking the ball out of bounds. Richard Hamilton above the 3-point line at the top of the key, Joakim Noah at the right elbow, Kyle Korver on the right block and Carlos Boozer on the left block. The initial action has Korver running toward Noah as if he wants to take a pin-down screen and pop out above the top of the key.

But instead of doing that, Korver changes his path midway through and cuts toward the near corner, rubbing his man off a screen from Boozer. Noah then turns around and sets a back-screen on Hamilton’s man as Hamilton heads from the top of the key toward the far side corner. Down by 5, the Bulls send their guards off screens to the corners and if either is open, they can get a quick-hit 3-point opportunity out of it.

While Korver flashes open in the nearside corner, the man guarding the inbounds pass shuffles over to cut off the passing lane. This creates an opening for Watson to easily inbound the ball to Joakim Noah, who has flashed toward the ball after setting a screen on Hamilton’s man.

After receiving the inbounds pass, Noah quickly flips the ball back to Watson, who is on the move toward the middle of the court. At the same time, Noah sets a screen on Watson’s man to create some separation for Watson to get off a quick shot. The end result is that Watson gets off a wide open 18-footer after just two seconds have run off the clock.

The Wizards would hit one of two free throws on their next possession, and the Bulls again set up to inbound the ball from the same spot on the court. Watson is again the inbounder, but this time, Korver and Hamilton have flip-flopped their starting position. Korver is stationed above the 3-point line at the top of the key and Hamilton is started on the right block. Noah still occupies the right elbow and Boozer remains on the left block.

The play begins with the same basic action except that Hamilton does not feign a cut toward the top of the key as if he is going to receive a pin-down screen from Noah. Instead, Hamilton cuts directly across the lane to the near side corner, rubbing his man off a screen from Boozer. Korver runs the same route Hamilton did on the previous play and again gets a back-screen from Noah. Here’s where the twist on this play comes in.

Rather than slipping his screen to receive the inbounds pass from Watson, Noah holds the screen on Korver’s man to create separation so Korver can heads towards the corner for a spot-up opportunity. Boozer pivots and faces Watson, posting up his man on the left block, and this time he’s the man who receives the initial pass.

This is where you realize that the Bulls are running almost exactly the same action as on the previous play. Noah again comes over and sets a screen for Watson, who is on the move toward the middle of the court. Rather than being a dribble hand-off pick-and-roll, this time it’s an off-ball screen designed to get Watson an opening near the top of the key. Boozer, a good passer for a big man, immediately senses Watson will be open after coming off Noah’s screen.

Watson is pretty wide open here, but his man is closing out quickly to contest his shot. So what does he do? He throws up a pump-fake and takes a step inside the 3-point line.

The final result is another wide open jumper for Watson, this time after a mere three seconds have run off the shot clock. The Bulls cut the lead to two points. After the teams traded turnovers on consecutive possessions and John Wall made two free throws, Chicago was again down by four points. This time, they inbounded the ball from the opposite side of the court.

Hamilton is now the trigger man for the Bulls on this play. Noah, Watson, Boozer and Korver are staggered near the right elbow. Korver, again stationed closest to the top of the key, runs off a screen from Noah toward the strong side corner. Watson, stationed between Noah of Boozer, initially heads toward the hoop.

Look at how crowded that area near the right elbow is. The Wizards don’t know who is heading in what direction. As Korver heads toward the corner off of Noah’s screen, Watson stops on a dime and changes direction. Rather than continuing toward the hoop…

Watson quickly turns around and heads toward the top of the key, aided by a screen from Boozer. Watson, who started between Boozer and Noah, essentially made a V-cut and wound up on Boozer’s outside shoulder. This allowed him to run his man into Boozer and create a little separation as he headed out to the 3-point line.

Rather than heading straight out to the top of the key, however, Watson again changes direction. He runs his man off yet another screen, set by Noah, as he cuts toward Hamilton, the inbounder. This creates just enough room for Watson to catch, pivot, square himself up and fire a jumper. This time, only 0.5 seconds run off the clock before Watson puts up the shot.

Three plays. Seven points. 5.5 seconds total. The Bulls designed three different ways to get the ball in bounds and get up a quick shot. Far too often late in games, coaches depend on their players to manufacture looks themselves out of isolations or simple high pick-and-rolls. By getting his players on the move and using both on and off-ball screens, Thibodeau was able to get points out of his sets quickly and extend the game. The Bulls didn’t wind up winning, but the creativity and imagination that Thibodeau put into his late-game sideline out of bounds plays was something to be admired.

Page 8 of 363« First...«678910»203040...Last »