Blog Archives

The Harden trade and recent draft busts

10/28/2012

OKC traded James Harden yesterday to Houston, along with Cole Aldrich, Daequan Cook and Lazar Hayward. They got back Kevin Martin, Jeremy Lamb, two first round picks and one second round pick.

Most of my feelings on Harden and OKC I expressed the other day. In my mind, the most prudent thing OKC could have done would have been to extend Harden for four more years at $60 million, and then work from there. To avoid serious luxury tax implications that would mean probably amnestying Kendrick Perkins next year, and essentially having only very low paid players on the roster besides Kevin Durant, Russell Westbrook, Serge Ibaka and Harden.

If the Thunder had done this, they would still be in luxury tax territory, but not nearly as terribly as they seem to want you to believe. They would also unquestionably be a loaded team for the foreseeable future, and could have traded one of their stars if chemistry ever became an issue.

Nonetheless, OKC traded Harden, and it seems money was the main reason why. The good news for OKC is what I wrote the other day:

Usually in the NBA, it is a team's two or three best players that ultimately matter in winning a championship. That is what it really comes down to. The value of having a fourth exceptional player is if one of the other three star players is hurt, or playing terribly, the fourth player can pretty easily fill their place.

Having four great players is usually better than three, because it can provide a team with a level of insurance. It is not necessarily required, though, and it is not always advantageous.

When you have four star players, at least one of them will be somewhat marginalized, and unable to maximize their talent. This can cause problems, both on and off the court. The risk a star-laden team must deal with is the chance that not every exceptional player will be content with their role, and the team will suffer from this problem.

Quite frankly, when you are on a team that features Durant and Westbrook, everybody else will be marginalized offensively. It's just how it is - and it's not a problem. Durant, Westbrook and Harden couldn't all shoot the ball 20 times a game. Eventually, this fact could have caused chemistry issues on the court, although none were readily apparent. Going forward, particularly after this season, a healthy Durant, Westbrook and Ibaka should be all the star power OKC needs.

Kevin Martin should be good for OKC, and I still see them making the Finals. Sam Presti did very well to secure Jeremy Lamb and 3 future draft picks; those are valuable and inexpensive assets. In short, OKC should be in great shape for the next half decade, as long as Durant, Westbrook and Ibaka stay healthy.

As for Houston - they finally got a max player. They paid a steep price in Lamb and the three picks. We will have to see where the first round picks end up being, but it appears unlikely they will fall in the top five.

Basically, for the Rockets, this deal simply comes down to Harden playing as well as he did last year. If he can be as good, and with a heavier load on his shoulders, he will be well worth the max contract he is about to sign. But if he regresses once given a larger burden, the Rockets will be losers in this trade. Cole Aldrich could also be a nice throw in piece for Houston; he appears to have some talent.

In unrelated news, I just put up a short piece for Bleacher Report on five recent draft busts. Nothing mind-blowing, just common sense stuff. Essentially it comes down to this: you try your best to research top prospects via stats/how they look in games, you check for injuries and mental issues...and then you realize sometimes you still don't know.

0 Comments

2012-13 projected records

10/25/2012

0 Comments

Injuries and pure chance always play a major role in how well a team ends up doing in the regular season. When all is said and done, I think we will have a repeat of last year's Final's matchup, with Miami once again being victorious. Like I mentioned a few weeks ago, the West is much better than the East this year. Projected regular season records, with brief comments:

Eastern Conference

1. Miami Heat 58-24
It's hard to imagine the Heat not finishing with the best record in the East unless LeBron gets seriously hurt. With Rose injured, there is a major gap between them and every other team.

2. Boston Celtics    49-33
Depth and veteran star leadership might make the Celtics still the second best team in the conference. While the defense is great, people do not realize how terrible Boston's offense was last year. Offensive weakness will likely derail them again come playoff time.

3. Indiana Pacers   47-35
A team that most people are a little too excited about. Hibbert, Granger and George are a nice core, but nothing truly scary.

4. Chicago Bulls   46-36
Probably Miami's biggest threat if Rose can come back 100% by the playoffs. I have my doubts that will happen.

5. Atlanta Hawks   45-37
This team could surprise people. If Horford and Josh Smith have big years we might be looking at the second best team in the East.

6. Brooklyn Nets   45-37
An expensive team with overrated stars. Deron Williams will probably need to have a MVP-type season for this team to top 50 wins.

7. New York Knicks   43-39
I don't expect the dysfunction to stop with Lin's departure. The pieces have never fit together here, and there is no reason to think they will now.

8. Philadelphia 76ers   40-42
Not really sure why people are high on this team. Bynum is already hurt, and the rest of the offense is pretty bad. It could be a disappointing year in Philly.

9. Cleveland Cavaliers   36-46
Byron Scott probably will get his young team to play hard, and Irving seems likely to break out this year. The Cavs could surprise, or experience growing pains.

10. Detroit Pistons   36-46
The Pistons could easily make a run for the playoffs if the talented young players click with the veterans. Those things are easier said than done.

11. Milwaukee Bucks 35-47
The Bucks seem to be stuck in limbo. A youth movement might be in order.

12. Toronto Raptors 31-51
I am not sure if the Raptors are consciously trying to rebuild, or if they seriously think they can be a decent team with this weak roster. Casey will be a COY candidate if Toronto makes a serious run for the postseason.

13. Washington Wizards   29-53
Inept management and coaching have made the Wizards a joke the last few years. Unless Wall has an incredible year when he returns from injury, don't expect this team to even sniff the playoffs.

14. Charlotte Bobcats   23-59
Mike Dunlap could make the Bobcats fun to watch, and if all things click this team could be significantly better than expected. But again, things rarely end up all clicking.

15. Orlando Magic   18-64
Probably the worst team in the league. The goal this year will just be to develop young talent.

Western Conference

1. Oklahoma City Thunder 59-23
A loaded and deep team with a chip on their shoulder after a Finals loss. That makes them the best bet to win the most games.

2. Los Angeles Lakers 57-25
If injuries are not a major concern, and the chemistry is strong, nobody might touch the Lakers. I doubt that happens.

3. San Antonio Spurs 56-26
They were great for a long stretch last year, and their offense is maybe the best in the league.

4. Los Angeles Clippers 53-29
A team no one will want to play come the playoffs, questionable coaching aside. Keeping Paul and Griffin healthy is the most important thing.

5. Denver Nuggets 51-31
Young, talented and ready to run. Denver might not live up to expectations, but they have so much depth for the regular season.

6. Memphis Grizzlies 50-32
Gasol and Randolph are still a load down low, and this team gets after it night in and night out.

7. Utah Jazz 44-38
A big team with some youthful talent, the Jazz play in the wrong Conference. In the East, they might be the second best regular season team.

8. Dallas Mavericks 42-40
Nowitzki's injury just underscores the fact Dallas is getting old, but they still probably will make the playoffs.

9. Minnesota Timberwolves 41-41
Love and Rubio's injuries put a real damper on the start of the season. However there might be enough depth to make it into the playoffs.

10. Golden State Warriors 33-49
Questionable coaching and constant injury concerns means it will be difficult for this team to make the playoffs.

11. Houston Rockets 32-50
A ton of the youth here is unproven, but if Lin and Martin play well, this team could be pretty good.

12. New Orleans Hornets 31-51
The Anthony Davis effect should mean something positive. It will be interesting how Anderson and Gordon play after both getting paid over the Summer.

13. Sacramento Kings 31-51
Chemistry, as usual, seems bad here. But the talent is good; if Cousins and Evans break out this team can make the playoffs.

14. Portland Trailblazers 30-52
Not a lot of depth here - at all. If Aldridge goes down again, this team could be very bad.

15. Phoenix Suns 29-53
The departure of Nash makes this Suns team rudderless. They have some decent players, but it's hard to see them competing for the playoffs.

0 Comments

Extensions for the draft class of '09

10/24/2012

0 Comments

I just put a piece up on Bleacher Report regarding James Harden and the Thunder. It will be interesting to see if Harden, Ty Lawson, Stephen Curry, Tyreke Evans, Brandon Jennings, Jrue Holiday or Taj Gibson get extensions before the deadline at the end of the month.

0 Comments

Rookie PER for future stars

10/16/2012

0 Comments

I recently wrote a short piece for Bleacher Report regarding rookie PER and what it can mean. It's probably worth glancing over before reading this long post.

That article pretty clearly spells out how important a rookie's PER can be in predicting his future success in the league. It's not that all rookies that post a 15+ PER will become stars, but rather that if a player does not hit that number there is some serious doubt as to whether he will ever turn into an exceptional pro, especially if that player is a big man.

By quickly looking at the highest PERs posted by rookies since 2002 we see that plenty of players that were very good as rookies never progressed into exemplary NBA players. But having a good PER as a rookie is a very auspicious sign. In the last ten years, almost every future star has posted a PER above 15 his rookie year. Therefore I think rookie PER can maybe best be used to weed out players who are thought to have great potential, but in reality seem unlikely to fulfill high expectations as their careers progress.

While the Bleacher Report article gives us all the general information we need to understand rookie PER, I want to spend some more time here to look at the concept more closely, and specifically to examine exceptions.

First of all, it is worth thinking about the twenty players drafted since 2002 that have made 2+ All-Star games. Most of the best players of the last ten years started by being very good from the beginning. Historically, it's been a little tougher for guards and small forwards to hit 15+ PER as rookies than the last decade would indicate. I think a 13+ PER is a better minimum number to look at for those positions. But the reality is recently the best players, even guards, have been hitting 15+ immediately.

Let's now view rookie PER with a larger historical scope. I decided to look at every player drafted since 1992 that was selected to an All-Star game. I wanted to look for exceptions: Which star big men were under 15.0 as rookies, and which guards and small forwards were under 13.0?

Here's the list of every All-Star drafted since 1992, with their rookie PER. It's long, I suggest looking at it fullscreen:

That is all 95 All-Stars drafted since 1992. It's an interesting list, and worth examining closely. You can see the majority of players are good right away - 54 of them had at least a 15.0 PER as rookies.

Of the 95 All-Stars, 22 players did not meet the rookie criteria of 15+ PER for big men/13+ PER for guards and small forwards. Let's look at all the exceptions, starting from the lowest rookie PER:

- Michael Redd played a grand total of 35 minutes as a rookie. The next year, his first "real" season, his PER was 20.0. It is interesting to note that Redd hardly played at all as a rookie, even though he was an experienced college player with clear talent.

- Rashard Lewis, right out of high school, played 145 minutes total as a rookie. He had a 16.5 PER the next year with regular playing time.

- Ben Wallace, one of the better undrafted players ever, played 197 minutes as a rookie. His second year he posted a mediocre 13.4 PER. Wallace slowly grew into an exceptional player, and has had a highly unusual career path.

- Andrew Bynum only played 338 minutes as an 18 year old rookie. The next year, with more playing time, his PER was 15.4.

- Allan Houston, a two time All-Star, was simply lousy as a rookie. He bounced back to have a solid 16.4 PER his second year. Overall, Houston does not stack up well statistically compared to most multiple time All-Stars.

- Mo Williams, a one time All-Star, played 774 minutes as a rookie, and was not very good in the time given to him. He had a much better second year and never looked back.

- Chris Kaman had a terrible rookie year for a future All-Star, particularly given he was a center. In reality, Kaman has hardly ever been a superior center in the league, and it is no surprise he made only one All-Star team.

- Steve Nash has had one of the strangest career paths of any truly great player in NBA history. Nash simply was not that good his first four years in the league, and he did not flash any legitimate signs of stardom until he was 26 years old. He molded himself into an All-Star, and then stunningly got increasingly better in the following years, leading to two MVP awards. His rookie PER of 10.8 is staggeringly low for an experienced college player who goes on to dominate his position in the pros.

- Richard Hamilton somewhat struggled as a rookie, but like many of the players we are listing, was a good deal better by his second year.

- Tony Parker was 19 as a rookie, and his struggles are rather understandable given his age and the cultural gap he must have initially experienced. He was much better by the playoffs, and then had a strong following season.

- Rasheed Wallace had a PER of 11.8 as a rookie, which seems very low for a big man with such natural talent. Because we are discussing Wallace, it is easy to conjecture many of his on-court problems stemmed from chemistry issues. Whatever the reasons for his struggles were, he did manage to bounce back with an 18.4 PER the following season.

- Joe Johnson has had an odd career. His PER never got above 15 until Steve Nash arrived in Phoenix in '04-05, Johnson's fourth year in the league. He then went to Atlanta and has been regarded as an All-Star ever since. He is a player whose reputation has generally exceeded his actual talent level, which is why his name on this list doesn't strike me quite as much as Nash or either of the Wallace's. Johnson's PER as a rookie was 11.8.

- Deron Williams is the third fantastic point guard on this list who had a PER below 13 as a rookie. It is quite possible point guard is the hardest position in the NBA to play well as a rookie, and Williams did not do too badly with a 12.4 PER. He had a 17.1 PER his second year.

- Dirk Nowitzki, perhaps the best player on the list not to fulfill PER expectations, had only a 12.8 PER in 958 rookie minutes. On closer inspection, it is pretty easy to see why Nowitzki struggled early - he was a skinny 20 year old German kid playing against NBA veterans in a strike shortened season. He was much better his second year, and had a 17.5 PER.

- Baron Davis fell just a tad short of a 13 PER as a rookie, and given the position he plays this is not a huge surprise, despite Davis' physical gifts and talent.

- Kenyon Martin, a power forward, had a 13.4 PER his rookie year, which is not surprising given his career path. Martin made one All-Star game and was a disappointment as a #1 overall pick.

- Jamaal Magloire was only a one time All-Star, and like Martin, his rookie PER is not a surprise at all.

- Jermaine O'Neal was drafted right out of high school and not given a legitimate opportunity his first four years in Portland. He stagnated, never playing more than 900 minutes in a season. When he finally was traded to Indiana in '00-01, he posted a 17.5 PER. His career took off from there.

- Theo Ratliff posted a perfectly decent 14.0 PER as a rookie; he made one All-Star team.

- Tom Gugliotta posted a 14.6 PER as a rookie; like Ratliff he made just one All-Star team. Both these guys are PER exceptions of little to no consequence.

- Al Horford had a PER of 14.7 as a rookie, nearly hitting 15, but not quite. I am interested in Horford's rookie PER because there are currently two other highly touted young big men, DeMarcus Cousins and Enes Kanter, who also narrowly missed 15 as rookies. There is a chance 14.5 would be a better general criteria for big men, and not 15.0. But then again maybe not. Let's see how Cousins and Kanter do in the future.

- Mehmet Okur, a one time All-Star, just narrowly missed 15; bringing him up is just a formality to complete the list of PER exceptions.

Overall, most of the 22 PER exceptions are not that surprising. Many players that failed to meet the 15+/13+ PER criteria did not get ample minutes as rookies to prove their worth, and succeeded as soon as playing time was given to them the next year. Others, like Nowitzki and Parker, were young foreigners who had to adjust to a new country. And a few, quite simply, were never that good. Being an All-Star once in the NBA does not necessarily mean being an amazing player; guys like Kaman and Magloire are clear testaments to that.

The real PER aberrations are probably Nash, Ben Wallace and Rasheed Wallace. Nowitzki's low PER is also striking, despite the extenuating circumstances, because he ends up having such an incredibly dominant career. All four of these players had surprising statistical struggles early in their career, and then went on to become stars. Allan Houston, Richard Hamilton, Joe Johnson and Deron Williams are slight surprises, but their rookie troubles are relatively more minor, easier to understand, and seemingly less significant.

In conclusion, rookie PER is very important. I do not know if it is the single most important stat we can use to predict a rookie's future success, but I can't think of anything more important. It's amazing the consistency in which future great players achieve the 15+/13+ PER criteria. Obviously there will be exceptions, but we should not count on them happening regularly.

0 Comments

NBA Draft Review Table 1997-2011

10/10/2012

0 Comments

Check out the draft review table. I will have much more to say about this 15 year review over the course of the upcoming year.

0 Comments

Review of the 2011 NBA Draft

10/10/2012

0 Comments

Quite simply, it is too early to analyze the 2011 Draft appropriately. Like the prior year, we just do not have enough information yet. What we can do is make some educated guesses.

This was not a draft that people were particularly excited about, mainly because the top five was lightly regarded. That said, Kyrie Irving (pick #1) showed every sign of being a future superstar his rookie year. Derrick Williams (#2), Enes Kanter (#3) and Tristan Thompson (#4) all had pretty mundane rookie seasons for top five selections, but we need to give them more time before we can truly pass a harsh judgment. Jonas Valanciunas (#5) will be a rookie in 2012-13.

Like Irving, Kenny Faried (pick #22) had an exceptional rookie season that was very auspicious. Other first rounders that showed promising signs their rookie season included Kemba Walker (#9), Klay Thompson (#11), Alec Burks (#12), Kawhi Leonard (#15), Nikola Vucevic (#16), Iman Shumpert (#17) and MarShon Brooks (#25.) But again, it is too early to fairly judge most of these first rounders.

One thing we can already say is that the second round appears to have much better depth than 2010. Isaiah Thomas (pick #60) had a phenomenal rookie season for a player who went at the end of round two. In retrospect, like Jeremy Lin the year before, Thomas should have been selected much earlier. Other second rounders who provided some immediate production included Shelvin Mack (#34), Jordan Williams (#36), Chandler Parsons (#38), Jon Leuer (#40), Josh Harrellson (#45) and Lavoy Allen (#50.)

So the first impression of 2011 is a draft with good depth and a potential superstar up top. We will know much more about this class in a year or two. A very rough approximation of the top ten players from this draft, with their actual selection number in parenthesis:

1. Kyrie Irving (1)
2. Kenny Faried (22)
3. Kawhi Leonard (15)
4. Isaiah Thomas (60)
5. Enes Kanter (3)
6. Kemba Walker (9)
7. Tristan Thompson (4)
8. Derrick Williams (2)
9. Chandler Parsons (38)
10. Klay Thompson (11)

0 Comments

Review of the 2010 NBA Draft

10/8/2012

1 Comment

It is too early to draw firm conclusions about the 2010 Draft. While the past few drafts have already provided us with enough information to give us a clear idea of the quality of players in a class, 2010 has not. So far there have been no All-Stars, and it is difficult to ascertain who the best few players from this year will end up being.

As it currently stands, this draft class looks like a disappointment, and that starts with the top selections. Expectations were very high for both John Wall (picked #1) and Evan Turner (#2), and so far neither has lived up to the hype. Turner, in particular, has looked surprisingly overmatched in the pro game. Derrick Favors (#3) has shown promise and is young, but at this point it is unclear if he will be a borderline star or just a decent starter. Wesley Johnson (#4) looks to be a complete bust. DeMarcus Cousins (#5) might end up being the best player from 2010, but there are still serious questions about his decision making, which was the initial reason his stock dropped on draft night.

The best player from this class so far has been Greg Monroe (pick #7.) He appears likely to be an All-Star soon. Paul George (#10) has also shown flashes of star potential. The only other players from the first round that have made a sizable impact are Gordon Hayward (#9), Ed Davis (#13) and Trevor Booker (#23.) This will likely change, and other first rounders will probably go on to have at least semi-productive careers, but it is simply too early to know.

The second round of 2010 looks weak. Landry Fields (pick #39) was an excellent selection, but no other player has made an impact so far. Again, this will probably change with time, but nonetheless round two looks paltry compared to most years.

Maybe the most interesting aspect of the 2010 draft has been Jeremy Lin, who went undrafted. Lin is still somewhat unproven, but he already looks like one of the great undrafted players in recent history. He seems to have almost as much star potential as virtually anyone in the entire draft.

So overall, while it is early, the class of 2010 looks pretty weak. This could change, and a good deal could depend on Wall and Cousins' development, but it seems unlikely this draft will stack up well compared to the previous few years. A very rough approximation of the top ten players from 2010, with their actual pick number in parenthesis:

1. Greg Monroe (7)
2. DeMarcus Cousins (5)
3. John Wall (1)
4. Jeremy Lin (undrafted)
5. Paul George (10)
6. Derrick Favors (3)
7. Ed Davis (13)
8. Gordon Hayward (9)
9. Evan Turner (2)
10. Landry Fields (39)

1 Comment

As usual, the West is the best

10/2/2012

0 Comments

While sometimes the best team(s) are in the Eastern Conference, the Western Conference in general has been better for so long that it hardly merits mentioning at this point. It can just be assumed, until something dramatic changes.

This year is no different. While there are five or six teams in the West that we could easily see winning at least 50 games, in the East really only Miami seems certain to achieve 50+ wins. Sure, a team like Boston or Indiana could do it, but I wouldn't count on it. Nor am I optimistic that Brooklyn or New York will be as good as some people are saying.

Oklahoma City, San Antonio, the Lakers and the Clippers all have to be considered legitimate title contenders. Denver and Memphis also might end up with better records than anyone in the East, excluding Miami.

So let's not even consider the argument for parity this year. It's gonna take a lot of funky stuff to even consider making a claim like that. Eight of the top ten teams might be from the West.

The West is deeper, too. Teams that are potentially adequate (like New Orleans and Houston) probably won't ever even be seriously considered in the playoff hunt out West, while a potentially mediocre team like Cleveland could sniff the playoffs in the East. Obviously things change and are highly unpredictable, but the conference disparity seems to stay the same year after year.

0 Comments

NBA Focus

The Harden trade and recent draft busts

2012-13 projected records

Extensions for the draft class of '09

Rookie PER for future stars

NBA Draft Review Table 1997-2011

Review of the 2011 NBA Draft

Review of the 2010 NBA Draft

As usual, the West is the best

Contact

Archives