The Spurs have made the first move in the Southwestern Arms Race.
ESPN.com is reporting that the Spurs have traded Bruce Bowen, Fabricio Oberto and Kurt Thomas to the Bucks for Richard Jefferson.
R.C. Buford and Greg Popovich continue to impress, as they always have. They spent the last half-dozen years building a team around a trio of high level players while filling in around the edges with smaller contracts.
This time, they put together a classic "Buy Low" transaction. Jefferson's reputation hit its zenith during the Nets two runs to the Finals under Byron Scott, but then he was part of the Olympic Debacle in Athens - and caught a fair amount of blame because he was supposed to be a shooter - and didn't shoot worth a bean curd. Since then, he got an over-sized contract, had some injury problems and caught a lot of the blame for the Nets not being able to do jack.
Here's the rub though - remember that list of Class-A scorers I put together?
Jefferson is on it.
Jefferson took 15 shots a game, while still producing 1.32 points per shot, and I can't see how that efficiency won't do anything but increase playing with the big trio of Spurs. Now, other than scoring, Jefferson's doesn't give you much, and the Spurs now sport a big man rotation of a slowly-breaking-down Tim Duncan, limited Matt Bonner, and unproven Ian Mahinmi, but there is a lot to love in this trade if you are a Spurs fan.
Matt Bonner is hyper efficient with his shooting - Duncan and Ginobili are already Class A Scorers, and Parker is a solid B. If the Spurs re-sign Drew Gooden as a back-up big to join Roger Mason and George Hill in an effective eight-man rotation they should scare every team out there. Their defense may slip a little (though not too much with Popovich at the controls) but their offense is going to more than make up for it.
The Spurs have made their move. I fully expect to see the Rockets make one of their own with McGrady this summer. The Mavericks are definitely going to try and make a move.(though I expect little) The Southwest Division is just a nasty place - particularly for a team struggling with some cap issues.
At least we always have the Grizzlies.
55 legendary comments post your own
Gaiking
06/23/09 02:31 PM
I wonder if we will ever see a good trade of this magnitude happen to our team. For as long as I can remember we've always had trades ranging from terrible to decent.
Never have I been able to say that finally we got an amazing deal and felt that coming next season we'd be a force to reckon with. The most optimistic I've felt about our team was last year when I believe that this past season was going to be very special and we all know how that went.
How is it possible for the other teams to pull these type of magical trades that at least until now seem extremely favorable? All we ever get are lucky draft picks that turn out to be stars.
Sorry for the rant, I just hate the Spurs with a passion and seeing a seemingly wounded and dying beast recover makes my blood boil.
#1
bigindian15
06/23/09 04:04 PM
I am completely stunned by this. This is the first trade in like 5 years that didn't have rumors preceding it for 10 days. The only bright side for the Hornets is that MAYBE we can pry Roger Mason from the Spurs cheap...nahhh, it just sucks.
My god, their starting lineup is Parker, Ginobili, Jefferson, Duncan, and...starting center. That's 4 all star level guys. Unbelievable. And now there's insurance for the inevitable 35 game Ginobili ankle injury in mid December. Damn it all
#2
bigindian15
06/23/09 04:10 PM
Hey, can we start a topic just to discuss the outrageous trade rumors? Apparently it's confirmed that the Celtics offered Rondo and Ray Allen to the Pistons for Stuckey, Prince, and Hamilton, and for some ridiculous reason the Pistons turned them down. I mean, isn't Joe Dumars supposed to be a genius? HOW COULD THEY TURN THAT DOWN?
My point in bringing this up is that if they wouldn't dump the salaries of Hamilton and Prince for a phenomenal young point guard and an all time great shooter who still has some left AND is a huge expiring contract, then I don't think we're trading with them
#3
At the Hive
06/23/09 06:08 PM
I don't buy that Jefferson is an All-Star level talent, or even close. Last year, he was right around league average offensively, and even though age-wise he should be in his prime, there are signs he's actually on the decline. Is he an upgrade over Michael Finley? Absolutely. But he's not the player he was in Jersey with J-Kidd.
Plus, Ginobili's condition is arthritic, which to my knowledge is one of perpetual deterioration. Tony Parker is amazing, Tim Duncan is still Tim Duncan, but I don't know that his move puts SAS over DEN for 2nd.
And I'm not trying to disagree with you on purpose bigindian (haha), but I also agree with Dumars on passing. The Pistons aren't winning the title next year, so it seems pointless whether they have Ray Allen or not. What's the point of having the greatest three point shooter on a slightly above average, at best, team? And I think diminishing marginal returns comes into play here. The Pistons have a miniscule 20,000,000 guaranteed next summer. By doing the trade, they'd slice off another 10 mil. Drawing a couple big name free agents would be just as possible at 20 as at 10. And free agents would be less likely to sign when your most famous player is Jason Maxiell. Add on the facts that Tayshaun Prince is one of the most valuable trading chips in the league right now and that the Pistons would have to literally build a roster from scratch next summer, and it doesn't make much sense. Rondo is better than Stuckey, but is he so much better than he justifies all the rest of the factors?
www.atthehive.com #4
bigindian15
06/23/09 06:18 PM
I dunno, I like Richard Jefferson more than most I guess, but also remember that last year he was the main guy on the team that was full of injuries, so he was always the focus.
I think Denver will slide a little just because I'm not sure their bench will be as good next year as this year with Kleiza and Andersen possibly gone.
I agree that Prince is a great chip, but he and Hamilton both have really long contracts, which no one really wants right now. Between Hamilton and Allen right now, I'd take Allen for 1 year any day over Hamilton for 3-4 (however many it is). Plus, if they shed that contract now, then maybe they sign Boozer this year, and Wade next summer, and then along with Rondo, that's a freaking monster top 3.
Also, Rodney Stuckey has to be the most overrated player on the planet. They were comparing him to D Wade at the beginning of the season to justify trading Billups, and the guy is really average. Rondo is a top 5 point guard and an incredible defender for the next 12 years has has championship experience and was HUGE in the playoffs this year (as Brad Miller remembers vividly...or maybe he doesn't, hard to say). I'd give up Prince to upgrade from Stuckey to Rondo. But that's just me
#5
Dodgerblue15
06/23/09 07:18 PM
You should be happy about this Spurs trade. It means they are desperate. If they would have stayed pat, the Spurs would have been in line to sign someone like Chris Bosh (who lives in Texas) next off-season seeing as how only Parker and Duncan would have been on the payroll. With Jefferson, they've got $30 million tied up in a dude with an average 15.5 PER over the last three seasons. RJ makes them better, but I agree with At The Hive. This just goes to show how misleading your points per shot stat is. R Jeff could potentially be good for the Spurs, but he'll have to do a lot more than hit jump shots for them to be elite. Not saying it won't happen. Maybe wasting his time on losers like the Nets and the Bucks made RJ lackadaisical. Maybe he'll come out with a renewed hunger and sense of urgency.
BigIndian,
Again, have to agree with At the Hive, but I'd also like to add that Rajon Rondo looked super duper dope in this year's playoffs against the Bulls. He was also playing against a rookie. A rookie who scored a higher average than during the season (19.7 to 16.8) on a higher percentage (49 to 47) all against him. And while Rondo put up numbers that approached averaging a triple double in the conference semis, he shot 37 percent. Rondo's good, but with the inevitable contract pay raise coming along with his questionable attitude, Dumars is probably wiser to stick with Stuckey, who has one more year on his deal and won't command the same huge salary. Two things to remember here, first, Rondo's been really good playing with KG, Pierce and Allen, three future HOFers. He's stood out, but he's still been playing with three HOFers. Second, Stuckey had a bad season, but, when actually given time to play, was being asked to replace Chauncey Billups in only his second season. He had to contend with the malcontent-nature of Allen Iverson as well as Rip-I-ain't-coming-off-the-bench Hamilton.
For the record, being a genius doesn't mean doing what seems obvious.
westcoastslant.blogspot.com #6
Mark
06/23/09 08:01 PM
Richard Jefferson all star or not, if Pop drafts a ballboy, his team still seems to get better. He's almost infallible to a mere mortal like me.
Off topic, but re: DodgerBlue, I don't really buy 'Jesus' (it's biblical) or 'The Truth' being hall of famers. 'Future HOF' just seems to be thrown around like honorable mentions for players of this generation. Granted, my problem would be the induction process more than the actual players, but eh... Just my opinion that I had to chime in.
www.dogpile.com/ #7
Mark
06/23/09 08:04 PM
Oh, and sad day for me. Money Mike Miller seems to be on the verge of being traded to the Wiz. Not that this actually affects our standings really, haha.
www.dogpile.com/ #8
Andrea
06/23/09 09:33 PM
Bowen, Thomas, and Oberto's contracts must be expiring for the Bucks to get on board with this deal. While this makes the Spurs better offensively, I still think defensively is where they'll have issues.
The only legit teams that can at least make the WCF right now are the Lakers, the Blazers, and the Nuggets. Everyone else still has work to do. Spurs are just trying to get some younger pieces and put a solid run together. Even with this trade, I wouldn't call them contenders.
#9
bigindian15
06/23/09 09:48 PM
@Mark: more than Mike Miller, I'm more pissed that Foye is probably off the market now. Also, I think Ray Allen is a no doubt hall of famer. So is Paul Pierce.
Ray Allen: 9 time all star, 2nd all time in 3 pointers (will pass Reggie within 2 seasons), 34th all time scoring (to date), and apparently several "good guy" awards
Pierce: 7 time all star, finals MVP, Celtics all time 3rd leading scorer, etc.
@Dodgerblue: the Nets weren't losers when he was there. They made 2 finals and (if memory serves) made the playoffs every year he was there except his last.
Also, what exactly more does RJ have to do to make the Spurs contenders? He's replacing guys like Bowen and Udoka. All he has to do is nail threes, play good defense, and occasionally drive and score (all things he can do). He only needs to get like 15 ppg with Parker, Ginobili, and Duncan there, and if/when Manu goes down, he ups that to 19 ppg and they're good. The real question is gonna be his attitude going from the go-to-guy to a 4th option.
I'll concede that Rondo plays with 3 great players, but I'm not gonna say Derrick Rose's great play had anything to do with Rondo's defense. In 2 years, Rose will be the 2nd best PG next to CP, and this was a preview (now I sound like the media)
Also (not to pile on, I'm just argumentative I guess), I don't see it as a desperation move per se, more as a win-now move with Duncan getting older. Bosh and Duncan play the same position as F/C and have similar offensive games, so I'm not sure he would have fit in SA anyway...
#10
Mark
06/23/09 10:33 PM
bigindian: heh, for me it's always easier to see how good a player is after they're done (i.e. Michael Jordan). I know those accomplishments support their case, but I just see hall of fame to be THE quintessential best. I know, I'm just being a picky eater. Doesn't help that I'm one of those people who roots for under-appreciated players like A.C. Green... or the opposite extreme with Dennis Rodman haha
www.dogpile.com/ #11
Dodgerblue15
06/23/09 10:36 PM
@Mark,
You might not view them as Hall of Famers, but a lot of other people who are going to be voting to do believe them to be. They have the credentials as well. I agree with you that the NBA HOF is somewhat watered down, but HOF is HOF and both, according to basketball reference, have over 90 percent chance of making it. Either way, that's not really my point. My point is that Rondo was playing with KG (a HOFer for sure) and Pierce (top five small forward) and Jesus (top ten shooting guard).
@Big Indian
Honestly, I was just trying to shed a positive spin on the trade for Hornets fans. Truthfully though, you're right. Jefferson (a healthy motivated one that is) is exactly what the Spurs need. If they can stay healthy and sign Loannis Bourousis (or it's rumored possibly Marcin Gortat), then they'd have to be right there with the Lakers as favorites to take the West.
As for the Rondo trade thingee, you watched the Celtics Bulls series right? Rose was absolutely burning Rondo. I mean, Rondo was burning Rose too, but Rose is a rook in his first playoffs. Rondo won a championship already.
As for Rose's potential, I know this is a Hornets website, but Deron Williams, if not better than CP3, is certainly 1A. I don't know if Rose will be better than Williams or CP3. It will be fun to watch though.
Finally, Duncan plays center. Let's be honest. Especially now that the Spurs don't have any centers. He guards centers, he jumps. He's a center. Chris Bosh and Duncan together would be like revisiting Duncan/Robinson back in 1999. Yikes. But alas, not to happen thanks to RJ...
There! I found the silver lining for Hornets fans.
westcoastslant.blogspot.com #12
At the Hive
06/23/09 10:36 PM
Staying on the off topic (good topic, the HOF one), I gotta put RayRay in. Even if he was horrible at everything else- which he's not- you just have to induct the all time leader of a major statistic of any sport.
Pierce is just shy of the border, to me. Of course, I'm one of those people that doesn't put much stock in championships and much more in total, quantifiable performance. Pierce wasn't in the conversation two years ago, suddenly he gets two HOFers on his team, they win the title, and he's a lock. His performance is borderline to me.
And Mark: it's a sad day indeed. Those long golden locks and complementary rubberband.... WAS isn't worthy!!
www.atthehive.com #13
At the Hive
06/23/09 10:41 PM
@DodgerBlue Yeah, in the absolute sense, those 3 are in. No debate on what's actually gonna happen. And I still think D-Will is up there. Definitely not 1A, because the difference between him and Paul is so vast, statistically and observationally, offense and defense, but definitely #2. He didn't get talked about much this year, but he should be even better next.
As far as Rose, I don't think he'll reach Paul's peak (which even we don't yet know). Paul's rookie season simply blows away Rose's, and CP brought the defense in Year 1 (worst movie ever) itself. But it def will be fun to watch.
www.atthehive.com #14
chefcdb
06/24/09 01:05 AM
I'm not as worried about this trade. For one it gets Bruce Bowen and his dirty karate away from us, which means better shots for our wings should we meet in the playoffs. For two, it may be interesting to see how Ginobili, Roger Mason, Jr and RJ share the floor -- perhaps Mason will continue to run 2nd team point guard, but there seems to be a glut of the same kind of hybrid 2/3 shooter on the Spurs, especially including Bonner (who is chicken soup for the soul of David West, cuz Bonner cannot guard DX at all), who is a catch & shoot guy primarily. I guess if Manu is hurt and sketchy to become the same terror he was, then the Spurs need redundancy on the wings.
For 3, perhaps Jefferson recaptures his athleticism, but he's been hurt and dinged up almost as much as Ginobili or Peja lately. One would think RJ would be an upgrade on Michael Finley, but he's facing a new situation to be called upon to be clutch while not the top two option on his team. It's just as possible that Jefferson and Ginobili miss plenty of games next season, even during the same stretches, as it is for them to become a cohesive, lethal tandem to help Parker & Duncan.
It's potentially a good trade for the Spurs. They get younger and have more scoring, but lose a savvy vet like Kurt Thomas who saved Timmy some mileage last year. Mason did a great job for the Spurs during the regular season, but he faded in the playoffs. To me, it's a crapshoot for the Spurs. On paper it seems pretty good, but will RJ's body be able to shake off his nagging injuries to boldly contribute, and will he be able to play D like Popovich wants?
In the end, what would I feel like if the Hornets had made a similar package to get RJ? I would feel, if Peja was part of the trade, that it would favor the Hornets, but only to a small degree. The thing I would like is that it gives the Spurs some extra roster space, too, and if we cleared out players like Devin Brown and Hilton in the same Peja package to get RJ, I'd be happy to shake up our roster, but realizing we have salary cap restraints that means more Sean Marks and some other developmental guard -- so ho hum.
My two cents on HOF. I wasn't aware there was an NBA HOF. It's pretty much Springfield or bust. I think Ray Allen is every bit as close to automatic as KG. Amazing shooter, dedicated baller, and class act. Great college player, too. Paul Pierce is a closer call, but if his career numbers and winning percentage stays high, he deserves to be in the discussion. At the same time while he couldn't carry the Celtics to the top by himself (neither could KG do it for the T-Wolves...), he's never been afraid to be the guy who takes the pressure situation upon his shoulders. Pierce is undoubtedly a superstar in the NBA at the least; even when the Celtics were crappy he played the game the right way. Plus, it is a little amazing he survived getting stabbed/attacked, and playing for a big market team with the history of the Celtics can only help his shot at HOF.
I think it's not so easy for NBA guys to get HOF. I remember Dominique Wilkins wasn't first ballot, and that truly surprised me. Maybe Ray Allen gets the same treatment as "The Human Highlight Reel" and waits it out an extra year, but he is worthy IMHO, whether he catches Reggie or not.
www.greengoddessnola.com #15
Dodgerblue15
06/24/09 02:14 AM
@chefcdb,
Well, RJ might have been dinged up, but he's played all 164 games the past two seasons. So, no, in that sense, he's nothing like Ginobili and Peja. Neither of whom have made it all the way through an entire season. Peja was close once, missing 82 by one game, but that was six seasons ago and since he hasn't come close. Manu's NEVER been close. RJ's actually played all 82 three times and 80 once. So, he's been pretty durable, no thanks to Chauncey Billups.
Ur right. There's no NBA HOF. There should be. But there's not. A lot of guys are in the basketball HOF that probably don't seem like they deserve it, especially if we're talking about absolute best of the best. But as far as numbers, Pierce has them. Has them even a little more than Ray Allen in terms of career averages. While I think Pierce is a HOF caliber player (meaning he has the numbers), he'd need to win another ring for him to be a shoo in. I, personally, am wary to rely so heavily on numbers which leads me to my next topic that will get all kinds of flack on this site...
@At the Hive
I think Deron Williams is right there with Paul. I think he does as much creating on offense, can be a tougher matchup on one-on-one defense, and is a more versatile (though perhaps not as efficient) scorer than Paul. He's got a better shot and way more reliable range. Paul creates havoc on defense with his uncanny ability to come up with balls, always takes the right shot and has a money mid-range game, but guys can shoot over him and he's not great at shooting long jumpers and threes off the dribble.
I'd still say Paul has the edge, but it's really hard for me to say Paul is waaaay better. It's like the Olajuwon-Shaq example. Shaq's numbers are more efficient than Hakeem's...more WS, better PER, etc., but to me, Hakeem was the vastly superior player. There's plenty of examples like that, like how Larry Bird has a worse PER, TS% and WS% than Dirk Nowitzki. These are just two examples that lead me to believe that while numbers and advanced stats can paint a certain picture for us, to rely so heavily on them is unwise. Much like the points per shot stat Ryan so openly throws out there.
westcoastslant.blogspot.com #16
Mark
06/24/09 02:59 PM
Dodger: hehe I know that wasn't your point, but I agreed with most of your other points and didn't have anything new to offer. Although players gain HOF momentum over time, I never remembered 'Jesus' nor Pierce as HOF locks, but now that they've won a 'chip (with KG no less), people no longer hesitate anointing them. Statistically they're definitely up for nomination, but I'm still unconvinced (makes no difference since I have no ballot!). Plus, while not completely of Pierce's fault, do you guys remember Doc Rivers seemingly intentional losing of games at the end of 06-07 season? Same mentality I have with the Bees (and elementary school kids). I don't care if you suck, if you give effort, I'm proud of the team, win or loss. Unfortunately, it works the other way around.
And with D-Wil, I agree he's up with CP, but the biggest difference is that the old NOLA franchise consists of superior players and coaching. While that may mean CP's stats are 'inflated', it also means CP can almost single-handedly carry a team; unknown whether D-Wil has that capacity.
Hive: That mane+headband combo earns him 'sexy mascot' status. Did I say sexy? I meant super sexy. CP needs to get on point haha
www.dogpile.com/ #17
bigindian15
06/24/09 04:15 PM
@Dodgerblue: I completely agree with you on Paul and D Will. They are 1 and 1A. My point is that within 2 years, Rose will be 1A and Williams will be 1B or 2, if that makes sense
@chef: I really don't know which Richard Jefferson you've been watching. 82 games each of the past 2 years. He might not be quite as athletic as he used to be in the finals because he's about 8 years older, but he's still not exactly Ilgauskas levels of non-athleticism. He's athletic enough to guard pretty much any sf in the league except maybe Rudy Gay (off the top of my head)
Also, dunno if you remember this, but Manu played backup pg to Tony Parker for a couple years. So him, Mason, and Jefferson would probably work pretty well. Manu is one of those guys who would be great at any position if he put enough time in, like how they say if Kobe wanted to play point guard, he would've been the best pg in the league.
About Bruce Bowen and his "dirty karate" (my favorite phrase of the year): he was already losing minutes to guys like Ime Udoka. He's 38 years old. He's not that much of a threat anymore. Also, the Bucks will probably cut him and he'll re-sign with the Spurs, so...yeah
I don't think the Spurs will have any trouble finding another big to take pressure off Tim Duncan. They always lose serviceable big men, then replace them with other serviceable big men. They've won championships with Rasho and Oberto starting for god's sake...
#18
joe
06/24/09 04:36 PM
everyone see the warriors-hawks trade?? If the hawks can get crawford for law and claxton (2 expiring contracts), couldnt we have gotten him with armstrong and daniels?? This goes back to the point about how we dont really try and make the home run deal and its starting to make me a bit angry with the teams management
#19
Dodgerblue15
06/24/09 04:46 PM
@Mark
While I agree that the overall talent level on the Jazz is better one through 12 (I mean, Nola's bench blows), I wouldn't go as far as saying the Jazz have "superior" talent. You think Boozer is way better than West? Offensively, maybe. Rebounding for sure. But defense? Not even close. You think Okur is superior to Chandler? Again, offensively, yes, but defensively? No way. Kirilenko is like the white version of Lamar Odom. Oodles of talent in a lanky body, but lacks a consistent J, and lacks a consistent, well, consistency. In fact, he's JuJu-esque in that they both are superior defensively but like to jack up ill-advised jumpers. That being said, the "talent" comparison would be with Peja and again, we have that offensive/defensive dichotomy. It's hard to say who is "superior." Ronnie Brewer versus Posey? Brewer gets lots of steals and finishes thunderous dunks, but Posey wins championships. Again, hard to tell, though I'd give the edge to Posey. Kyle Korver or Mo Pete? I'd pick a healthy Mo just cuz he can actually stay in front of players. The trump card in the talent department for the Jazz is Paul Milsap who is three times the player Hilton Armstrong could ever hope to become (okay, that's an exaggeration).
But to be honest, I think Milsap is overrated. He's a product of advanced statistics telling us that per minute, he's one of the best power forwards out there. The only problem is those per minute numbers are based on minutes he's never actually played. When he started to get those minutes, he was dope for a month, then battled injuries the rest of the year and his production tapered way off.
Ronnie Price, CJ Miles, Matt Harpring (what's left of him), and even Jarron Collins trump whatever the bugs are passing as a bench, but it's not like these guys see major minutes with either Paul or Williams. So, overall talent, yes, the Jazz are (or were, depends on what they do this offseason) one of the deepest teams, but as far as superior talent? I think the edge would have to go to the Bugs.
And as for better coach, sometimes we get so caught up in what is wrong with what we have, that we forget how much is right. Answer this question. Of the two coaches, which coach took his team to the finals twice with two HOF/top 50 players of all time and which coach took his team twice with only one who might not make the top 50 if it were redone today?
Superior is in the eye of the beholder.
westcoastslant.blogspot.com #20
Dodgerblue15
06/24/09 04:54 PM
@Joe
Crawford is a pretty good get for the Hawks (though he can't defend a lick), who need another offensive player who can create for himself (and occasionally for others) but, not really seeing how he'd fit in with the Hornets. Crawford needs the ball in his hands to be effective, he's not the best spot up shooter. And I'm pretty sure ball domination and offense creation is reserved for one player only on NOLA. Also, I'd be extremely cautious of wanting Hornets management to do Hawks management-type things.
westcoastslant.blogspot.com #21
joe
06/24/09 05:25 PM
@ DodgerBlue : I understand that crawford wouldnt necessarily fit with us, but its just that when big names are on the market for low prices (id swap bowen/oberto/thomas for jefferson anyday no matter what the worries) we never see the hornets mentioned as possible options, we only see the hornets mentioned as teams willing to give up those big pieces, and i would just like something to be excited about besides the 21st pick and the prospect of the team being fully healthy, i just dont want the hornets to bail on the current roster and to see that maybe one plyer here or there could really push us to the championship level team that all teams should aspire to be
#22
BeesGivingEffort
06/24/09 05:41 PM
I am so tired of this CP3 and D-Will nonsense. Honestly telling yourself that the Jazz aren't better? They went 8-5 when D-Will didn't suit up this year. I can't imagine a stretch of games for the Hornets where they could even go 5-8 without Chris Paul. It's no contest. The Jazz have everything the Hornets have and better. 3 Point Shooting? Check. In fact, hey our center shoots the 3 ball ridiculously well. Boozer is David West. Kirilenko plays better D than Peja and actually can drive the ball to the hoop. Ronnie Brewer can take over quarters by himself. It's a plain silly argument and the only reason it's an argument is because the Jazz fans are all hot and bothered that they messed up and actually passed on Chris Paul and that we thank them every day for their misfortune every other day during the months of November-June (hopefully). Oh and btw, comparing Byron Scott to Jerry Sloan is a joke. J-Kidd, R-Jeff, and K-Mart in their prime in one of the crappiest conferences in pro sports history does not mean Byron is a better coach. Jerry Sloan finds ways to win yearly with whatever team is thrown his way and is regarded as one of the brightest minds in NBA history. Look at Utah's ball movement and their offensive scheme and look at ours. Hell, look at how Byron Scott can't fathom a game plan that even touches the Jazz in head to head matches.
I am sorry. Deron Williams is not 1A and as long as CP3 stays healthy he never will be.
#23
bigindian15
06/24/09 05:44 PM
@Dodgerblue: I'm not saying Boozer is Tim Duncan or anything, but if you think West is a superior defender, you've clearly never watched him play. The fact that West is a horrible defender is one of the best kept secrets in the league. Well, it's not that he's bad, it's that he doesn't give a crap. He doesn't move his feet and he doesn't jump. And I don't think he boxes out ever. So...yeah
#24
bigindian15
06/24/09 05:45 PM
The only reason I'm kinda bummed about the Crawford trade is that now Maggette is probably off the market
#25
joe
06/24/09 05:52 PM
really the only warrior that i would look to try and trade for would be Ronny Turiaf and i would think we could get him if we really wanted him. He would be a great fit, an energetic big that rebounds and blocks shots and just plays with energy that alot of hornets bigs lack
#26
Dodgerblue15
06/24/09 06:08 PM
@Joe
I hear you. But you have to realize that the Spurs organization is a special organization. They have made wise investments and doled out reasonable contracts over the past decade in a well-planned, meticulously thought-out way that has left them with a lot of flexibility. No other team out there could do what the Spurs did, because no other team is set up in that way.
Never is such a strong word. Two seasons ago, you were major players signing Peja and Mo Pete and extending Chandler and West. You have to give credit to Jeff Bower and George Shinn for going out and spending the money on a team they believed could contend...Peja, Chandler, West and Paul. They even over spent to get James Posey last off season. Unfortunately, things didn't go according to plan, so now they are tied up with big, unmovable contracts amidst a horribly slumping economy. The last thing they need to do is throw what few bargaining chips they have on a band aid that will cost them more money down the road. Giving up both of the Bugs expiring contracts to get a Jamal Crawford would be a horrible idea. Be glad Hornets management didn't do anything. I'm a Lakers fans and even we had to go through the post-Magic 90s slump and the two years of Kobe and scrubs Lakers. So, rebuilding is a tough process. At least Paul's only 23.
westcoastslant.blogspot.com #27
Caleb462
06/24/09 06:14 PM
"The fact that West is a horrible defender is one of the best kept secrets in the league." I think West is an adequate one-on-one defender. Atleast, he generally holds his own. His weakness is help defense - where he's atrocious. I don't know if its because he "doesn't care," as you say - because West seems like a pretty driven hard-working guy to me, yet a lot of layups and dunks get through because West was late or not even there... it's puzzling. And he's definitely not the rebounder he *could* be... that in fact could be effort, I'm not sure.
As for all this other stuff - Jefferson is not an all-star talent these days, but he's a very solid piece. And at his best he is a borderline all-star (18/19 PER). I do think this helps the Spurs a lot... if everyone is healthy they will be a very strong offensive team.
Re: Rondo being traded. What puzzles me is not Detroit turning this down but Boston attempting it. Rondo is one of the best rebounding points in the NBA, arguably the best defensive point guard in the NBA, a very solid playmaker, an improving shooter and along with Chris Paul one of the few guards who scores at a 50% clip. He was also triple-double machine in the playoffs, and he's only getting better. He was a big part of why Boston stayed strong this year even with all the health problems. Shame on you Danny Ainge.
neworleansbasketball.blogspot.com #28
Dodgerblue15
06/24/09 06:28 PM
@HornetsGon,
Did I say the Jazz weren't better? I said they're deeper. But superior talent? It's not that easy. Just because a team can score doesn't make them better. Defense wins championships, and when healthy, the Bugs are a vastly superior defensive team to the Jazz.
I mean, you all thought the Hornets were going to be Western Conference champs this year. How is that possible if the Jazz, who weren't even in the top four Western Conference contenders in terms of talent and depth, have sooooo much more talent than the Hornets? It's the same Lebron crap that Cavs fans spew off. Lebron makes his teammates better until they suck and then it's their fault. CP3 makes his teammates better until they suck and then it's their fault. You can't have it both ways. It's one or the other.
For the record, the Jazz didn't mess up. Like you said, the Jazz play a certain style of basketball, one Williams runs to perfection. You put Paul in that same situation, and he isn't putting up the same numbers he does on this team. He could do it, no doubt about it, but he's not 30 PER man on that Jazz team. Chris Paul is allowed the freedom to do what he does on the Hornets. And that's a credit to Byron Scott as much as it's against him.
As for Scott, in the two years the Nets went to the finals, they were the best defensive team in the league. Two years ago when the Hornets went to the conference semis, they were the 7th best defensive team. Byron isn't the greatest coach, but irregardless of what era, it's really rare for any coach to make back-to-back finals appearances...especially with Kerry Kittles as your third best offensive option. Byron teaches defense, much like Mike Brown. It's too bad you can't see the value in the aspect of basketball that wins championships.
@BigIndian
Not saying West is a great defender, but he's better than matador Boozer. And, be thankful Maggette is off the table. If he's sitting behind the bench in a designer suit, he's driving to the hoop with his head down forcing up shots while three teammates stand wide open. Not worth the money, the injured time off, or the headache. Trust me. Watched him for his whole Clipper tenure.
westcoastslant.blogspot.com #29
Mark
06/24/09 06:29 PM
Dodger: I see your point. They're well founded, but I suppose superior was a bit of a superlative, and rather I meant their players have greater general output/productivity, like where they're maximizing different talents. Our squad spreads the floor very well, but other than that there's no real capacity with low-post, mid-range, nor slashing. We felt stagnant and primitive in some games this season. The Jazz have a better distribution of talents (like HornetsGoneSoft said, Okur can hit the three. Unorthodox but strangely effective) and combined with a better coach (I won't budge here)... it just feels they're a stronger match-up for most teams.
and Devin Brown. I believe you forgot to mention him (heh heh heh).
www.dogpile.com/ #30
Caleb462
06/24/09 06:31 PM
And finally... this is for Ryan primarily. Points per shot. I've been thinking about this stat for a while and its a stat that kind of bothers me. As a measure of efficieny it has a serious weakness. It rewards players for made free throws but does not punish them for missed free throws. Free throws are a use of a possesion just as a field goal attempt is. For instance... let's say Player A has 200 points on 150 shots, 50 of his points coming from made free throws - where he was 50/60. Okay let's say Player B also has 200 points on 150 shots, 50 of them coming from made free throws as well - where he was 50/100. These players will have the same PPS, but obviously Player A was more efficient. The other way to calculate PPS (the way Dave Berri does it for instance) is to calculate it as points per FGA, but I don't really like that method either. I think free throw attempts should be counted as "shots." Because really they are shots... just 1-pt shots as opposed to 2-pt or 3-pt shots. Thoughts?
On another note... I have to respond to Dodgerblue on this: "He's got a better shot and way more reliable range." Really? From mid-range Paul shot 48% this year on 9 attempts per game. Williams shot 46% on 6 attempts per game. (From 82games.com) From three Paul shot 36% on 176 attempts. Williams shot just 31% this year on 226 attempts. How exactly does that equate to Williams having a better shot and more reliable range. In fact I'd say Williams' range is quite inconsistent. Williams was a lights-out shooter his rookie year at 41%, but dropped all the way down to 32% his soph year. Then he was back up to just under 40% in 07-08 before dropping back to 31% this season. Paul on the other hand has been a 35-37% shooter from three for the last three seasons.
Okay, I think I've typed enough for now.
neworleansbasketball.blogspot.com #31
Dodgerblue15
06/24/09 06:31 PM
@caleb
Rondo's apparently "uncoachable" and butted heads with Doc and isn't well-liked in the locker room. Plus, he's going to want a huuuge pay raise next year.
westcoastslant.blogspot.com #32
Caleb462
06/24/09 06:35 PM
Okay I have to respond to this too!
"You put Paul in that same situation, and he isn't putting up the same numbers he does on this team. He could do it, no doubt about it, but he's not 30 PER man on that Jazz team. Chris Paul is allowed the freedom to do what he does on the Hornets. And that's a credit to Byron Scott as much as it's against him."
I wouldn't be so sure about that at all. I think you might see a small decrease in per-game stats, but really... who knows? I don't like these arguments because its pure conjecture. I mean by the same token the Hornets are one of the slowest teams in the league while the Jazz are one of the faster-paced. On the Hornets CP has *less* possessions to work with while Williams has more on the Jazz.
neworleansbasketball.blogspot.com #33
Dodgerblue15
06/24/09 06:36 PM
@caleb
From what I've seen (15 or so Hornets games, 15 or so Jazz games) Paul gets most of his threes on spot ups. Deron gets a lot of his off the dribble. You got a stat for that one? Like I said, Paul is more efficient with his scoring, that's why the stats favor him. But efficiency doesn't always equal winning. Just ask Jose calderon.
westcoastslant.blogspot.com #34
Dodgerblue15
06/24/09 06:40 PM
@Caleb,
The Jazz led the league in assists. The Hornets were 28 out of 30 teams. The system the Jazz runs calls for a lot of passing, which means faster pacing and a much better offensive efficiency and more equal opportunity. Even still, Williams averaged 11 dimes. I'd take team efficiency over single player efficiency any day. That being said, the Jazz can't play a lick of defense, whereas a healthy Hornets squad most certainly can. So, Byron can coach defense, and Sloan can coach offense and they both lack the opposite quality. If you created Byron Sloan, then they'd be the perfect coach.
westcoastslant.blogspot.com #35
Dodgerblue15
06/24/09 06:42 PM
@Caleb
last comment for today, i agree with you 100 percent on ur points per shot questions. Simplified stats are never a good indicator of anything complex.
westcoastslant.blogspot.com #36
Caleb462
06/24/09 06:44 PM
I'm not sure why that matters, and I'm not even sure I agree with it. Williams is slightly better at taking threes off the dribble? Okay, maybe... maybe not. Fact is his percentages are inconsistent and he didn't shoot the three as well as Paul did this year. So to say he has more reliable range is simply incorrect.
Efficieny doesn't always equal winning? Hmm... no, but scoring points while using the least amount of possesions is in fact the best method of winning. So efficiency is indeed vitally important.
neworleansbasketball.blogspot.com #37
Dodgerblue15
06/24/09 06:47 PM
so is getting stops...and limiting the other team from scoring. Jazz are one of the top teams in offensive efficiency but can't win because they can't stop anybody. The Bugs were a better defensive team, but couldn't win because they couldn't score efficiently enough. And round and round we go.
westcoastslant.blogspot.com #38
Ryan Schwan
06/24/09 06:47 PM
Williams can't hold a candle to Paul. The only stats he's ever, ever had an advantage over Paul was his three-point shooting and wins. His defensive rep has always been based on his physical measurements - and never reality. The Jazz have consistenly been an all-offense no-defense team since he was there, and his personal numbers are weak.
Deron Williams is the second best point guard in the league behind Paul - but the comparison is like saying Danny Granger is the second best Small Forward in the league . . . behind LeBron James.
As for points per shot, Caleb, I've never said it was a perfect statistic - it's just very easy to calculate, and is sufficient to make my point. Given your example, if Player A and Player B are both generating more than 1.3 Points per shot on more than a dozen shots, then you WANT them with the ball in their hands, because they are both elite scorers in the NBA.
The measure is arbitrary, but any number is when you decide to classify someone as an 'A' or a 'B' instead of a true number. Is Richard Jefferson and his 15 shots per game at 1.32 points per shot better than Ben Gordon who scored 1.29 points per shot on 16 shots a game? No, not really. But Gordon was left off the list and Jefferson wasn't.
Berri doesn't actually use shots per FGA. He gives people points for being better than average at the various categories - and they include scoring per 48, FG%, FT% and FTA.
www.hornets247.com #39
Mark
06/24/09 06:54 PM
Ryan: not really addressing D-Wil, but the Jazz as a whole are a bunch of physical thugs (with added flopping bonus). No sarcasm, but intimidation counts as a defensive scheme to an extent, does it not?
www.dogpile.com/ #40
Ryan Schwan
06/24/09 07:01 PM
It's a defensive scheme, yes. But its results that matter, and their physical brand of defense gives them a pretty weak defensive efficiency for a good team.
Every team has a scheme - half don't work. :)
www.hornets247.com #41
Dodgerblue15
06/24/09 07:15 PM
@Ryan
I can't help but respond. We can all agree that the point guard, especially in the cases of Deron and Paul, is the motor to the offense, while centers (and every once in awhile small forwards) usually are the backbone to defenses. This being the case, up until his this season where Deron was injured, he has taken the Jazz from 22 in offensive efficiency (the year before he got there), to 16, to 4 to 1 in 2008. This year the Jazz were 8, but made a strong push towards the end of the middle of the season after Deron got right. Meanwhile, the Hornets went from 30 in offensive efficiency the year before Paul, to 19, to 23, to 5 to 12. Look, I'm not saying this proves Deron is just as good as Paul, but if basketball is a team game, we have to look at team accomplishments. For the Jazz to first, fourth and eighth best in offensive efficiency during the last three years as opposed to Paul's 23, 5, and 12, says a lot about Deron's impact and should show, at the last, that individual numbers should not be the end all, be all sign of which players is better than the other. Like you said, Deron's had more success in the playoffs and in head-to-head matchups--team success. You can say that he's got better teammates or you can say Deron makes his teammates better. Nobody was talking about West or Boozer as all-stars until they met up with Paul and Willams. Nobody was considering Chandler or Okur all-stars until they met up with Paul and Williams. It's all perspective.
Again, Paul's individual numbers are way better than Williams, but DWill has much better team numbers. Team, as in MJ didn't win a championship by himself no matter what Chris Broussard would have you believe.
westcoastslant.blogspot.com #42
bigindian15
06/24/09 07:45 PM
@Dodgerblue: "he's driving to the hoop with his head down forcing up shots while three teammates stand wide open."
We already have that hogging minutes in Devin Brown. At least Maggette makes the shots or draws free throws lol
I'm not going to bother entering the whole CP vs. D Will debate. I don't think the difference is QUITE as big as a lot of people here, but I will saw that CP is pretty clearly superior. I'd say the difference small enough and ambiguous enough that each fanbase can make a legit (kinda) argument that their guy is better, and the Jazz fans are only slightly wrong :P
But, we can all at least agree that Williams is really good and definitely should have been an all star by now
#43
Ryan Schwan
06/24/09 10:44 PM
Sorry, Dodger. In the same post you posit we must give credit to Deron Williams for his teams good numbers and consider him very close to Paul as a result. Then you eloquently make the point that MJ didn't win without good teammates.
So Deron Williams isn't winning and he HAS good teammates.
Paul is winning almost as much WITHOUT good teammates.
Therefore . . . Deron is close to Paul?
I'll stick with my stance about Paul being head and shoulders above Deron.
www.hornets247.com #44
Dodgerblue15
06/24/09 11:41 PM
Ryan
My point is that basketball is a team game and to credit Paul with all of the Hornets success and then to say that Deron Williams success is because he has superior teammates is ridiculous to the point of ignorance.
Tell me all about what the stats say once the NBA comes up with numbers for successful screens set, or picks that lead to a bucket, or hockey assists or turnovers forced, or defensive assignments made or double teams drawn, or successful box outs or successful "shows" as the help defender, etc. etc. Basketball is too complex to break it down into points, rebounds and assists. And no matter what you or Berri or even Hollinger say, all of the advanced numbers are formulas based on the typical boxscore, because that's all we've had.
How can you tell me that Memo Okur is more talented then Tyson Chandler because he can shoot threes? Chandler is excellent at setting picks that help get CP wide open. He's also excellent at rolling and finding openings in the defense and then elevating for dunks. None of those thing show up in win shares or PER, but they are vitally important to success for an NBA team, especially the Hornets.
The early 2000s Sacramento Kings were a great offensive team because Webber and Divac could pass and because Divac was a master at setting picks (albeit moving ones). Anderson Verajao does thousands of things that never show up in the boxscore or in win shares or in plus/minus, but all of those things greatly help influence who wins the game. You can't tell me that CP3 is responsible for all of his team's success, then blame his teammates when the Hornets fail. Just like you can't tell me that Deron Williams, who has orchestrated one of the best, most consistent offenses in the league over the past three years is only able to do so because he has superior players to Paul. It's a double standard that I know you hold against Kobe as well.
Numbers tell part of the story, but in basketball, a fluid, free-flowing game that also has set plays and defensive assignments, and an infinite amount of variables from coaches to playing styles to the way refs call the game...that basketball can't be quantified in numbers. I don't care who's better between Paul and Williams. They are both fantastic point guards. But to make a statement that "Paul is head and shoulders above Deron" smells of homerism and someone who just doesn't fully understand the intricacies of basketball.
I'm not claiming to fully understand either. All I'm saying is we come to this site, or I was coming to this site, for in depth analysis of the Hornets. When you continue to come up with ways to simplify and quantify the sport I love, it ruins your otherwise insightful commentary. I've been coming on here to challenge you to pick up your game. But so far, you haven't shown me anything insightful to the comments I make. You should be looking for ways to expound on the intricacies that take part on the court, not settling for points per shot because "it's just very easy to calculate, and is sufficient to make [your] point."
I thought I had found a site that was good, but looks like I'll have to keep looking. Good luck with the simplifying of basketball...
westcoastslant.blogspot.com #45
Niall Doherty
06/25/09 07:33 AM
Lots of Hornets draft and trade talk today. Catch and comment on it all in our News and Lagniappe sections:
http://www.hornets247.com/news
http://www.hornets247.com/news/lagniappe
Apparently we were close to sending Chandler to Cleveland, but Phoenix gave them a better offer.
www.ndoherty.com #46
Dmon3k
06/25/09 07:44 AM
If all we would have gotten for Chandler is Ben Wallace and Sasha, then I'm glad Phoenix beat us out
#47
Ryan Schwan
06/25/09 08:59 AM
Honestly, Dmon3k, I'm hoping we get ANYTHING for Chandler.
www.hornets247.com #48
bigindian15
06/25/09 10:22 AM
@Dmon: Wallace makes like 3 mil more than Tyson, so that trade wouldn't have worked. I like to think it would have been Tyson and Mo Pete for Sasha and Wallace...even though that's probably not true lol
Ok, with Shaq gone, here's my next wish: something that involves a 3 way trade between us, Houston and Phoenix: West to Phoenix, Stoudemire to Houston, we dump our crap salaries and pick up Knee Mac and Carl Landry. Even though both of them say no, I can dream, right?
#49
bigindian15
06/25/09 10:23 AM
By the way, can we have a moment of silence for Steve Kerr's career as a GM? At least maybe now he will come back to TNT and kick Reggie Miller out
#50
Caleb462
06/25/09 12:57 PM
"Berri doesn't actually use shots per FGA." When discussing players he usually has points per shot as a stat on his chart. Only he removes made free throws from the equation. It's points minus made free throws/FGA. That's what I meant to say... didn't express it well.
Anyway... I wasn't trying to criticize your use of points per shot, I just wanted to get your thoughts on the weaknesses that it has since I never hear anyone discuss that aspect of it. I just think it would be better if free throws were actually considered "shots."
neworleansbasketball.blogspot.com #51
Caleb462
06/25/09 01:09 PM
"You can't tell me that CP3 is responsible for all of his team's success, then blame his teammates when the Hornets fail."
Actually I don't see why not. CP is the best player on his team by miles and miles and miles. He has some solid pieces around him, but the Hornets have huge holes... particularly when injuries come into play. Having a player like CP guarantees a certain amount of success, but not enough. Blaming CP's teammates, or rather his lack of teammates, is in fact the perfectly logical thing to do when the Hornets fail.
" Just like you can't tell me that Deron Williams, who has orchestrated one of the best, most consistent offenses in the league over the past three years is only able to do so because he has superior players to Paul."
Again, why not? Orchestrating an effective and consistent offense requires a talented offensive squad, and that's exactly what Williams has. Williams is able to do so because he's a good point guard, yes, but also because overall he does have superior offensive players to Paul. That's an obvious fact. I don't see why you object to this.
And while I agree that stats aren't the end all be all and there's things that stats can't measure, or don't yet measure.... they are the best way we have to analyze basketball. And the stats, along with observation, tell most of us that Paul is simply on a different playing field than Williams. Williams will always be considered a great PG and will probably be one of the better players of his generation. Paul has a chance to go down as the *greatest* PG... there's the difference.
neworleansbasketball.blogspot.com #52
urgmasdaughter
06/25/09 03:05 PM
Niall posted this earlier:
"An excerpt from Cory Elfrink at RotoTimes.com:
Ideal Situation: I have to think the Hornets will make a trade this summer (they would gladly shed Stojakovic, but no one will gamble on him and his contract). As previously mentioned, there are a number of scenarios and ideally they could land J. O'Neal in return for Chandler and Daniels (the Heat need another point guard unless they plan to use Wade there). O'Neal has the second largest expiring contract and he would be able to replace Chandler in the middle. They may also shop Posey, but his value is not very high following an injury-riddled season. Hopefully Eric Maynor, Ty Lawson, or Jeff Teague is around at the 21st pick, with Maynor being the ideal option. Finally, they would be wise to add a power forward, and Wilcox may offer the best mix of age, power, and price tag."
Does anyone know if there is any REAL truth to this?!? I love the Bosh trade more but I think this J O'Neal trade would be great for us too if it's true...
#53
bigindian15
06/25/09 04:19 PM
@vandalfan: I would love that trade too. Jermaine O'Neal is better offensively and people seem to forget that he was a dominant defender in his prime, better than even Chandler at his peak (so far). I think that works well for the Heat too, because Chandler would be younger and be able to grow with that team. Then again, his contract runs a year longer if he exercised his option, so they might not wanna take on salary for 2010 to help re-sign D Wade or possibly D Wade and Bosh
Ok, so now Vince Carter is being traded to the Magic. This is frickin ridiculous. Is every good player except for Kobe and LeBron gonna be traded today?? Then again, I hate this trade, because Hedo is what made the Magic go, and with VC there, they can't re-sign Hedo just because that's a way crowded offense. Then again, a Vince-Kobe finals would be baller if they make it next year (I mean, a Vince-CP finals :D)
I'm holding out hopes that the Knicks do something really stupid. I know Donnie Walsh is in charge now, but I mean, there's a hangover right? There's a rumor that they're interested in Gerald Henderson, which means that Jonny Flynn could fall to the Pacers, causing Blair to fall to us, assuming someone bombs Chicago in the next 5 hours. Then again, it's much more likely that Charlotte (Jordan) will do something stupid like pick Mullens and make him Jordan's new pet project.
Apparently all is quiet on the Tyson front (Chandler, not Iron Mike). Calm before the storm?
#54
BeesGivingEffort
06/25/09 04:40 PM
Trying to challenge our moderator to taller heights as a basketball journalist? Seriously, get over yourself. You come in here bringing the Deron Williams vs Chris Paul crap right to our front door and it's a stupid argument. The fact that people have to COMPARE D-Will to Chris Paul is in and of itself proof that most people don't put him on the same playing field. I have yet to see a single article about how Deron Williams could be the best PG to ever play the game, statistically or otherwise. You back up your arguments with crappy logic that people have statistically already pointed out the holes in. Than you want to come in and act like your the savior of our board and bring the board to new heights and call Ryan out? Move on. Peace out. We won't miss you.
#55