NBA Title Teams and Opening Night

On opening night, the two presumptive favorites, Brooklyn and the Lakers, started the season with resounding thuds.  The Nets were easily handled by that Bucks, before bouncing back with a nice win in Philly.  The Lakers, on the other hand, were beaten by Golden State and then were steamrolled by Phoenix to start out 0-2. 

These results got me wondering whether winning on opening night has any relationship to winning a title.  How worrisome is a losing start to eventual teas?  Of course it seems absurd to assume any single game should matter enough to mean anything but let’s dive in and see how the eventual title team did on opening night.  We limited the inquiry to teams since the NBA expanded to eight playoff teams per conference in 1983-84.  Here are the results:

1983-84 Celtics: Lost to Detroit 121-127

1984-85 Lakers: Lost to Spurs 112-113

1985-86 Celtics: Lost to Nets 109-113

1986-87 Lakers: Lost to Rockets 102-112

1987-88 Lakers: Beat Sonics 113-109

1988-89 Pistons: Beat Bulls 107-94

1989-90 Pistons: Beat Knicks 106-103

1990-91 Bulls: Lost to Sixers 116-124

1991-92 Bulls: Beat Sixers 110-90

1992-93 Bulls: Beat Cavs 101-96

1993-94 Rockets: Beat Nets 110-88

1994-95 Rockets: Beat Nets 90-86

1995-96 Bulls: Beat Hornets 105-91

1996-97 Bulls: Beat Celtics 107-98

1997-98 Bulls: Lost to Celtics 85-92

1998-99 Spurs: Beat Kings 101-83

1999-00 Lakers: Beat Jazz 91-84

2000-01 Lakers: Beat Blazers 96-86

2001-02 Lakers:  Beat Blazers 98-87

2002-03 Spurs: Beat Lakers 87-82

2003-04 Pistons: Lost to Pacers 87-89

2004-05 Spurs: Beat Kings 101-85

2005-06 Heat: Beat Grizzlies 97-78

2006-07 Spurs: Beat Mavs 97-91

2007-08 Celtics: Beat Wizards 103-83

2008-09 Lakers: Beat Blazers 96-76

2009-10 Lakers: Beat Clippers 99-92

2010-11 Mavs: Beat Bobcats 101-86

2011-12 Heat: Beat Mavs 105-94

2012-13 Heat: Beat Celtics 120-107

2013-14 Spurs: Beat Grizzlies 101-94

2014-15 Warriors: Beat Kings 95-77

2015-16 Cavs: Lost to Bulls 95-97

2016-17 Warriors: Lost to Spurs 100-129

2017-18 Warriors: Lost to Rockets 121-122

2018-19 Raptors: Beat Cavs 116-104

2019-20 Lakers: Lost to Clippers 102-112

2020-21 Bucks: Lost to Celtics 121-122

The eventual title teams went 26-12 over this time, which projects to 56-26 over a full season.  This are really nice results in the abstract but actually below the average of 61 wins for these squads (we projected wins over an 82-game season for teams that played in the few shortened seasons).  So, generally speaking, it is fair to say that the eventual team is slightly more likely to lose on opening night than it would be on most nights.  Obviously, individual matchups can affect outcome (the 2010-11 Mavs got a terrible Bobcat team while the 2019-20 Lakers had to contend with Kawhi Leonard and Paul George).  Still, the exercise does tell us generally that you shouldn’t get too worked up about early bad results.

We will end with a few interesting individual notes:

-The great 1990-91 Bulls started out 0-3, including a home loss to a decent Philly team, followed by a loss to a bad Bullets team, and another home loss to the aging Celtics.

-The peak Larry Bird Celtics of 1985-86 lost in overtime on the New Jersey not-so-famous parquet against the Nets.  The results show you players you remember as legends did have bad days sometimes.  Mike O’Koren scored 16 points and held Larry Bird to 5-15 shooting (but he still had a triple-double) and Buck Williams ran amok (23 points and 15 boards) against Kevin McHale.  Bill Walton, in his first game as a Celtic, had and ugly seven turnovers (!) in 19 minutes. 

-On Halloween 1997, Rick Pitino’s Celtics beat up the Last Dance Bulls.  It was an odd game.  Chicago jumped out to a 32-12 lead after one quarter only to be outscored 56-26 the next two quarters.  Michael Jordan shot 7-3 from the field but still scored 30 points, thanks to 16 free throws.  It sure seemed like Pitino knew what he was doing then.

-The worst opening showing by an eventual champ belongs to the 2016-17 Warriors.  In Kevin Durant’s first game, GS lost to the Spurs by 29 in Oakland.  That Spurs team was really good but losing at home to anyone by that much is unexpected for a title team.  Kawhi dominated with 35 points and the legendary Jonathon Simmons had 20 points off the bench.  It sure seemed like a statement win by the Spurs but it ultimately didn’t matter.  Man does Kawhi as a Spur seem like 100 years ago now.

-Another seeming statement win occurred when the 1986-87 Lakers were matched up with the Twin Tower Rockets, who knocked the Los Angeles out of the 1985-86 playoffs.  The Rockets won again, even without an injured Ralph Sampson.  Rodney McCray outplayed James Worthy handily.  Again, the symbolic win didn’t carry weight in the long term, as the Lakers won the next four games against Houston.

-This isn’t really statistically significant but I did find it weird that the Rockets would play out-of-conference against New Jersey to start both the 1993-94 and 1994-95 seasons.

2021-22 NBA Preview: Reviewing the Title Contenders

Well, that was a quick off-season.  With so much going on, it feels like we didn’t have to miss the NBA for very long.  The season officially starts on October 18 and it feels like early 2020-21 again.  The Nets and Lakers are the early bettor favorites, with Sportsbettingdime.com, giving Brooklyn the edge at +200 followed by the Lakers (+400) and the Bucks (+900).  But do these odds accurately reflect the current statuses of the potential contenders?  I’m skeptical of one of those teams.  Let’s dig in with a quick few of the potential title contenders, FAQ-style:

Are the Nets as good as they look on paper?

Yeah.  But for a few untimely injuries, the Nets were on their way to a title last year.  Of course, injuries are part of the game but both the James Harden hamstring strain and Kyrie Irving ankle sprain against Milwaukee seemed more in realm of bad luck than reflection of chronic injury problems.  This is not to say that injuries could not rear their head again but, the probabilities favor avoiding those types of injuries again.

Will Kyrie tear the Nets apart?

Possibly. The Nets’ biggest issue is Kyrie’s refusal to vaccinate, which would guarantee that he would miss all games played in New York, Los Angeles, and San Francisco (and probably in other cities eventually as well).  While this issue is getting a lot of play now, the issue isn’t really that big a problem quite yet.  If Brooklyn is willing to cut Kyrie’s salary by 55-60%, they can maintain this status quo for now.  A Kevin Durant-James Harden duo should be enough to win close to 60 games anyway even without Kyrie most of the time.

Where things get weird will be the playoffs.  Assuming Kyrie never gets vaccinated, he won’t be able to play all home games and there are a few series (and possibly more coming later) where he will not be permitted into any of the games.  That’s a problem.  The Nets could win a title without Kyrie but, at some point, the current flux will have to be resolved with a needle or with a decision that he is off the roster.

How strong are Brooklyn’s odds?

At +200 the Nets are fairly strong relative to recent favorites.  By way of comparison, here are the pre-season odds each year since 1984-85 and how the favorites did:

SeasonFavoriteOddsSecondOdds2Title WinnerOdds3
1984-85Lakers200Celtics200Lakers200
1985-86Lakers160Celtics250Celtics250
1986-87Celtics160Rockets350Lakers400
1987-88Lakers120Celtics350Lakers120
1988-89Lakers350Pistons400Pistons400
1989-90Pistons300Suns500Pistons300
1990-91Pistons350Lakers450Bulls700
1991-92Bulls250Blazers400Bulls250
1992-93Bulls120Blazers350Bulls120
1993-94Knicks200Suns300Rockets1200
1994-95Suns350Rockets450Rockets450
1995-96Bulls350Magic400Bulls350
1996-97Bulls100Lakers500Bulls100
1997-98Bulls140Jazz600Bulls140
1998-99Lakers300Jazz350Spurs450
1999-00Blazers350Lakers400Lakers400
2000-01Lakers180Spurs600Lakers180
2001-02Lakers200Spurs500Lakers200
2002-03Lakers180Kings300Spurs1100
2003-04Lakers140Spurs400Pistons1500
2004-05Spurs400Kings500Spurs400
2005-06Spurs250Heat350Heat350
2006-07Mavericks400Spurs450Spurs450
2007-08Spurs450Mavericks450Celtics1000
2008-09Lakers350Celtics350Lakers350
2009-10Lakers225Cavaliers300Lakers225
2010-11Lakers200Heat225Mavericks2000
2011-12Heat225Lakers450Heat225
2012-13Heat225Lakers275Heat225
2013-14Heat200Thunder550Spurs1200
2014-15Cavs275Spurs350Warriors2800
2015-16Warriors165Cavaliers260Cavaliers260
2016-17Warriors-128Cavaliers385Warriors-128
2017-18Warriors-187Cavaliers515Warriors-187
2018-19Warriors-155Celtics620Raptors1850
2019-20Clippers425Lakers450Lakers450
2020-21Lakers275Bucks550Bucks550

The last two seasons, the second favorite ended up winning the title.  With the exception of Warrior dynasty, the last time a team was as favored as this year’s Nets team was the 2013-14 Heat (LeBron’s final run there) and the 2010-11 Lakers (Kobe’s titled defense).  Neither team won the title (the Heat were waxed by the Spurs in the Finals and the Lakers didn’t make it even nearly that far in 2011).  In fact, the last time a non-Warrior title team had better odds than this year’s Nets and won the title was the 2001-02 Lakers (the Shaq/Kobe three-peat).  So, there is ample past data to support that the field could win out over the Nets.

What about the Lakers?

The Lakers are currently second in the odds market and the last two second place odds teams both won the title.  But I’m not optimistic about the Lakers.  As we explained back in August, Russell Westbrook is not an ideal fit with LeBron and Anthony Davis.  Also, the Lakers are generally pretty old and lack shooting around LeBron and Anthony Davis.  But the real question is LBJ. 

Can he still carry a team at age-37? 

There are really two components to this question.  First, can LBJ stay healthy at this age?  James has had big injuries in 2018-19 and 2020-21 but both were more soft tissue related (hamstring strain and ankle sprain) and the Lakers shut down LBJ down for long periods for strategic reasons (they tanked in 2019 for a lottery pick and in 2021 they wanted to avoid the Clippers in the playoff seeding).  While injury risk rises with age, James has fortunately avoided the major injuries and hopefully he should continue to do so.

The second component of this question is whether James can stave off age-related decline.  It’s hard to take some minor declines in LBJ’s stats too seriously because, since his return to Cleveland, he has shown a conscious ability to coast and then turn on the supernova production for the playoffs.  There will come a time when he won’t be able to do that anymore and there is some anecdotal evidence of decline: (a) his ability to get to the rim has declined to near career-low levels, (b) he had a his worst PER since his rookie year, and (c) he had a very weak playoffs.  Still, these declines are not to particularly low levels. 

In fact, his decline phase stats are damn impressive.  LBJ played only 1,504 minutes last season and his advanced stats were as follows:

-24.2 Per, .179 WS48, 7.5 BPM, 3.6 VORP (would have been 5.5 had he played his 2019-20 minutes)

There really is no comparison for James at age-37. His closest comp is Michael Jordan, who retired at age-36.  The best advanced stats for a player age-37 or older:

-PER: Karl Malone 2000-01, 24.7

-WS48: John Stockton 1999-00, .222

-BPM: John Stockton and Karl Malone 2000-01, 6.7

-VORP: Karl Malone 2000-01, 6.3

All this tells us is that Stockton and Malone were physical freaks.  Despite their production, their late Utah teams were not serious title contenders.  The only players to be near-top players at age-37 for a bona fide title contender:

-Jason Kidd 2010-11 (age 37): 14.4 PER, .116 WS48, 2.8 BPM, 3.3 VORP (won title)

-Kareem Abdul-Jabbar 1984-85 (age 37): 22.9 PER, .204 WS48, 5.1 BPM, 4.8 VORP (won title)

-Kareem Abdul-Jabbar 1985-86 (age 38): 22.7 PER, .197 WS48, 5.4 BPM, 4.9 VORP (lost in WCF)

-Tim Duncan 2013-14 (age 37): 21.3 PER, .164 WS48, 3.3 BPM, 2.9 VORP (won title)

-Tim Duncan 2014-15 (age 38): 22.6 PER, .207 WS48, 5.1 BPM, 4.0 VORP (lost in first round)

Each of these three players was not the best player on his team at the point that LBJ is in now.  Dallas had Dirk Nowitzki and an egalitarian supporting cast (of which Kidd was arguably second best).  Kareem was great but still supported by Magic Johnson.  TD was great (and still even pretty good at age-39) but Kawhi Leonard was the clear best player on the team. 

It’s not clear that LeBron has ever been the second best player on any team.  He could transition to that role now with Anthony Davis but it is unfamiliar territory for LBJ.  James could be a freak like Tom Brady who rewrites the aging rules but, more likely, LBJ will have to make some concessions to age and soon and that makes the Lakers a shakier proposition than usual.

So, where do you go if you don’t believe in the Lakers and are skeptical of the Nets?

In the East, Milwaukee brings back the heart of a title team and has a strong and legitimate shot at repeating yet are pegged at +900.  The actual Bucks’ chances of winning are not significantly lower than the Nets, making the Bucks a nice value.  No other East team seems to be realistically in the same picture. Philadelphia needs to resolve the Ben Simmons situation before it can be seriously considered at this time.  Miami has some talent but has age and roster-balance issues.

Out West, the Clippers have no Kawhi so they are eliminated from contention.  That leaves the Jazz, Nuggets, and Suns as potentially viable contenders right now.  Utah does not seem well-suited for postseason play.  Denver is missing Jamal Murray.  The Suns will rely heavily on Chris Paul’s health (he has actually been quite healthy the last few years) but their run to the Finals appear to have been a result of good health and a favorable bracket. 

The strangest odds go to the Warriors, who have the fourth best odds at +1100 (over Utah, Phoenix, and Denver).   GS had a bad offense last season (20th) and all non-Steph Curry options were ineffective (the only other regular player with a positive OBPM was Jordan Poole).  The odds makers (or bettors) apparently believe the return of Klay Thompson will fix that.  Suffice it to say, we are not sold on the idea that an older Klay who hasn’t played since 2019 can come back to the level of play he was at a few years ago. 

In end, what do you say?

Everything else being equal, the Nets are still my pick for the NBA title. Their grip on the title is more tenuous than the odds suggest, making the Bucks a nice value.   

The NBA’s Vaccine Quandaries

The big NBA news of the last few days has mostly related to whether/where Ben Simmons will be traded.  Another story that has been lurking in the background is how the NBA and the NBPA will deal with issue of COVID and vaccines and what the NBA would do with players who refuse to be vaccinated.  Let’s review what’s happened so far to see what the looming issues are:

-About 10 days ago, Adrian Wojnarowski reported that 85% of players had been vaccinated.

-The NBA would not mandate that players get vaccinated but that vaccinated players would be afforded much more favorable protocols.  Unvaccinated players will have to test daily and quarantine if they came in close contact with the virus (even without a positive test), while vaccinated players would not.

-Teams would be required to comply with local rules regarding vaccine requirements.  Right now, New York City and San Francisco have local law requiring players to be vaccinated to enter the local arenas.

This all seemed pretty straightforward but new reporting indicated some potential monkey wrenches.  Yesterday, Matt Sullivan of Rolling Stone dropped a story detailing how some star players are trying to avoid the vaccine and “basketball confronts its own civil war.”  The major names who seem to be vocally anti-vaccine are Andrew Wiggins, Jonathan Isaac, and Kyrie Irving.  Wiggins and Kyrie are in particularly tough situations because they play home games in areas that require vaccines to enter the arena.  The article also details some questionable opinions regarding the vaccine, particularly by Irving’s family.

What happens to these NBA holdouts?

I’m no expert on NBA labor issues but the NBA’s CBA clearly details that any arguments will be made in the context of the “Player Conduct” provision.  This provision states that a team can punish a player “when a player fails or refuses, without proper and reasonable cause or excuse, to render the services required by a Player Contract or this Agreement, or when a player is, for proper cause, suspended by his Team or the NBA in accordance with the terms of such Contract or this Agreement.”

This begs the question whether a player who can’t play a game because he refuses to get vaccinated is essentially refusing, without reasonable cause, to render services.  Rarely are contracts terminated for cause and any dispute is usually the subject of confidential arbitration.  Usually, contracts are terminated for cause due to drug issues, weight issues (remember, Hot Plate Williams?), or another clear contract violation, for example when Jay Williams seriously injured himself in a motorcycle accident (he ultimately negotiated a buyout despite violating the contract). 

COVID is new territory but it would seem that a player refusing to comply with local law probably would be considered an unreasonable position.  For example, if a player refused to comply with a local law by bringing illegal substances or an unlicensed gun into the arena, his absence would likely be considered an unreasonable refusal to render services.  Regardless of what one might feel about the law, it must be obeyed.

How does this play out for the players who refuse to vaccinate?

That’s a darn good question but it would probably depend on the particular situation.  I can’t see a team standing by if a bench player refused to comply.  Such a player probably doesn’t impart enough value to deal with the drama and uncertainty. 

Okay, but what about the specific players noted in the Rolling Stone article?

Sure, we can run through them….

A.            Kyrie Irving

Kyrie he will be scheduled to play 41 games in Brooklyn, two in MSG, and one in San Francisco.  Kyrie’s can protect his paycheck (and potentially his full contract) through one legal path, getting an exemption from the New York City law.   The law makes clear that no unvaccinated people can enter indoor entertainment venues and that the employer and owner of the facility have a duty to prevent unvaccinated staff from entering. 

The law has been challenged by a few other New York unions so far, with little success.  In a Teachers Union dispute, an arbitrator ruled that exemptions can only been granted where the person has “a documented contraindication” to the vaccine or a valid religious objection.  The religious exemption requires a written statement from clergy supporting the application and will not be granted if any leaders of the religion have spoken publicly in favor of the vaccine. 

For example, Christian Scientists have consistently refused vaccines even before the pandemic and thus any such religious application would be considered legitimate.  Conversely, the arbitrator held that there is no religious exemption available where the “objection is personal, political, or philosophical in nature.”  I have no idea what Kyrie’s objection is but, based on what I’ve read, it sounds like his objection is personal and thus unlikely to be legally valid.

Irving, however, does have some leverage to protect his paycheck based on his star ability and the fact that he is a big shot on the team.  The Nets sort of tolerated his previous mercurial conduct (remember, when he went AWOL last year?) because Irving is a great player and he is tight with the Nets’ other stars.  Still, Irving makes $35 million this year and I doubt he could miss about half those games and get paid for that time.   In short, Brooklyn is facing a delicate situation and will probably need to involve Kevin Durant and James Harden to help resolve it (or to make sure that KD and Harden aren’t too irked if the Nets play a little hard ball with Irving).

B.            Andrew Wiggins

Wiggins is an even more complicated situation.  He is not nearly as good a player as Irving.  How good Wiggins actually is an interesting question but he is certainly not underpaid at $31.6 million this year (and about $34 million next year) on a team that is waaaaay over the luxury tax threshold.  Last year, the Warriors paid $147 million in luxury taxes.  Wiggins’ salary, when you add in the accompanying luxury tax exposure,  actually costs the Warriors well over $100 million. 

The CBA provides that a players base compensation is reduced by 1/145th for the first 20 games missed due to suspension and 1/110th for 20 plus games missed.  The Warriors are not realistically competing for a title this year.  Why wouldn’t the Warriors try to terminate Wiggins’ contract or get him suspended in an effort to reduce the crazy luxury tax burden?  I suspect this calculus was at play when Wiggins applied for, but was denied, a religious exemption to the vaccine by the NBA.  Given all these facts, Wiggins’ resolve will be tested, as he’s realistically risking $65 million if he refuses to get vaccinated.  I imagine he will probably capitulate but we shall wee.

C.            Jonathan Isaac

He plays in Florida, where no local rules exist regarding vaccination.  So far, he’s risking pay checks in NYC and SF (yes, not getting vaccinated creates other risks but we are only talking financial considerations right now).  He’s also one of the key young players on a rebuilding team.  As a result we probably won’t hear much about his vaccination situation.

Is this a big problem for the NBA?

Frankly, I’m skeptical.  In some ways, this Rolling Stone story being blown out of proportion.  It is true that some major names refuse to be vaccinated and their factual bases for doing so are dubious.  Nevertheless, a large portion of the NBA is vaccinated and, while a public battle with stars isn’t a great look, the issue is really a minor footnote when compared to the largescale hesitancy of Americans to get vaccinated.

While vaccine hesitancy has become a cultural clash, the fact is that in the NBA seems to be much more of a financial/strategic issue.  When great players (or highly paid decent players) refuse the vaccine, the remedies available to the teams will force hard decisions.  The reasons why these players refuse to get vaccinated matters to them but not to the CBA.  These players will likely have to put their money where their mouths are. 

Breaking Down The Ben Simmons Drama

With training camp a few weeks away, the only persistent newsworthy story is Ben Simmons’ demand to be traded and his threat to holdout if he isn’t traded.  While this story has been well-covered, I thought we could break it down FAQ style and see if we can break any new ground or, at the very least, come to our own conclusions.  Let’s start with the facts as we know them:

-Simmons is turning 25 years old and has four years and $160 million left on his deal.

-There was no evidence, before the playoffs, that Simmons was unhappy in any way, though some past data has suggested that Simmons didn’t mesh perfectly on offense with Joel Embiid because they both are mostly low post guys and Simmons never has shot jumpers well enough to create requisite offensive spacing with Embiid. While this had been a concern, as recently as May 17, 2021, Fansided wrote a nice deep dive indicating that Philly had solved the spacing issue and that the team was +16 points with Ben and Joel playing together.

-Simmons proceeded to have one of the worst case of the yips from the foul line we’ve ever seen in the playoffs.  He started out 0-9 combined in the first three games of the playoffs versus the Wiz before “improving” to 5-11 (for a total of 5-20).  The problem seemed solved when he went 5-8 from the line in the clincher against Washington (.625% isn’t great but it was basically in line with his career numbers). 

-Alas, the yips came back with a 3-10 showing from the line in game 1 against Atlanta.  He ended up going an execrable 15-45 from the line for the series and, even worse, was so freaked out about shooting that he stopped touching the ball.  While he never shot too much from the field he was passing up nearly all shots and took only 14 shot the final three games of the series.  Simmons was basically a huge liability in the fourth quarter because he couldn’t touch the ball on offense. 

-After the upset loss to Atlanta, Philly coach Doc Rivers was asked if Simmons could be a point guard on a title team and Rivers honestly answered: “I don’t know the answer to that right now.”  Here’s where things get hazy.  According to Justin Grasso of Sports Illustrated, Simmons has now demanded a trade because he “feels slighted over Rivers’ postgame comments.”  Philly Inquirer reporter Keith Pompey told 97.5 The Fanatic that Simmons and his team “feel like when Doc Rivers said what he said, nobody apologized, and Doc was never reprimanded.”

-On the trade front, Philly GM Darryl Morey has supposedly asked for a huge amount of value for Simmons but has been rebuffed by teams who sense they can acquire a distressed asset at a discount.  Morey has responded by stating that, if a trade does not happen, he expects Simmons to report to training camp.  This is either a big bluff with teams who are trying to lowball Philly or a huge dare to Simmons to put his money where his mouth is and risk fines and/or forfeiting pay checks.

Now that the facts are pretty clear, let’s answer the big questions raised by this standoff…

Who is acting more reasonably/unreasonably between Simmons and Philly?

This is the easy question.  Simmons has some right to expect his coach to fully support him publicly but his reaction seems a bit ridiculous.  Ideally, Rivers would’ve answered that question about Simmons with 100% positivity but….who the hell are we kidding?  Simmons looked like damaged goods in the playoffs.  If Simmons’ ego is so fragile that we all have to pretend he wasn’t a huge liability during the Atlanta series, then we have to question his ability to work through the adversity.  Better players have acknowledged when they sucked.   Just look at Paul George, who immediately  admitted when he didn’t get the job done against Denver in Game 7 in 2020.  I fully realize that Simmons is still quite young and, perhaps more sensitive than older vets but he should be honest about his performance and just consider 2021 a learning experience and try to do better.

Can Philly salvage this situation?

That’s really a two-part question.  Philly is in a tight spot.  The window to win a title with a healthy Embiid is narrow and there is a risk that bringing back an unhappy Simmons could hurt the team in the regular season and/or sabotage their playoff seeding.

On the other hand, the market for Simmons is screwy.  He is no doubt a star player but he makes max dollars and has indeterminate value as a player because of the uncertainty of how last season ended.  Philly wants to win now and the most likely return is either another damaged star or a group of less talented players who, in theory, might fit better (i.e. Buddy Hield and Marvin Begley in Sacramento).  This return sounds super underwhelming and you can see why Morey might rather just see what happens in trying to bring Simmons back.

Is there a risk that Simmons might not be the same player again after an embarrassing playoffs?

We can’t know for sure but he should probably be okay.  He’s had other bad runs and bounced back.  Here are a few examples:

-2017-18: He shot 15-34 (.441%) from March 26, 2018 to April 10, 2018 but then went 41-58 (.707% ) in the playoffs.

-2018-19: He shot 33-69 (.478%) from December 25, 2018 to January 13, 2019.  He shot .644% the rest of the regular season.  He was a quasi-acceptable .575% from the line in the playoffs.

-2019-20: Shot a career best .621% from the line and had no really terrible streaks.  He missed the playoffs with injury.

-2020-21:  For the regular season, Simmons was right around his usual free throw shooting (.613%) and was relatively steady until the playoffs.

While the playoffs are clearly a different environment, Simmons has always bounced back from prior crappy free throw slumps.  In fact, if there is any real concern it’s that Simmons’ has reached his ceiling as a player.  All of his advanced stats data  from 2020-21 was slightly below his established norms:

2017-20: 20.1 PER, .157 WS48, 3.9 BPM

2020-21: 18.3 PER, .153 WS48, 2.7 BPM

He was pretty good last season too but and it doesn’t appear Simmons will add a jumper or some other tool to his offensive game that will allow him to break out in value.  He’s a great defender and rebounder with some serious offensive holes (lack of long range game, free throw issues) that limit his value.  Given all this, Simmons seems to have more value to Philly as a player than a trade chip (unless Minnesota gives them Karl Anthony Towns or something like that). 

Where does that leave us?

If Morey isn’t seeing close to equal value, he may as well try to rehab Simmons.  Have a group sit down and tell Simmons he won’t be traded because the market for him stinks at the moment and demanding a trade probably made it even worse.  Maybe they can discuss when Rivers, who was a career 78% free throw shooter, got the yips during the 1987 playoff when he shot 26-52 from the line (and was thoroughly outplayed by Isiah Thomas).  The silver lining Doc and Simmons can discuss is the fact that Doc shot 39-43 from the line in the 1988 playoffs and had a great season.  Things can be fixed if everyone just moves on from the fact that Simmons felt humiliated on Twitter for a few days.

After such a theoretical meeting, Simmons can get with the program again or sit out, in which case he would be giving back $160 million.  That would not be great for the Sixers but it would be an acceptable outcome.  In reality, there is no way Simmons will sit out for even a single regular season game (each of his game checks is about $500,000).  There is risk that Simmons will sulk and/or misbehave so badly he’ll have to be traded but it’s worth at least trying this road if the offers have been as weak as Morey’s behavior indicates.  Middling offers like the Kings’ Hield/Begley offer will be there in a few months even if Simmons gives Philly problems.  May as well swing bigger than that.

Examining Noel v. Klutch

The most interesting NBA story of the week was business related.  Actually, it was a court filing. Nerlens Noel sued his former agents Rich Paul and Klutch Sports Group, LLC, accusing them of bungling the negotiation of Noel’s contracts over the last few years and costing Noel millions ($58 million actually).  In short, Noel was eligible for a big extension and he fired his agent at the urging of Paul, who allegedly promised that he could do better.  There has been some insightful reporting on this case but, since the pleading is available, I thought we could run through the allegations verbatim to see what that review can yield:

-Before delving into the pleading itself, what is particularly salacious about this lawsuit is that Paul and Klutch are super tight with LeBron James, Anthony Davis, and Trae Young, some of the biggest names in the NBA.  One would think that Noel didn’t lightly choose the path of burning bridges with such big names in the industry.  On the other hand, I might be a little pissed at anyone who cost me $58 million.

-As a preliminary matter, the case was filed as a petition in Texas state court.  None of the parties reside in Texas but Noel alleges that Paul and Klutch all have been continuously doing business there, which is probably true.   

-The petition starts with a recitation of Noel’s backstory: his career at Kentucky and the fact that Philly drafted him sixth in 2013 and his trade to the Mavs in February 2017.

-In the summer of 2017, Noel was a restricted free agent and Dallas offered him a four-year $70 million deal.  While the offer was on the table, in July 2017, Noel went a birthday party in Los Angeles for Ben Simmons.  Paul, who was Simmons’ agent, happened to be sitting next to Noel at the party.  They, of course, discussed business.  Paul told Noel that he should reject the $70 million offer and that Noel was a “100 million man,” which was the maximum amount that Noel could be offered.  Noel’s 2016-17 season was actually a down year.  Noel missed his entire rookie year with a knee injury (suffered before he was drafted) but over the next two years, he put up 10.5 ppg and 8.1 rpg in 30 mpg.  In 2016-17, Noel only played 20.5 mpg (22 mpg for Dallas).  It does seem strange that, after a down year, Noel would take a large guaranteed payout.

-Shortly thereafter, Noel fired his current agent (Happy Walters) and hired Klutch.  They immediately rejected the Mavs’ offer and took the alternative one-year deal, known as the qualifying offer (which totaled $4.1 million), with an eye towards seeking a maximum deal the next off-season.  Paul advised Noel to stop any future negotiations with Mavs at that time.  In other words, they were betting big on Noel having a great season and being a hot commodity when he entered unrestricted free agency the next summer.

-Noel’s big bet really didn’t pay off.  His 2017-18 season was a drag.  He tore a thumb ligament and missed 52 games.  When Noel did play, the Mavs limited him to 15.7 mpg and he had only 4.5 ppg and 5.6 rpg.   Noel was still youngish (23) and super athletic but backup centers don’t get max offers.

-This is when things got bad.  Paul “began to lose interest in Noel as a client.”  Noel alleges that Klutch never gave any proposals or strategies regarding how to get a long-term deal.  Noel didn’t have any strong suitors so he took another low short term deal with OKC (two years, $3.75 Million) with an opt out after the first year, which would give Noel the shot to make more money if his market heated up again.  Noel played hard in OKC but played only 14 mpg.  A the notion that he was a limited backup center seemed to be setting in.

-Noel opted out of the second year of the deal and wanted a better deal in 2019 free agency.  Again, Klutch never presented any strategic plan to secure a long term deal (though the petition does state that Paul advised Noel to opt out of the OKC deal).  Free agency went poorly.  Noel says a false rumor was circulated by someone that Noel was about to sign a long term deal with OKC and that the rumor killed Noel’s market with other teams.  Noel re-signed with OKC for a relatively paltry one year, $1.9 million deal.

-The petition gets a little squishy at this point.  While first alleging that Noel got no offers in summer 2019, Noel drops a claim that he was told by his old coach from Philly, Brett Brown, that Philly had been trying to call Paul/Klutch to make an offer but received no response from them.

-Noel played better in 2019-20 for OKC (his minutes ticked up to 19 mpg and he had 7.7 ppg on .685 FG%).  Noel thought about firing Klutch in January 2020 but was told by another Klutch employee that OKC was planning to offer that elusive three-year deal (For $7-10 million per year) that Noel had contemplated.   This satisfied Noel and he did not terminate the relationship with Klutch. 

-When 2020 free agency started, Noel didn’t immediately hear from OKC or any other team.  The Knicks called on the second day of free agency and ultimately offered a one year, $5 million deal, which Noel signed on November 25, 2020.  Klutch negotiated the deal and wanted the usual 2% commission.  Noel later learned that Houston and the Clippers were trying to call Paul but that he did not respond to them.

-A few weeks later, Noel learned that “Paul had a history of mismanaging and ignoring other clients and costing them significant money.”  In addition, Paul and Klutch was “only focused on serving their ‘marquee’ client and did not have the capacity to provide competent service to other clients….”  The petition specifically sets the examples of Norris Cole and Shabazz Mohammad as players whose deals were screwed up by Klutch.  Noel fired Paul on December 19, 2020.

-After another solid season as a backup center, Noel got a three-year $32 million deal from the Knicks this summer.  Noel’s journey with Paul was a huge loser.  The difference between the Maverick offer in 2017 and the actual contracts Noel took over the same four years was $58 million.  Noel blames Klutch for failing to adequately represent him.

-Noel’s petition has five causes of action.  The first cause of action highlights a procedural hurdle, namely that the NBPA standard agent contract has an arbitration clause to adjudicate all disputes.  Noel argues that arbitration clause is invalid as a matter of public policy and should be voided.  I haven’t studied Texas law but most jurisdictions are really reluctant to invalidate an arbitration clause.  In fact, most courts favor these clauses for a variety of reasons (By way of example, the Supreme Court has upheld forced arbitration clauses against ordinary individuals who argued that they were bullied into the agreement by large corporations).  Noel, even at his relatively low NBA contracts, has vast resources to properly arbitrate and there is no reason to think arbitration would be unfair to him. 

-Assuming that Noel can get past the arbitration clause, the other four causes of action are substantive (and he can fully assert them if he has to arbitrate the dispute).  Noel primarily argues that Klutch breached its fiduciary duty to Noel by advising him to reject the 2017 Dallas offer and go for the “max deal” and that Klutch lied about offers that were being made, failed to strategize with Noel, and did not return phone calls from potential free agent suits (the other three causes of action duplicate this same allegation but dress it up as breach of contract, breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and negligence).

So, where does this leave us? 

-Noel is pissed that Paul promised him a better deal and supremely under-delivered.  Unless Texas law has some strong case law to void the arbitration clause, the case is likely to be tossed over to arbitration.  Clearly, Noel’s goal in filing the case is to let the entire NBA and world know that Klutch doesn’t care about its non-marquee clients and its competence is dubious.  Had the case gone to arbitration, all the records would’ve been sealed.  Now, there is a glorious pleading that craps all over the vaunted Klutch.  Indeed, The New Yorker wrote a glowing profile about Paul and Klutch in June entitled “LeBron James’s Agent Is Transforming the Business.”  Ummm….Noel begs to differ.

-The petition gave me a strong impression that Klutch did screw Noel in promising the max deal but I was less convinced that the legal case is strong.  In order to prove breach, Noel doesn’t have to just prove that Klutch did a bad job but, rather, that it didn’t fully advise him of the risks and that was the reason Noel lost out on the money.  Noel’s decision to turn down big money was a risk but can he prove that Paul gave concrete advice?  Telling Noel he is a “max guy” doesn’t sound like quite enough.  Is there a memo or opinion letter to rely on somewhere?  I’m guessing not based on how Noel framed the representation as disorganized and haphazard.   There is also the fact that Noel didn’t deliver either.  Between injuries and lack of minutes, the best agent in the world  wouldn’t have gotten Noel an offer close to what Dallas offered in 2017.

-Paul’s failure to return phone calls also may have cost Noel money but this is complicated.  What if Brent Brown lied to Noel to make him feel better?  What if the offer from Philly (assuming it was real) was for less money?  How would Noel begin to prove what offers other hypothetical teams would offer?  Would deposing future prospective employers to try to prove this issue be advisable?  Probably not.  No one wants to be deposed if he can avoid it.  Moreover, these teams have no reason to give testimony adverse to Klutch and burn bridges with Paul, who still holds a stable of powerful clients.

-It’s clear Klutch did a crap job on Noel in advising him to turn down that big offer.  Their plan appears to be simple: play out all contracts to unrestricted status and see what happens.  This is a great plan for LBJ or Anthony Davis or other superstars but was a terrible plan for Noel.  The NBA landscape was changing so profoundly that a shot blocker with limited offensive game just was never going to see a $70 million deal again unless he was as effective as Rudy Gobert (or even Andre Drummond).  On top of that, Noel’s bad injury helped him morph into a bench player.  Then, OKC went into tank mode after losing their big stars (Westbrook/George) so it had no incentive to give a veteran specialist a long-term deal when they were planning to set up a tanking situation.

Noel got bad advice from Klutch and he had bad timing/luck.  It would be interesting to see what reports are in Klutch’s Noel file.  Did they do an actual analysis of Noel’s future options and his stats that showed he was a max guy?  Even a cursory look at his game and stats would indicate otherwise.  I’m glad he was able to get a decent long-term deal from the Knicks (though I remain skeptical it is going to be a good deal).  In either case, Noel wants some justice for how poorly he was treated/advised.  It doesn’t seem like a strong case on paper (unless there is some concrete evidence he has that we are not privy too) but, at the very least, he can make Klutch take some heat in the court of public opinion.

Revisiting the Kidd-Marbury Trade

Today, the Nets are at the center of the NBA universe.  They are laden with megastars and the odds-on favorite to win an NBA title.  As we are deep in the off-season, I thought it would be a good time to revisit the recent 20th anniversary of one of the Nets’ most famous trades: the dealing of Stephon Marbury to Phoenix for Jason Kidd. 

The basic story is well-remembered: Kidd turned around a terrible Nets team and brought them to back-to-back Finals in 2001-02 and 2002-03 and generally gave the Nets their best extended run as an NBA team.  Marbury had some good seasons after the trade but was dumped by Phoenix to New York anyway.  Steph’s time in New York is considered a failure and ended very badly and gave Marbury a bad taste to most that he only redeemed by going to play ball in China.  Let’s take a look back at the trade 20 years later and see what more we learn with the benefit of hindsight…

Classic Challenge Trade

The Kidd-Marbury trade was most unique because there were no ancillary considerations.  No draft picks were swapped to even out perceived differences in value.  Chris Dudley, Johnny Newman, and Soumaila Samake were thrown in for cap purposes but Dudley and Newman were waived shortly after and Samake was dealt in a very minor deal.  At the time, Suns owner Jerry Colangelo said that the additional players were dealt “mainly just to make the salary cap numbers work.”

Both teams were all in on the idea that they would better off with a new point guard.  The calculus definitely had some off-the-court components which we will discuss below but here’s how Kidd and Marbury looked as players for the 2000-01 season:

-Kidd, age 27: 16.9 ppg, .510 TS%, 6.4 rpg, 9.8 apg, 19.4 PER, .150 WS48, 4.2 BPM , 4.8 VORP (2 years, $18 million left on contract)

-Marbury, age 23: 23.9 ppg, .540 TS%, 3.1 rpg, 7.6 apg, 22.7 PER, .147 WS48, 4.3 BPM, 4.1 VORP (4 years, $52 million left on contract)

So, the players had nearly equal value, except Marbury was a good deal younger and locked in to a long-term deal.  Marbury was the better scorer, while Kidd could bolt town in two years.  Of course it wasn’t that simple.  As Nets GM Rod Thorn noted at the time, Kidd is “All-NBA in defense and we need help on defense.”  The advanced numbers really bear that out.  Kidd had a DBPM of 1.7, while Marbury was -1.6.

Kidd and Marbury Had Baggage

In addition to the stats, context matters.  Both players had some degrees of toxicity…

Marbury’s Eternal Misery

Marbury  had no legal issues that I could recall (or find upon further search) but there was a sense that he was difficult to deal with.  First, he forced a trade from Minnesota in 1999, even though he appeared to be a perfect bookend to a young Kevin Garnett.  Right after the trade, former teammate Tom Gugliotta ripped Marbury, telling the New York Post that: “Stephon couldn’t take being overshadowed by Kevin Garnett.  It really bothered [Marbury] that Kevin got all that money ($126 million) and [Marbury] had to settle for $50 million less [due to changes in the CBA].  It killed him to see Kevin make the All-Star and Olympic teams and he didn’t.    He wanted to go some place where he could be the man, that’s the bottom line.”

In Jersey, Marbury wasn’t very happy either.  Some of this was understandable.  The Nets were terrible, winning only 47 games over Steph’s two full seasons.  The key players he hoped to play with (Kerry Kittles, Jayson Williams, Keith Van Horn, Kenyon Martin), all suffered injuries.  A March 2001 New York Magazine article summed up Marbury’s misery with the Nets  thusly: “[w]hat’s left [after all the injuries and Nets’ organizational dysfunction] is Marbury, the nonpareil, who finds himself out there on the break with no trailer save Vladimir Stepania, who you know will blow the layup. Which may explain why Marbury caused a stink last year by writing all alone on his sneakers.” 

The sneaker incident was only the most overt complaint (remember in the 1980s and 1990s, before Twitter, when players had to complain by writing messages on their headbands or shoes?  In retrospect, it was adorable).  I actually voluntarily watched many Nets games in 2000-01 and I can attest that Marbury definitely projected unhappiness.  With no inside information, I could see this was not working.  Marbury had reason to be frustrated with the franchise after two and a half terrible seasons.  His misery was so palpable that it was understandable why the team might want to cut him loose for relatively similar value. 

Marbury would go on to have some memorable incidents in New York but those seemed to be caused mostly by how poorly run the Knicks were (the Isiah/Dolan Years were something else). 

JKidd’s More Legal Oriented Issues

This summer, there were articles revisiting some of Kidd’s misadventures as a coach and player.  The notable incidents being revisited:

-In January 2001, Kidd was arrested for domestic violence for hitting his wife during a fight.  They did reconcile (at the time) and the Suns didn’t appear to make a big issue of it at the time.  They did trade him a few months later but, as noted above, Colangelo said the move was purely basketball-related.  No doubt the spousal incident would’ve been more heavily scrutinized in 2021 than it was then.

-In July 2012, Kidd was arrested for DWI when he struck a telephone pole in the Hamptons and knocked out a power grid.  Kidd was a veteran at that point at that point and really should’ve known better.  This was not excusable and could’ve killed someone and suggests that he was exercising terrible judgment.

-In 2013, Kidd was hired as coach of the Nets and he had a few stormy moments.  First , he cursed out assistant coach Lawrence Frank (who was also his former coach with the Nets) and demoted Frank, removing him from the bench and assigning him the more menial task of writing scouting reports.  At the end of the same season, Kidd abruptly resigned as coach when an attempt to amass power from GM Billy King was rebuffed by ownership.  These two incidents certainly make me question if I would want to hire Kidd but are not in the category of severe character flaws. 

-Recent reporting sets forth that Kidd was a bit of a dickhead while coaching the Bucks.   Kidd punished the team for a loss by yelling at them and making them workout on Christmas Day, even though some players had travel plans.  The story is not flattering but not really proof of a deep character flaw as a human.

In short, Kidd has always been a hardass on the court (and off) but, in his early career, he had many legal issues before all this.  Here’s a breakdown of the forgotten baggage that perhaps loomed more in 2001 than it does today:

-According to 1997’s “Money Players” by Armen Keteyian, Harvey Araton, and Martin F. Dardis, Kidd had at least two bad college incidents.  First, “In May 1994, misdemeanor hit-and-run charges were filed when Kidd’s Toyota Land Cruiser, traveling at high speed, clipped another car and careened out of control at 2:50 a.m.”  Kidd had two passengers were who arrested for drunkenness and both had prior conviction for drug sales.  Kidd said that: “[i]t’s being portrayed that I knew these things about my passengers and that I condone these actions.  I did not then, and I do not now.”

A month later, “Kidd was the subject of a civil suit from an eighteen-year-old woman who claimed that Kidd physically abused her in the wee hours after he turned twenty-one on March 24….soon after, another woman sued Kidd for child support….”  All lawsuits were resolved but the incidents did linger to some.

-On Dallas in 1996, Kidd feuded with teammate Jimmy Jackson and demanded one of them be traded.  The rumors of the feud were salacious and indicated that they had a rivalry regarding singer Toni Braxton.  Kidd complained only about Jackson taking too many shots and, according to the San Francisco Gate, “had derided [Jackson] for selfishness [on the court].”   Kidd also fought with new coach Jim Cleamons, who had insisted on a deliberate offense that Kidd hated (rightfully so given the team’s personnel). 

The Mavs abruptly traded Kidd to Phoenix early in the 1996-97 season and that trade had drama too.  Kidd broke his collar bone in his first game with Phoenix but, according to Sports Illustrated, “Kidd is convinced that the Mavs are trying to make him look bad.  He says that after the trade they leaked information that he had been in an early-morning car accident–as a passenger–on Dec. 11, the same day he began suffering from shoulder and neck problems that hindered his play in his final weeks in Dallas.”  Kidd vehemently denied the rumor.

-Kidd’s aura was tinged enough that Grant  Hill was wary of him.  At the time, Hill was the purest young star in the NBA with no legal or Generation X reputation issues.  When Kidd joked that Hill was campaigning to get Kidd on the 1996 Olympic team, Hill flatly denied this saying in Money Players that: “[Kidd] says we’re friends.  He’s not my friend.  I barely see him.”

Kidd’s time in Phoenix was relatively calm compared to college and with Dallas until the January 2001 arrest for spousal abuse.  On the court, the Suns played pretty well but had been eliminated in the first round in four of the five seasons that Kidd starred on the team, including in 2000-01.  It’s clear that the Suns figured the Kidd-led team had run its course and it was worth resetting with the younger Marbury, who was under contract for a longer period of time.  Marbury could be sullen but he didn’t seem to have any high profile feuds, litigation, or car crashes. 

Perception v. Reality: Jersey Won the Trade but Phoenix Did Okay

In 2001-02, Kidd had his usual great season and the Nets won 52 games and made the NBA Finals.  Marbury struggled with ankle injuries and Phoenix fell from 51-31 to 36-46.  The story told at the time was that the Nets totally fleeced Phoenix and Kidd was a true winner.  But that narrative is not complete. 

Kidd did play better and he did make the Nets much better but his contributions were misunderstood.  John Hollinger wrote about this in his 2002 Basketball Prospectus: “The Kidd trade worked about as well as the team could have possibly expected: Marbury had an off year in Phoenix, while Kidd had one of his best seasons….[but] their karma changed in a big way last season…Van Horn missed 33 games in 2000-01; he missed just one in 2001-02.  Most miraculous of all was Kerry Kittles.  He missed all of the previous season with a knee injury, and it was assumed that if his career wasn’t over, he comeback a shadow of his former self.  Instead he returned as though he had never missed a game….”

Kidd was a huge part of Jersey’s success but they had unprecedented health and development from Martin and rookie Richard Jefferson.  Even had Marbury stayed, the Nets were on the upswing.  Kidd is the better point guard but the trade, on paper, was good for Phoenix and Kidd was far from a sure thing coming to the Nets.

The fact is that trade made sense for both sides.  Though they hit the jackpot on the trade, in reality, New Jersey was a bit desperate.  They had suffered through three bad seasons and were willing to give up cost control, take risk of losing Kidd (or that he would do something stupid).  From Phoenix’s side, they were stuck in a rut and Marbury let them reboot.  Marbury played pretty well with Phoenix but the team decided they were better off using him to offload the hefty dead contract of Anfernee Hardaway and using the cap savings to sign Steve Nash.  It’s hard to argue with that logic.  In the end, both Phoenix and New Jersey entered into a mutually beneficial and rational challenge trade.   Would love to see more of those one day.