1. Memphis Surge Reviewed: One of the more interesting stories of the season is the unexpected improvement of the Grizz, who are now 20-18 after going 24-58 all of last year. Well, it’s not that improvement was unexpected it’s just that the extent of improvement is the surprising part. When the Grizz grabbed Zach Randolph for nothing, we kind of figured there would be some improvement but the team is a fringe playoff team. What’s going on here? Well, the Grizz of 2008-09 were one of the worst offensive teams we’ve seen for a while. Let’s take a look at the basic stats for the Grizz the last two years:
2008-09 2009-10
-Offensive Rating: 103.5 (28th) 110.2 (7th)
-Defensive Rating: 109.5 (21st) 110.5 (27th)
-PPG: 93.9 (29th) 104.0 (4th)
-OPPG: 99.3 (14th) 104.2 (25th)
-Pace Factor 90.1 (20th) 93.6 (10th)
-Attendance Per Game: 12,680 (30th) 12,685 (30th)
The Grizz have changed their style drastically. The putrid offense of 2008-09, which involved O.J. Mayo and Rudy Gay chucking has become faster and more efficient (though the chucking hasn’t exactly stopped). There has been sacrifice of in defense (from bad to terrible) but this is easily counter-balanced by the offensive improvement. Mayo and Gay are both improved a little bit (though Mike Conley hasn’t been much better). The real improvement has come from Marc Gasol (who went from good to very good) and newly acquired Zach Randolph, who is playing as well as any time since 2006-07 and is huge upgrade over Darko Milicic and Hakim Warrick.
On the downside, Memphis doesn’t appear to have gained any attendance by this improvement. Attendance takes a while to catch up with improvement on the court/field but one would’ve helped at least some improvement so far. Also, while we applaud the Grizz for getting back to respectability ,there is also a risk that this is just a modest blip on the radar. The playoffs seem unlikely. The Grizz are now 10th in the West and have to fight the Thunder, Hornets, Jazz, and Rockets for the seven or eight seed. Also, the Grizz are still in a tough spot in terms of decision making. Gay will be demanding a big contract and the Grizz aren’t usually willing to pay big contracts, let alone to someone like Gay who is not clearly worth near-max money. On top of that, it is hard to think that Randolph will continue to play this well long-term.
So how can this team improve, instead of staying as a near-playoff team or regressing? The only realistic in-house hope is that Hasheem Thabeet develops into a defensive presence, where the Grizz have much room for improvement. Thabeet has shown some promise in that front (blocking 3.9 shots per-36 minutes and putting up a respectable PER of 16.1, though he is clearly a limited offensive player and fouls way too much). The other possibility is that the Grizz might want to trade Mayo or Gay (both offense-only scorers with high perceived value) for another defensive player or a point guard. Gay is more likely to be traded because he’s about to become quite expensive. There aren’t a ton of names that pop up right now but, short term, Andre Miller would be a nice solution but he is not a lasting long-term one.
In sum, the Grizz should be happy about 2009-10 so far but there is significant planning to be made and Memphis should not be shy about fan backlash if they trade a player like Gay, since it could help the team and there isn’t much in the way of fan following anyway. More importantly, being satisfied with the current accomplishments and not making any moves will likely guarantee regression next year.
2. Tracing Lucas: Early this week, John Lucas brought us back to the heady days of the early 2000s when he told AOL Fan House this week that the Cavs had intentionally tanked the 2002-03 season to position themselves to draft LeBron James in the summer of 2003. Lucas said that while he was coach “[t]hey trade[d] all our guys away and we go real young, and the goal was to get LeBron and also to sell the team.” In the same article, the Cavs owner at that time, Gordon Gund denied the charge.
Is Lucas’ accusation true? As far as I recall, the general consensus was that the Cavs were absolutely tanking. Of course, the question is two-prong: (1) were the Cavs tanking (probably)? and (2), if so, did Lucas manifest any ambivalence towards this plan at the time? But let’s go back to 2001-02 and examine how evident it was. In order to understand the Cavs’ thinking in 2002-03 we have to go back to the forgotten days B-LBJ (Before LeBron). The pre-LeBron Cavs were not a pretty sight. After the potential dynasty of the early 1990s flamed out due to injury (Mark Price and Brad Daugherty), age (Larry Nance), and a bad trade (Danny Ferry for Ron Harper), the Cavs spent the rest of the 1990s trying to re-establish the team and fill a new arena. Mike Fratello made a respectable team in the mid-1990s that made the playoffs but was quite painful to watch (the old snail-paced team behind Terrell Brandon, Bobby Phills, Chris Mills, Tyrone Hill squad). The Cavs then started over by trading Brandon and Hill for Shawn Kemp in 1997. Kemp combined with youngsters Derek Anderson, Zydrunas Ilgauskas, and Brevin Knight. The team had promise and made the playoffs in 1997-98 but fell apart when Kemp gained weight and his drug problem manifested itself and Ilgauskas couldn’t stay helpful. In the meantime, the Cavs attendance, which was fourth in the NBA in 1994-95 had slowly declined to average by the late 1990s and was near the bottom of the league in 2000.
By 2001-02, the Cavs were a weak 29-53, hadn’t broken .500 since 1997-98, and hadn’t won a playoff series since 1992-93. The 2001-02 roster was filled with a few promising young players , notably Andre Miller (age 25, 16.5 ppg, .454 FG%, 4.7 rpg, 10.9 apg, 21.8 PER), Ilgauskas (age 26, 11.1 ppg, .425 FG%, 5.4 rpg, 17.4 PER but coming off of two years of injuries), and Ricky Davis (age 22, 11.7 ppg, .481 FG%, 3.0 rpg, 2.2 apg, 15.9 PER) and some decent filler veterans like Lamond Murray, Wesley Person, and Tyrone Hill.
Miller was considered a pretty good guard approaching free agency. In fact, at about this time John Hollinger thought so much of Miller that he called Miller a “star” and one of the top 15 players in the NBA (Miller was also on the cover of Hollinger’s first Basketball Prospectus book, which came out that year). The rest of this bunch was, at best, useful. This leaves an ugly situation. The Cavs were a bad team, with little talent or fan following, and Miller was apparently demanding a maximum contract. Sports Illustrated did a nice feature on the Cavs’ war room during the 2002 draft and how Lucas and GM Jim Paxson planned to deal with the roster. Paxson attempted to trade Miller for Lamar Odom and a draft pick that they hoped would be Caron Butler (the deal fell through and the Cavs ended up drafting bust DaJuan Wagner). Miller was traded later in the summer for Darius Miles, who was only 20 a promising prospect. Person and Murray were also traded for spare parts (a finished Nick Anderson, 13th man Michael Stewart, and a pick). When Murray was traded, he wrote an editorial in the Cleveland Plain Dealer and called the Cavs “a house on no foundation” and accused the team of tanking the coming season for LeBron.
Lucas, who sounded a bit despondent this week about the firing from 2003, was less so when interviewed in 2002 about the team’s prospects for the 2002-03 season. Lucas told Sports Illustrated during training camp that Ilgauskas could “score 20 points a night” and that Miles “could be a Jordan-type player.” Lucas did reveal some concern about the season and said that “[y]ou just hope management is patient.” Well, the Cavs weren’t very patient and Lucas was fired in January 2003 with an 8-34 record (worst in the NBA). Paxson said that he fired Lucas because “[w]e were not making the kind of progress that we should be making at this point of the season.” I couldn’t find any article and I have no recollection of any incidents that would’ve precipitated Lucas’ firing, though Miles had an awful season and youngsters Wagner and Chris Mihm were not developing at all. I’m not sure if the failure of the young players to develop was an element to the firing but we do know that neither of these three really panned out as viable NBA regulars.
It’s quite obvious the Cavs were tanking at the time and the SI quote from Lucas also reveals that Lucas was at least a little worried that he would be a casualty of the plan to do so. So, we have to conclude that Lucas was 100% accurate on all fronts when he spoke this week. He executed the plan and was executed himself as a result. Of course, that’s how this tanking stuff usually works. Just ask the coaches for the 1992-93 Mavs, the 1996-97 Celts, the 2002-03 Nuggets, and the 2009-10 Nets.