Uncategorized

Revisiting the Kidd-Marbury Trade

by  • 

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.

Uncategorized

Quick Thoughts Russ/Duarte Edition

by  • 

1. Westbrook Traded Again:  The biggest trade of draft day was the Lakers flipping Kyle Kuzma, Montrezl Harrell, Kentavious Caldwelll-Pope, their 22nd pick (who ended up being Isaiah Jackson, who was, in turn, traded to the Pacers for Aaron Holiday) for Russell Westbrook (and two future second-rounders).  My initial reaction was to wonder how a ball dominant point guard who is a shaky shooter would mesh with LeBron James and Anthony Davis.

I also questioned why the Lakers would invest so heavily in Russ  for his age-33 and 34 seasons, when he has showed some decline and is due $91 million over those two season (2022-23 is a player option for $47 million that Westbrook would almost surely exercise unless he somehow ages like John Stockton).  From a money perspective, per Sportrac, the trade adds about $8 million in salary to the Lakers’ payroll in 2021-22, leaving the Lakers near the luxury tax threshold with essentially only LBJ, Davis, Pau Gasol, and Russ on the roster (Alex Caruso and Talen Horton-Tucker are free agents and are due a raises). 

But if the Lakers are willing to pay the tax to win games, that’s their business.  LeBron is under contract for two seasons and he’s turning 37, uncharted territory for most star players.  The Lakers rightfully want to take as many chances as possible to squeeze out another title during that span (assuming LBJ can still compete as a star player during that time). The only question is whether spending on Russ is good use of cap room.   

As noted, my sense is that this is not a great move.  Let’s dig into the issues a bit and see if the move might be better than it looks at first glance:

-The Current State of Westbrook:  The anti-Westbrook sentiments about his age and lack of shooting can been countered by the fact that the guy fills a stat sheet like no player.  Remember how big a deal it was when Russ averaged a triple-double in 2016-17?  Well, he’s done it three times since and did it again last year for Washington (22.2 ppg, 11.5 rpg, and 11.7 apg).  Of course, raw stats aren’t close to everything to consider in evaluating a player.  Here are Westbrook’s year-by-year advanced stats since 2016-17 so we can get a sense of how his production has progressed during that span:

-2016-17: 30.6 PER, .224 WS48, 11.1 BPM, 9.3 VORP

-2017-18:  24.7 PER, .166 WS48, 6.3 BPM, 6.1 VORP

-2018-19: 21.1 PER, .124 WS48, 5.2 BPM, 4.7 VORP

-2019-20: 21.0 PER, .098 WS48, 1.5 BPM, 1.8 VORP

-2020-21: 19.5 PER, .075 WS48, 3.4 BPM, 3.2 VORP

Russ is still clearly valuable but the trend line is downward.  Scarier is the fact that his weakest season was when he tried to fit in with James Harden in 2019-20 in Houston, a situation that could be similar to what he currently has with LeBron and Davis.

 Last year, Washington needed to deploy Westbrook as ball dominant to make the team competitive.  Even in that setting, Westbrook had a career-low 19.4% of his shots within three feet of the rim (his career average is 34.5%).  On top of the decline, Russ will not help spacing (he’s a career .305% three-point shooter).  Even at his absolute peak as a shooter, Westbrook is below average from three and he’s as likely to shoot under 30% this season given past history.

I would be concerned that paying Westbrook to be the third option in this context carries significant risk that Los Angeles would be paying $91 million for a guy who doesn’t perfectly fit and is in decline.  The hope is that Westbrook somehow captures the same mojo that Rajon Rondo got in the 2019-20 playoffs (another aging bad fit who played incredibly for a few months before reverting back into a pumpkin).

-Could L.A. get anything better?:  The best arguments for making the trade for Russ are twofold: (a) Westbrook can probably munch minutes/stats while the Lakers take it very easy on James’ minutes in the regular season and (b) the Lakers are better off with Westbrook than any theoretical future acquisition to fill out the roster.  The first part of the argument makes some sense.  Westbrook’s best skill is keeping teams moderately competitive at all times.  The second part of the argument is tougher to accept.  Westbrook’s big salary and lack of fit with James make me wonder if waiting for a bit fit might be a better idea.

Of note, the Lakers were the best defensive team in the NBA but 24th in offense.  A lot of that offensive struggle can be attributed to LBJ and Davis being injured but even the title team of 2019-20 was just okay at offense (11th).  Westbrook should be much better than the soon-departed Dennis Schroeder (13.8 PER, .093 WS48, -1.1 BM, 0.4 VORP) but I would’ve liked to see what other offensive option might have emerged in the marketplace before committing to Westbrook.  The Lakers are still a title contender but you can feel the window closing and this trade reflects their knowledge that the end is coming.

2.  Duarte, Loving Those Old Rooks:  When the Pacers drafted Chris Duarte with the 13th pick, it got everyone’s “old rookie” radar pinging.  Duarte is 24-years old as of June 13, 2021, which is only about two years younger than Giannis Antetokounmpo.  As a good college player at 23, Duarte’s ceiling is probably low but that doesn’t mean he won’t be a useful player.  Or does it?  For fun, we did a rundown of the top 15 picks taken since the mid-1970s who were 24 years old in their first seasons and how they did:

-Ron Lee, 1976-77 (age 24): Lee started his college career late and averaged 18 ppg each of his four college seasons at Oregon.  He was drafted tenth overall and had a blah NBA career as a backup.

-Mychal Thompson, 1978-79 (age 24):  Thompson was the top pick in the 1978 Draft.  His late start to basketball didn’t hurt his draft status or his career, as he was a very good pro (but not quite an All-Star).

-Steve Johnson, 1981-82 (age 24):  Johnson actually played five years in college but missed most of his sophomore with injury.  As a result, he was 24 when Kansas City took him seventh in 1981.  He had a nice career as a banger in the post.

-Joe Kleine, 1985-86 (age 24):  Transferred from Notre Dame to Arkansas, which delayed his pro start.  He was taken sixth overall and had a long career as a backup.

-Brad Sellers, 1986-87 (age 24):  The Bulls took him ninth after a career at Ohio State, which delayed a bit because he was a transfer from Wisconsin.  His pro career was not great.

-David Robinson, 1989-90 (age 24):  Obviously, Robinson was a unique case.  He was drafted two years earlier and spent time in the Navy.  If we could magically teleport 1987 David Robinson into the 2021 draft pool and told the teams that he wouldn’t be ready to play in the NBA until 2023 at age-24, he would likely still be the first pick in the draft.  Special case doesn’t begin to describe it.

-Bo Kimble, 1990-91 (age 24):   Kimble was a transfer from USC to Loyola Marymount, so he was older than most players.  His NBA career didn’t pan out.  His age and the LMU system should’ve been warning signs.

-Alec Kessler, 1990-91 (age 24):  The big man from Georgia had a late start to his college career (age 20) and was drafted by the Heat.  He had a short NBA career because he was slow.  He later became a physician before sadly dying of a heart attack while playing pickup ball at age 40.

-Dikembe Mutombo, 1991-92 (age 25):  Mutombo is also a unique story.  A find out of the Congo, he came to basketball late and people were even dubious about his listed age, though Deke strongly denied being older than he was listed.  In any event, he had a Hall of Fame career and was a clear outlier in any era.

-Greg Anthony, 1991-92 (age 24):  Anthony started college a little late (age 19 in 1986-87) with the University of Portland and then transferred  after a year and was a fifth-year senior during UNLV’s 1990-91 title run.  The funny thing is there was a lot of talk about how old his teammate Larry Johnson was but he was two years younger than Anthony.  Greg had a solid career but was mostly a backup.

-Eric Piatkowski, 1994-95 (age 24):  Solid shooter was taken 15th by the Clippers and had a low ceiling but good career.

-Brent Barry, 1995-96 (age 24):  Born on New Year’s Eve 1971, Barry was held back a year in school making him a bit old for his grade.  Combine that with the fact that Barry went to college for four years, he appeared to be pretty low ceiling in the draft.  He slowly improved at Orgeon State (5.2 ppg as a freshman to 21.0 ppg as a senior).  He was taken 15th overall in 1995 and had a fine career as a starting guard, including that bonkers 5.5 BPM in 2001-02.  His career would be an ideal outcome for Duarte.

-Rafael Araujo, 2004-05 (age 24):  The Brazilian big man from BYU was drafted eighth based on his potential  but did not develop as a pro and was out of the NBA quickly.

-Nick Collison, 2004-05 (age 24): Collison was taken 12th as a solid power forward for Kansas.  He had a long career as a solid starter/backup. 

-Buddy Hield, 2016-17 (age 24): Hield was taken 6th overall and is a pretty good player but probably would’ve dropped a bit had people realized he wasn’t honest about his age.  As a data point, however, he is a pretty good outcome for an older draft pick.  I’m not sure the Kings are so thrilled. 

The chances of a really good player going to college for four years and being a hot prospect are low.  In the olden times, a Mutombo or Robinson might stay in college for unique reasons that don’t exist today.  In the last 25 years, of the older rooks, only Hield has been taken in the lottery and turned out to be above-average (and he would’ve sunk in the draft if he told the truth about his age).   Of the above group, there were very few great players.  Taking away the truly unique situations of Robinson and Mutombo (and also Thompson), the best players were Barry, Johnson, Hield, and Collison and they are juxtaposed against a long line of busts.

On the other hand, there are a few players college players who developed into really good players as older rookies.  The higher end for these older rookies are really good, like Paul Pressey, Sam Cassell was and Malcolm Brogdon.  In all, however, the past indicators are not great for Duarte.

Uncategorized

Revisiting Pippen’s Bad Days

by  • 

Thanks to Scottie Pippen’s recent statements, we now to get to revisit the 1990s yet again.  Pippen, who apparently has a book and some other stuff to promo, told Dan Patrick and GQ that Phil Jackson’s decision to choose Toni Kukoc to take the final shot of Game 3 against the Knicks in the 1994 playoffs was “a racial move to give [Kukoc] a rise.”  At the time, Pippen refused to go back into the game and Kukoc did hit the shot for the win.

Pippen and Kevin Durant also had an extended Twitter feud where KD took exception to a Pippen critique that Durant was forcing too many shots against the Bucks in the playoffs.  Durant, who has also been known to lash out, shockingly lashed out at Pippen on Twitter about being a bad teammate and referencing Pippen’s refusal to enter the game against the Knicks in 1994, as well as Pippen’s decision to delay needed surgery in 1997 until the start of the season.  Pippen missed several months of the 1997-98 when he could’ve done the surgery earlier.  The Bulls did end up winning the title that year but Pippen frustrated management and Michael Jordan with how the situation was handled.  As with all good Twitter spats, the KD/Pippen was spectacle but lacked any nuance. 

I have always been somewhat sympathetic to Pippen.  His manhood was questioned when he struggled through a migraine during Game 7 against the Pistons in 1990.  Any person whoever suffered a bona fide migraine could tell you that standing up straight, let alone playing professional basketball, is nearly impossible in that circumstance.  The same manhood questions cropped up with Pippen against the Knicks in 1992.  Pippen seemed somewhat intimidated by Xavier McDaniel that series but he came through in Game 7 and vanquished them.  I thought we could take a slightly deeper look at the Kukoc shot and the surgery decision and see how much criticism Pipp deserved for the incidents and see how reasonable Pippen’s actions really were.

Game 3 1994: 1.8 Seconds Left

A little context is necessary here.  In 1993-94, Jordan had retired and Pippen had the season of his career, leading the Bulls to a 55-27 record.  They were now playing their hated rivals the Knicks with the game tied and 1.8 second left in Game 3 of the second round of the playoffs.  Jackson then called a play where Pippen was to inbound the ball and try to get the shot to Kukoc.  This is when Pippen freaked out on the bench. 

According to Sam Smith in “Second Coming,” there was “chaos on the bench…Bill Cartwright [was] yelling at Pippen that the team needed him, Pippen stone-faced and determined, but weakening, assistant Johnny Bach pleading….Then Jackson said, ‘Fuck him, we’ll do it without him.’”  And somehow they did and Kukoc hit an amazing fadeaway over Anthony Mason.

The notion that any of that was race-based seems ridiculous.  Pippen’s gripes with Kukoc are well-known and deep seeded.   Pippen really resented how management courted Kukoc in Europe while they antagonized Pippen.  The resentment was understandable but Jackson was very separate from the front office and had only one goal….to win games.  In fact, Jackson barely played Kukoc that game.  Toni had played 13 minutes and was 1-5 from the field at the time.  Pippen had 25 points and was 10-20 from the field.  Jackson’s choice of Kukoc definitely seems unorthodox but was based on past history.  

In January 1994, Jackson had run a play where Pippen inbounded the ball to Kukoc, who hit a game winner against the Pacers.  Jackson wanted to run the same play again and figured that Kukoc, at 6’11, could shoot easily over the 6’7 Mason, who would be guarding him.  Jackson was correct on all fronts.  The logic was reasonable but Pippen’s real beef was that he was inbounding, which eliminated the theoretical chance of a shot as even a secondary option.  Had Jackson left Pippen on the court, even as a decoy, the Bulls probably would’ve been better off and Pippen might’ve been less freaked out.  Jackson would surely retort that Pippen was their best passer but the play worked with Pete Myers as the passer so who knows?

After the game, Pippen apologized to his teammates but then went out and said “I’d do the same thing [if given the chance].”  Pippen actually blamed Bulls GM Jerry Krause back then as well: “[t]hey understand why I didn’t take the ball out.  They understand my feelings about Krause.  Krause is in love with Kukoc.  He’d send him gifts when he was still in Europe…..I felt it was an injustice the way Phil treated me.  Do you think teams are saying, ‘We’ve got to stop Kukoc?, Or, ‘We’ve got to stop Pippen?’ I had to say something, whether it was the wrong time or the wrong thing….It was the right thing to do for me.”

Pippen’s anger was understandable.  Jackson’s decision was not totally crazy but it was quite unconventional.  Nearly any other coach would’ve called Pippen’s number on that play.   Still, there is ultimately no excuse for refusing to go into a game.  Several other players in the 1990s were considered malcontents for doing similar things in much lower stakes moments.  Had Derrick Coleman, for example, done what Pippen did, the anger would’ve been much more severe.  Also odd is that time has not calmed down Pippen on this issue.  One would think that winning six titles and having a great career would overshadow this one moments (especially since the damn play worked!).

As a quick postscript, Basketball-Reference.com has cataloged every buzzer beater in NBA history.  Kukoc has hit only two (the Pacer game from January 1994 and the aforementioned shot).  Pippen has only one, a shot to beat the Knicks on December 29, 1988 over Patrick Ewing (who had rejected a few previous attempts).

Pippen’s Surgery in 1997

By the beginning of the 1997-98, Pippen’s relationship with the Bulls had really devolved into pure antagonism.  The Bulls had two record breaking title teams in 1995-96 (72-10) and 1996-97 (69-13).  1997-98 was Pippen’s final year of his contract and the Bulls had no intention of extending him (or Jordan for that matter).   The Bulls were clear favorites to win again but Pippen was a key player and knew he needed foot surgery as early as the end of the 1997 playoffs.  At the time, AP reported that Krause as saying that the delay was not a result of malingering bur rather that “the Bulls followed a conservative path, prescribing offseason rest. But it didn’t work, and surgery was the only remaining option.” 

Shortly after, The Hartford Courant reported that “Pippen’s bitterness toward the Bulls front office is such that, despite a foot injury that hobbled him late in the 1997 playoffs, he delayed surgery until just before training camp, leaving the Bulls to founder in the early season without him.”  Pippen also began telling reporters that he expected to be traded before he came back from surgery, implying that he didn’t want to come back and was in no rush to do so: “I’m not going to play there anymore and that’s that. I think I’ve been treated very unfairly through this organization, and it’s gotten to the point now, I don’t see myself carrying on with it. I would rather leave things as I can remember them as a player and go on.”

The Bulls management knew this was a weak bluff.  MJ, Jackson, and Dennis Rodman had been brought back specifically for one last run.  Pippen, as a pending free agent, would crater his value if he didn’t comeback.  Pippen would come back by January 10, 1998 and play well and play hard.

In the meantime, Jordan had to shoulder a heavy load. In that time without Pippen, the Bulls went 24-11, which projects out to about a 58-24 season.  With Pippen back, the Bulls went 38-9, which would be a 66-16 record in a full season and enough to earn home court for the playoffs.  As it was, the Bulls were 62-20 and still earned home court in the East (over the 58-24 Pacers) but lost out to the Jazz (also 62-20 but won the tiebreaker).  This set up the Jordan’s best moment when he beat Utah in Game 6 to clinch the series.  In some ways, MJ can thank Pippen for the set up but if Pipp had had surgery earlier, the Bulls probably would’ve cruised to an easier victory in the NBA Finals.

Pippen acted against the Bulls interests (and his own) by not resolving his health issue earlier.  It worked out for everyone anyway.  The Bulls won the title despite this and Pippen got a big contract from Houston.  In Pippen’s defense, other players have blown off surgery to enjoy the summer. Shaquille O’Neal famously did the same thing in 2002 and it did hurt the team.   Yup, that’s not a great excuse.

In the end, it’s safe to say that Pippen was very temperamental (and continues to be to this day).  That aggression was mostly positive but he is somewhat lucky that his bad moments just ended up working out anyway.

Uncategorized

NBA Finals Preview: Suns v. Bucks

by  • 

The 2020-21 NBA playoffs have been a battle of attrition.  Getting a Bucks/Suns Finals would’ve been considered a reasonable prediction outcome at the start of the playoffs.  How we actually got here was not anticipated.  Milwaukee dodged a few bullets against the Nets due to some untimely injuries (but, yes, Milwaukee played well when it had to).  Phoenix has been consistently pretty good but each team they have faced so far has had to deal with major injuries to key players (Anthony Davis, Jamal Murray, and Kawhi Leonard).  Now, we have a Finals matchup where Phoenix appears relatively healthy but Milwaukee looks very likely not to have Giannis Antetokounmpo.  Naturally, the Suns are currently solid but not overwhelming favorites.   Let’s dig into the facts/numbers and see if we agree.

Team Numbers

The Suns put up a slightly better SRS than Milwaukee (5.67 to 5.57).  Of course, the spread is small and Phoenix’s star players played nearly full seasons: Devin Booker (67), Chris Paul (72), and Deandre Ayton (69).  On the Bucks’ side, Giannis (61) and Jrue Holiday (59) missed a good deal of time that more than accounts for the minor SRS split.

In terms of team stats, the Bucks were actually better on offense (6th) than they were on defense (10th).  This is in stark contrast to the last two seasons, where the Bucks were the best defensive team in the NBA each season.  This defensive decline probably can be attributed to the key injuries, as well as a conscious decision by the Bucks to leave some weapons on the table for the playoffs after peaking too early during their last two disappointing playoff flameouts.  In terms of tangible weaknesses, the Bucks gave up a lot of threes (last in the NBA in opponent makes).  This is consistent with the last two seasons in opponent attempts but now the opponents are making them at a much higher percentage.

The Suns are very similarly ranked to the Bucks (5th on offense and 9th on defense).  The difference is the Bucks were second in the NBA in pace but the Suns, thanks to CP3’s deliberate style, were quite slow paced (26th).  The Suns also were near the bottom of the NBA in free throws but made up for that by ranking high in assists and avoiding turnovers (yup, Paul has made a difference).   The Suns did not foul opponents much either.  In short, they play a deliberate style with the offense run through Paul and Booker.

Prior Head-to-Head Matchups

The Suns and Bucks have played twice this year and both games have been as close as can be:

-On February 10, 2021, Phoenix beat the Bucks 125-124 in Phoenix.  The Bucks were missing Holiday and the Suns were at full strength.  It feels like a long time ago because Giannis scored 47 points and somehow went 17-21 from the line.  Phoenix’s top players had regular good games.  For future predictive value, a  1-point loss on the road without Holiday probably constitutes a better showing for the Bucks.  The Suns did play Frank Kaminsky 34+ minutes, which is not going happen again (he has had DNPs in the last seven games).

-On April 19, 2021, the Suns beat the Bucks 128-127 in overtime in Milwaukee.  The teams were at full strength and the team rotations more closely resemble the playoff rotations (and both teams really needed the win for seeding purposes).  Milwaukee did a nice job making it hard for Booker to score but Paul and the other starters (Ayton and Mikal Bridges) did quite well.  Milwaukee’s Big Three were great but Brook Lopez struggled and the bench was mostly blah.

These two match ups indicate that a healthy showdown between these teams in the Finals would’ve been a ton of fun.  Now, Giannis’ minutes (and his 40 ppg average against Phoenix) will have to be allotted to Bobby Portis, who has had his moments (he has a respectable 1.0 BPM in the playoffs) but is usually taxed in a featured role.  For reference, the Bucks went 5-5 in games Giannis sat out this year (none of those 10 games involved teams that won a playoff series).

Match Ups to Watch

Paul/Holiday should be fascinating.  Holiday is one of the better defensive point guards in the NBA and Milwaukee has to hope he can slow down Paul .  Mike Budenholzer may also shift Holiday over to Booker and hope that Pat Connaughton or Bryn Forbes will have better luck against the older slower Paul than they would against Booker.  Whatever Budenholzer chooses, the Bucks will have a weakness that can’t be masked.

Another interesting decision to watch will be how Milwaukee deals with Ayton.  He is young and quick and the Bucks’ primary options are the slower Lopez or the faster, smaller P.J. Tucker, who can’t score at all.  Last round, Lopez matched up mostly with fellow conventional big Clint Capela and Tucker actually played a few more minutes (particularly when Atlanta went to Danilo Gallinari at center).  Tucker will likely get more minutes versus Ayton, as the Clippers did better going small against Ayton last round too.

On the Phoenix side, they have a pretty set rotation other than the funky line up when they use Dario Saric as a big man.  Defensively, Bridges will be assigned with the task of making Khris Middleton work really hard to get shots (a task that Atlanta did a good job of last round too).  The only path to victory for the Bucks will be to ride Middleton and hope he scores a ton.

Are the Suns worthy champs?

Assuming the Suns win the title (and that is the more likely scenario) are they worthy champs?  Of course they are.  They went 51-21 (.708%), which comes out to a 58-24 record in a normal season.  Yes, the road has been relatively easy but they are a legit good team.  Let’s see where they would rank in terms of SRS with other champs.  There have been a 14 champs with lower SRS ratings.  Here’s the list of champs with lower SRS ratings since 1979-80:

-1994-95 Houston Rockets, 2.32

-2005-06 Heat, 3.59

-2000-01 Lakers, 3.74

-1993-94 Houston Rockets, 4.19

-1981-82 Lakers, 4.37

-2010-11 Mavericks, 4.41

-2009-10 Lakers, 4.78

-1987-88 Lakers, 4.81

-2003-04 Pistons, 5.04

-1979-80 Lakers, 5.40

-1989-90 Pistons, 5.41

-2015-16 Cavaliers, 5.45

-2018-19 Raptors, 5.49

-2002-03 Spurs, 5.65

In the last 40 years, the Suns fall on the lower end of the spectrum of title teams but not the absolute bottom.  Most (but not all) of these teams were either considered underdogs in the Finals or had injuries or major trades change their fortunes during the season (and a few coasted a bit in the regular season like the 2000-01 Lakers and the 2015-16 Cavs).  Again, SRS is not a totally reliable way to measure a team but the SRS comps show the Suns to be respectable but on the lower end of title teams.

The bigger irony is that there have been several prior Phoenix teams that could’ve (and should’ve) won titles that score as a bit better in SRS.  The 2006-07 Steve Nash/Shawn Marion/Amare Stoudemire Suns were great but were robbed of a title shot by Robert Horry’s cheap shot on Nash.  Five of the Kevin Johnson Suns teams also rank better than this year’s team (only one of those teams also included Charles Barkley).  Yes, the 2020-21 Suns are not dominating but they deserve a title if they can get it.

Prediction: Even with Giannis this would be a tough match up for the Bucks in the back court.  Without Giannis, the task seems too much.  Suns win 4-1.

Finals MVP: Chris Paul

Uncategorized

Rick Carlisle: Can You Go Home Again?

by  • 

The Pacers recent hiring of Rick Carlisle as coach fascinates me.  By all accounts, he’s a pretty good coach and, divorced of any backstory, his hiring by the Pacers is totally rational.  He’s a seasoned professional on a team that has struggled to get the most out of relatively solid talent.  What interests me is the fact that Carlisle is a prodigal son returning to town.

By way of quick backstory, Carlisle had an interesting prior reign in Indiana.  In 2003, he was hired to replace Isiah Thomas, who had led the Pacers to a 48-34 record but struggled in the playoffs (also new GM Larry Bird was not really an Isiah fan for a variety of reasons).  Carlisle replaced Thomas and the team jumped from 48-34 to 61-21 and lost a tough playoff series in the Eastern Conference Finals to the eventual title winning Pistons (remember that crazy Tayshaun Prince block on Reggie Miller?).  It was a tough end to a great season but that Pacers looked like a title contender coming into the 2004-05 season.

Alas, things fell apart for Indy and Carlisle from there mostly because of the infamous Malice at the Palace destroyed their 2004-05 season and, subsequently, the Pacers struggled with injuries and ended up having to trade Ron Artest (who started the riot in Detroit) for a rapidly declining Peja Stojakovic.  The result was that the Pacers declined in wins from 61 to 44 to 41 to 35 wins in each of Carlisle’s four seasons in Indy.

On April 25, 2007, the Pacers and Carlisle mutually parted ways.  At the time, Carlisle told ESPN that the team needed a “new voice.”  The break up was amicable but it was trying as ESPN pointed out that: “the situation was made more difficult because of his close friendship with Bird. Carlisle said he spoke with Bird on Tuesday and they decided that whichever of them dies first, the other will read the eulogy.”  (Great, we will make a mental note on that for the future).

It all ended up working well for Carlisle as he famously had a great run coaching with Dallas that lasted from 2007 until only a few days ago.  Indy floundered for four more seasons but did have that nice mini-run in 2011-12 through 2013-14, when Paul George and Company nearly went to the Finals.  Now, 14 years later, Carlisle is back in town.  Carlisle’s odyssey back to his friends in Indiana got me wondering how other similarly situated coaches did in their returns to coach the same franchise.

We found 14 times that a coach was rehired by the same franchise.  Before we examine them, let’s eliminate a few of these instances on technicalities: 

-Paul Silas came in as an interim coach for the Hornets in 1999 and the Bobcats in 2011.  Since the teams were not quite the same franchises and both hirings were both initially interim in nature (and happened to turn to full-time gigs) they don’t really fit with our study.

-Same goes for Lionel Hollins, who had two interim gigs in Memphis, one of which became permanent.  Again, he did a great job but Hollins also doesn’t fit the Carlisle return.

-We will also eliminate the legendary Pat Riley.  Yes, he had two stints in Miami but he runs the franchise.  Clearly, his decision to re-install himself was not an organic rehire of an old coach.

-Cotton Fitzsimmons had three stints with the Suns but he was already ensconced in the organization and also wasn’t a true outside hiring, just a front office guy tagging in to help the organization as he did in 1988 and 1996.

-The Timberwolves brought Flip Saunders back to coach in 2014 after a ten-year break.  This would be a perfect case study because Saunders’ situation was so similar to Carlisle’s in Indy.  Unfortunately Flip passed away after one season rebuilding so we won’t count him on the list, as it’s not fair to evaluate his second stint given the circumstances.

That leaves nine situations where a franchise fired/lost a coach and decided later that the same guy was, again, the perfect coach to lead the team to the Promised Land.  How did they work out?  Let’s do quick chart of the rehires in their second stints, reverse ranked by won-loss record:

9. Dick Motta, 1994-96 Mavs: 62-102 (.378%)(no playoff appearances)

8. Mike Brown, 2013-14 Cavs: 33-49 (.402%)(no playoff appearances)    

7. Dan Issel, 1999-02 Nuggets: 84-106 (.442%)(no playoff appearances)

6. Don Nelson, 2006-10 Warriors: 145-183 (.442%)(1 playoff appearance)

5. Brian Hill, 2005-07 Magic: 76-88 (.463%)(1 playoff appearance)

4. Red Holzman, 1978-82 Knicks: 147-167 (.468%)(1 playoff appearance)

3. Gene Shue, 1980-86 Bullets: 231-248 (.482%)(3 playoff appearances)

2. Lenny Wilkens, 1977-85 Sonics: 357-277 (.563%)(6 playoff appearances, 1 title)

1. Phil Jackson, 2005-11 Lakers: 323-169 (.657%)(6 playoff appearances, 2 titles)

Broadly speaking, only two of the nine rehires worked out really well and those were not typical circumstances.  Wilkens helped turn the Sonics around in his second tenure in Seattle but his first tenure as player-coach in the early 1970s wasn’t actually successful (they were a .500ish expansion team).  When he was brought back, Wilkens wasn’t really revisiting glory years he was more like any other coach trying to fix a bad situation.

The biggest success was Phil Jackson who memorably quit/was fired by the Lakers after 2003-04 and wrote a book about how immature Kobe Bryant was.  The Lakers still hired him back after a year off and he helped bring two titles back to town.  They never should’ve let Jackson go to begin with and they apparently knew it.  This brief excursion by Jackson is clearly distinguishable from Carlisle’s long layoff.

Carlisle’s coaching story is most similar to Nelson, who returned to his roots after also leaving the Mavs.  Nellie had some success in his return to Golden State.  The Warriors upset the Mavs in the 2006-07 playoffs and jumped to 48 wins the next season before Nelson created an internal power struggle with GM Chris Mullin and then lost interest and quit again.

All of this is a long way of saying most rehires are not rousing successes, though nearly all the rehires had hopeful moments.  The only two coaches who had little success on return were Brown and Issel.  Brown only got one season before he was canned.  Issel’s second tenure was not great. 

But all the others can point to some good times.  Motta led the previously awful Mavs back from terrible to near the playoffs in 1994-95 before cratering in 1995-96.  Hill developed a young Dwight Howard and led the Magic back to the playoffs before a soft firing that left him in the organization.  Holzman got the Knicks back to 50 wins in 1980-81 before declining quickly.  Shue’s teams were around .500, neither good nor bad but they made the playoffs, which is usually considered acceptable by Bullets owners for some reason.

Carlisle is coming back to a team with some solid talent (Myles Turner, Domantas Sabonis, Jonathan Brogdon).  There’s little reason Carlisle can’t get them back to respectability quickly.  The Pacers have been mediocre in all facets of the game and Carlisle has been good at putting awkward pieces together (notably, what to do with Sabonis and Turner, who probably shouldn’t pay together much).   If past history is an indicator, Carlisle is in for a decent (but not great) return to Indy.

Uncategorized

Game 7 Preview: Nets/Bucks

by  • 

Is it possible that the most anticipated game of this playoff season will be played in the Second Round?  It’s not a foregone conclusion but there is a good chance that tonight’s Bucks/Nets Game 7 will be the NBA champ.  This Game 7 will be, perhaps, the most consequential game of the playoffs.  At the moment, the Nets are pegged as very slight favorites by the odds makers.   Let’s run through this game FAQ style to see if we agree…

Has this actually been a good series so far?

Well, it has in the sense that we are watching two really good teams knock each other around.  On a per-game basis, however, we have had only two watchable games out of six.   Of course, Kevin Durant’s legendary Game 5 will be remembered but much of the series has been less exciting.

Would the Nets have won this series easily with a healthy Kyrie Irving and/or James Harden?

Probably but we are where we are.

What’s with the Nets and free throws?

KD has gotten to the line a ton (43 attempts) but the rest of the team, not so much.  Even before he got hurt, Kyrie wasn’t getting to the line (two attempts in four games) and Joe Harris has zero in six games (though he had only two in five games versus Boston).  The Nets desperately need a second scorer to open up the office so they don’t have to rely on Durant being otherworldly to win.  Jeff Green has been a real boost at time and should help add some offense and make it difficult for the Bucks to play the slower Brook Lopez.

Maybe Harden will help?

Harden’s bad hamstring is obviously key to the series.  He was put in a tough situation in Game 5 when he was essentially playing injury rehab minutes during the most important game of the season.  He had no leg strength and could not make any shots at all (1-10 from the field).  In Game 6, Harden looked fairly effective (16 points on 5-9 shooting and he got to the line and had four steals).   Hamstrings pulls are notoriously hard to recover from but the trend line looks pretty good and if Harden is 75% of his usual self that would indicate a Nets win is coming.

Will this series define Giannis’ legacy?

It’s fairly amazing how much crap Giannis Antetokounmpo is taking for a guy averaging 30.5 ppg and 12.8 rpg.  But the criticism isn’t totally crazy.  Giannis is a big man without a great jumper or low post moves on offense.  Nor is he a great candidate to guard Durant on the perimeter.  These facts shouldn’t be viewed as personal failings by Giannis.  He’s an incredible player but you can’t ask him to do things he can’t really do. 

Actually, Jrue has had it rougher…

Of Milwaukee’s Big Three, Jrue Holiday is the player that has struggled the most.  He has shot really poorly (.465 TS%) and has not been the defensive force they had hoped.  It didn’t matter in Game 6 because Khris Middleton was on fire but Holiday has been Milwaukee’s weak link.  The Holiday-Harden match up will be huge in Game 7.

There’s no place like home…

The home team has won every game and mostly dominated those wins (with a few exceptions).  This trend is fully consistent with the regular season where both teams were much better at home. Brooklyn was 28-8 at home and Milwaukee was 26-10.  The Nets have a marked advantage in Game 7 for that reason.  It’s sort of ironic that the Nets consciously punted on fighting for home court to get healthy and they ended up unhealthy but with home court advantage over the Bucks anyway. 

The general history of Game 7s also clearly favors the home team.  In the last decade, most of the Game 7 wins on the road involve ridiculous performances from transcendent stars (mostly LeBron James) or poorly timed injuries (the Rockets with Chris Paul in 2018, the Clippers with Blake Griffin in 2017).  The last team to win on the road without benefitting from a key injury or having a superstar do superstar things was the Nets beating the Raptors in 2014 when Paul Pierce blocked Kyle Lowry’s late jumper.

For the Bucks to win…

Man do they need another great Middleton game and/or some help from the designated shooters.   Middleton has carried the outside shooting for the Bucks.  Middleton is 17-45 from three (.378%) while the rest of the team is an abysmal 39-155 (.252%). 

For the Nets to win…

If they get the usual Kevin Durant game, they should be able to win this game.  If KD or Harden go off, they may win comfortably.  Their concerns are more about health than Durant or Harden having an off game.  That injury risk, however, is not insignificant. 

Prediction: Nets win 118-111.  The Bucks certainly have a chance but the most likely outcome is to favor the home team with Durant.