1. Limping to the Finish: About one month ago we had an interesting season going on. The Magic, Celts, and Cavs were locked in a three-way battle for top seed. At the bottom of the conference, the eight-seed had a logjam of potential teams vying for the slot. Out West, the Lakers were pretty much in hand and the Dallas-Phoenix race for the eight seed also looked interesting. At this point, with a few weeks left in the season, there aren’t a whole lot of reasons to watch the homestretch of the season. Here’s a look at what’s left to actually watch:
Quick Thoughts
1. Falkenstein Ruminations: While the playoff chase whirls in our faces, the background story people are talking about relates to the economic and labor health of the game. Revenues are projected as down for the next few seasons and David Stern, for the first time, is telling teams to expect the salary cap and the luxury tax threshold lower over each of the next three seasons. As a consequence, all eyes are on whether the NBA will seek to renegotiate the key terms of the collective bargaining agreement, which expires in 2011. Both David Falk and Bill Simmons have recently virtually guaranteed an NBA lockout in 2011. Falk was the first to stir the waters and he identifies several problems with the state of the current NBA. Falk’s re-emergence interested me on two levels. First, where has he been the last ten years? Second, do his current complaints have any merit?
NCAA Tourney Preview
In picking the NCAA tournament winner, and the final four teams, one important factor has stood out in recent years. Teams with the best big men do well. Not the big men who win college POY awards, but the big men who will be drafted in the top ten. There are other important things. It’s good for the backcourt to have as many good players as possible and a good coach is a nice thing to have. But the main thing is having a strong inside game. Going back the last 7 years, it’s clear that the teams with the best inside talent are in the best position to win:
NBA Draft Update
Right now a good historical reference as to how the 2009 draft turns out might be the 1989 draft. This draft was weak at the top, but had some pretty good guards chosen later in round one. That’s a little how I think this one will end up. The draft is void of can’t-miss types, but is deep enough with wing players that I’m sure a sleeper or three will emerge from later in the draft.
I’ll list the prospects as I did last month. I feel it’s best to look draft prospects in this order:
Quick Thoughts
1. Playoff Meanderings: On an overall level, the Eastern Conference has caught up the West. Three of the top four teams are in the East and they have been pretty effective against the West. Nevertheless, the West is absolutely flying in terms of playoff position. Right now, the West’s top eight have winning percentages of .600 or better (projecting to 49-50 wins) and Phoenix is ninth with a .557 winning percentage (which projects to about 46 wins). Now, we’ve looked at the playoffs a lot over the years, finding the best eight seeds of All-Time and the Mavs/Suns have a very good shot of beating out the 2007-08 Nuggets (50-32) as having the most wins for an eight seed.
Transactions: 1/19-2/24
Boston Celtics
2/17 Traded Sam Cassell to Sacramento for a conditional 2015 second-round draft pick
2/19 Traded Patrick O’Bryant to Toronto for a conditional second-round pick in 2014
2/24 Signed Mikki Moore
For Boston, Sam-I-Am was always an insurance policy for Rajon Rondo. Since that time Rondo has played quite well and they haven’t needed to try to cash in the Cassell policy, save for one game against San Antonio last spring. Even so, the Celts are still very thin on the bench and the team decided that they were more desperate for a forward in Moore than Cassell. The hope is that Moore provides the same punch that P.J. Brown did at the end of last season. Moore’s numbers this year indicate he doesn’t have much to offer but P.J. was similarly not good in the regular season and he still made some big plays in the playoffs. So, there is an argument for signing a rapidly declining Moore.