Basketball Free For All

During a recent Suns-Jazz game back in January, Suns color announcer Eddie Johnson mentioned that Utah is one of the toughest places to play on the road. While this is merely one isolated example, it represents a common perception throughout the League and there are loads of anecdotes that mirror EJ’s comment. The notion of Utah as an elite home team is a perception that is worth investigating to determine whether it is actually true both historically and currently and also to examine the reasons for home court advantage in general. It is also relevant because Utah happens to be one of the two hottest teams in the League right now and is poised to make some noise in the playoffs.

Continue reading

It wasn’t all that long ago that fans and analysts alike praised the outstanding play of the Lakers’ bench players, dubbed them the “Bench Mob” and put them among the league’s elite reserve units. This season, the Bench Mob was supposed to continue the tradition of wreaking havoc on opposing teams’ second units while spelling starters Kobe Bryant, Pau Gasol, Andrew Bynum, Ron Artest and Derek Fisher and maintaining or extending leads while the Lakers attempt to defend their title.

Over the past few years, the Bench Mob has been known for being aggressive during their stints on the court, sporting the swagger of a starting unit when they enter a game. The following account from the 2007-08 season summarizes the rise of L.A.’s Bench Mob and the respect they garnered.

A worthy next-generation supporting cast has suddenly appeared in the most appropriate of cities — Los Angeles — where a feisty band of extras serves at the pleasure of a genuine leading man. The Lakers’ Kobe Bryant, as Jordan once did, enriches these lesser lights figuratively (by the grandeur of his talent) and literally (backup point guard Jordan Farmar snagged a Louis Vuitton bag for Christmas), and so they aid him utterly and enthusiastically, while also making sure that their walk-on moments are duly recorded. “If we win a championship,” says reserve guard Sasha Vujacic, “we know it will be mainly because of Kobe. But we will have something to say about it too.”

Source: Jack McCallum, Sports Illustrated

Oh, how times have changed.

That era seems like a distant memory, as the 2009-10 version of the Bench Mob has been ineffective at best and downright detrimental at worst. Before looking at the numbers, let’s meet the Bench Mob first and see who has come and gone over the years.

Meet the Mob

When the Lakers are at full strength this season, the following players are the Lakers’ bench players (listed in descending order according to minutes played this season): Lamar Odom, Shannon Brown, Jordan Farmar, Sasha Vujacic, Josh Powell, D.J. Mbenga, Adam Morrison and Luke Walton (although Walton has been injured for most of the season with a bum back). If we limit the Lakers’ rotation to only ten guys, the top five bench players are Odom, Brown, Farmar, Vujacic and Powell.

From last season’s Championship squad, the Bench Mob’s top five consisted of Trevor Ariza, Vujacic, Farmar, Walton and Vladimir Radmanovic. From the 2007-08 version, it was Walton, Farmar, Vlad-Rad, Ronny Turiaf and Vujacic. While there has been some turnover with the Bench Mob, it is also clear that there have been some constants with the Bench Mob (Farmar, Vujacic, Walton being the mainstays) making year-to-year comparisons interesting, if not totally legitimate.

With that in mind, the one thing can be analyzed independently of the year-to-year comparisons is the Bench Mob’s performance on the court so far this season.

Bench Mob Production, 2009-10

Taking a look at bench production for this season, the numbers point to the Lakers’ Bench Mob being one of the weaker in the League, no matter how you choose to evaluate their performance. In nearly every category (turnovers being the main exception), the Bench Mob provides below average production relative to the other 29 benches in the League.

*Table is sortable. Click on column headers to sort data.

Data Source: Hoops Stats

When scrolling down the list, what strikes you most about this version of the Lakers’ Bench Mob is how they excel at nothing and are average to downright pitiful in almost every respect. For a major market team that leads the league in payroll, this should be absolutely unacceptable from their bench players. At the very least, they should excel (i.e. be in the top three) in a few categories and should be average in most others.

All of the categories listed in the table above are self explanatory except for Efficiency, which is Hoops Stats’ simple means of comparing the overall statistical impact of a team based upon numbers available in the standard box score. The comparison can either be cumulative or on a game-by-game basis. The formula itself is Efficiency = ((PTS + REB + AST + STL + BLK) – ((FGA – FGM) + (FTA – FTM) + TOV)). By no means is this the perfect system for comparing teams (problems such as it values points/rebounds/assists/steals/blocks equally, does not account for pace, etc.), but it is a quick and dirty, but objective, way of measuring on court performance.

So now focusing on Efficiency, which can be thought of as a method of comparing the total impact of the bench unit, the Lakers are 24th in the League. If you compare the Bench Mob’s Efficiency rating of 29.3 to their opponents’ bench Efficiency rating of 38.0, you get a differential of -8.7. Compare this efficiency differential to prior seasons and you see how the Bench Mob has fallen off this season (2007-08: net efficiency of 0.9th good for 13th overall; 2008-09: net efficiency of 2.1 good for 9th overall). In the prior two seasons, the Lakers’ bench has had a positive impact for the team while on the floor. This season, the Bench Mob has been a net loss for the Lakers relative to other teams’ bench production. Simple as that.

Looking at the entire season’s numbers, the Bench Mob has clearly not been an elite bench unit for the defending world champs. But what kind of an impact does the bench have on the Lakers’ overall success?

A Closer Look: Game-by-Game Production

Taking Hoops Stats’ Efficiency rating one step further, we can break the Bench Mob’s success (and failure) down to a game-by-game basis. When looking at a game-by-game perspective, the Bench Mob is 11-22 in the Efficiency rating battle, meaning that the Lakers have had a greater Efficiency rating (using the same formula listed above) than their opponent’s bench 11 times and a lesser rating 22 times.

In the 11 games in which the Lakers bench won their matchups, the Lakers are 10-1 for a .909 winning percentage. In the 22 games in which the Lakers bench lost their matchups, the Lakers are 17-5 for a .773 winning percentage. The difference is startling. If you think of each of the two winning percentages relative to their overall winning percentage of .818 (27-6), the difference is even more pronounced. When the bench loses the Efficiency battle, it reduces the Lakers’ chance of victory from .818 to .773, for a net loss of -0.45 winning percentage. When the Bench Mob wins the Efficiency front, it boosts their chances to of picking up a W from .818 to a staggering .909, for a net gain of .091 winning percentage relative to the average.

Thus, the Lakers’ bench play affects their ability to win basketball games in a very significant and tangible way.

Payroll v. Production

As alluded to earlier, the Lakers’ salary situation makes their average (or poor, depending upon your perspective) bench play less palatable. The Lakers have the biggest payroll in the league, coming in at a whopping $91,341,066 (salary statistics via Sham Sports). The bench represents $28,452,691 of Los Angeles’ total salary, which is 31 percent of the team’s total salary. In a vacuum, the Lakers’ bench seems to be a decent bargain but a point of comparison would probably provide some insight.

For some perspective, let’s see how the Bench Mob stacks up against the League’s best bench, again measured in terms of net Efficiency. The San Antonio Spurs’ bench is far and away the Association’s best bench, with a net efficiency gain of +21.4 . For more perspective, the next most productive bench is Cleveland’s with a +11.3 so it is safe to say that the Spurs’ bench is the gold standard. In terms of salary, the Spurs bench players account for 32 percent of their total salary. In relative terms, the Spurs are spending the same ratio of their total amount of  team salary on their bench but getting a much better return on their investment. In absolute terms, it’s no contest.

Conclusion

The Lakers’ Bench Mob has been relatively pedestrian this season and has certainly been their weakest bench in three years. They’ve lost the aggressive brand of arrogance past Bench Mob versions have exhibited while on the floor in both crunch time and garbage time. The bench is critical to the any team’s success in the NBA but even more so to a team that is defending a title and gearing up for a deep postseason run. Just imagine if this team had San Antonio’s bench instead of their own! However, this Lakers team doesn’t need the League’s best bench to defend their title — they just need a bench that is slightly above average due to their league-leading starting five.

While their cumulative impact has been disappointing thus far this season, there is some hope for the Lakers faithful. On Sunday, the Lakers routed the Dallas Mavericks with the bench contributing a season-high 66 points and Jordan Farmar tying his career-high of 24 points. This game had the feel of a turning point for the Bench Mob, a game in which the regain their confidence and swagger. If that is the case, the Lakers’ chance of repeating will be infinitely greater than if their early-season woes continue.

Like in real life, one of the most important aspects of managing a team successfully involves making adjustments. Often, a few minor tweaks can make the difference in transforming a middle-of-the-road team into a juggernaut. One of the easiest ways to strengthen a fantasy squad is by building upon your strengths in head-to-head or by shoring up your weaknesses in roto without adding turnovers. Even more useful is to add to your strengths or to shore up your weaknesses while at the same time reducing your turnovers.

Turnovers are an easy category to win consistently based on the simple observation that most managers, including very competent and competitive managers, don’t pay much attention to turnovers. They play in nine category fantasy leagues but basically value their players based upon only eight categories. They take the attitude of letting the chips fall where they may in both roto and head-to-head leagues despite the fact that it is very much in their interest to keep the turnover numbers down.

Probably the most common argument against using turnovers as a scoring category in fantasy leagues is that people feel that the best players in the league are penalized because they have the ball in their hands so much when trying to create for their team. It is definitely a valid argument but there is something to be said for looking at the assist-to-turnover ratio instead of the raw turnovers. But that’s another argument for another day. For now, we are stuck with standard nine category fantasy basketball, for better or worse.

If you find yourself competing in a league that counts turnovers, trading a few of the players that hurt you on turnovers (such as Monta Ellis or Chris Kaman) for a few players that take care of the ball and address other needs can pay dividends. It is important to point out that there are players of all caliber that have manageable turnovers, including first round talents on down the line, so the previously mentioned argument that states good players are needlessly punished for turnovers doesn’t hold water. There are excellent players that average less than two turnovers per game while providing you with solid fantasy value, despite playing over 35 minutes per night. These players are just more rare and in higher demand than their bumbling counterparts.

The following chart contains players who are a net gain for your fantasy squad in terms of turnovers. It contains players of all positions and of all calibers, but is restricted to the players within the top 100 in per game value for the entire season. These valuable players are guys that make for interesting trade targets for managers trying to keep their turnovers to a minimum.

*Table is sortable. Click on column headers to sort data.

Right off the bat, one of the top two players in per game value is extremely impressive but should not be surprising. Dirk Nowitzki is constantly underrated and yet consistently provides amazing cumulative value from season to season. Over the past three seasons, only Chris Paul and Kobe Bryant have provided better cumulative value. And yet Dirk gets passed over for guys that bring in sexier stat-lines ever year but are either less efficient or more injury-prone. Dirk is a great first round pick for a head-to-head team that is looking to either punt assists completely or to just keep turnovers low.

In Kevin Martin’s case, the 1.4 turnovers per game were really impressive for two related reasons. First, K-Mart played big minutes (41.8 minutes per game) during the five games he appeared in earlier this season prior to his wrist injury. Just being on the floor for over forty minutes a night and not turning the rock more over is pretty impressive by itself. Even more impressive is the low turnovers coupled with his very high usage rate (29.4 usage percent while on the floor; this usage percent puts him in the top ten in the league this season). If he could only stay healthy, Kevin would rank among the league’s elite in fantasy leagues that count turnovers.

In perusing further down the list, you start to notice that there is a dearth of point guards that have low turnovers. There are four players that provide more than four assists per game while also keeping the turnovers low. These four players are Jose Calerdon (6.1 assists per game), Lou Williams (5.1 assists per game), Luke Ridnour (4.4 assists per game) and Beno Udrih (4.1 assists per game). Looking these same players from the assist-to-turnover perspective, they are re-ranked as follows: Calderon (3.84), Ridnour (3.43), Williams (2.84) and Udrhi (2.42). Target players such as these four if you are looking to add assists without overburdening turnovers. Contrast their stats with the aforementioned Ellis, who averages 5.0 assists per game but also tallies 4.3 turnovers for an AST/TO ratio of 1.17, which is not great for a guard.

For each statistical need, there are players on the table that provide the production you are looking for. For three point shooting, give Danilo Gallinari (2.8 threes per game) or Channing Frye (2.5 threes per game) a look. For boards, target Nene (8.8 rebounds per game) or Al Horford (9.4 rebounds per game) to clean up the glass. In the end, you can find add to your strengths or reduce your weaknesses while also reducing your team turnovers. It simply requires targeting the right low turnover players for your team.

At this point, the remaining Kings fans are probably all thinking the same thing, but aren’t saying it because it sounds a little crazy. It’s the idea that the Sacramento Kings are actually playing better without their best player and leader, Kevin Martin. It sounds ludicrous, but the anecdotal evidence is mounting and the battle lines are forming. Time for another Great Debate.

For being such a great scorer, it is amazing to think that Kevin might actually hurt a team more than he helps. But before we dig too deeply, just how good of a scorer is the other K-Mart? To put it in perspective, Martin was scoring 30.0 points per game, after only Carmelo Anthony (30.2) and Kobe Bryant (30.1), prior to his wrist injury earlier this season. That’s pretty good company right there. Thus, Martin is clearly a high usage scorer with a usage percent of 29.1 percent, which would be good for 11th overall this season if he qualified for inclusion on the leader board.

But scoring and scoring efficiently are two different things all together. So what about K-Mart’s scoring efficiency? His effective field goal percentage is .500 percent (versus a league average .494 percent) and his true shooting percentage is .577 this season (versus a league average of .531 percent). So it is safe to say that Martin is a high usage scorer that also is above average in scoring efficiency. Definitely a pretty ideal combination for a team’s primary or secondary scoring option.

With that being said, how is it possible that a team could be better without Martin on the floor?

Theory One: The Kings are Better Without K-Mart

Those that believe the Kings are better without Martin on the floor will first point to the Kings’ record. The proof is in the pudding, they say. With Martin in uniform this season, the Kings are a paltry 1-4 (.200 win-loss percentage). With Kevin riding the pine this season, the Kings are 4-5 (.444 win-loss percentage). Granted, the Kings don’t have a winning record without Kevin but their win-loss percentage has improved noticeably in his absence. So it appears there is some evidence for the argument that the Kings might be better off without Martin in the lineup.

Beyond the Kings’ record, there are other metrics that give credence to Theory One. In looking at On/Off data from 82games for Martin, the case against K-Mart continues to build. With Martin on the floor, the Kings had an O-Rating of 106.6 and a D-Rating of 117.2, for a net of -10.6 points per 100 possessions. Ouch — not what you want if you are trying to win basketball games. With Martin firmly entrenched on the bench, Sacramento had an O-Rating of 110.6 and a D-Rating of 107.4, for a net of +3.2 points per 100 possessions. So to recap, the Kings have been worse both offensively (-4.0 points per 100 possessions) and defensively (+9.8 points allowed per 100 possessions) with Martin on the floor.

Most people who have watched Martin play would have probably conceded that he is a defensive liability but never would have thought him to be a liability on offense as well. If you take the Kings’ win-loss record and Martin’s On/Off data together, Theory One looks to be pretty convincing. But before you start demanding that the Maloofs trade K-Mart, take a look at the argument that says Kevin isn’t responsible.

Theory Two: K-Mart is Not the Problem

According to Theory Two, Martin being out of the lineup is not the cause for the King’s improved record but instead simply a correlation. Proponents of this theory will mention the names of two of Kevin’s teammates when presenting their case: Tyreke Evans and Beno Udrih. Each of these two players play a pivotal role in helping making the Kings better when Kevin Martin went down.

When picked fourth overall by the Kings in the 2009 NBA Draft, Evans was sold to the Sactown faithful as the point guard of the future. True to their word, the Kings started Evans at the one from the opening tip, allowing Martin and Evans to make up the Kings’ starting backcourt. This moved Udrih to the bench backing up the young and promising rookie. From the start, Evans numbers were pretty nice for a rookie and no one was complaining. But once Martin went down, Evans’ numbers really took off.

So what changed?

The significant change was Beno Udrih moving into the starting five, sliding Evans over to the two. And the numbers have shown that Evans is hands down much more effective playing the off guard. Examining 82games’ positional data for Evans, Evans’ production compared to his opponent counterpart’s production clearly illustrates the difference. Playing point, Evans has had a PER of 11.5 while his opponent counterpart has had a PER of 22.8 for a -11.3 net. Playing the two, Evans has had a PER of 25.2 while his opponent counterpart has had a PER of 15.0 for a net of +10.2. What a difference playing the correct position can make. Switching Evans from the one to the two has had a huge impact on Evans’ effectiveness on both the offensive and defensive ends of the floor. Pretty convincing stuff.

But there is more to the story. As mentioned earlier, Martin’s injury has opened up increased PT for Udrih and he has definitely risen to the challenge. For evidence, examine Udrih’s splits as a starter/reserve this season. Coming off the bench, Udrih has averaged 9.8 points on .484/.750 percent shooting, 1.5 threes, 1.5 rebounds, 3.0 assists, 0.8 steals, 0.3 blocks and 2.0 turnovers in 22.3 minutes per game. As a starter, Udrih has averaged 15.8 points on .509/.900 percent shooting, 1.1 threes, 2.6 rebounds, 4.6 assists, 0.8 steals, 0.1 blocks and 2.0 turnovers per game. As a starter, Udrih has played much more efficiently (both shooting and assist-to-turnover) and has been much better at than Evans at the point (as a reference, check out Beno’s positional data from 82games and notice that Udrih is a net positive).

According to Theory Two, Martin is not the problem. Instead, the problem was playing a shooting guard at the point and having an effective point guard wallow on the bench. With Martin out, Coach Paul Westphal tweaked his lineup with beneficial results.

Conclusion

Both theories have enough basis in fact to be believable. However, only one theory can be correct and it is to each person to make up their own mind. In my opinion, Kevin Martin is too good of a player for Theory One to be true. If he were a high volume, low efficiency scorer, it would be easier to give credence to Theory One. However, his efficient scoring alerts me to the fact that something else is probably to blame. Enter Theory Two, which stands to reason and is supported by factual evidence.

So where then does the blame lie?

One, as is usually the case, coaching is partially to blame. Granted it was only a few games, but Evans is clearly not a point guard but is instead a shooting guard. It took an injury to Kevin to make Coach Westphal realize this fact but I am sure he has gotten the memo after Evans has posted impressive line after impressive line. And two, the front office is culpable as well. The front office has the final say on who the Kings draft and they chose a player who plays the same position as their star player. They duped themselves into believing that Evans could be molded into playing an unnatural position. More often than not, attempts to change a player’s nature fails (see the Allen Iverson saga).

One thing is for sure, though. Kevin Martin is not the one to blame.

Of all the great basketball debates, none is more divisive than the Kobe Bryant versus Michael Jordan debate. In all likelihood, there will never be consensus as to who should be the GOAT (Greatest Of All Time), especially if Kobe picks up another couple of rings before hangin’ em up. The debate is so compelling because Bryant and Jordan are/were shooting guards that dominated their respective eras.

The 23-versus-24 debate often centers around weak arguments, comparing apples to oranges or relying on the subjective rather than the objective. The NBA’s official basketball magazine, Hoop,  just committed such a transgression when it made a general argument claiming that Bryant was a much better defender than Jordan.

Before presenting the full quote, consider the context. In recapping the 2008-09 season, Hoop compiled lists of various sorts. Top buzzer beaters. Top teams. Top regular season performances. In all, the categories were more or less pedestrian and what you would expect. However the perimeter defender, put Kobe Bryant third overall, after Houston’s Shane Battier and Atlanta’s Marvin Williams.

For the record, there’s nothing wrong with Bryant at third overall (I would argue with Marvin at second though) but the blurb explaining why Bryant deserves to be number three for 2008-09 is where the problem lies.

Bryant has oftentimes been compared to Michael Jordan unfairly, but if there’s one aspect of their games which KB24 comes out on top it’s been defense. While Jordan developed into an elite defender with time, Bryant has been a top-notch defender from the time he first stepped foot onto an NBA court. During his first two years in the League, Bryant was the guy that L.A. brought off the bench to cool off a hot hand. His athletic gifts, length and high basketball understanding enabled him to frustrate scorers. His role has since changed, but when the game is tight, you’ll always see #24 manning up against the other team’s top dog.

Source: Hoop, September/October 2009

Ignoring the fact that there is no reason to bring Jordan into the debate as to why Bryant deserves consideration as the third best perimeter defender in 2008-09, the numbers just don’t support the claims that Hoop is making in the above quote (reproduced in it’s entirety to provide the full context). With Bryant beginning his thirteenth season, it is only fair to compare Jordan’s first twelve seasons to Kobe’s first twelve.

First, take a look at the two main claims Hoop is making in their argument:

Claim Number One: Bryant has oftentimes been compared to Michael Jordan unfairly, but if there’s one aspect of their games which KB24 comes out on top it’s been defense.

Claim Number Two: While Jordan developed into an elite defender with time, Bryant has been a top-notch defender from the time he first stepped foot onto an NBA court.

Next, examine the corresponding statistics and facts, all courtesy of the web’s finest online basketball statistics site, Basketball Reference.

To compare Michael’s and Kobe’s defensive abilities objectively, we’ll examine several viable angles.  First, we’ll look at individual defensive awards, such as All-Defensive Team honors and Defensive Player of the Year Awards.

• All-Defensive First Team: Bryant 7, Jordan 8
• All-Defensive Second Team: Bryant 2, Jordan 0
• Total All-Defensive Team: Bryant 9, Jordan 8
• Defensive Player of the Year: Bryant 0, Jordan 1

Bryant has the edge on total All-Defensive teams in his first twelve seasons. However, all of Jordan’s appearances were on the First Team, while Bryant appeared on the Second Team twice. It is more or less a push. However, the edge goes to Jordan with the Defensive Player of the Year Award, which is considered the most prestigious defensive award in the Association.

Second, individual defensive statistics provide another objective means of comparison. Two such metrics are Defensive Win Shares (an estimate of the number of wins a player contributed to his team through his defense) and individual Defensive Ratings (an estimate of points allowed per 100 possessions). With  Defensive Ratings, it is important to compare it relative to each year’s average, as it fluctuates from season to season. Remember with D-Ratings, a negative differential is more desirable than a positive differential (Offensive Ratings are the exact opposite). With Win Shares, the scale is static as there is a consistent number of possible wins per season (82).

Bryant’s Numbers

Over his first twelve seasons, Bryant’s average D-Rating was 104.8 compared to a 105.2 D-Rating over the same period giving him a differential of -0.4. In Defensive Win Shares, Bryant was good for an average of 2.9 per season. These numbers both provide support for the claim that Bryant was an above average defender.

But are they better than Jordan’s numbers?

Jordan’s Numbers

Over Michael’s first twelve seasons, his D-Rating was 103.3 versus a league average of 107.8, working out to a net -4.6. In Defensive Win Shares terms, MJ contributed an average of 4.4 wins per season through his defense alone. These statistics seem to support the claims that Jordan was an excellent defender and, subsequently, he was a better defender than the Black Mamba.

When you consider both individual defensive awards and the individual defensive statistics available, Hoop’s first claim that Bryant is a better defender than Jordan seriously fails to hold water.  Hence, let’s move onto the second claim that KB was a better defender than Jordan early on in their respective years.

We’ll narrow the twelve season data down to just the first five seasons and look at the same metrics and awards. In terms of Defensive Win Shares per season, Jordan finished in the top ten three separate times (1986-87: 4th, 1987-88:  3rd, 1988-89: 5th); Bryant accomplished the same feat only once (1999-00: 10th). In terms of D-Ratings, Jordan finished in the top ten during one season (1987-88: 6th) with Bryant never accomplishing the same feat. Edge: Jordan.

For individual defensive awards during the first five seasons, the evidence is similarly conclusive. Bryant was named to two All-Defensive Teams (1999-00: 1st; 2000-01: 2nd). Jordan was selected for two All-Defensive Teams (1987-88: 1st; 1988-89: 1st). During that same time span, Jordan also earned his only Defensive Player of the Year Award (1987-88). Again, Michael is the clear-cut winner.

Considering the aforementioned evidence, it is clear that Hoop’s second claim is also not supported by the evidence.

In the end, Hoop’s two main claims that Bryant was the better defender both overall and early-on during their respective careers both wither under scrutiny. Although it seems to run against reason, Jordan’s defense is actually consistently underrated, despite being widely promoted as the GOAT.

While there is no inherent problem in arguing that one player is better than another, it is important to support such claims with some sort of empirical evidence then mere subjectivity. In failing to bolster their primary claims in regards to Bryant’s and Jordan’s defensive abilities, Hoop did a disservice to both itself and all critical basketball minds.

There’s no denying that the San Antonio Spurs have been one of the most successful franchises in the last decade, compiling four championships in a span of ten years. The only other team to do that recently accomplished the feat this past season and featured some guy named Kobe.

But when talking fantasy, the Spurs are no juggernaut. Let’s face it –- if you’re drafting a fantasy team this year and you take a Spur, chances are his last name is Duncan, Parker or Ginobili.

However, that may all change next season due to several moves the Spurs have made that have put the words fantasy relevant back into the same sentence as San Antonio Spurs. One newly acquired Spur in particular has a good chance to exceed his current average draft position. What may surprise you though, is that this Spur isn’t named Richard Jefferson.

Try Antonio McDyess.

The Spurs have always had a player or two outside of the Big Three that dabbles with fantasy relevance each season. For example, Matt Bonner (no, that was not a typo) or Roger Mason both had fantasy value through several stretches last year. This year, it’s McDyess that stands to gain fantasy relevance by a simple formula — less is more.

Last season as a starter in 30 games with the Detroit Pistons, McDyess averaged 12.1 points on .514/.775 percent shooting, 11.0 boards, 1.6 assists, 0.6 assists, 1.2 blocks and 0.9 turnovers per game. But he did so playing close to 35 minutes a game. Sports writers, fantasy gurus and managers alike were all waiting to see the eventual break down of Antonio McDyess.

Fortunately for McDyess (and Spurs fans), the break down never came –- at least, not physically. It was more like he just ran out of gas. By the time the Pistons reached their first round playoff matchup with the Cleveland Cavaliers, McDyess was unable to reach the level of play he did during the month of March, when he had a string of ten double digit scoring games in a row.

Unfortunately for the Pistons, he also played the most minutes of his season during that same stretch — four games of 41 minutes plus, including a marathon 51 minute effort against the Houston Rockets. And the Pistons lost, by the way.

Ouch.

Once the playoffs started, the Cavs easily clamped down on McDyess, allowing him only 26 points total through the first three games. To put things into perspective, McDyess scored 26 points in the Pistons’ game four loss alone. With that loss to the Cavaliers, the 2008-09 Pistons were swept into the history books.

Hey Antonio: want a take-back on the decision to negotiate a buyout with Denver to return to Detroit?

However, Dyess’s situation in San Antonio is better than it could be anywhere else. As a Spur, he could start at either the four or the five alongside Duncan. Theo Ratliff and Matt Bonner aren’t fantastic coming off the bench, but they can provide enough of that ever so important rest for a savvy vet like McDyess.

And with Gregg Popovich being the one head coach notorious for setting his rotations in stone (well, more or less), McDyess could see a steady run of 25-27 minute games, easily a work-load he could handle at this stage in his career.

And with those minutes, expect quality stats, especially in rebounding, blocks and field goal percentage. A line of 8.8 points and 8.2 rebounds on over fifty percent shooting from the field and low turnovers would be a safe bet with 26 minutes per game. Because the Big Three carry the primary offensive load, Mcdyess would be allowed to simply focus on boards and defense –- so it’s very possible his 1.2 blocks remain steady and his field goal percentage rises as a result of getting easy looks and put-backs.

If everything breaks just right, you’re looking at a very nice late round flier in standard leagues, or a solid late round value pick in deeper ones. Currently, McDyess’s Buser Sports average draft position is 147 and his Yahoo! O-rank is 150. This puts his preseason value at around the 13th round in a standard 12-team league.

But (there is always a “but” somewhere, right?), keep an eye on McDyess during training camp and the preseason. The Spurs have some youth in their ranks that they are very high about including DeJuan “I don’t need no stinking ACL’s!” Blair and Ian Mahinmi.

All joking aside, Mahinmi has shown flashes of athleticism, which the Spurs seriously lack in their front court. As a rookie, Blair has enough motivation after being snubbed in the first round of the 2009 NBA Draft to last a lifetime. Let’s just hope his medical miracles of knees can last as long as his will.

Coach Pop and the Spurs have made it no secret that they intend to play these two young big men next season. What will be of concern is whether they cut into those quality minutes McDyess was acquired to play. Training camp and the preseason should give us a better idea, although one must be careful not to read to deeply into preseason games.

But if all indications are correct and McDyess starts alongside Duncan and his minutes per game hit that magic number of 26 or more, it’s very possible ‘Dyess meets or exceeds expectations if drafted after the twelfth round.

Picking up Antonio McDyess in the later rounds of your draft could yield solid dividends from your third or fourth power forward or center, especially if you’re looking for a player to give you quality stats in limited minutes. He may not give you top 100 returns, but by the time the season starts, his average draft position could continue to plummet, making Antonio McDyess a true Sleeper in Seattle San Antonio.

Step aside Lebron James, the real king of the NBA is Tim Duncan. The fact of the matter is that no other active NBA player has had a bigger impact on the game than the Big Fundamental. The only other candidates even in consideration would  be former teammates Kobe Bryant or Shaquille O’Neal.

Take a look at the San Antonio Spurs’ record during the Duncan era. Granted, TD has had a solid supporting cast of role players and complimentary stars but the consistent success at a high level is remarkable. The other major factor at work during the Tim Duncan era is the outstanding coaching from Gregg Popovich.

Among active coaches, the only other coach who parallels Pops’ level of coaching is the Zen Master himself, Phil Jackson. Popvich’s biggest strength as a coach is his ability to maximize the production and effectiveness of his role players to support his franchise player and complimentary stars.

What really stands out is the high level of winning, consistent across Duncan’s career. The winning percentages by season range from 0.646 to 0.768. From a cumulative perspective, Duncan’s Spurs have won .703 of their games. Considering the fact that these are statistics spanning twelve seasons, it is really a remarkable feat.

Winning .703 percent of games is really good for any franchise in any given season (that translates to an average of 57.6 wins per season). Doing it consistently for over a decade is what makes it truly a remarkable feat. Not to mention the four rings they collected along with the winning seasons.

The credit really goes to both Duncan and Popovich, as their rise to mythical status will be perennially intertwined (Co-Kings?). In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised at all if Popovich retired when Duncan decides to throw in the towel. Pop has always had a maverick streak in him.

The numbers don’t lie. And the numbers say that the real kings of the NBA are located in San Antonio.

Congratulations to the Los Angeles Lakers who are the 2009 NBA Champions.

The story lines are endless with this championship. Lakers coach Phil Jackson earns his tenth championship ring (six with the Bulls and four with the Lakers) to pass the legendary Red Auerbach as the coach with the most rings in NBA history. Kobe Bryant finally silences the haters as he wins a ring without Shaquille O’Neal (which is an absurd criticism because nobody wins an NBA championship alone).

With the Larry O’Brien trophy in hand, the Lakers will return to L.A. as champions. So how did people react to the Lakers’ convincing defeat of the Orlando Magic in five games? In an all too familiary sequence of events, people rioted all over the world in anger Laker Nation rioted in Los Angeles to celebrate the team’s hard earned victory.

Huh?

Police say they have arrested two residents of a downtown L.A. loft for receiving stolen property after the couple picked up some athletic shoes that had been stolen from a looted shoe store. That would bring the total number of arrests in Sunday night’s post-Lakers-victory melee to 23.

Investigators also said they will be reviewing video to identify other people involved in the violence. Eight Los Angeles police offers suffered minor injuries and 21 people were arrested during Lakers victory celebrations that turned riotous outside the Staples Center, authorities said today.

Following the Lakers’ 99-86 win over the Orlando Magic on Sunday night, officers faced small groups of revelers in downtown Los Angeles who shook passing cars, threw debris and sparked fires.

Source: The Los Angeles Times

Ok, not exactly unprecedented territory here but ridiculous all the same. At least (so far) no one has died because of the revelry in Los Angeles. Can you imagine a more meaningless death than to to die celebrating your team’s championship? Having never experienced such a feeling personally (Suns fan), it is hard to imagine what drives someone to turn from celebrating to looting, but my guess is that it probably involves large quantities of alcohol.

For being such critical statistics, pace and possessions are rarely referenced except in the most general sense. For example, you often hear that the Golden State Warriors consistently play at one of the fastest paces in the league. Or, a team like the San Antonio Spurs is usually said to average a low number of possessions per game. From listening to the generalities, it is apparent that pace and possessions are related, but how so?

Pace is simply an estimation of the number of possessions a team has per-48 minutes (length of regulation game). Pace is tracked year by year at Basketball Reference, which is the gold standard for free online basketball statistics.

What then, precisely, is a possession? A possession is a team’s uninterrupted control of the basketball and can only end in a variety of ways (a possession is different than a play; a possession can encompass multiple plays). A possession can end with a made field goal, a defensive rebound, a turnover, or in a foul being called.

There are two ways to approximate the number of possessions in a game from statistics that can be viewed in a box score. These methods come from Dean Oliver’s groundbreaking and influential book, Basketball on Paper. If you haven’t read it and are interested in learning about advanced basketball statistics or just interested in gaining abetter understanding of the game, there is no better resource out there.

A simple approximation of the number of possessions is: FGA – OREB + TOV + (0.4 x FTA). The more accurate formula is as follows: FGA – ((OREB / (OREB + DDREB)) x (FGA – FGM) x 1.07) + TOV + (0.4 x FTA). In the latter formula DDREB refers to the opponent’s number of total defensive rebounds. The other values should be familiar to all basketball enthusiasts. If you are not a basketball enthusiast, you have somehow taken a google detour. Welcome and enjoy!

To make it more concrete, examine Game One of the 2009 of the NBA Finals, which featured a Magic beatdown care of Kobe Bryant and the Los Angeles Lakers. In order to estimate the number of possessions, you simply pick one team and use their numbers from the box score to run the calculations. It doesn’t matter which team you use, as the number of possessions are roughly the same (although one team could have a couple of possessions more than the other team).  Both the simpler and more accurate calculations provide similar numbers of 86.6 possessions and 85.0 possessions, respectively.

Where does this game fall in terms of pace relative to the league average in this season? According to Basketball Reference, the league average was 91.7 possessions per game. The Los Angeles Lakers played at the fifth fastest pace in the league, averaging 94.4 possessions per game. The Orlando Magic’s 92.3 possessions per game was good for the twelfth fastest pace in the league. With it being the postseason, it is understandable that the game’s pace has slowed a bit as defenses tighten up and teams play more in the half court.

With all that being said, why does the number of possessions or pace even important at all?

In general terms, it is important to recognize that pace can distort statistics by judging teams based upon different numbers of attempts, for example. It is important to recognize when to use pace-adjusted statistics (Offensive and Defensive Ratings for example) and when to use raw statistics (points per game or points allowed per game for example). For fantasy purposes, adjusting for pace is less important as what really matters is what was actually accumulated. For real life, pace-adjusted statistics allow for comparisons of different teams on an even scale, which deprives a team like the Warriors of it’s pace inflation.

On an individual game level, like examining Game One of the 2009 NBA Finals, pace gives another statistic to piece together why a certain team won and why the other team lost. Imagine the fastest paced team in the league and the slowest paced team played against each other. If the fastest team won the game and the game was played at a fast pace, you could point to the pace and say that the fastest team dictated the pace of them game to their advantage.

Understanding and being familiar with more diverse statistics allows you to marry argument and evidence. All too often arguments are decided by rhetoric backed by zealotry. Don’t fall into that common trap and look for the evidence to back up your opinions based on your personal observations.

With the top two seeds still alive and kicking in the Western Conference, both the Los Angeles Lakers and the Denver Nuggets avoided upsets on their way to the Western Conference Finals. However, both teams took divergent routes this season to arrive at the same destination; the doorstep of the Promised Land.

For the Lakers, it seems as though their season was predestined from the moment training camp began. Kobe Bryant and company finished the season with the second best record in the league, second only to Eastern Conference power house, the Cleveland Cavaliers. The Lakers also sported high profile wins against some of the toughest competition this season and stole a game from the Cavs at the Q (39-2 record at home this season, with the Lakers being the only team able to dethrone the King at home;  The Philadelphia 76′ers beat the Cavaliers at home in the final game of the season by one point with Lebron James in street clothes).

For the Nuggets, the season started ominously with the front office kicking Marcus Camby to the curb for peanuts (well, salary cap relief). At that time, the Nuggets faithful were despairing the loss of their defensive anchor for nothing in return. Little did they know that the front office had an ace up their sleeve and would pull-off one of the best trades since the Lakers acquired Pau Gasol from Memphis last season.

In what has proven to be a franchise-altering move, the Nuggets shipped out Allen Iverson for Chauncey Billups and Antonio McDyess (who was ultimately waived and re-signed with Detroit for a better shot at winning a title… whoops). Since that time, the Nuggets have gone from possible lottery team to legitimate championship contender. If Allen Iverson truly is the Answer, the Denver Nuggets certainly weren’t interested in finding out what the question was. In contrast to the Lakers, this team has had to prove the doubters wrong every step of the way on their journey to being one of the last four teams standing.

So how do these two teams compare to one another?

Tale of the Tape: The Los Angeles Lakers

Record: 65-17
W-L%: .793
Rank: 2nd

The Lakers played consistently good basketball throughout the course of the regular season. Outside of Laker Nation, the Lakers probably didn’t get quite of enough credit for their accomplishments this season with Lebron James, and to a lesser extent Dwayne Wade and the Celtics’ Big Three garnering most of the media’s attention. They also maintained the best record in the West even with Andrew Bynum missing 32 games leading up to the playoffs.

Pace: 94.4, 5th
O-Rating: 112.7, 3rd
D-Rating: 104.6, 6th
Differential: +8.1 (O-Rating minus D-Rating)

Of the numerous basketball cliches out there, one in particular describes this Lakers team when they are firing on all cylinders. It is the well known saying that ‘their defense creates their offense.’  But for this Lakers squad it really holds true, with Trevor Ariza leading the charge (and earning himself a nice raise in the process going into free agency this season). Ariza, who is the Lakers’ defense personified, gets into the passing lanes, pushes the tempo and finishes way above the rim without ever giving up on a play. When Ariza and the Lakers play inspired basketball, they are really an exciting team to watch.

Offensively, you cannot overlook three time champion and former MVP Kobe Bryant. He draws a huge amount of attention from opposing teams’ defenses and makes life much easier for his teammates to get high-percentage looks. At the same time though, last season’s key acquisition, Pau Gasol, has made it much easier for Bryant to get good looks as well. Having Lamar Odom and Andrew Bynum as your backup weapons makes the Lakers a very dangerous team. Add in great perimeter shooting and you have a team that punishes you for doubling to try and stop Bryant. They truly make you pick your poison.

First Round, v. UTA: 4-1
Conference Semifinals, v. HOU: 4-3

In the first round of the playoffs, the Lakers took care of business fairly efficiently in taking five games to dispatch of the Utah Jazz. However, the conference semifinals provided the Lakers with a much bigger challenge in the Tracy McGrady-less Houston Rockets. When Yao Ming went down for the season after game three, the Lakers and everyone else in the world counted the young and injured team out of the running.

The trouble for the Lakers was that the Rockets didn’t get the memo that everyone else in the world got that the series was over and they played like their (playoff) lives depended on it.  The simple fact that it took the Lakers seven games to move past the Rockets (refer to Lebron James, Mo Williams and the rest of the Cavs to see what a championship team truly looks like) has given legitimacy to the argument that this team is mentally focused enought to win a championship. However the 2007-08 Celtics didn’t exactly cruise to victory against the Hawks or Cavaliers in the first two rounds of the playoffs either.

Tale of the Tape: The Denver Nuggets

Record: 54-28
W-L%: .659
Rank: 5th

The Nuggets played like an entirely different team this season by both addition by subtraction and also by, well, addition. The Nuggets gained by subtracting Allen Iverson, who is the epitome of a high-volume, low-efficiency scorer in decline. Iverson is unwilling to admit that he can no longer carry a team on his back and unable to accept any lesser role. This is probably the ultimate chemistry killer in the locker room. Billups, in an absolute contrast to AI, is the consummate professional and a savvy, championship proven veteran (they don’t call him Mr. Big Shot for nothing). You replace an undersized and disgruntled shoot-first point guard with a professional, pass-first floor general who demands a commitment to defense from his teammates and you have a vastly improved Nuggets squad this year.

Pace: 94.3, 6th
O-Rating: 110.4, 7th
D-Rating: 106.8, 8th
Differential: +3.6

Much like the Lakers, the Nuggets play high tempo basketball and especially push the ball and force the issue on their home court. Defensively, both Nene and Kenyon Martin play physical defense in the paint and tend to force jump shooting big men like Dirk Nowitzki out of their element (although to Dirk’s credit he played phenomenal basketball against Denver in the Western Conference Semifinals). What really stands out when looking over this Denver Nuggets squad is that they played great team defense, which is exactly what they’ll need to do to try and limit Kobe Bryant. Dahntay Jones, despite earning minutes from George Karl based on his perimeter defense, is simply over-matched against Bryant. It must be a concentrated and carefully executed five man strategy if you hope to stop the Black Mamba.

Offensively, this team is a true partnership with Billups and Carmelo Anthony sharing the leadership onus for this team. Billups calls the plays and initiates the offense while Melo is the finisher. Off the bench, J.R. Smith provides instant fire and has matured from playing alongside Billups (although he is still J.R. Smith so keep that in mind). He is prone to occasionally taking ill-advised jumpers or pull-up threes. But when this guy is on, he can absolutely make it rain. Smith is the true X-Factor for the Nuggets offense.

First Round, v. NOH: 4-1
Conference Semifinals, v. DAL: 4-1

Melo could not being player better basketball this postseason (27.0 points, 6.4 rebounds, 4.3 assists on 48/45/83 percent shooting). Him and Dirk really battled last series with Anthony rising to the challenge and hitting big baskets when they mattered most. Chauncey Billups is right there alongside Melo in terms of playoff production (22.1 points, 7.3 assists, 3.8 rebounds on 49/54/96 percent shooting) and impact on ball games. As a result, the Nuggets made quick work of both the Hornets and the Mavericks along the way.

Regular Season Matchups

The Lakers and Nuggets played four regular season games this year, with the Lakers holding the 3-1 advantage. But upon closer examination, the team’s head-to-head play is not so clear-cut.

• Game One: 11/01/08. Lakers 104, Nuggets 97 (No Billups).
• Game Two: 11/21/08. Nuggets 90, Lakers 104.
• Game Three: 02/27/09. Lakers 79, Nuggets 90 (No Bynum).
• Game Four: 04/09/09. Nuggets 102, Lakers 116.

One of the Lakers’ three wins came against an Iverson-led Nuggets team, which, as discussed earlier, is essentially a different team. Empty win, Lakers 0-0. The second Lakers win was played out by two teams at full strength. Lakers 1-0. The third game involves a Bynum-less Lakers team, which is a different team as well. Lakers 1-0. The fourth and final game was again played out at full strength and again resulted in a Lakers win. Lakers 2-0.

Slam dunk, the Lakers are going to sweep the Nuggets in this series then, right? Not so fast. If you look at regular season games one through four again, paying particular attention to home court (the second team listed above was the home team), the Lakers two wins at full strength were both at the Staples Center. The two games that were thrown out for missing key players both occurred in Denver, where Denver is much more likely to play better basketball. While not providing hard evidence in favor of Denver winning the series, these few games definitely don’t give me any reason to count out the Denver Nuggets yet.

Position Battles

Point Guard: Advantage Nuggets. Hands down, and it’s not even close. Billups is a vastly superior floor general to Derek Fisher, although Billups is a better defensive assignment for Fish than Aaron Brooks proved to be last series. Fisher was absolutely embarrassed at times by Brooks’ speed and looked his age (34). Not to take anything away from Fisher, who is a great piece for the Lakers, but  he is clearly overmatched here.

Shooting Guard: Advantage Lakers. Hands down, and it’s not even close (again). I’m sorry but Bryant is better than Dahntay Jones and J.R. Smith combined. You better hope that Smith is ready to play lock-down defense, because Jones will be into early foul trouble in at least a couple of games in this series. One of the top five players on the planet and a nightmare to guard.

Small Forward: Advantage Nuggets. Again, not to take anything away from Trevor Ariza, but Anthony is clearly the better player. Ariza’s quickness may get the better of Melo at times, but Anthony’s strength will likewise cause problems for Trevor on the defensive end. Melo has forced his name into the discussion of best players in the postseason and I fully expect that trend to continue in the immediate future.

Power Forward: Advantage Lakers. Kenyon Martin is a very physical defender and could possibly cause Pau Gasol to lose his focus and start trying to get the referee’s ear. However, Gasol can stretch the floor and play with his back to the basket with equal skill. Martin is much more limited offensively which allows Gasol to conserve more of his energy for the offensive end.

Center: Push. Bynum has not fully proven that he is healthy and ready to be a factor in this series. Sure, he did play much improved basketball in the later games of the Rockets series, but he was also playing against a team without a true center or anyone who can body up on him (he is a beast). Nene has also not proven that he can be a consistent factor on the road in the post season, which is of crucial importance if the Nuggets hope to have a chance at upsetting the Lakers.

Bench: Push. This is a hard decision to make. Chris ‘the Birdman’ Andersen is the heart and sould of this Nuggets team and he, like Ariza, has earned himself a nice raise this season heading into free agency. He gets the crowd in the game. He blocks shots and alters way more shots than he actually touches. He provides highlight reel finishes in the open court. Besides him, the Nuggets have Anthony Carter, J.R. Smith and Linas Klieza to provide quality minutes.

The Lakers also have an extremely solid bench with depth at every position. Lamar Odom, Sasha Vujacic, Jordan Farmar, Shannon Brown and Luke Walton all provide production off the bench and can step in if an injury were to occur to a starting teammate. The Lakers generally only need Odom and other of these guys to have a big game and they are virtually unbeatable. The bench (more so than even the Bynum v. Nene matchup) will be hugely important in this series.

Final Questions

Which team will show the mental toughtness of a championship team, even through adversity?

Can the Denver Nuggets overcome the Lakers’ home court advantage?

Where will game four be played?