NBA Free Agency Questions

Since NBA Free Agency began less than a week ago, one of my favorite players joined a team I have historically not liked, a "ball hog" went to Brooklyn, and an old guy moved to a big city.  I decided to ask and answer a few questions about some of these moves.

Did the Lakers really get better by adding Steve Nash?

Yes.  They added a two-time NBA MVP to a team that already made it to the second round of the NBA Playoffs.  Anyone who isn't sure the Lakers got better needs to never have an opinion about anything basketball related ever again.

With Nash on the Lakers, whose team is it?

Every Kobe fan just laughed out loud at this question and stopped reading the post.  They might not read another post I ever write.  "What?  Whose team is it?  Kobe's team!  Kobe should have won the MVP.  He's the best player in the league!  No one is better than Kobe!  LOOK AT THE RINGSSSSSSSSSS!"

Now that we have covered irrational arguments, let's take a look at this Lakers team.  Under Mike Brown, this Lakers team has had NO identity.  Kobe Bryant is allowed to take as many shots as he wants and thinks he needs.  Andrew Bynum is the only post player that gets touches where he can actually be effective and Pau Gasol has been so underutilized that Laker fans forgot that they went to three straight Finals after they added him.  These are problems.  Very large problems.

With the addition of Nash, one would think that these problems would disappear.  When the latest rumors had Nash going to New York, everyone started to question whether or not Nash would be able to thrive playing for a defensive minded coach, Mike Woodson.  These questions were dismissed by many who claimed "Steve Nash is the system."  I think this might be a little simplistic, but overall I would agree with this logic.  In general, the point guard should be the one in charge and needs to dictate a team's style of play, which means this SHOULD be Steve Nash's team.

Unfortunately, this is where we run into problems.  Under Mike Brown, Bryant has been the main facilitator.  He has been allowed to take the shots he has wanted to take when he has wanted to take them.  With Nash on the team, this should no longer be the case.  Bryant should defer to Nash and allow Nash to be the world-class playmaker that he is.  And honestly, I don't think this should be a problem. Bryant might fight it a little bit at first, but after a short time playing Nash, he will see just how easy life can be with an All-NBA point guard...I hope.  In the back of my mind though, I see Bryant being upset about ceding control to another player.  And it's not just any other player.  It's Steve Nash.  A former rival of his.  Someone he may not particularly like.  Like I said, I think Bryant is of a special type of mindset and will be able to easily make the the transition to working off the ball more often, but there is just something I can't shake about him.

The larger problem comes with Bynum and Gasol.  Nash is great in the pick and roll situation and both players should benefit from playing with him, but at the same time it may be difficult for them to figure out who gets to use the pick and roll.  Will Pau be able to be effective in the pick and roll with Andrew on the floor?  Will Pau be able to find the shooting touch and confidence that he had as a Laker in previous seasons?  I tend to believe that they will be able to figure out both of these questions because these four players are among the best in the league at their respective positions, but once again I have lingering doubts in the back of my mind.  I see Andrew Bynum childishly quitting on plays because he isn't getting touches and Pau Gasol hoisting 15 footers he isn't completely confident in, but still I just think there is too much talent on the floor for this not too work.

Does anyone remember Joe Johnson in Phoenix?

The guy that averaged 17.1 PPG, shot 46% from the field, and 47.8% from the three point line?

No.

How about the guy that Bill Simmons described as "a 24-year-old potential All-Star, the perfect swingman for their system, a deadly shooter who could even play backup point guard for them"?

Still not ringing a bell.

How about one of the highest paid players in the league that many people started to refer to Iso-Joe?

Ooohhh.  You said Joe Johnson.  Yeah, I know that guy.  He shoots too much and doesn't seem to try very hard.

This is my biggest problem with the reactions I've heard to the Joe Johnson trade.  Many people have been blinded from seeing Johnson's skill because of the huge contract he signed and the amounts of shots he has taken in Atlanta.  I don't really think you can blame Joe Johnson for either of these things.

Is he overpaid?  Probably.  But what did you want Johnson to do when the Hawks offered him the huge contract?  Was he supposed to give money back?

Does he force up some shots?  Probably.  But what did you want Johnson to do when there were very few viable offensive options in Atlanta?  Was he supposed to encourage Josh Smith to jack up ill-advised threes?

These two things were essentially out of Johnson's control.  Johnson was able to control his immense talent and get himself to into six consecutive All-Star Games.  He's been one of the best players in the Eastern Conference, but extremely forgettable because he was stuck in Atlanta on a team that would always make the playoffs, but would never truly contend.  Johnson was always the team's best player, but I've never thought he was truly comfortable in being the team's best player.  I don't think he ever enjoyed being the guy that had too take every contested jumper late in the shot clock and probably take a few too many shots each night.  This is why I think Johnson will love his move to Brooklyn.

In Brooklyn, Johnson will be able to get more catch and shoot opportunities and more open looks playing with a world-class point guard in Deron Williams.  Besides Chris Paul, you'd be extremely hard pressed to find a better point guard in the league than Williams.  He embodies exactly what you want out of a point guard.  He is a great decision maker who shoots the ball well and is extremely efficient.  Williams' ability as a point guard should help bring the best out of Johnson.  Johnson should hopefully be able to get more open shots and improve his efficiency which will ultimately turn the Nets into a contender in the Eastern Conference.

Is Jason Kidd old?

Yes.  Very old.  So old, in fact, that I think he makes little difference in New York.  I will concede that he will help the Knicks and fits well in New York because he doesn't really need any shots, but overall this doesn't turn the Knicks into a team that compete for an NBA Finals appearance.

The biggest question for the Knicks is whether Jeremy Lin and Carmelo Anthony can coexist.  (I know Lin isn't officially a Knick, but it doesn't seem like they have much of a choice with him.  They need a point guard and will likely resign him.)  This question is especially annoying because we discussed it for about a month last year, but never got an answer because of the injuries to both Anthony and Lin.  For me, I just don't see it working.  Mike Woodson is a great coach defensively, but offensively he just doesn't have a clue.  The Knicks offense slowly regressed into an offense that relied nearly solely on isolation basketball.  That is just not going to work with Lin at point guard.  As much as Lin may help with ticket sales and fan base, he turns the Knicks offense into an absolute mess.

Cole Talks Hockey: State of the NHL

In an attempt to better myself as a sports fan, I am going to attempt to understand the NHL.  To help me do this, I have enlisted the services of my good friend and avid NHL fan Cole Vanden Heuvel.  Today, we start with Cole's State of the NHL piece.  In the coming weeks, I will be emailing Cole questions about the NHL that I, as a novice, have always been curious about.  Enjoy.

As a sidenote, this is all I can think about when I see the word Cole in the title of a post.



Unfortunately, that is not Cole Vanden Heuvel in the video.
--------------------------------------

As you may or may not be aware of, the current CBA in the NHL is set to expire on September 15^th (or the day after my birthday for anyone who cares to send any gifts my direction).  Many of you probably remember the 04-05 season when an entire hockey season was lost.  I wasn’t a fan of the sport at that time so it was nothing more than a footnote on the ESPN scroll that I happily ignored at the time.  However since then I, along with many others, have fallen in love with the game that has embraced a youthful resurgence from players that were barely out of diapers when that season was lost.  This post will hopefully give you an insight into what is currently going on within the NHL and what all these debates over the next few months are actually centered around. 

It’s easy for the average fan to be bitter and blame the players and sport for a lockout, it happened on a smaller scale to the behemoths that are the NFL and NBA this past year.  However where hockey has been lucky is that most of the “faces of the league” weren’t around during that 04-05 disaster.  Alex Ovechkin, Sidney Crosby, and Jonathan Toews are all players that don’t have any blood on their hands and fans are able to get behind.  The league now rests in their, and many other players whom are in the same boat, hands as they have hired Donald Fehr to run the NHLPA.  Fehr’s negotiating tactics are famous because he was the head man leading the MLBPA during their World Series-less season in the mid-90’s, but he is also utilizing a new technique that the talking heads didn’t fully capitalize on during those negotiations in 04.  The NHLPA has announced a 30 member executive committee made up of players with varying experience levels in the league.  On top of that the PA has also offered to pay for the flights and lodgings of any active player interested in going to NY to take part in discussions to both better understand what’s going on and get their opinion out there.

The biggest sticking points in this round of CBA negotiations revolve around the percentage of total revenue that is allocated to player salaries, player involvement in the Olympics, and closing current contract loopholes.  Currently the players get to see 57% of all league revenues by way of salaries.  To any normal person that may seem about right since it’s the players who put butts in the seats and without them it would just be a bunch of suits not generating any revenues.  However when you compare that % to those in the NFL and NBA (both barely about 50%) it results in a quite substantial difference that the owners will be looking to take a chunk out of this go around. 

NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman (BOOO!!!) has made it known that he is against the idea of sending NHL players to the Olympics in Russia in 2014.  His thinking is that it does nothing to promote the game and only risks players getting hurt and owners losing out on hundreds if not thousands of dollars.  The 2010 Vancouver Olympics were a great success and did an unbelievable job promoting the sport and increasing viewership and fandom in North America mainly because the marquee games were played during the late afternoon or during primetime.  The 2014 Olympics being played on the opposite side of the planet meaning those same marquee games will take place during the middle of the night or extremely early morning for more North Americans, and when it really boils down that’s the main market that the talking heads care about.  The players love the idea of playing for their country and with their countrymen, but it may be a point they have to give up if they want to keep that large chunk of the “revenue pie”.

The third sticking point of the CBA negotiations revolves around the contract loopholes that are currently being exploited.  If you’re not an avid hockey fan, which I’m working under the assumption encompasses most of the readership here, you may just see the absurd 10-15 year contracts handed out by NHL teams and just scratch your head.  The reason that’s done is because under the current CBA the salary cap is calculated using AVERAGE salary over a player’s contract.  I’m going to launch into an example here, so if you don’t feel like putting up with all the numbers and jargon, please feel free to bypass the next paragraph.

So if you have player X signed for 5 years at $40 million total, he counts for $8 mil against your cap each season.  Whereas you could sign him for 10 years at a total of $50 million and lay out the pay scale such that he makes $8 mil the first 5 years and $2 mil a year for the last 5 years his cap hit falls to $5 mil a year.  This may not seem like a big deal, but imagine if you do this to a player who is 35 and it’s understood he’ll retire at 40.  You’ve saved yourself $3 mil a year in the cap and after he retires you drop off those last 5 years/$10 mil/$5 mil cap hit.  The new CBA will look at likely putting a max amount of years you can offer to a player over a given age in order to remove or at least curtail that sort of loophole in the future.

Of course those aren’t the only 3 issues that the NHL will be discussing, but they are 3 that you will for sure hear mentioned at some point during all the proceedings.  Armed with this info you will be at least somewhat prepared to hold a discussion with another sports fan on these issues, and if not you can show off for all the girls because what chick isn’t interest in a good CBA discussion?