Who else is sick with the Great Hype surrounding Andrew “Bust”num?

If you’ve ever wandered onto an LA Lakers blog, message board, or listened to a nationally broadcasted game by Mike “Fellatio for the Lakers 24/7” Tirico then you’ll know, with complete certainty, that Andrew Bynum is one of the best centers in the league, and will without giving any prior notice, become the next best center in the league and join the pantheon of great bigmen. He will rightfully sit alongside Wilt, Russell and Kareem while using Ewing, Robinson and O’Neal as foot rests. The third footrest will be necessary because of how great and grand his male organ must be – as he has been photographed at the Playboy mansion (who cares) and is curiously linked to Rihanna right now. (who? exactly.)

As impressive as his potential appears, and as great as his off-court life may or may not be (I’d rather hang out at the Acharya mansion any day of the week) – I’m less than impressed with him as a player. I’m even less impressed when I actually look at his accomplishments as a player in the playoffs (aka. when it counts). Furthermore, I’m pretty much sick to death by the hype that he has received from casual fans, homer fans, and the media alike. Now, this isn’t meant to trash the hopes of the future of the Lakers at all – I strive to temper the expectations of him a little bit. For his sake, and ours.

My brother is the most rational Lakers fan I know, he is passionate, but not completely under the spell that countless others are on the internet. He’s more concerned with consistent play, rebounding and solid defense from all of the Lakers and does not have the time to worry about if Bynum is going to be the next Kareem – he’s worried about right now. If I was a Lakers fan I wouldn’t be worried about right now – you guys will trounce Denver on your way to the NBA Finals (where anything can happen). I would, on the other hand, be worried about the past – specifically Bynum’s past.

He’s 21 years old right now and was drafted as a 17 year old. What do we know about him that should really count? How about the fact that he had an injury ruined high school career (leg/knee injury), and in the NBA has had two more leg/knee injuries in his young career. He’s tall, but not nearly as super athletic and fit as freaks like Dwight Howard or Amare Stoudemire are – I don’t expect him to be physically made of the same stuff as those guys are. When you get over 7 feet tall, any injuries to your lower body seriously limit how reliable you can be, regardless of how much work one may put on their upper bodies. (You’re only as strong as your base is – look at Yao Ming, who has just a storied lower body injury history as Bynum, he misses lots of games every year, and is never 100% due to the strain his body puts on his lower body) Amare had two career ending (had this been the 80’s/90’s) knee injuries, but has come back due to a great work ethic. Bynum puts women on his shoulders during rehab. I wouldn’t be making a huge leap by suggesting that Bynum may have a career that features a number of injuries to his lower body, not unlike Yao Ming – as opposed to being virtual injury free like Dwight Howard. But I have no crystal ball, I’m just going on the fact that he’s a big guy with a history of lower body injuries who was injury prone as a teen and only looks to put an increasingly large strain on those same joints as his ages and increases mass.

That’s not very empirical though, it’s just an assumed health arc based on his body type, job, apparent work ethic, how healthy other big guys his size have been and medical history. What is empirical, on the other hand, is to dig deep and look at stats. I love stats. Stats are flawed, as I’ve explained on this blog before, but they still give a pretty good indication of on court production. (After all, that’s what counts, points, rebounds, blocks, assists, steals, turn overs and fouls, right?)

After this last game against the Houston Rockets the total number of playoff games that Bynum has participated in stands at 18. These 18 games have taken him from 2005-2006 till now to amass. In that time he has been brought along slowly – thanks to the fact that he doesn’t need to be useful when he’s so far down the pecking order behind at least 4 other guys. That said, his production does not appear to be indicative of him joining the pantheon of great bigmen any decade soon. I want to look at his stats in the playoffs and see the promise that appears to be there (and only appears in regular season games against bad teams sandwiched between injuries). As a point of reference I looked at Patrick Ewing’s first 19 games (why not 18? wanted to complete that one series to make it an even number of playoff off series for the two) in the playoffs. Ewing was a great center, but never will he be called the best of his generation, and thus, not up for entry into the pantheon of greatest bigmen ever (though the media has already reserved a spot there for Bynum).

Bynum’s first 18 Playoff games, and how they stack up:

Ewing creams Bynum statistically. And Ewing played in a time where big guys weren’t bailed out with foul shots, and played against much better competition. Bynum played against the Phoenix Suns, twice anchored in the paint by Frenchman Boris Diaw; the injury depleted Utah Jazz that was forced to start Jarron Collins; and the Houston Rockets, who during the course of the series, lost Yao Ming to injury a little more than 2 games in – and had to turn to a rotation of Chuck Hayes, Carl Landry and Luis Scola to battle LA’s 7 footers. Bynum gets killed – just look at the stats.

Alas, he is immune to any criticism for a great rebuttal exists: Ewing had much more experience from being a guy who actually went to college, won a National Title; and also played in the NBA for a few seasons before making the playoffs. All this is true, but nothing prevented Bynum from going to college himself – if he was really interested in experience. That said, I also took a chance to look at another young bigman, and saw how he faced the NBA pressure. David Robinson did manage to make the playoffs as a rookie (he led his team there, unlike Bynum who did his best to stay out of Kobe’s way). David Robinson is far from my favorite player in the world – but he also creams Bynum’s numbers when you take out experience and look just at Bynum’s FIRST FOUR SEASONS against David’s ROOKIE season.

Let’s not forget that David had to go to war against Joe Barry Carroll and the plethora of tough guys in the paint that Portland sported back when David was a rookie. Bynum, with 4 years of experience in the NBA, has yet to face anything like that in the NBA playoffs – and his numbers are completely pathetic.

Ewing: 22.1 ppg, 10.9 rpg, 2.37 bpg

Robinson: 24.4 ppg, 12.00 rpg, 4.00 bpg

Bynum: 4.83 ppg, 3.78 rpg, 0.67 bpg

Obviously the data is heavily skewed against poor, young Bynum. His first few playoff sorties were short and he was inexperienced. Obviously the stats are going to go against him when you include some of his early games. The Bynum of today is a beast though! Look at Bynum’s numbers from just his 4th season in the playoffs against other greats and you’ll see! You’ll all see!

Okay, let’s do that then.

Bynum’s Playoff stats from his 4th season, and how those stats stack up:

Bynum’s numbers improve very slightly, he ups his ppg from 4.83 to 5.58, his free throw percentage from 62.96% to 76.47% and he swats almost 0.2 more blocks per game. Still not impressed. He’s a far cry from, let’s just randomly say, Hakeem Olajuwon. In the Dream’s 4th NBA season he happened to tear the NBA playoff’s a new one with his scoring -- 37.5 ppg (57.14 fg%, 88.37 ft%); rebounding – 16.75 rpg; and all around game – 2.75 bpg, 1.75 apg, 2.25 spg.

Not only did Hakeem obliterate Bynum’s pitiful offensive output by a magnitude nearing 7x, but absolutely owned him all over the boxscore. He also did it against much tougher competition as well.

Heck, Bynum is so far from being impressive that Greg Ostertag’s fourth year playoff stats could (and do) give Bynum’s fourth year playoff stats a run for their money. It’s horrible to say, but really Lakers fans (and media, or is that redundant?) – take a look and weep.

Bynum is a much better offensive player than Ostertag (is this even saying anything?), but Ostertag owns Bynum when it comes to rebounds and blocks. Greg even managed to out-assist Bynum and made less mistakes (as seen in less turn overs and fouls per game).

What’s worse, the fact that Bynum just got his lunch handed to him by Ostertag; or the fact that Ostertag was doing this against super duper vets and talented players like Vlade, Arvydas, Dale Davis and Rasheed (when Ostertag was a 4th year player) – and looking better than media adored Bynum going up against Chuck Hayes and the guy who was behind Ostertag on the depth chart?

Furthermore, Bynum’s had 5 scoreless games in the playoffs, out of 18. And he’s scored less than 5 points 11 times out of 18. Ouch.

Take a look at Hakeem’s 37.5 ppg average again. Ouch.

Of course, there HAS to be a rebuttal for this . . . no way can Bynum been so far behind Hakeem at the same stage of NBA experience, and yet so close to NBA laughingstock Greg Ostertag . . . right?  . . . .right? Don’t worry Lakers fans, of course there is . . . forget about NBA experience, that’s a flawed concept. Let’s not forget that Hakeem and Greg both played college ball (like Ewing and Robinson did) . . . Bynum didn’t play college. Look at how young he is! He’s only 21! Surely when you take that into account it makes up for 32 ppg (in the case of Hakeem), or nearly a block and a half (in the case of Ostertag)!!!

Okay, let’s take at a look at that. Try me.

Bynum’s Playoff stats as a 21 year old, and how those stats stack up against another 21 year old:

Bynum is a very brittle 21 year old who doesn’t have to do anything, and his team makes it to the NBA Finals. I’m not lying, the Lakers did that last season. That said, Bynum is a force of nature, and the future of the center position in the NBA. His 21 year old production is unrivaled. Right? Wrong. Take a look at this guy, and what he did in the playoffs at the tender age of 21 (his 2nd season in the L, not his 4th like Bynum). I just have one hyphenated word to describe this: Shaq-Attaq.

A lot of the same Lakers fans who champion Bynum marginalize how great Shaq was. I can clearly see why Kobe went out of his way to suggest that Bynum needed to be traded – because Kobe knew how good Shaq was. The difference between the two is quite telling when you look at these two centers at the age of 21, Bynum in his 4th season and Shaq in his 2nd.

The difference between the two was almost 15 points, 10 rebounds and over 2 blocks and almost 2 assists . . . in favor of the 2nd year player.

That’s a huge difference.

The difference between being called one of the best bigmen of all time, and being called a bust.

Bynum was a lotto pick man, and aside from his inspired dirty play in injuring two guys this season, and being afraid of Fesenko in the paint, he’s done nothing to earn the high praise that’s heaped on him. And he’s done nothing to make me feel like giving him any props.

His current playoff run isn’t over yet, and he’s got one, most likely two more playoff series to make his 2008-2009 playoffs slightly more memorable than his complete no-show in the 2007-2008 playoffs.

I’m taking it easy on Bynum here by comparing him to guys that he may yet one-day reach . . . even if it doesn’t seem like it. I could really try to down him if I wanted by comparing him to his contemporaries who are out-playing him right now. For example take Dwight Howard -- in his first 14 playoff games: 17.86 ppg (57.23 fg%, 51.72 ft%), 15.5 rpg, 2.71 bpg, 1.14 apg, 0.714 spg . . . those numbers are way better than Bynum’s. Also better are Dwight’s numbers as a 21 year old and Dwight’s numbers in his 4th NBA season.

If I really wanted to be a dick I’d mention that Dwight also has 3 less leg injuries. I’m not a dick though, so I’m not going to mention that.

 

 

What did we learn?

What did we learn? Well, for starters we learned that Andrew Bynum’s playoff performances leave much to be desired. His first 18 games in the playoffs pales in comparison to Ewing’s numbers over the same situations – and Ewing played against much better defensive clubs like Michael’s Bulls and the Bad Boy Pistons. We learned that David Robinson’s rookie season playoff numbers invalidates the argument that Bynum’s rookie numbers shouldn’t count. We also learned that Hakeem’s numbers as a fourth year player completely eclipse Bynum’s as a 4th year player. I didn’t even have to look up 2nd tier NBA centers like Rik Smits at all after I found out that at the same level of NBA experience that Greg Ostertag’s playoff performance was a wash with that of Bynum’s. Lastly, we learned that Bynum can’t even hide behind his age as an excuse for how poor his performances have been – as Shaq as a 21 year old eats Bynum up. Ultimately, we learned that it’s a bit too premature to call Bynum anything other than a bust at this stage. He’s much closer to Ostertag, albeit one who rebounds and blocks less, and fouls and turns the ball over more, than he is to being one of the greatest bigmen of all time – let alone in his own generation.

After all, Dwight’s numbers at each break down (first x number of games, 4th NBA season, and at age 21) are vastly superior to Bynum’s. Oh yeah, also Bynum has a history of injury problems to the same parts of his body and young guys who sustain so many injuries in short succession tend to have injury plagued careers. Yeah, I wasn’t supposed to mention that again . . . I guess I am a dick after all.

Bynum doesn’t deserve his hype until he does something. Something other than sucking when it counts, that is.

If you liked the stat breakdown, and would like a full version at full resolution, click on the image below. I dunno, maybe you are just into making Bynum look silly . . . or want a stat heavy window’s desktop wallpaper . . . or both? Go nuts!

The Five Epic Qualities of Jerry Eugene Sloan

An eternity ago I wrote about The Five Epic Errors of Jerry Eugene Sloan. There were a variety of reactions to that article, some in agreement, others in argument -- ultimately though I think it was a pretty interesting take on things. Jerry isn't perfect -- and the points I made way back in September seem to elucidate that point quite nicely. That said . . . there are very few coaches that I'd want to be the coach of my team (the Jazz), and I can't really think of any off the top of my head. (Maybe Lenny Wilkins? Maybe not . . . no, definitely not.) It's not all bad with Jerry, in fact, there is a lot of good out there. Here are just five:

Photographed by David Zalubowski for AP Photo

1. He's a no nonsense guy:

Jerry is a straight shooter. He tells it like it is. If his team gets beat on the glass he'll say it like it is. If he messes up, he'll own up to it. If he wants a player to do something, he'll try to communicate it. Jerry probably doesn't think himself to be 'smart enough' to be any other way but humble, direct and honest. He may miss out on some of the cerebral mind games that some other coaches play (against their own rosters as much as they play it against the media and refs) like Phil Jackson. (Btw, he's not zen. That's bullshit. Really, stop calling him the zenmaster. Zen Buddhism isn't about making $10 Million dollars per year, possessions are fleeting . . . but he wouldn't know that, because he's a fraud) Anyway, back to Jerry . . . Sloan isn't going to be all smug and cryptic all the time, and then whine to the media in post game interviews about the other team.

I remember reading an interview of Jackson's years ago when he was first coaching the Lakers -- they lost a game and he blamed the loss on everything from his players injuries, the crowd noise, the pre-game festivities, to refs, the style of play, and on the fouls not called -- he basically blamed the loss on everything BUT the other team doing things well.

That's just a sore loser to me.

Jerry may not have any Coach of the Year awards, or coached any team that's won a ring, but when he does lose, he does it graciously as he's a no nonsense guy. Even better than Jackson, he also wins with humility, and he tries to treat his players fairly (which is subjective). Maybe a more touchy-feely coach would have been able to coax more out of the Ostertags and Giriceks that Sloan has had to coach . . . but that's just not Jerry's strong suit.

2. Jerry fights for his players:

One of his strong suits is that he'll never throw his players under the bus (or, you know, write a book about a particularly difficult season, airing out all the secret details without his players' consent and laugh all the way to the bank while talking trash about his meal tickets). Jerry does the exact opposite, as he's frequently ejected from games because he cares so much about his players. What does Phil Jackson do? He sits with his legs crossed in a chair all game long and occasionally whistles at his players. That's inspiring. Jerry Sloan gets into it with refs when he feels like his players are getting the short end of the stick.

Players are going to be willing to fight if they see how hard their coach his fighting. Very rarely do the Jazz lose games (to the best of my memory) that Sloan is thrown out of, they tend the get fired up and play harder. Not to make this one of those really weepy eyed, inspirational deals . . . I can see Sloan making a Tony D'Amato type of speech while Phil Jackson would be reading a poem about rabbits and hoping that his talented roster does all the work.

Jerry Sloan was a fighter as a player, and as a coach he is responsible for taking care of his team out there. It's not the place of the players to really talk to the refs, but it's the Head Coach's duty to do so when he feels like his guys are getting the screwjob. I'd rather have a coach who actually reacted to the game than one who sat down and did a Sudoku puzzle.

3. Superb game to game adjustments:

I mentioned this in the other write-up, but I honestly don't see the Jazz getting beat the same way more than once, unless in the rare cases that the are playing a team that just has our number (like the Minnesota Timberwolves or Portland Trailblazers last season), or one really unstoppable guy (Kobe Bryant). There's one good reason why we don't get beat the same way often -- it's because Sloan (and his staff) make really good adjustments in-between games. Sloan does his homework, and his vast experience makes it a bit easier to see patterns and develop strategies. He's a very under-rated X's and O's guy -- people talk about Rick Pitino knowing about shooting range and shooting percentage ratios. Pitino was a horrible NBA coach though, and didn't do anything in the league. Partly because he relied a little too much on the three point shot.

Sloan, on the other hand, doesn't rely on anything except rebounding, hustling on defense, and playing fundamentally sound basketball -- especially on offense (layups are emphasized, one on one play and three pointers are not).

4. Fundamentals aren't just buzzwords with him:

Frankly, this is one of the reasons why the Jazz have won so many games under Sloan (closing in on 1000 with the Jazz). If you don't box out your man he'll replace you with someone who will. If you don't run the plays, you'll sit on the bench. There are really three components of Jerry's offense: move the ball around for a layup, get to the foul line, don't try to be a hero -- pass the ball instead of taking a contested shot. There are really three components of Jerry's defense: funnel guards into bigmen, don't leave shooters open, don't foul jump shooters. This is pure, distilled fundamental basketball that can be applied to grade school ball all the way up to the NBA.

Some coaches play lip service to fundamentals, and when the game starts, their players play some undisciplined monkey ball, or alternatively, the game plan shifts to a series of gimmicks . . . like posting up their PF at the three point line (like what Avery had Dirk do instead of posting him up near the basket), or just relying on one player to do everything for his team, and have no real plays or anything ("Chris Paul -- go dribble a lot, and when the defense collapses on you, pass to an open guy. Do this 40 times a game! Go!" -- Byron Scott). Is it any wonder that teams coached by those types of players rarely impress in the post season?

If you play fundamentally sound basketball your team has a chance to win -- regardless of the make up of the roster, or how many super star calls you get. He almost made the playoffs with Carlos Arroyo and Ben Handlogten. Phil Jax would have retired that season because he didn't have any top 2 players on his team. (Seriously Phil, take a chance on your coaching ability and actually coach a team instead of relying on your player's star power . . . remember what it was like when you got beat by Detroit and Boston in the finals the last few seasons? Those teams were coached... yours was on autopilot after having the West given to you on a platter.)

5. Expects you to leave it all on the floor

He may hate you in a game, but off the court, he may be one of your staunchest supporters -- Jerry Sloan was this way with Greg Ostertag. All he wants is your best effort -- which is why he rewards players that play hard. (Like the Adam Keefe's of the world) Why is Jerry so hung up about effort? Probably because he knows that's what got him where he is today -- and if a simple farm boy from southern Illinois can be an NBA All-Star and make it in the NBA that anyone can (well, most gifted athletes that make up current NBA rosters) if they work hard enough. He can't do it for his team, but he can try to make his team work hard, so that they can do it for themselves. His teams can do it for themselves if they work hard.

Simple, huh?

Now watch this video of Al Pacino showing us how to inspire professional athletes/professional actors playing professional athletes. It's not just because it's a good scene, but I'm sure there's a lot of Jerry in this scene . . . especially the part about the guy who's willing to die being the one who's going to come out alive. Sloan's not a perfect coach, but just like how I ended the critical article, I still feel like there is no other coach I'd want to coach the Jazz this season.

His faults are still faults, and his propensity to make people have to earn it when they are clearly better can be a problem at times -- but really, aren't you happy that Jerry coaches the Jazz, and not that smarmy, self-aggrandizing pseudo-intellectual Phil Jackson?

I know I am.

Flashback Friday: Blue Edwards

Theodore "Blue" Edwards . . . man . . . he probably had the most statistically 'average' career of the most average NBA players. He really had done a whole lot, he was drafted by a perennial playoff team, was in a dunk contest, traded to a cellar dweller, dunked a lot, then moved onto an expansion franchise, got in some legal custody battle, and faded into oblivion . . . the sad part is that I was there every step of the way following his career. Blue was a 6'4/6'5 tweener guard/forward. He didn't really have three point range on his shot (but still shot a very respectable 33.5% from there for his career), and he was mostly a hustle player. The Utah Jazz drafted him 21st in the 1988-1989 NBA Draft. His best season as a pro had to be his first year out of Utah, playing in Milwaukee (part of that Jay Humphries, Larry Krystkowiak trade back in 1992-1993).

He played 33.3 mpg, and played in 82 games. Sure, he was out of the protective passing range of John Stockton -- so his shooting percentage dipped a bit. He still managed 16.9 ppg (off of 51.2 fg%, 79.0 FT%, 34.9 3pt%). 4.7 rpg, 2.6 apg and 1.6 spg -- all career highs. He left Milwaukee after the '94 season ended and somehow split time the next season with the Boston Celtics, and then the Utah Jazz again.

Blue as a Rookie with the Jazz	Blue became our Starter at the Two for a while	A veteran Blue Edwards was a key part of the Grizzlies gameplan

The second stage of his life began when he was taken in the expansion draft and headed north to play for the Vancouver Grizzlies.

He was a solid veteran player by this stage in his career, and was instrumental in guiding them to their handful of wins. I really rooted for him at this stage of his career, he was getting solid minutes and had a solid role for once. There he met and impregnated a nice Canadian girl (Kimberly Van de Perre) and had a custody battle with. (The custody battle went all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada) Tsk Tsk. Who do you think you are, Shawn Kemp? But let's not remember him for all of that, that's not the point of Flashback Friday. (there was a point?)

Two distinct Blue Edwards moments come quickly to me, and my rose-colored glasses tinted memories of previous incarnations of the Utah Jazz. One game, I think in the playoffs on NBC, had Blue get an offensive rebound, then he fake dribbling it back out to re-set a play (Stockton even bought it and was waiting for the pass) and then he quickly turned back and drove to the basket and dunked the ball. Some NBC talking head (Bob Costas?) exclaimed that "Blue Edwards is playing like a TIGER!" and, well, that's a strange thing to say. (It's very Ron Burgundy)

The second moment was long after his "interesting" Dunk contest entry back when he was a nobody. This was back when Adam Keefe was a rookie playing for the Hawks and back when no one used to show up to the Omni to watch the Hawks play. This was back when Blue was playing for the Milwaukee Bucks, and for some reason Canadian TV was broadcasting this game between the Bucks on the road against the Hawks (sans 'Nique et al.). It was a broken play in the first quarter and the Omni was so quiet you could hear everything on the court, from the sneaker squeaks to the chatter of the players. It gave the game a more intimate feel in some ways. Well anyway, Blue got the ball in a broken play -- and if for no other reason than for the people sadly watching at home -- he took off from the circle and threw down a one handed traffic jam over a few Hawks. Sadly the play of the game happened in the 1st quarter of play. But I was so NBA starved growing up in Canada that I would watch anything . . . even Blue Edward's led Milwaukee Bucks teams. For good reason that highlight does not exist on YouTube, but I did find this interesting video that DOES feature Blue Edwards. It's a vid of the Top 10 plays of the week, from some random week during the 1990-1991 NBA Season. And thus, it's a classic all by itself and I could probably do a Flashback Friday on just the plays and players that appear in this YouTube offering.

Okay, I just watched this video again, and it truly is a masterpiece, a great collection of moments in time that were part of my childhood.

#10 -- David Benoit bricking a shot for the Jazz against the Spurs (another tough Texas team), Mike Brown being on the Jazz, and Blue skying in out of no where to do something ridiculous. Almost as ridiculous as the length ratio of his shorts and his compression shorts.

#9 -- John Battle beating Kurt Rambis off the dribble and getting the And-1 on Tom Chambers. Special note is that Danny Ferry is open but no one passes the ball to him, very classic.

#8 -- Dennis Hopson nails a three from behind half court against the Jazz

#7 -- I was watching this game on TV years ago, and I remember this play. Danny Ainge (who had won titles with the Celtics) does a pretty impressive no look pass on the break that results in a Buck Williams basket.

#6 -- Jordan and Pippen being Jordan and Pippen. Pip is seriously under-rated. Dee Brown (I) and Reggie Lewis are helpless as the Bulls run wild on them.

#5 -- Plastic-man against the Lakers. Kevin Willis and Adam Keefe round out the front court for the Atlanta Hawks in this highlight. The Lakers have Byron Scott, A.C. Green, Sam Perkins and Elden Campbell on the floor.

#4 -- Clyde the Glide basically drives and shoots without looking at the basket. He scores on (teammate) Kevin Duckworth, Doug West (before the alcoholism) and Felton Spencer. Terry Porter (another current NBA head coach / GM type) gets an assist on this, I think.

#3 -- Isiah Thomas with the rebound, assist and stupid face all while sitting on the floor, and not even looking at the ball ... against the Kings.

#2 -- Spudd Webb (how many Sacramento Kings highlights this week?) breaks down Kenny Smith (of TNT fame), and splits Otis Thorpe and "Akeem" Olajuwon for a pretty difficult lay-up.

#1 -- That now famous Larry Bird shot from that same Boston/Portland game that I was watching live on TV as a kid back in my parents basement. He gets the ball, is defended well by Cliff Robinson Clyde Drexler, manages to trip over himself, and throw up a three pointer that ties the game 122-122 with 2.0 seconds left in Boston Garden. Amazing.

Point for Point

The Utah Jazz have been lucky in some ways, and unlucky in others. One of the greatest examples of this is how they have had some pretty good point guard play over the years. Perhaps luck has nothing to do with it, and it's rather the scouting department and player development that has much to do with the apparent success of Ricky Green, John Stockton and now, Deron Williams. Of course there were some lean years along the way, specifically the capable though unspectacular trio of Carlos "Pride of Puerto Rico" Arroyo; Raul "The Hispanic Heartthrob"Lopez; and Maurice "Mo" Williams -- but those days are now gone.

Recently, as recent as last week, the Utah Jazz front office was able to trade Jason Hart for Brevin Knight. This type of trade may have no overt impact in the short term -- though this trade may resonate within the consciousness of fans for generations to come -- like the trade that brought Ostertag back to Utah. Or maybe not. That said, this position for the Jazz has not been this secure since the days of Stockton, Eisley and Vaughn.

Point for point -- Brevin Knight is the superior player out of the two traded. Through this measure, Kevin O'Connor won the trade. It doesn't hurt that Knight makes less money and is pretty talented for a 3rd stringer. It's also good to know that Knight is just too damn short, and not a good enough shooter for Jerry Sloan to go crazy, and contemplate starting -- like he did with that Deron Williams / Derek Fisher starting lineup in the 2006-2007 season. Neither are perfect . . . Hart was to bring defense and veteran leadership, but ended the season deep on the bench while Ronnie Price made fans and the media go wow! Brevin is good at taking care of the ball, but has made only 16 career three pointers. That is a ridiculously low number which makes me cringe at the thought of him being in the game, and the other team immediately clogging the paint and passing lanes with a super-duper zone defense.

Photo by NBAE / Getty Images	Photo by NBAE / Getty Images

At the risk of repeating myself, Knight is a solid 3rd stringer because he is frequently unable to stay healthy for any long period of time, is very short, and can't shoot. All of our sets that we run rely on the point guard being able to, at the very least, keep the defense honest. Outside shooting is a key component of the NBA today -- when Portland found out that the Jazz had spotty shooting from deep (before the Korver trade) they just zoned us and laughed. I don't want a repeat of that horrible December, 2007.

Knight is also great insurance. Sometimes players get tired. And tired players who play long minutes are at risk of getting injured. John Stockton played in the Olympics in the summer of '92 and again in '96. Each season after the Olympics he had relatively 'down' seasons in the NBA (scoring and assists went down from 1991-1992 to 1992-1993, and again in 1995-1996 to 1996-1997). [For those keeping track at home, the Jazz went to the Western Conference Finals in 1991-1992, then the next season were bounced from the 1st round of the Playoffs. In 1995-1996 the Jazz were again defeated in the Western Conference Finals, and in the next season lost in the NBA Finals.] The Jazz Brass want to make sure that if Deron needs more time during the regular season to rest that they can afford to let him have it.

"I'm happy to be coming to a winning team with very good players and a Hall of Fame coach . . . How can I be upset with that? I'm also looking forward to hearing the cheers and not the boos from Jazz fans. I see my role as being a veteran guy there to do whatever is necessary to help the team win. I'll more know about that when I get to down." (Knight, 2008, via. The Salt Lake Tribune)

It's a solid deal for the Jazz, may have had some influence on the C.J. Miles re-signing and could be good for us down the road. Great move Kevin O'Connor!