Showing posts with label Andrew Bynum. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Andrew Bynum. Show all posts

Monday, May 18, 2009

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

Rehab aint easy . . . 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:

Bynum Ewing and Robinson 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 closer to Ostertag than Olajuwon 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 far cry from Shaq when looking at their stats at age 21 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!
Click to view in full resolution

Friday, March 6, 2009

Contract years, Developing Talent & Front Office Subterfuge

The work of a General Manager is easy to criticize, yet hard to fully quantify. Team owners are like dragons sleeping on their hoard of gold coins and other priceless treasures. Coaches want to build winning resumes. Players want to get paid. The GM has to be the go-between that gets all these parties (with differing motivations) on the same page. The GM has to get a coach the players he needs to win. The players want the promises they need before signing on the dotted line (salary, role, playing time, etc). And for the team owner, well, the GM has to placate this obstacle on a near daily basis and convince the owners not to devourer the GM on sight -- while suggesting that parting with part of their hoard (on the 1st and 15th of each month) is the smart thing to do.

[Matthew Mitchell -- Draconomicon] Dragon and Hoard

At times the NBA can be distilled to purer components, of winning and losing, and of the honesty of the game. Yet, at other times the NBA can expand into a complex juggling act more akin to micromanagement in a strategy game, or a RTS click-fest. For players, the game is the game. It's simple in that way, and relies on skill, speed and quick reflexes -- a Video Game analogy would be the first person shooter. For coaches, it's series of complex decisions, not unlike the original turn based strategy game called "Chess". (you may have heard of it) The GM, though, has to delve into the previously mentioned RTS click-fest:

But instead, imagine dealing with salaries, egos, scouts, coaches,
players and injuries . . . also less cannons, probably . . .

*Ahem* Back to the point . . . a GM's job is rarely done perfectly because of how difficult it tends to be. Some GM's are great talent evaluators (for example, there's Isiah Thomas, just look at the player's he has drafted in his career, most of them have been All-Stars or award winners in some regard: Vince Carter, Tracy McGrady, Marcus Camby, Damon Stoudamire, David Lee, and so on) but poor on other sides of their job description. Other GM's have good connections with other teams, and always seem to do business with them (look at Kevin O'Connor and all the deals he has made with Philly over the years). Some GM's are really good with managing money, while others are known for turning things around in short order. At the end of the day, though, the GM is a salesman. He is essentially selling his services to a consumer -- in this case the team owner. Part of sales is to buy low and sell high. Another part of sales is to be consciously deceptive in just what your wares are. That last part does not really apply fully to the GM - Team Owner relationship, but rather to the GM to GM relationship. Sometimes you get a lemon, but you have to pass it off as a safe family sedan. Other times you (as the GM) are working not against the team owner, the other GM's, but the actual assets -- the players and their agents.

You want to keep a good player on your team for the least amount of money it's going to take to keep him there. All Team Owners expect the GM to be able to do such a thing. This part of the job ties in directly with the buy low/sell high and deceptive doctrines. If the first step is acquiring a player (via a Trade, Free Agency or the Draft), then the next step is evaluating that player (though, we hope that some evaluations have taken place before the player is traded for/signed/drafted). The next logical step would be to give playing time to that player and develop him. The last step? Making a decision on that guy -- sign him again when his contract expires, trade him, or let him walk. Parts of the last step depend greatly on each of the previous steps.

  • For example, say the team acquires player A. They evaluate him, see some things they like, some things he needs to improve on, and play him accordingly. He either gets better or worse. If he does well, he becomes more valuable to the team -- and more valuable as a player. His asking price may go up, and making the last step (in this case: deciding to keep him) harder to do. An example of this Jazz fans may be familiar with would be All-Star Mo Williams.
  • Player B, on the other hand, does not appear to have much upside, does not make the most of his chances on the court, and is not in the future plans of the team. They can get rid of him in a variety of ways, the team's disinterest in retaining him opens up options for his removal. An example of this Jazz fans may be familiar with would be Kris Humphries.

It's not always this simple, though.

  • What about Player C . . . the team that drafts him knows him best, and knows that there is hidden potential deep inside. If they go about normally giving him playing time, allow him to develop openly (instead of only during closed practices and workouts with the team), then other GM's may wish to pry him away. Even if the original team wishes to keep him, retaining him may become very difficult as the exposure led to quicker development, which led to a greater player value. This would be repeating the same mistake with Player A all over again. What if, instead, the team decides to develop him secretly, give him less exposure, drive his asking price down, remove interest other GMs would have in him, and basically, keep him on the "down low".

This is pretty much the only way to retain those people that you think *can* blow up (in a good way), without having to give them a lot of money to make them stay. Deron Williams deserves the contract he got. It's an expensive contract though. Some teams are forced to over-pay to retain their talent (don't need to look farther than a young, uninjured Andrei Kirilenko half a decade ago). In general, you want to avoid doing that. If anything, I think we can clearly place the curious case of C.J. Miles as an example of a Player C scenario.

Dec 11 2008 [Melissa Majchrzak NBAE Getty] CJ with the thunder dunk At the end of C.J.'s first season he was getting more playing time, and in the last game of the season he played really well. How well? 23 points (8/13 fg, 2/5 3pt, 5/8 ft), 6 rebounds, 4 assists, 2 blocks, 1 steal -- as a rookie with extend playing time playing against a tough Western Conference team. Every off-season since then there have been fishy things going on. He was a consistent no-show in future summer leagues, but instead opted to work on his game by himself. During times of injury he would be pressed into the starting line-up, only to return to the end of the bench only a few days later. C.J. should have played more than he did in when he was on his rookie contract. The clock struck 12 on C.J.'s contract though, and the Jazz simply put themselves in a situation to match whatever contract someone threw his way by virtue of him being a restricted free agent. No one really bit, not knowing what they would be getting . . . until Oklahoma City offered him a 4 year $15 million dollar contract. We all know how that story ended, as the Jazz eventually matched. Was $3.75 million per season too much for C.J. Miles? Perhaps . . . but at the same time, it's a lot less than it could have been had C.J. been playing like he is now at this time last season. (or perhaps, getting the playing time that he is getting now at this time last season) Back then I thought the Jazz were (in chronological order) a) not developing C.J. enough, b) using him only for spot duty, c) giving his playing time to guys who did not deserve it.

This season Ceejay has been everything from a solid deep threat, a versatile 2nd option on offense, to invisible . . . sometimes all in the same week. This is his 4th season in the league, and his first where he has averaged over 11.5 mpg. I'm sure he would be better, more seasoned player than he currently is if he was playing 20 mpg every season after his rookie campaign. I'm also pretty sure that he wouldn't be on the Jazz then. In effect, one could directly point to a systematic way in which the Jazz brass (Sloan and O'Connor mostly) lowered interest in a prospect, sequestered him from exposure (he only got one short stint in the NBA DL), yet did not develop him for fear of losing him. At the end of the day the Jazz have C.J., but not the C.J. he could be right now, and C.J. is not earning as much as he perhaps thought he would be after his rookie contract expired.

The Jazz financial situation is horrible right now. If it does not improve shortly than there may be a few more Player A type situations in the future with key contributors Paul Millsap and Ronnie Brewer. The Jazz would love to keep them for reasonable contracts, though their development (and production) have elicited quite a bit of exposure. Good for their bank accounts, perhaps not so great for the Jazz.

That's where the micromanagement comes back into play. You want your players to be good, productive and develop . . . but you do not want to lose them to other teams after you put in all the hard work to make them useful. Gilbert Arenas comes to mind, he was drafted, developed, and then left to get paid in free agency. Right now the Jazz are playing the "front office subterfuge game" with some other young players that could possibly be helping the Jazz right now.

Oct 9 2008 [Melissa Majchrzak NBAE Getty] Mo looks to pass Morris Almond: He is a scorer's scorer, who despite having limited quickness and has played defense only once in his life, could be doing a whole lot more for this Jazz team. He's looked horrible in his rookie season with the Jazz where he never got to be involved in the plays that the regular rotation run that get swingmen easy buckets. He didn't play a minute with Deron Williams last year, and was relegated to garbage time spot up shooting from the corner. Reason for not getting playing time: He's behind a few key guys on the depth chart and doesn't rebound or defend as well as others. For some reason this has prevented him from playing one single second in the NBA-DL this season. Something fishy: Why hasn't he played in the D-League at all this season then, if there's no space for him on our current roster? Do the Jazz know that he's a raw gem that only seems to look better when he gets to play?  Utah is healthy now, so there's no real risk to put him in the game at all . . . maybe practice with the Jazz is better than games with the Flash? Or maybe they don't want him to get too much exposure right now? Utah has opted not to extend his contract, so seemingly he is out . . . but maybe they are trying to keep his going rate low so that they *can* still have a shot at retaining him for a while. After all, they scouted him, interviewed him, drafted him, are developing him . . . Harpring's contract expires next year, and the Jazz will need a wing player who can come off that Harpring curl and hit the mid-range jumper. Financial situation aside, that sounds like something the Jazz have in their laps right now with Almond. Alas, this is exactly not the contract type of year a young player wants to have (being buried on the bench). Co-incidentally, this is exactly the type of contract year the Jazz would want him to have . . . after all, they did the same thing with Ceejay, they know what they are doing.

Oct 9 2008 [Melissa Majchrzak NBAE Getty] Fes defends Shaq Kyrylo Fesenko: Very large man (7'1, 300+ lbs.) with the same wingspan and standing reach as Greg Oden -- yet uninjured and a capable passer and interior defender who has, due to injuries, been pressed into defending the likes of Yao Ming to Andrew Bynum . . . and done so well. Very likely that he is more talented than the guy ahead of him on the depth chart (Jarron Collins), but lacks experience, familiarity with the system and seasoning. Reason for not getting playing time: Work ethic and personality appear to anchor this man to the bench, though at some level talent and ability should trump that. Something fishy: As a rookie, this wet behind the ears, 2nd round draft pick center joined the Jazz and played in 70 games, and played over 20 mpg. This player joined a playoff team that was contending for a championship. This player had no experience with the Jazz system prior (as a rookie) and ended up getting playing time over a limited, soft center who had much more experience in the system. This young player was Jarron Collins. What, did you think I was talking about Fesenko? Heck no, Fesenko has played only 200 minutes with the Jazz in his 2 year career, let alone played in 70 (@ 20 per) as a rookie. Why is there such a disparity between Collins' and Fesenko's early careers? I don't know, but it seems kind of fishy to me. Even more fishy is that Fes only had one stint in the NBA-DL this season (8 games), promptly did exactly what we'd want him to do (be a defensive presence who rebounded, blocked and changed shots, shot a high percentage and eventually was averaging a double double) . . . and was called back and never played again. Ever. Hmmmm . . . he improves, shows that he's good at what he does . . . and can be a free agent this season . . . 'need to reel that big boy in, and hide him somewhere!' (which was the original plan with drafting a little known, poorly scouted player from a minor European league in the first place) More so than Almond, I think that Fesenko has a future with the Jazz, or at the very least, in the NBA somewhere as teams always want size, and if the guy is talented, he's going to get a contract somewhere. If you gave him the playing time, I'm pretty sure that he'd be able to get Rookie Millsap type of numbers for sure.

Nov 26 2008 [Melissa Majchrzak NBAE Getty] Put back jam Paul Millsap: Speaking of the 'Sap, he got some great exposure this season. He produced as a starter due to injuries to Carlos Boozer. He's a free agent, and he's going to get paid this off-season. No doubt about it. Interestingly enough, at the first whiff of a hobbled, rusty Carlos Boozer the Jazz sent 'Sap back to the bench and as his fantasy owners know firsthand, 'Sap just hasn't been the same since. Reason for being sent to the bench: Boozer was the starter before he got injured, the Jazz/Sloan doctrine on this is that you cannot lose your starting job due to injury. Something fishy: No one said anything about a starting job, but just let Paul start the first 4-5 games after Boozer comes back and then let Boozer slowly work his way back into playing shape, and then give Boozer the starting spot. A lot of teams do this, they bring a starter back from injury on the bench just to test things out a bit. Out of all of my conspiracies, this is among the weakest -- though I don't see why the Jazz didn't keep starting Millsap for 4 games while Boozer (who was playing limited minutes) worked his way back into starting shape. For one thing, this almost looks like a directed attempt to reduce Millsap's exposure (for the open market). It's probably not, but it just looks fishy -- during a contract year, no less.

Nov 19 2008 [Melissa Majchrzak NBAE Getty] Kosta gets the board Kosta Koufos: Let's just say that if this 19 year old was playing Brook Lopez type of minutes on a bad team we'd see Brook Lopez-ish production out of Kosta. Yet, a guy who is clearly more talented than Collins, and is a very hard worker (much more than Fesenko has shown), is completely lost on this team. Kosta isn't on the active roster right now, isn't playing in the development league, and isn't developing. Reason for not getting playing time: Apparently he doesn't know the plays. Sure, he's a smart shot blocking 7 footer who has a nice offensive game AND is a very hard worker who hustles . . . but he's not going to get to play because by playing him he would then be in a position to actually learn the plays, and then we would have even less of an excuse for why he isn't playing. He's almost a gestalt character that takes the size (mostly) and shot blocking of Fess, with the hustle and work ethic of Collins . . . and gets none of the playing time that he should. Something fishy: There is no good reason not to play this guy, develop him with real NBA minutes, or even send him to the NBA D-League for some in game action. He hasn't seen the developmental league at all in his career, instead getting better by wearing suits next to Carlos Boozer for 50+ games. That's another thing, he got some very minor playing time just because of injuries . . . this season was a prime season to be forced into playing and developing younger talent. Sloan had to work many games without being able to call on veteran bigmen . . . but still he elected to instead play Matt Harpring at power forward. Huh?

It's not that difficult to imagine that the Jazz are hurting their futures by risking not getting these guys playing time because they do not want to lose them to other teams . . . but they also get nothing out of these guys. Other teams play younger players during the regular season so that they may become contributors to that team . . . and even help them in the playoffs. Heck, our team did this with Paul Millsap as a rookie, or Shandon Anderson (more on him later), or Bryon Russell and a host of others. There's no doubt in my mind that if Fess of Kosta were getting 12-15 mpg this season that one of them would be able to contribute in the playoffs for us. Instead the development time has become much longer for a bunch of guys who could be helping us now. Also, it's not that difficult to imagine that the Jazz are hurting the values of their players by flat out burying them during contract years. No playing time = no exposure and no stats = bargain prices. They did this with C.J., and if they had a time machine, would probably like to do so with others as well.

The way that the Jazz develop talent seems to be highly unequal. Some young guys get regular burn, while others don't. This time is directly proportional towards development. I think that Jazz Brass feel the financial side to all of this needs to take precedence over the immediate development and returns from the players on the roster. The Jazz gave good minutes to a solid player (Shandon Anderson) as a rookie, and eventually left the team, the Jazz get nothing in the long term for it. The Jazz gave good minutes to a very talented player (Andrei Kirilenko), and end up having to really over-pay to keep him on the team. The Jazz don't want to get into anything like that again, and now underplay most guys during the span of their rookie contracts, so they they do not have to over-pay.

C.J., only after the Jazz matched an offer he got from another team, is finally getting playing time -- but as a 4th year guard with the potential that he had when he was drafted, he is behind where he should be. They seem to be guilty of doing that with Almond and Fesenko by not playing them in the NBA, nor allowing them to rack up stats in the D-League . . . which would have been a great way to audition for other teams during contract years -- or you know, actually get better and be able to help OUR team.

Some Jazz apologists feel like the practices the Jazz have are of greater value to a younger player than actually playing in the development league, or even playing in the NBA on poorer quality teams. I think that this is a very haughty thing to say . . . especially with how closely the Jazz *can* keep an eye on things with their development team being only a few miles away and the coach of that team is related to Jerry Sloan -- it almost seems like a no-brainer to send the kids down at least once each when none of them are even on the active roster with the Jazz. They threw C.J. a bone once by doing that, by giving him a chance to play, and that improved his morale. Why not do the same for a younger player this season? Sloan even goes out to harp on how great the D-League is, and how he wishes they had that when he first came into the league. If it's so great, why not use it, now that the rest of the guys are healthy?

As for how great the Jazz practices are . . . they rarely get a chance to practice on the road (they only practice on days off, and now at the end of the season, with the playoffs coming up, there may be less than the regular number of practices on off-days), so the younglings are getting even less time to improve than normal. This clearly is the case where the GM, at the behest of saving the team owner money, works with the coaches to screw the players out of money / job satisfaction. Or maybe that's by design, especially in their contract years?

Wednesday, October 29, 2008

Utah Jazz Pre-Season 2008-2009: X Factor

The major X-Factor this season is not going to be guard play . . . or post defense . . . or bench production. All three of those things have normalized themselves, our guards are who they are, our post defense needs improvement and our bench is very productive. The whole issue of next off-season will not hang over the heads of this team all season long either -- as they will focus on the games at hand. If this does become a large factor it will actually serve as a positive motivation for the team to get it done this season, instead of just rely on the fact that they are all so young. (Eldest player on the team is Brevin Knight at 32)

The X-factor for this season is, bluntly, Andrei Kirilenko. I've written about him a lot ever since I started this blog (61 times as of this writing), and that is no doubt correlated to how complicated his situation is with our team.
More monkey dunks, less games of 8 points and 2 rebounds

I don't need to rehash everything here, we all know that he makes more money than he could ever justify on the court. We also know that he's pretty talented, and when given the minutes, he can do some amazing things -- things no one else on our team can do. Right now he's going to come off the bench for us (which may be good -- or bad).

The main reason why he's the X factor is because of escalation. Back in the 80s you were a contending team if you had two really good players (for example, the Jazz didn't start to win until they had Stockton and Malone). Then somewhere in the 90s you needed a third guy to be a good team -- and all these crops of "the big three" started to be talked about. Some teams still did well with two really good players (like Shaq and Kobe), while other teams needed that third guy to get them over the top. The last, best example of this would be the 2007-2008 Boston Celtics with Paul Pierce, Kevin Garnett and Ray Allen. Escalation now has changed things, and to be a good team you're going to need four good guys.

For example, a team like Orlando (three good guys in Dwight, Hedo and Rashard) can only advance so far in the playoffs because their three guys aren't the best three guys around. They would need a 4th guy to be as good. Moreover, the LA Lakers now sport line ups with Kobe Bryant, Pau Gasol, Andrew Bynum and Lamar Odom. The Detroit Pistons have been playing forever with Chauncey, Rip, Tay and 'Sheed. Houston has reloaded and are now Tracy, Yao, Ron and Battier/Rafer (they equal one good player).

Brewer is a nice player, but right now he's not at the same level as most of the guys I've listed -- he's not at an All-Star level. Andrei, on the other hand, has all the credentials to be a player at that level. He is a go-to-guy for his national team, he compliments the other three guys (Deron, Carlos and Memo) well, and he's BEEN just as good as an All-Star at times during his career (Like last season's victory over the Lakers when Memo and Booz were out and he had a triple double and nearly a 5x5 in the same game).

Four is the new three; just as three was the new two. We need that 4th guy to step up. And as a result, Andrei Kirilenko is our X-Factor this season. We need less 12 point, 4 assist games from him and more 16 point, 6 rebound, 5 assists games from him if the Jazz are going to be one of the top 5 teams at the end of the season -- instead of just at the beginning.

Thursday, October 9, 2008

Pre-Season Game 1 Recap: Utah 99 - LA Lakers 90

If you haven't already read about it here, here, here or here . . . let me be the first to tell you that we won. It was a come from behind victory over the team that eliminated us from the 2007-2008 playoffs. It's always satisfying to beat the Lakers, even if it's pre-season and our All-Star doesn't play -- but Kobe and Pau both do. I did not watch the game, even though I've already paid for my NBA League Pass. The Boxscore does not appear to fully recognize the efforts of Ronnie Brewer who played much better against Kobe (in the 5 minutes that bean played in) -- Brewer was dunking on everyone's head like he had activated some cheat code. (For the people out there in the John McCain age bracket, click here to find out what a cheat code is) Brewer ended up with 13 points on 50% shooting.

Millsap had 13 points and 2 rebounds in the start, to contrast that, in one more minute of action Andrew Bynum had 15 points and 8 rebounds off the bench. I guess size does matter (6'8 vs. 7'0). Speaking of size, Fesenko had 5 defensive rebounds and 2 assists in 8 minutes of action. He continues to get killed on Utah sports talk radio -- but really, that's quite good. If he played Bynum minutes that adds up to 15 rebounds. Bynum only had 8. I fail to see the need to completely kill Fesenko for doing his job. Some people make it their job, though.

Deron Williams has 11 and 8 in two quarters and Mobe came off the bench to score more than Korver did (10 to 9) on 4 less shots. Lyde had a good game with 7 points and 2 blocks . . . clearly using his weight to his advantage. As great as all of that is, this game was interesting for a variety of reasons . . .

  • Boozer did not play as he as (again) injured his hamstring
  • Koufos played 2 minutes and also injured his leg (he did make the only shot he took though, so yeah, he continues to shoot the ball at a very high rate, 1 shot per 2 minutes -- for a point of reference, Deron Williams shot the ball 6 times in 24 minutes, or 1 shot per 4 minutes. Should our rookie Kosta be shooting more frequently than Deron? Why doesn't anyone talk about this?)
  • Due to a variety of reasons (no Boozer, hence starting Millsap, hence the need to start CJ; no Harpring, so need vet off the bench), Andrei Kirilenko came off the bench and did an okay job. Also his psyche is stronger than some people give him credit for, and he didn't rock himself in a corner at the prospect of not starting. He was two blocks shy of having as many blocks as the entire Lakers team.
In Soviet Russia fast breaks YOU!
Image by Andrew D. Bernstein for NBAE/Getty Images

Injuries are going to be an issue this season, apparently. Kosta is down, and he's 19 years old. Boozer is down too, and Harpring is down. If this keeps up, Jerry Sloan may tell Kevin O' Conner not to tear up that Jarron Collins contract just yet.

Our 2nd game of the pre-season goes tonight at home vs. the Phoenix Suns. Should be interesting to see if the AK as a 6th man experiment continues. (Boozer, Kosta and Harpring are all out for this game, so I almost expect it) In good news, LHM will be at this game, so the Jazz better win.

Sunday, October 5, 2008

Things to look for this season: Kyrylo Fesenko

If the only news you get is from the major news outlets in Salt Lake City you get the impression that NBA MVP Kosta Koufos (tentative) is not only the best draft pick EVAR, but also a lovely boy scout! The articles I read leave me to believe that some reporters are crushing a little bit on him . . . I understand the need and utility of a fluff piece (most of my stuff is just that). But even I can't stand it. That's not to say that I have issue with Kosta Koufos -- it just appears that way because in a preview of Fesenko's next season all I've done in rant about the new guy. It's just that fluff pieces, saying 'sir' and shooting three pointers when you are over 7 feet tall HARDLY qualifies as helping the Jazz out on the glass; with blocks; and with interior defense and intimidation.

How is a 7 foot tall teen with pimples/boy scout/three point shooter who calls everyone 'sir' going to be a force in the paint and help out our anemic defense of our basket? It's almost as if winning the paint is less important than winning some magical award for having 'morally upright' kids on the team who help old ladies cross the street.

Melissa Majchrzak -- now picture yourself floating in water, surrounded by seahorses . . .

That's not going to help us block shots in the playoffs, or play defense against other bigs without fouling them. We don't need another soft guy to come off the bench to replace Boozer or Memo. We need someone hard and mean. Someone who eats old ladies who try to cross the street. Someone -- at this stage -- that I don't think Mr.Polite Koufos is, or will be. Don't get me wrong, I want Kosta to succeed, I want him to be a legit NBA player. I think Kosta is going to be a solid NBA player. I also want the Jazz to have someone come off the bench, and actually play like a 7 footer who bangs, blocks shots and gives hard fouls. You know, things that we don't have on this team right now. I don't think that Kosta fills our greatest need.

Somehow this pictures reminds me of that scene from Napoleon Dynamite where Deb is photographing Uncle Rico . . . audio here  

Alas, no one seems to say anything good about Fesenko, so perhaps he's not going to be that guy either -- which would suck, seeing how at this part of the season, last season, everyone was on the Fes bandwaggon. (How quickly people turn on you . . . not unlike how Boozer was loved then hated, then loved, and now hated again)

So, in a world where we must temper our feelings for Fes, while our projections for Kosta run with wild abandon what do I see Kyrylo doing this season?

  1. Make the best of his time on the floor with the Jazz: Fes isn't going to play in 70 games this season unless something amazing happens (like Jarron Collins goes all Bison Dele on the Jazz, or Fes levels up into an NBA player at some point), so he's going to have to really bring it when he is playing with the big boys. I can imagine how someone who has trouble self-motivating can slack off in the D-league, he still put up good stats (10 ppg, 8 rpg, 2 bpg, 2 apg) for someone they just pulled off of the hard streets of Kiev. His NBA career is only 9 games long, and he's only played more than 10 minutes in any given game on three different occasions. His season averages are horrible because he played three times this season: once in November, then during a stretch of 6 games in December (the worst month of the season for our entire team), and then in a back-to-back set all the way in March. There isn't much continuity there, especially how he'd get into the game for 4 minutes there, or 36 seconds there ... all the while dropping his averages down. If you look at the four games where he played at least 8 minutes you get a chance to see some good in Fes. First of all, when he plays extended minutes the Jazz usually win (3 wins, 1 loss), in addition to that, he seems to play better when he actually has some time to settle down into a game. During those four games (Nov 30 vs. Lakers, a win; Dec 15 vs. Seattle, a win; Dec 17 vs. Atlanta, a loss; Dec 21 vs. Orlando, a win) he averaged 4.3 rpg (2.3 offensive), 0.75 bpg, 0.5 apg and 3.5 fpg in a little over 12 mpg. He also chipped in 2 ppg, but he hardly shoots, and that's not what he's in there for. Fes can be effective, against Bynum he had 7 boards (4 offensive) and threw it down a few times.
  2. Corner the market on a skill: Fes isn't going to be better than Memo or Kosta at jump shooting. He's not going to be better than Jarron at flopping, or knowing the playbook (he hasn't been here for 73 seasons like Jarron has). Fes has to develop that one (or more) skill that sets him apart from the other guys on the roster. He has to be so proficient with it that the Jazz coaches feel good with him on the floor, instead of on the bench. That skill is going to have to be dominating the paint. Fesenko has the size, strength and agility to dispel the common ideas of European bigmen. While he may lack it in the girth department, he does have Shaq-like size. He can run the floor and play physical basketball. He can rebound and block shots. He just needs to keep working on this part of his game to the point where even old man Jer (who always comments on peoples' conditioning . . . hey, Shaq sucked at conditioning Jerry, he has 4 rings and you have none, sometimes talent requires playing time) has to play him. No one needs Fesenko to be David Robinson on offense, just as long as he can catch the ball and dunk it then he'll be okay. (And last time I checked, Fes and catch the ball and dunk it, ask the Lakers about that) Conditioning is good and great, but we're looking for a guy to lumber up and down the floor for 12 mpg as a backup to Memo/Booz (who'll play most of the mins at the 5 this season). I'd rather have the guy who barely makes it through 12 mins, but actually does something in that time than the guy who plays 12, has the conditioning to play 22, but does nothing in that time.
  3. Want it more: Often a big guy gets conscripted into playing basketball just because of his height. (see: Eaton, Mark) After a while he either loves the game and wants to be better, or he's just happy to make money doing something like this. Kyrylo needs to want it more, or at least, show that he does. (He may want it, but may not show it for a variety of reasons, but we don't need to go into psychology here) Who he is, and his future with the jazz may very well boil down to what happens this season, especially in relation to the wunderkid Kosta Koufos. Fesenko has to want it more, as he has an uphill battle against him where he not only has to beat out Koufos, but also a conditioning obsessed Coach (you know, Adam Keefe plays 27 mpg while Chris Morris sits) and a media that idolizes his competition as well.