Lotto News

The tragedy of draft lottery analysis is that the conclusion that the big winners here were Portland and Seattle lacks a certain depth. Mainly, the entire Western Conference must be breathing a sigh of relief that Atlanta got a top-three pick, so Phoenix doesn't wind up with a lottery pick with which to further stack their roster. Beyond that, who really knows what to say?

It seems to me that Chad Ford is probably wrong to think the Hawks will use their #3 pick on Mike Conley, if only because if there's one thing Atlanta's management is good at, it's passing on the opportunity to draft point guards despite the existence of a clear need. It'd be hilarious to see yet another long, athletic swingman heading to Georgia, but I think Corey Brewer should start developing a taste for peaches. Also -- whoever advised Joakim Noah to stay in school one more year gives really bad advice.

Comments

The next Simmons column should be fun.

Posted by Petey | May 23, 2007 9:49 AM

And Zeke dodged a real bullet.

Posted by Petey | May 23, 2007 9:50 AM

"Also -- whoever advised Joakim Noah to stay in school one more year gives really bad advice."

Meh. His family has money. He had no reason to come out early if was enjoying life in college.

Posted by Petey | May 23, 2007 9:53 AM

I don't know if I agree with your last statement. Sure, Noah will not be as high a pick in this year's draft as he would have been last year, but he had another year to develop his game, had a less stressful life than being the top pick would have had, won a national championship, and might well end up on a better team than he would have. It hurts him some on his first contract, but the place where NBA players make their serious money is on the next contract, which will be based on his performance in the league. If the extra year in college makes him a better pro, it will be worth it in the long run whether it hurt his draft status this year or not.

Posted by Curtis | May 23, 2007 9:53 AM

Meh. His family has money.

I forgot about that. It does kind of make a difference.

Posted by Matthew Yglesias | May 23, 2007 9:55 AM

Also, if you have the chance to hang around another year, win a national championship with guys you like, and bang numerous UF coeds despite looking like Master Splinter, why pass that up?

Posted by CJH | May 23, 2007 9:58 AM

The take away from the lottery is that karma is a bitch for the three teams that tanked egregiously and still won't get Oden or Durant. I say this as a suffering Celtics fan this morning. Simmons said he would develop a drinking problem if Boston didn't get #1 or #2.

Posted by Dimmy Karras | May 23, 2007 9:58 AM

"It hurts him some on his first contract, but the place where NBA players make their serious money is on the next contract"

Tell it to Shaun Livingston.

If your family doesn't have money, it really does make sense to make your decisions based on moving up a couple of slots in the lottery. A couple of million extra dollars in your rookie contract means something big if it ends up being your only contract.

(Not to mention that even if your knee doesn't explode like an IED, coming out younger still means more years of non-rookie contracts before your skills decline with age...)

Posted by Petey | May 23, 2007 10:05 AM

While the conference may be glad that the Suns didn't get a pick in the top 10, it still would have been better for the conference and the NBA overall if Oden and Durant had ended up in the East. I suppose it lessens some of the pressure on the two kids since neither team will be expected to do much more than squeak out a playoff spot and little else in the West, but it would have added more drama to the East if these two could have raise some of the dregs of the league into the East playoffs with the hopes of knocking off a relatively weaker higher seed.

Posted by Ricky | May 23, 2007 10:09 AM

For clarifying purposes, the 1st pick in the '05 draft, Andrew Bogut gets $20.2m, while the 10th pick, Andrew Bynum, gets only $8.8m, and the 30th pick, David Lee, must get by on only $4.5m.

Those are big difference.

It's true that all three players should get second contracts that dwarf those numbers, but either injury or lousy development of skills could keep that from happening.

Posted by Petey | May 23, 2007 10:16 AM

A couple of million extra dollars in your rookie contract means something big if it ends up being your only contract.

Also, I believe that under the current CBA the allowable size of max contracts is based in part on the size of your previous contract, so if you're really great the financial difference can reverberate.

Posted by Matthew Yglesias | May 23, 2007 10:18 AM

Is it just me, but who really cares about NBA basketball anyway?

Posted by Howard | May 23, 2007 10:26 AM

Matt's right, which s why Wade is making less than Lebron though both signed "max" extensions.

Posted by Rob | May 23, 2007 10:30 AM

Many long years ago, there were 3 sophomore big men in the ACC, Joe Smith, Rasheed Wallace and Tim Duncan. Joe Smith was ACC POY, and TD was considered by far the rawest. And, no, though there was certainly talk of his 'upside' (or whatever term was then current), nobody would have ever seen this coming.

While Rasheed is a bit of a counter-example (leaving aside his lunacy, excellent career), would you rather be Joe Smith or Tim Duncan (who stayed all 4, and CLEARLY benefited).

Admittedly the injury thing can trump this principle, though the insurance does provide some buffer.

Leaving aside injury or immediate serious financial need (both valid concerns, of course), MOST of these guys would be better off with another year or 2, particularly in a good program where they are happy. The second contract is, indeed, where the money is, and becoming the best player you can be is the best way to get there.

Posted by drinkof | May 23, 2007 10:32 AM

"Also, I believe that under the current CBA the allowable size of max contracts is based in part on the size of your previous contract"

I'm about 98% sure this is incorrect, though I'm only an at a beginner's level of cap-ologist expertise.

One piece of actual evidence against your theory is here, where we can see both LeBron and Wade receiving identical $63m extensions despite the differing levels of their rookie contracts.

-----

What you might be confusing here is that pre-CBA contracts like Kevin Garnett's and Shaq's are grandfathered in, so that they can sign subsequent contracts above the max level.

Posted by Petey | May 23, 2007 10:33 AM

"Matt's right, which s why Wade is making less than Lebron though both signed "max" extensions."

As stated after you posted, this is absolutely incorrect.

LeBron and Wade have contracts that will be paying them the precise same number of dollars over the next few years.

In '09/'10, for example, both players will make $15,070,550.

This year, LeBron made more than Wade because they were both still in their rookie contracts and LeBron was drafted higher.

Posted by Petey | May 23, 2007 10:38 AM

The Duncan example isn't really instructive of a player improving due to staying in school. He would have been the #1 pick after his junior year, but decided to stay because he enjoyed the college life. Jerry West, among others, have stated that they would have also taken him #1 after his soph year.

I think Roy Hibbert, who is staying at GTown, is a better example of a guy who could benefit from staying in school and is making that decision to improve his game.

Posted by MJ | May 23, 2007 10:40 AM

As a Pistons fan, I loved seeing the top picks go out West. Nothing keeps you on top of the conference quite like an awful conference.

Posted by Steve | May 23, 2007 10:43 AM

I always love the way announcers will tout some player, such as Brandon Roy, as an example of the importance of staying in school. From now on, people should start invoking Noah whenever some kid is considering whether to stay in school or not. This will be true regardless of how his NBA career turns out since that decision undoubtedly cost him money both in terms of the money he lost out this year and the money he lost by being drafted lower than he would have last year.

Posted by Guscat | May 23, 2007 10:45 AM

This will be true regardless of how his NBA career turns out...

This is obviously incorrect. Do you see why?

Posted by Steve | May 23, 2007 10:52 AM

The argument that old-fogey types make for staying in school is kind of double-edged. When they say that about a sure-fire lottery pick like Noah, there's no mention of draft position, it's strictly about refining the player's game so he makes a bigger impact his rookie season. The draft position only matters, by these guys' logic, for players who slip out of the first round, like former UT forward PJ Tucker. He came out early, went in the second round (and therefore didn't get the guaranteed multi-year deal), and was eventually cut by the Raptors this season.

Also, is Mike Conley worth the #3 pick?

Posted by matt w. | May 23, 2007 10:56 AM

If I'm Atlanta I take Conley at #3 (or look at a deal to swap picks and take him lower, but both Memphis and Boston might be threats to take Conley as well, so that probably wouldn't work).

Posted by Quarterican | May 23, 2007 11:05 AM

"both Memphis and Boston might be threats to take Conley as well"

The AP is reporting that both Memphis and Boston have folded their franchises in the wake of last night's disappointing lottery performance, so I'd say that isn't a worry.

Oddly, immediately after the franchise folded, Danny Ainge extended Doc Rivers' contract through 2027. Legal experts think that in the absence of a franchise, Ainge will personally be on the hook to pay Rivers' extension.

Posted by Petey | May 23, 2007 11:10 AM

Nevermind the Western Conference, the NW Division has more talent now than the East all by itself (Utah, Denver, Seattle, Portland, and Minnesota).

Matt, just another reason to move to Portland! Go Blazers!

Posted by matthew c | May 23, 2007 11:27 AM

No conspiracy theories? Really? The two least stable franchises in the NBA get the two best picks in the draft, and there are no dark mutterings?

Posted by SomeCallMeTim | May 23, 2007 11:35 AM

I think it's a conspiracy to keep the Warriors from getting back to the playoffs. Probably Cuban is behind it somehow.

Posted by cs | May 23, 2007 12:12 PM

glad to see Matt called out for the Noah comment. not up to your usual standards, matt!

my 'wolves lose out again! they should take Simmons advice and trade KG for Amare. Then trade Amare to ATL for Webster and the #3, lock Ricky Avis in a broom-closet, option THud to the WNBA and start over.

Posted by chris | May 23, 2007 12:14 PM

The two least stable franchises in the NBA get the two best picks in the draft, and there are no dark mutterings?

And the three teams that clearly tanked finish in the worst possible spots. And, if you really wanna go crazy, if we imagine that Stern's *really* got it in the for the Suns, he jerked them out of Atlanta's draft pick as well.

You'd think though that he might want to kill multiple birds with one stone and give one of these picks to a team like Philly, which played honorably down the stretch *and* is a historic franchise *and* is in a major media market.

Posted by Quarterican | May 23, 2007 12:16 PM

"The Duncan example isn't really instructive of a player improving due to staying in school. He would have been the #1 pick after his junior year, but decided to stay because he enjoyed the college life. Jerry West, among others, have stated that they would have also taken him #1 after his soph year."

Well, of course the example was from their respective Sophomore years, and Wallace and Smith left. I stand by it, though you are correct that it was not so much the senior year but the junior year. During sophomore year, Smith was clearly ranked higher, Wallace about even, with Duncan still pretty raw, though seen as having upside.

Hey, I love Jerry West, but if he said that, he's blowing some serious smoke. As is anybody else who said that contemporaneously. Of course, he probably would have been picked ahead of Kobe and Steve Nash ...

Posted by drinkof | May 23, 2007 12:21 PM

"they should take Simmons advice and trade KG for Amare"

Why set your sights so low? Why not trade Marko Jaric for LeBron James and Troy Hudson for Tim Duncan?

I mean, if you're not going to be grounded in reality, why not jump all the way to the moon?

Posted by Petey | May 23, 2007 12:21 PM

. And, if you really wanna go crazy, if we imagine that Stern's *really* got it in the for the Suns, he jerked them out of Atlanta's draft pick as well.

Had that thought, too. If you look closely, you'll see a faint tattoo of the All Seeing Eye on Stern's forehead.

Posted by SomeCallMeTim | May 23, 2007 12:22 PM

"a team like Philly, which played honorably down the stretch"

You say "honorable", I say "sucker".

Yeah. Hanging on to Andre Miller in the Odenstakes year is the way to go, Ed. Yup. That's the ticket, Billy.

Posted by Petey | May 23, 2007 12:23 PM

"they should take Simmons advice and trade KG for Amare"

Why set your sights so low? Why not trade Marko Jaric for LeBron James and Troy Hudson for Tim Duncan?

I do this deal if I'm the Suns. I think KG solves almost every problem the Suns currently have.

Posted by Quarterican | May 23, 2007 12:28 PM

"I do this deal if I'm the Suns. I think KG solves almost every problem the Suns currently have."

While KG is an elite player, I think he's wildly overrated as a franchise altering title winner. Great small forwards have their limitations.

I frankly don't think the trade would make the Suns any better next year - and would likely make them worse. And even if it did make them better, it'd have to almost guarantee a title next year to justify trading a 24 year old for a 31 year old. And that's not even bringing KG's lousy contract into the conversation.

Similarly, if I were the Bulls, I'd rather have Gasol than Garnett for age and positional reasons. And Amare is better than Gasol.

Posted by Petey | May 23, 2007 12:38 PM

I missed (well, avoided) the last game, in which Amare exploded, so maybe I missed important data. But from what I've seen, he's lost a step. That's only going to become more apparent as time goes on. I'd deal Marion or Amare. I'm not sure I'd do it for KG, given his contract.

Posted by SomeCallMeTim | May 23, 2007 12:41 PM

At this point Amare is, IMO, somewhat better at attacking the basket, which is after all his role on the Suns, but I have to believe that in the Suns system KG would also be devastating rolling to the rim.

But swapping KG for Amare, even if it loses them a little of Amare's pure power, gives them another above average passer in the starting lineup. It gives them another elite defender in the starting lineup, which makes the Suns more flexible (since KG can also guard multiple positions) *and* frees them from worrying about whether to hide Amare against other elite bigs. Plus I think it solves almost all the (publicly known) attitude issues the Suns have.

Ultimately, while I think Stoudemire is better than Marion and has a higher ceiling, I think that Marion is more indespensible to the engine of how the Suns work than Amare is, because there are more guys in the NBA who can replicate to a sufficient degree what Amare brings but very very few who can do the same for Marion; ironically, I think one of the guys who *could* successfully replace Marion is KG, but that doesn't give the Suns an extra defender and I'm not sure how that works in the locker room.

Posted by Quarterican | May 23, 2007 12:50 PM

"But from what I've seen, he's lost a step."

He has lost a step. And what's left is enough for him to be a dominating post player for a decade.

Amare is one of the top 5 most untouchable guys in the league at this point.

Posted by Petey | May 23, 2007 12:50 PM

Amare is one of the top 5 most untouchable guys in the league at this point.

Sure, in your world. But in your world, Isiah's one of the top 5 best GMs in the league. Things are different in this one.

Posted by SomeCallMeTim | May 23, 2007 12:53 PM

"Sure, in your world."

Name 5 guys you'd take to start a team before you'd take Amare.

I come up with LeBron and maybe Yao (old and injury prone) ahead of Amare. I probably take Amare before I take Wade, though it's close.

I can't imagine anyone else seriously entering the conversation.

Posted by Petey | May 23, 2007 1:02 PM

"so maybe I missed important data."

Data is not what you lack, SCMT.

Posted by Petey | May 23, 2007 1:03 PM

"I come up with LeBron and maybe Yao (old and injury prone) ahead of Amare. I probably take Amare before I take Wade, though it's close"

OK, first, you're nuts. Second, Yao is 26.

Posted by too many steves | May 23, 2007 1:06 PM

But no one is really untouchable; I'd rank Amare very highly if I were building a team from scratch, but the Suns *aren't*. They've got a lot invested in a particular system and they're trying to win in the very short term, and they have to be looking at ways to tweak their system/personnel for better success. The Suns may disagree with me (and in the end I assume they do) that they'd benefit by trading Amare for KG, but my contention has nothing to do with thinking KG is intrinsically more valuable or a better player, it has to do with my perception of how he'd fit in with Nash, Marion, Bell.

Posted by Quarterican | May 23, 2007 1:16 PM

"The two least stable franchises in the NBA get the two best picks in the draft, and there are no dark mutterings"

Huh? Sonics yeah, but people haven't been paying attention to how much Portland has settled. Allen re-bought the arena. Pritchard is firmly in charge as GM, McMillan at coach, last years draft netted a great trio. These aren't the dysfunctional jail blazers of old. Miles is probably gonna retire, they can likely trade Randolph (say a 3 way sign and trade for Rashard Lewis)

A lineup of Jack, Roy, Lewis, Aldridge and Oden looks pretty damn good. Outlaw, Webster, Rodriguez, Udoke and Pryzbilla are a decent bench too.

As others have noted there is nice karma that the one team who didn't tank at all won the lotto.

Posted by Eric | May 23, 2007 1:17 PM

"OK, first, you're nuts."

The nescient always underestimate the importance of post players. It's why folks think there is some actual doubt about how Portland is going to use their pick.

Wade is an elite player. He's the first guard I'd take. But he's just less important as a cornerstone to winning titles than an elite post player.

"Second, Yao is 26."

He turns 27 before the season starts and has an injury history. As stated, I probably take him ahead of Amare, but it's not a clear cut decision.

Amare should get better over the next two years. Yao, not so much.

Posted by Petey | May 23, 2007 1:18 PM

As far as Amare vs. KG, I thin that's a trade that would make both teams worse. KG is a guy who can take a team of complete scrubs and carry them to a .500 record, because he does it all. Amare, as awesome as he is, has to have someone to get him the ball. 82games did a play-by-play study of one of Amare's best games this year, and they found that unless Nash got him the ball moving toward the hoop, he wasn't that effective. On plays were he got it outside the key, or got it in the post with his back to the basket, he was pretty average.

I know there's no doubt as to what Portland will do with their pick. And they're right, Oden is the smart choice. I happen to think Durant is going to be even better than people expect, but even I would probably take Oden #1.

By the way, I'm penciling Portland in for the 2011 NBA title. Especially if they can trade Randolph for a perimeter shooter or a PG (although I think Rodriguez could be pretty awesome.)

Posted by too many steves | May 23, 2007 1:29 PM

Oh, and I should note that Amare hasn't exactly been injury-free. Yeah, he had one complete season, but he'll have to have another one before I'm confident his knee is going to be OK.

Posted by too many steves | May 23, 2007 1:31 PM

Another guy I would take before Amare, if I were starting a team: Oden. Maybe Durant, too.

Posted by too many steves | May 23, 2007 1:31 PM

Agree with Quarterican - if the Suns had the opportunity to trade Amare for KG, they should. KG is just a better all around player and would better use the few years left while Nash is still elite. I wouldn't worry about 5 years down the road when KG will be on the down slope and Amare still elite - Nash will be retired then anyway.

Posted by Al | May 23, 2007 1:36 PM

Chris Bosh, Dwight Howard, Duncan, Kobe, maybe Dirk Nowitzki, who knows about Andrea Bargnani, and Gilbert Arenas (only because this is the Yglesias site)

Posted by joe dokes | May 23, 2007 1:41 PM

Bosh is close to Amare, and so is Howard. They're both better defenders, and Bosh is about Amare's equal offensively. Howard is very, very raw, and so far he hasn't shown any signs that he's learning, so I'm not sure.

I'd also take Dirk before Amare, and maybe Duncan, despite his age. Definitely LeBron, definitely Wade, maybe Kobe.

Posted by too many steves | May 23, 2007 1:46 PM

The two best examples of guys coming out too soon and staying too long are both from UCLA, Jaron Rush and Jason Kapono, respectively.

As for Yao, I think he is unfortunately playing in the wrong era, but I still think he will be a dominant offensive player. His rebounding and defense, I think, will never quite measure up. But if he gets his offense where it needs to be he'll be a great player. The tough thing is that expectations are so outsized for him.

Posted by Freddie | May 23, 2007 1:47 PM

I think Amare is probably slightly overrated in general, and Petey is wildly overrating him. He's a very talented scorer and pretty good rebounder, but subpar defensively, and his stats are probably a little inflated thanks to his place on the fast-paced Suns. Pace Petey, Amare simply doesn't have much of a back-to-the-basket post-up game, so his arguments about the value of post-up scorers are largely moot. I'm not going to try to rank the players I'd take before Amare to start a team, since I have no idea what criteria are involved there (young players building for the future? for a decade? or players who can win a championship in the next 3 years?).

And in discussing personnel moves no one should ever forget what SCMT called attention to: all through last year and the summer, Petey argued that Isiah Thomas was a MAD GEEENYUS! Petey, I plan to start paying attention to your fantasy-GM speculations right about when the Knicks finish the year above .500.

Posted by Antid Oto | May 23, 2007 1:48 PM

"Petey argued that Isiah Thomas was a MAD GEEENYUS!"

For the record, my repeated stance has been that Zeke has done a good, but not great, job as Knicks GM.

Generally sound overall strategy. Had both hits and misses.

-----

As to the general underestimation of Amare's value and the general overestimation of KG's value, well, what can I say other than most of y'all don't quite understand how this game works.

Despite his limited minutes, Amare averaged more FT's per game than anyone else in the playoffs other than Yao. He had more than Timmy, LBJ, or Wade.

And dude still has lousy footwork around the basket, which should improve over the next couple of years.

Even if you think trading Amare for KG would make the Suns better next year, (which I think it almost definitely wouldn't), you still can't trade away one of the premier post players in the league before he enters his prime. You'd get lynched by your fans 3 years from now, and the lynching would go on, and on, and on...

And how does taking away Nash's best finisher help him anyway? Dude requires finishers.

Posted by Petey | May 23, 2007 2:12 PM

You won't have to wait long for Yao to get better; he has a Dream. Nice long video of the workout. Takeaway - Yao's suffered too many turnovers because he carries the ball too low.

Posted by paperpusher | May 23, 2007 2:13 PM

Amare is a great player, no question about it, but he benefits a huge amount from playing with Steve Nash. If I were starting a franchise I think I'd take Dwight Howard over him.

Funny how injuries count against Yao but not Amare.

Posted by Steve | May 23, 2007 2:13 PM

"Funny how injuries count against Yao but not Amare."

I think Yao's feet are more of a worry for recurring problems than Amare's knees. Could be wrong, but that's the thinking. Mega-tall guys tend to end up with chronic foot problems.

Posted by Petey | May 23, 2007 2:18 PM

Hey, I didn't say the Suns should trade Amare for KG. I said it would make both teams worse. Besides, it's a silly idea, a Simmons throw-away remark. It'll never happen.

When you say, "And dude still has lousy footwork around the basket, which should improve over the next couple of years" ... I'm not sure. We always assume players are going to learn these apparently learnable skills: Howard will learn to pass, Amare will learn better footwork, KG will learn better post moves. Maybe they aren't as learnable as we thing.

Posted by too many steves | May 23, 2007 2:22 PM

Petey, you can't base your argument for Amare's great value on the idea that he will be a dominating post player for a decade while still acknowledging he has crappy footwork around the basket. You can speculate that he might become a good post player, but he's not even a decent one yet.

Also "Generally sound overall strategy" is only slightly closer to the truth than mad genius. More importantly, it is still very wrong.

Posted by Antid Oto | May 23, 2007 2:30 PM

"We always assume players are going to learn these apparently learnable skills: Howard will learn to pass, Amare will learn better footwork, KG will learn better post moves. Maybe they aren't as learnable as we thing."

I appreciate your general point here.

I don't think Howard is ever going to become an elite go-to post player because he doesn't seem to have the right instincts or finesse.

I don't think KG or Dirk are ever going learn post moves because they don't spend time in the post.

Amare seems to have great skill, spends time in the post, and given how he's been able to master the mid-range jumper, has shown an ability to add to his game.

I don't think it's guaranteed that he'll develop great footwork, but I think the odds of it are reasonably high. Lots of great post players still had rudimentary footwork at 24.

The only ways I see it not happening are if Amare has problems with his discipline, which have been hinted at. Or if playing with Nash provides him with a crutch to avoid learning post footwork.

But everything considered, I'd bet on him showing great improvement over the next couple of years.

Posted by Petey | May 23, 2007 2:31 PM

no doubt about it. it sucks that two great prospects will be playing in seattle and portland.

oden and durant playing in the Boston-DC corridor teams would revive the league.

Posted by thehova | May 23, 2007 2:40 PM

yeah, anyone claiming this is part of a NBA conspiracy would be crazy, and not just in a believes-in-NBA-conspiracies sort of way. you stick two incredibly marketable stars in small markets that won't be on national tv except on sundays or late in the evening and expect the league to benefit from that?

Posted by jackie t | May 23, 2007 2:44 PM

Petey, you nutter, Amare's game is an almost pure athletic play. He averaged, what, 37 pts, against the Spurs two years ago. He didn't look anything like that this year. He just can't blow by everyone in the league anymore. So you have a still athletic, but no longer off the charts athletic, 245lbs, 6'10 player. How good is he? Who knows, but pretty much every other player (poss. exception-Marion) yields his absolute best numbers with Nash; there's no reason to believe Amare's different.

Excluding contracts, I'd take any number of players before Amare, including Duncan, LeBron, Carmelo, Yao, Kobe, and Boozer (who has actual post moves). Definitely Oden, who has actual size. Cripes, when the Suns played the Lakers, Amare looked like Kwame's date because of the size differential. I'd want to compare shooting percentages, but possibly Parker, too. Nowitzki, too, probably. Possibly Nash; certainly the Suns would save Nash before Amare if forced to choose. That's off the top of my head.

Basically, you're advocating the CLE signing of Kemp. Worked out great for them.

Posted by SomeCallMeTim | May 23, 2007 2:45 PM

oden and durant playing in the Boston-DC corridor teams would revive the league

I don't know, man. I feel like the problems with the league aren't the kind that can be solved by putting X guy on X team. I love basketball but sometimes I can't deal with the wildly inconsistent officiating, heavy handed league office and the grind of the regular season.

Posted by Freddie | May 23, 2007 2:47 PM

Even if you think trading Amare for KG would make the Suns better next year, (which I think it almost definitely wouldn't), you still can't trade away one of the premier post players in the league before he enters his prime. You'd get lynched by your fans 3 years from now, and the lynching would go on, and on, and on...

And how does taking away Nash's best finisher help him anyway? Dude requires finishers.

Well, part of this is philosophical; the Suns are not a team that's building themselves up, which means they're trying to win a title right now. My philosophy is that if you're faced with

(1) gambling on winning a title NOW at the expense of being a contender five years down the road

vs.

(2) gambling that the nucleus which couldn't get it done this year is going to get it done in the next few years

you take the former risk instead of the latter; I understand why people would disagree with me. (And I believe teams do need time to gel, I just think the Suns have had that time.)

There's also information internal to the organization that I don't (can't?) know - their internal opinion of Amare's progress, both skill wise and physically. Skillwise is kind of moot on offense, though, for my purposes because Amare's lack of post mojo is also KG's biggest weakness (IMO).

The other thing is I don't see how you could believe KG wouldn't be a great finisher in the Suns system. Yes, you lose a bit of the explosiveness and raw power, but KG is still long and strong and fast and freakish; I'm not envisioning swapping players and having KG post up eight feet from the basket to shoot his turnaround, I'm envisioning him replicating Amare's role on offense. AND he drastically improves your defense. AND while financially the Suns ownership seem to feel like they may need to move Marion, I think that Marion and Amare can't coexist indefinitely, and Marion is more essential to the way the Suns work. There are extremely few guys who can fit into the role Marion plays for the Suns - excel at defending and rebounding against opposing bigs, stretch the floor on offense, and push the pace like a shooting guard. (As I wrote above, KG might actually be one of the few guys who could do it. LeBron could do it physically, but you don't bring in LeBron to be a garbageman, and he's obviously unavailable.)

And since this comment is stretching long anyway: SCMT, I think Marion is at his best in this system, though he'll probably never agree (which is why he should be surrounded by players he respects and defers to, and the sense I get is he doesn't feel that way about Amare). Marion thinks he's a McGrady/Carter/Pierce type who's been shackled by the Suns system, but I think he's dead wrong; I just don't think he has that dominant skillset, and I believe D'Antoni has actually put him in the position where he can most excel (which is why I think any other team in the league would be foolish to trade *for* Marion unless they were prepared to run him at the 4 with a creative point guard).

Posted by Quarterican | May 23, 2007 2:50 PM

"How good is he? Who knows"

Actually, the issue is how good will he be.

How good he is right now is quite clear if you watch hoops. That the Suns would have won a title this year if he hadn't been suspended is one way of looking at it, if you're fuzzy on the particulars...

And if you'd seriously consider taking Boozer, Carmelo, or Tony fucking Parker over Amare, well then, I'm at a loss for words.

Posted by Petey | May 23, 2007 2:54 PM

yeah, the season should be shortened.

but damn it, the best, most exciting players in the league are playing in small market cities that have no basketball tradition. there's nash in phoenix, duncan in san antonio, novitski in dallas, lebron in cleveland, wade in miami. kobe is the exception.

why can't boston-DC teams, who have the most money, hire the best GM's in the country. this is ridiculous. the knicks should steel the spurs' GM. and while they are at it, get popovich.

Posted by thehova | May 23, 2007 2:56 PM

well then, I'm at a loss for words.

If only that were true.

Posted by SomeCallMeTim | May 23, 2007 3:03 PM

"no doubt about it. it sucks that two great prospects will be playing in seattle and portland"

tehhova, as a Seattle native, Portland resident all I have to say is fuck you!

Seriously, and you wonder why we bitch about east coast bias.

Posted by Eric | May 23, 2007 3:26 PM

No tradition in San Antonio? We are talking about the franchise with the second highest winning percentage in league history since its inception - eat our dust, Celtic fans - we are talking about a city that embraces its team like its children. This is the team with the baseline bums and the Coyote. This is the team that delivered the Ice Man and elevated the finger roll to a form of artistic expression. This is the team of the Admiral, who could run and jump unlike any seven footer before him. This is the team with the greatest player since Jordan was a Bull. And when this season is over, likely as not, this team will be one shy in NBA titles of the Knicks, Nets, 76ers, and Bullets/Wizards combined.

We may be small market, but we got tradition. And guns.

Posted by Curtis | May 23, 2007 3:27 PM

I hope the Suns don't do anything drastic, like break up the Amare-Nash-Marion core. Yeah, it would have been awesome if they had got the #4 or 5 pick and drafted Noah -- god, he'd be perfect -- but the team they've got will contend for the title as long as Nash keeps playing at this level. That's not going to be forever, but he doesn't seem to be slowing down yet.

So what happens with the Suns/Hawks trade now? Does Phoenix get Atlanta's pick next year? I don't see the Hawks getting out of the lottery anytime soon.

I don't rate Amare quite as high as Petey does, but come on, Tony Parker? You're kidding, right?

Posted by too many steves | May 23, 2007 3:28 PM

just one note, petey, without making comment on your absurd arrogance throughout this.

the surgery that amare had (microfracture) on his knee has had pretty damn mixed results. kidd came back pretty strong, and randolph,too. but it wrecked allan houston's career and chris webber was never the same. admittedly, they were older than amare, but they also didn't rely on their explosiveness nearly as much. amare is never gonna be the player he could've been without the explosiveness he once had.

and i would take: oden, durant, lebron, howard, wade, bosh, and yao over him if i was starting a team for the long term.

particularly with howard i don't get how you can completely ignore him. dude's already about the best rebounder in the NBA, great shot blocker, shoots 60% from the damn field. he's gonna be a great one.

Posted by b.schac | May 23, 2007 3:41 PM

I stand corrected about San antonio's basketball tradition. i was referring to cleveland, dallas, phoenix, miami. but i guess they have some tradition too.

Posted by thehova | May 23, 2007 3:42 PM

"Does Phoenix get Atlanta's pick next year?"

Yup. Unprotected.

"I don't see the Hawks getting out of the lottery anytime soon."

Dunno. I think they're a PG away from being a .500 team.

Posted by Petey | May 23, 2007 3:46 PM

"We may be small market, but we got tradition. And guns."

You'll need your guns if you want to defend David Robinson. Nothing but a punk-ass bitch. Total Gump.

Posted by Petey | May 23, 2007 3:57 PM

"just one note, petey, without making comment on your absurd arrogance throughout this."

I'm never sure what attitude to adopt other than arrogance when I'm utterly correct.

Posted by Petey | May 23, 2007 3:59 PM

"particularly with howard i don't get how you can completely ignore him. dude's already about the best rebounder in the NBA, great shot blocker, shoots 60% from the damn field. he's gonna be a great one."

I subscribe to the view that others have noted in the past few months of questioning his court instincts and finesse ability, both of which may not be fully teachable/learnable.

He's definitely a special player. The question is whether he's a perennial third team all-NBA guy or a perennial first team all-NBA guy.

I'm of the school that thinks his potential is limited.

Posted by Petey | May 23, 2007 4:15 PM

the hova, just how many titles have the Knicks, Sixers, Nets or Wizards won in the last 40 years?

You know there is a great big world out here west of Ohio and most of the teams you've been denigrating for not having history have won titles or at least been in multiple finals, besides the Spurs and Lakers; Seattle, Portland, Phoenix, Houston, Utah, hell even Golden State.

Seriously the only eastern teams with multiple titles are the Bulls and Celtics. The teams us supposed rubes out here in basketball wasteland support have had more success than all but one of your "great" teams in the Boston-DC corridor.

Posted by Eric | May 23, 2007 4:22 PM

I don't rate Amare quite as high as Petey does, but come on, Tony Parker? You're kidding, right?

Just looked at Parker's shooting percentages. Yeah, that was a stretch.

One of the most valuable skills in the NBA is the ability to get your own shot. In the past, Amare could do so just because he was so much faster and stronger than everyone else. Now, not so much. He left a lot of balls at the rim that he would previously have powered through, and I can't remember a single play on which he blew by someone so quickly that I thought, "There's no way on earth to stop that." He's a very good player, but he doesn't frighten me anymore.

Posted by SomeCallMeTim, | May 23, 2007 5:08 PM

This is an interesting point from Henry Abbott today:

"Greg Oden, bless him, is a well-balanced individual. Kevin Durant is not. Multiple sources, who are in position to know, assure me that morning noon and night all Durant wants to do is dominate on the basketball court. I think it's entirely possible that distinction, multiplied over five years, makes Durant the more important player"

Abbot goes on to say that people close to the team -- the Oregonian beat writer, for one -- think the Blazers will take Durant. More Abbott: "If you have listened to Kevin Pritchard over the last couple of years, he has made clear that he values "heartbeat" almost above all else. From what I have heard, Durant wins that column easily -- not because Oden has little heartbeat (he almost won a freaking NCAA title as a freshman) but because Durant has so much."

If I have to bet, I still say they take Oden. I think Oden's going to be an All-Star, a 1st-team All-NBA guy by the time he's in his prime. I think Durant will be better than that, though.

Posted by too many steves | May 23, 2007 5:12 PM

If I have to bet, I still say they take Oden. I think Oden's going to be an All-Star, a 1st-team All-NBA guy by the time he's in his prime. I think Durant will be better than that, though.

I think Durant's too light, and that adding weight will cost quickness. I can't imagine the Blazers taking anyone but Oden.

Posted by SomeCallMeTim, | May 23, 2007 5:18 PM

An interesting post, steves, and an interesting distinction.

But is the "heartbeat" a reason to choose Durant over Oden?

When I think of current guys with that heartbeat, the first names that pop to mind are Garnett, Iverson, Nash, and Bryant. Again, this is not to say other stars don't have desire, but those were the first names to jump to my mind.

The common thread is those are guys I love to watch play basketball. The other common thread is that none of them besides Bryant have won championships at this level, and Bryant's came with the star who probably has the least heartbeat in the game among great players.

Posted by Curtis | May 23, 2007 5:26 PM

I think Durant's too light, and that adding weight will cost quickness.

Tracy McGrady.

Posted by WillieStyle | May 23, 2007 5:39 PM

If Durant is only as good as Tracy McGrady, I'll be a little disappointed.

Posted by too many steves | May 23, 2007 5:45 PM

I'll be surprised if Durant is as good as McGrady has been at his best.

Posted by SomeCallMeTim, | May 23, 2007 6:27 PM

I think Petey's got it closer to right than most of you think. Amare might not be quite the guy who only had one move but it was unstoppable -- "go right and dunk". But, with his ability to hit the medium range jumper and still fearsome speed and strength combination attacking the rim, he'll be the best pick-and-roll big man in the league for a long, long time to come.

I'm also not sold on Howard. Sure, he shoots 60% and is the best rebounder in the game already but how many shots does he generate out of the Orlando offense? Not many and it's one of the reasons the Magic suck. And he hasn't made much, if any, progress in that area since he came into the league.

One guy not mentioned in the who might you pick before Amare conversation is Deron Williams. He's been playing this way most of the year but if you don't think that guy is soon to be the best point guard in the league you're not watching very closely.

As far as the Oden/Durant debate, the people who are looking to Durant to be the next all-universe wing player a la Jordan need to temper their expectations a bit. Sure, there's the potential that he transcends the game but it's quite unlikely.

And I said this in an earlier thread about Oden, people are over looking just how freaking athletic that kid is. He's more than just a big guy who can play. He's Howard-like athletic with a resonably well-developed post game (with both hands) ALREADY. I think there's a good chance he'll make the all-star game as a rookie (almost zero chance for Durant out west).

Posted by Sigh | May 23, 2007 7:15 PM

From the Blazer blog at The Oregonian - Blazer beat writer Jason Quick on Blazer GM Pritchard:

http://blog.oregonlive.com/behindblazersbeat/2007/05/pritchard_i_wont_trade_the_pic_1.html

Personally, I have always felt Pritchard is a Durant guy. He's never said it directly, but in passing conversations throughout the year, I got that drift. Pritchard said he has watched both Oden and Durant "multiple times" this season in person.

At the same time, Pritchard puts a lot of stock in his upbringing in the Spurs organization, and likes to reference how San Antonio was built. He noted that the possibility of an Oden/Aldridge front line reminded him of a famously successful duo in San Antonio called Duncan and Robinson.

There seems to be no doubt among scouts that Durant is more NBA-ready, meaning he will have a greater impact immediately. One Western Conference executive tonight told me that Durant will without a doubt be the Rookie of the Year next season.

Pritchard responded to that by saying "I'm not drafting for the Rookie of the Year, I'm drafting for championships."

Posted by Tiparillo | May 23, 2007 7:25 PM

Um, Eric, in the last 40 years, the Knicks have won multiple championships. As have the Nets, Pistons and Pacers in the East.

Posted by Al | May 23, 2007 7:51 PM

Eric, of course I'm biased.

basketball in the Boston-DC corridor is less popular than it was 20 years ago (and at every level, grade school to the NBA). I would love to see a great basketball player do what Tiger Woods did to golf. the east coast needs a basketball superman.

i realize that there is a great basketball tradition in the western part of the country. I'll even admit that Los Angeles is more of basketball town new york.

Posted by thehova | May 23, 2007 11:09 PM

Al,

The ABA doesn't count. Yeah I forgot to include the Pistons as an Eastern team, though they aren't part of that vital "Boston DC corridor" he cares so much about and thinks should get all the best players just because.

And yeah if you go back 40 years the Knicks have multiple titles, so ok lets say 35:-)

Posted by Eric | May 23, 2007 11:51 PM

"hope the Suns don't do anything drastic, like break up the Amare-Nash-Marion core. Yeah, it would have been awesome if they had got the #4 or 5 pick and drafted Noah -- god, he'd be perfect -- but the team they've got will contend for the title as long as Nash keeps playing at this level. That's not going to be forever, but he doesn't seem to be slowing down yet."

They need a pickup, but nothing drastic. They need a bit of a contrarian, an skilled, older big guy who plays his 12-14 during the season, but can add quality D (and 6 fouls) when facing a true quality post man (Duncan, for obvious example). Thomas is good, but not enough.

Just say there were a Mourning clone (with both kidneys). Or say Kevin Willis was 37 again.

That alone, with this team, lets them deal with SA, and would help against some others, without really weighing down the real game.

Posted by drinkof | May 24, 2007 6:04 PM