La Bomba

Not only is Spanish guard Juan Carlos Navarro leaving Winterthur FC Barcelona to join the Washington Wizards, but he seems to have a well-entrenched nickname in Spain "Bomba Navarro," as seen on his official website, BombaNavarro.com, available in both Catalan and Castellano dialects (no English, sorry).

The inefficiency of the NBA personnel market is always a marvel to behold. The three point specialist is a type whose value varies substantially from situation to situation and while if Navarro works out that'll of course be good for DC, you'd hardly put the Wizards on the list of the top five teams who could really use a three point specialist. Someplace like Cleveland, Houston, or Utah (where they always seem to be on the lookout for white guys in general) would make a lot more sense.

Comments

1. The Wizards could use someone who can come off the bench and score. After the big 3, the Wizards had little offensive firepower last year.

2. The Wizards could trade him to a team that needs him more than the Wizards do.

Posted by ostap | July 5, 2007 8:17 AM

I think you're missing your own point-- the guy's nickname is "Bomba Navarro". I don't care if he's blind, you need this dude on your team.

Posted by Freddie | July 5, 2007 8:21 AM

Catalan and Castellano dialects (no English, sorry).

Let me just be the first to point out that Catalan and Castellano are languages not dialects. And "Castellano" or Castilian as it is properly called in English, is probably better known to most Americans by its other name - Spanish.

Posted by vanya | July 5, 2007 8:49 AM

I suspect that NBA personnel inefficiency is either caused or exacerbated by the combination of guaranteed contracts with a real salary cap and luxury tax. In the NFL, teams can cut players and not only not pay them but remove their salaries from counting against the cap in many cases. In MLB, the only real restraint on team's paying players is what their franchise can afford...which means it's never really hard to either trade a player away or go get a player you think your team needs.

In the NBA, guaranteed contracts, the cap and the luxury tax can make it very hard to trade a player or sign a free agent.

Mike

Posted by MBunge | July 5, 2007 10:03 AM

Vanya,

EXACTLY!

Posted by JRVJ | July 5, 2007 11:04 AM

Worth noting that a team who dropped the name "Bullets" as a reaction to urban violence just signed a guy whose nickname is "The Bomb."

Posted by just sayin | July 5, 2007 11:32 AM

With Curry and Randolph in the low post, you could add the Knicks to the list of teams that need a 3 pt specialist, unless Nichols sticks and develops.

Posted by Rich | July 5, 2007 11:48 AM

The Wizards drafted Navarro in '02, I think. So they own his rights - it's not like the Wizards outbid other teams for Navarro's services. They were the only US team that had the right to sign him in the first place.

Posted by abayer | July 5, 2007 11:53 AM

What Vanya said. I might add that if you know Spanish and try to learn Catalan, it's not easy.

Posted by Randy Paul | July 5, 2007 12:53 PM

"With Curry and Randolph in the low post, you could add the Knicks to the list of teams that need a 3 pt specialist"

Ya think? New York needs three shooters to surround Curry and Z-Bo.

Denver needs shooters. Miami needs shooters. Utah needs shooters. Cleveland needs shooters. LA Clips need shooters.

Given the lack of anti-zone rules, if you've got a primo inside game, you absolutely need shooters to make the defense pay for packing it in.

Billy King, perhaps the worst GM in the league, got slammed when he signed Kyle Korver to a long-term $4m/yr contract since Korver is an unathletic white guy. But, of course, that's perhaps his best move in his entire tenure. Pure shooters are a very valuable commodity.

Washington ought to deal Navarro if they can convince someone to pay a hefty price. With the Bullets having no inside game, his talents will be wasted, much as Korver's have been wasted with the Sixers since Iverson was dealt.

Posted by Petey | July 5, 2007 1:12 PM

Billy King, while a bad GM, has been on the receiving end of sooooo much criticism that I think he's practically become underrated. His draft history has been acceptably good, and his trades can at least be explained rationally. That can't be said for a lot of other NBA GMs.

Posted by JP | July 5, 2007 1:28 PM

"Billy King, while a bad GM, has been on the receiving end of sooooo much criticism that I think he's practically become underrated."

It's the George Bush theory. If he's at 28% in the polls, there are always David Broders to say he's ready for a bounce.

But in reality, no amount of criticism is too much.

"His draft history has been acceptably good"

I'd argue that it isn't that much of an accomplishment to take the consensus best player still up on the board when you draft. The trick lies in architecting a team.

Hell, both Billy Knight and Kevin McHale haven't really screwed up their draft picks.

Basically, the only way to screw up the draft is to make poor decisions about untested European talent, as Dumars did with Darko, as Babcock did with Araujo, and as Vanderweigh did with Tskitishvili.

-----

There is certainly a valid argument to be had about whether King is less of a war criminal than Kevin McHale. But regardless of which way that argument turns out, I think it's safe to say they both deserve to be hanged.

Posted by Petey | July 5, 2007 1:56 PM

What abayer said. I don't get how the Wizards having drafted a player and therefore owning his rights (this would be the definition of drafting) is evidence of some horrible inefficiency in the NBA personnel system. Cleveland, Houston or Utah need a three-point specialist more, therefore...what, the league should step in and assign him to another team? What the hell point are you trying to make, Matt?

Besides which, the Wizards actually have more of a need for a solid three-point shooter than you might think. The Wiz rotation includes two perimeter players with no three-point shot (Butler, Daniels), and three guys who are more volume three-point shooters (Arenas, Jamison, Stevenson) than three-point "specialists."

Posted by Jake H. | July 5, 2007 2:22 PM

"Basically, the only way to screw up the draft is to make poor decisions about untested European talent, as Dumars did with Darko, as Babcock did with Araujo, and as Vanderweigh did with Tskitishvili."

I'm no Euro apologist, but you could have left the word "European" out of there. Kwame Brown and Michael Olowokandi come to mind.

Posted by Jake H. | July 5, 2007 2:26 PM

The Bush analogy doesn't really make any sense, nor does the "bounce" analogy. I can take the time to explain why, if you're actually confused. Meanwhile, the Sixers, before being acquired by their current ownership, screwed up plenty of draft picks without going overseas to do it. Also, the Timberwolves have most assuredly have screwed up a great many picks. In the past ten years, they have drafted exactly two serviceable NBA players, and they were only serviceable. Obviously, the T-wolves didn't have first-round picks for a number of years, but even their second-round picks have panned out at a significantly lower rate than the Sixers' second-rounders have.

Posted by JP | July 5, 2007 2:38 PM

There's also another way to screw up a draft pick: choose an American white guy. Works almost every time.

Posted by JP | July 5, 2007 2:41 PM

"I'm no Euro apologist, but you could have left the word "European" out of there. Kwame Brown and Michael Olowokandi come to mind."

Drafting a high pick that turns out to be a bust is not the same as screwing up the draft. Kwame and Kandi were the right picks at the time, even if they didn't pan out.

Similarly, if Greg Oden turns out to be a bust, that won't mean Pritchard made a mistake. The draft is always a bit of a crap shoot when you're dealing with 18 yo's and 19 yo's.

But picks like Araujo and Tskitishvili seemed bad well before the players played their first NBA games. Everyone was laughing at Babcock for taking Araujo instead of Iguodala on draft night.

-----

"Besides which, the Wizards actually have more of a need for a solid three-point shooter than you might think."

No doubt. Every team in the league can make use of a solid three-point shooter. The point here, however, is that there are other teams that have more of a need for 3pt shooters due to a need to avoid defenses packing in the lane. The Bullets don't face that particular problem.

Thus, the Bullets may be able to get more in trade for La Bomba than he'd provide playing for them.

See again the Korver situation with Philly post-Iverson. Korver definitely helps Philly, but he'd help another team far more. And thus if Billy King weren't legally brain dead, he'd try to make that set of circumstances pay off via a trade.

Posted by Petey | July 5, 2007 2:45 PM

"There's also another way to screw up a draft pick: choose an American white guy. Works almost every time."

I thought about including Dunleavy and Morrison, but you can at least make the argument that those picks make sense from a business point of view, even if they don't make sense from a bball point of view.

Spencer Hawes may not be able to play, but maybe he'll help Sacto sell a few more tickets and get a bit better local TV ratings.

Posted by Petey | July 5, 2007 2:48 PM

So the Tractor Traylor/Dirk Nowitzki trade was a win for the Bucks then, Petey?

Posted by Freddie | July 5, 2007 2:49 PM

"So the Tractor Traylor/Dirk Nowitzki trade was a win for the Bucks then, Petey?"

Someday you'll acquire basic reading comprehension skills, Freddie. I have faith in you! Stay in school.

Posted by Petey | July 5, 2007 2:57 PM

Obviously.

Posted by Freddie | July 5, 2007 2:59 PM

Drafting a high pick that turns out to be a bust is not the same as screwing up the draft. Kwame and Kandi were the right picks at the time, even if they didn't pan out.

There is a kernel of a good point in here, but even so, if you draft a lot of busts, repeatedly, over an extended period of time, chances are you're doing something wrong even if all your picks seemed defensible at the time.

Posted by JP | July 5, 2007 3:43 PM

I'm willing to concede that it's MORE defensible to draft a bust if it seems like a good idea to everyone else, but it doesn't absolve the GM of all responsibility. I definitely think it counts as "messing up the draft." Taking Kwame as an example, just because nobody else wanted to notice his small hands, his lack of ball skills and his maturity issues doesn't mean MJ isn't responsible for missing those things in some sense.

"The point here, however, is that there are other teams that have more of a need for 3pt shooters due to a need to avoid defenses packing in the lane. The Bullets don't face that particular problem."

Yeah, they do. They don't have a POST presence, but their offense DOES rely on scoring in the paint, in the form of penetration and trips to the line by Arenas, Butler and Daniels. Spreading the floor and keeping defenses honest helps there, too.

"Thus, the Bullets may be able to get more in trade for La Bomba than he'd provide playing for them."

You might be right, and the theory of a bullish market for 3-point shooters presenting an opportunity is a good one. The problem is that the only offer I've heard rumored so far is a James Posey S&T. HATE that idea. Unless something more compelling comes along (perhaps someone willing to take on Etan Thomas' awful contract and send a little something back in return), I'd prefer to see them stick with JCN.

Posted by Jake H. | July 5, 2007 4:36 PM

Hell, both Billy Knight and Kevin McHale haven't really screwed up their draft picks.

Marvin Williams over Chris Paul (and Deron Williams) when they desperately needed a point guard, and Paul wanted to play for them?

How about Shelden Williams, when Brandon Roy and Randy Foye were both still on the board?

I don't know what it takes to count as 'screwing up the draft picks', but those seem like pretty big mistakes to me.
And that doesn't even mention that Knight could've gotten Stoudemire for the 3 and 11 this year...

Posted by jamie | July 5, 2007 4:38 PM

Hill to Phoenix.

Makes sense, as long as both sides accept that it's for a Michael Finley-esque role.

-----

All the noise is about the South Americans at the moment - Varejao and Nocioni.

Posted by Petey | July 5, 2007 4:46 PM

How will Hill earn playing time for PHX when Jalen Rose could not?

Who will replace the 3-point shooting of James Jones? (Don't laugh, I'm serious)

Posted by nbt | July 5, 2007 5:00 PM

"How will Hill earn playing time for PHX when Jalen Rose could not?"

Hill still has a game. Jalen doesn't.

Hill should be nice in limited minutes if he can stay healthy.

"Who will replace the 3-point shooting of James Jones? (Don't laugh, I'm serious)"

One trey per game. Less in the playoffs.

Very minor loss. They're squeezing their pennies.

Posted by Petey | July 5, 2007 5:09 PM

What the hell were they thinking last summer when they signed Marcus Banks instead of drafting Rajon Rondo?

Posted by nbt | July 5, 2007 6:09 PM

Navarro is not a 3-point specialist, more of a penetrator with a great floating shot over big men. He is clearly the best non-NBA Spanish player as of now, and, after Gasol, the second pillar of the Spanish national team.

Not sure how good of a match he is for Washington; here in Spain he is rumored to be traded to Miami or Memphis (he is great friends with Pau Gasol).

Castilian-Spanish/Catalan: what was said before, not dialects but languages. It is relatively easy, however, to learn Catalan once you handle Spanish (particularly if you also know French).

Posted by Luis | July 6, 2007 5:56 AM