SB Nation User Blog: BlazersOrBust

Simmons... ::sigh::

BlazersOrBust — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 17:17:03 -0000

Simmons... ::sigh::

The guy just can't stop chugging that Blazer haterade. A couple of excerpts:

"We knew Miller was a bad fit when the Blazers signed him. It just didn't feel right. He's a moody loner; they had great chemistry last year. He needs the ball in his hands; so does Brandon Roy. He likes free-lancing; Nate McMillan is hands-on. But Portland felt obligated to spend their extra cap money, and nobody else was pursuing Miller, so what transpired was the equivalent of two single wedding guests going through the motions on the dance floor."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

"The "You Thought We'd Take Another Leap, But Instead We Went Backwards Because Expectations Were Too High, We Tinkered With Our Chemistry & Our Young Guys Tuned Out Their Coach" Team.

(Ladies and gentlemen, your 2009-10 Portland Trail Blazers!)"

Does Andre Miller Actually Improve His Bigs?

BlazersOrBust — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 20:05:02 -0000

Conventional wisdom and Wendell Maxey would have us believe that Andre Miller is the bee's knees when it comes to making life easier on his big men on the offensive end.

There's no doubt that Miller is a slick passer, and his 351 combined "dunk" and "close" assists ranked third in the NBA last year, trailing only Steve Nash and Deron Williams.

But does the conventional wisdom hold up when we examine the stats of the primary big men on Miller's teams throughout his career? Check it out after the jump.

METHODOLOGY:

My methodology was straightforward: first, I selected the two most pivotal (pardon the pun) big men from each one of Miller's teams based on playing time. If two power forwards/centers played a similar number of minutes per game, then I selected the one who averaged more points per 36 minutes. Using points per 36 minutes holds playing time steady -- if you just look at points per game, then you could see a "Miller effect" when you're actually just seeing a playing time effect.

I then compared their last seasons before playing with Miller to their first seasons playing with him, and looked at what change -- if any -- we could see in their true shooting percentage (TS%) and points per 36 minutes (PP/36). If Miller is the top-flight setup point guard we hope he is, then it stands to reason that his primary big men's TS% (more dunks, layups, and FT attempts) and PP/36 (same) would be higher from playing with him.

Cavaliers 1998-1999 (22-28, 25th in pace)

Shawn Kemp and Andrew DeClerq were the featured big men for the Cavs during the '98-'99 lockout-shortened season. For every single entry, PP/36 will be the first number and TS% the second number.

Kemp: 21.0; .578

DeClerq: 12.6; .552

Cavaliers 1999-2000 (32-50, 3rd in pace)

Kemp: 21.1; .530

DeClerq: 10.7; .508

We see precipitous declines in TS% for both players during Miller's rookie campaign, though this can hardly be attributed solely to him: the Cavs underwent a coaching change that swapped Mike Fratello's methodical style for Randy Whitman's running and gunning, which would have an obvious impact on shooting percentages. As a side note, Miller split time at the point all year with Brevin Knight.

Cavaliers 2000-2001 (30-52, 17th in pace)

The Cavs picked up two new big men in the offseason before the 2000-2001 season, adding Chris Gatling and Clarence Weatherspoon. Ilgauskas was limited to 24 games this season because he was in the midst of his foot problems, so I excluded him.

Gatling: 20.2; .466 (1999-2000, Orlando and Denver). 18.2; .468 (2000-2001, with Miller).

Weatherspoon: 12.6; .566 (1999-2000, Miami); 12.0; .563 (2000-2001, with Miller).

No real change in either player's statistics occurred during Miller's first season as the full-time starting point guard. The dip in Gatling's PP/36 can be attributed to Cleveland's slower pace compared to Orlando and Denver the year prior.

Cavaliers 2001-2002 (29-53, 15th in pace)

Another season, another group of big men for young Miller. Ilgauskas and Chris Mihm each average about 22 minutes a game as new head coach John Lucas does his best to assemble patchwork lineups.

Ilgauskas: 16.4; .524 (in 24 games in 2000-2001, shortened by injury); 18.7, .501

Mihm: 13.8; .500 (2000-2001, Cleveland). 12.3; .470

Ilgauskas' TS% of .501 is the lowest of his 11-year career, though his PP/36 takes a nice jump. Take these numbers with a grain of salt because Ilgauskas is still racked by foot problems at this point in his career, which likely has a far greater effect on his statistics than the play of his point guard. Both Mihm's PP/36 and his TS% declined during his second season playing with Miller.

Clippers 2002-2003 (27-55, 14th in pace)

Miller is dealt during the offseason to the Clippers for Darius Miles. Head-bopping fans everywhere are devastated that the duo of Miles and Quentin Richardson has been cruelly separated.

Brand: 17.3; .586 (2001-2002, Clippers). 16.8; .543.

Olowokandi: 12.4; .457 (2001-2002, Clippers). 11.7; .457.

Here's the first major strike against the Legend of Andre: Olowokandi's PP/36 was actually better the season before Miller arrived, and his TS% stayed exactly the same. While the Kandi Man did average a career-high 12.3 PPG playing with Miller, he also played -- unbelievably -- 38.0 MPG that year. His PP/36 averages were remarkably consistent in their mediocrity, ranging between 10.8 and 12.4 for the first seven years of his career. Miller's arrival coincided with ridiculous amount of PT for Olowokandi -- nothing more.

Brand's PP/36 and TS% both drop with Miller's arrival.

Nuggets 2003-2004 (43-39, 1st in pace)

Miller arrives to the go-go-go Nuggets and plays with a competent pair of big men for the first time in his NBA career. In what is likely related news, it is also the first time Miller plays on a team that finishes the season above .500.

Nene: 13.4; .545 (2002-2003, Nuggets). 13.1; .578

Camby: 12.9; .444 (2002-2003, Nuggets, injury-shortened season). 10.4; .511

Not much to see here. Nene's PP/36 stays virtually the same and his TS% takes a nice jump, but 2003-2004 is also his second year -- one would hope that he'd have improved his shot selection as a second-year player. Camby's TS% takes a giant leap, but the .444 he posted in the year prior to Miller's arrival was the worst of his career. Camby's career TS% is .510, exactly in line with his percentage during his first year playing with Miller.

Nuggets 2004-2005 (49-33, 4th in pace)

Nene begins his fight against injuries; enter Kenyon Martin from the Nets.

Martin: 17.4; .528 (2003-2004, Nets). 17.2; .521.

Camby: 10.4; .511 (2003-2004, Nuggets). 12.2; .505.

Camby's PP/36 bump up slightly from his first season playing with Miller to his second, but otherwise we see no change in either of the players' numbers. In the case of Martin, you could look at this as a good thing, though -- he experienced no drop in PP/36 or TS% when he left Jason Kidd and started playing with Miller.

Nuggets 2005-2006 (44-38, 2nd in pace)

Nene continues to struggle with injuries; Martin and Camby hold down the fort in the paint for the Nuggets.

Martin: 17.2; .521 (2004-2005, Nuggets). 16.8; .533

Camby: 12.2; .505 (2004-2005, Nuggets). 13.9; .499

Martin and Camby provide similar production to the 2004-2005 campaign. No significant changes in TS% or PP/36 for either player.

Nuggets 2006-2007 (45-37, 2nd in pace)

Miller is dealt midway through the season in the trade that sends Allen Iverson to the Nuggets. Nene returns to play 63 games; Kenyon Martin suffers a season-ending knee injury just two games into the season.

I'm not going to list Camby or Nene's stats this time -- you guys get the idea, plus Miller was only in Denver for 30 games. It's worth mentioning that Nene bounces back with a huge .611 TS% this year.

Philadelphia 2006-2007 (35-47, 23rd in pace)

Dalembert: 9.9; .568 (2005-2006, Philadelphia). 12.5; .581.

Smith: 15.4; .533 (2006-2007, Denver). 13.2; .510 (2006-2007, Philadelphia).

Dalembert improves his PP/36 by more than 25% with Miller's arrival, and his TS% jumps up a point and a half. Smith was essentially a benchwarmer for the Nuggets and thrust into a featured role when he joined the 76ers with Miller in the trade that sent Iverson to the Mile-High City.

Philadelphia 2007-2008 (40-42, 20th in pace)

Reggie Evans sees significant minutes for the Sixers at the 4-spot this year as the organization grooms Thaddeus Young. This is not a good thing for the Sixers.

Dalembert: 12.5; .581 (2006-2007, Philadelphia). 11.4; .556.

Evans: 10.4; .544 (2006-2007, Denver and Philadelphia). 8.1; .441.

Dalembert's numbers dip slightly in his first full season with Miller, though the 11.4 is still significantly better than the 9.9 he posted in his last full season *without* Miller. I don't know what the heck happened to Evans' TS%, but I don't think you can blame Miller for it, because Evans was part of the Miller/Smith package and played with Miller in Denver prior to being traded.

Philadelphia 2008-2009 (41-41, 21st in pace)

Evans is rightfully relegated to the scrap heap as Young flourishes in his second season. Dalembert resumes his pre-Miller suckiness.

Dalembert: 11.4; .556 (2007-2008, Philadelphia). 9.2; .535.

Young: 14.1; .570 (2007-2008, Philadelphia). 16.0; .549.

Dalembert's performance actually falls below pre-Miller levels in his second full season with the point guard. It's difficult to know how much of Young's maturation can be assigned to Miller's veteran influence, so I won't attempt to quantify that here.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WHAT IT ALL MEANS

Frankly, there's not a whole lot of evidence to suggest that Andre Miller significantly improves the offense of his big men. The only player whose performance significantly jumped with Miller's arrival was Sam Dalembert, and he tailed off so badly in the next two seasons that the Sixers would trade him for a used jockstrap right now.

Miller has bounced around a lot, and he's played with some truly terrible bigs (Chris Gatling and Clarence Weatherspoon? Are you kidding me?) And the quality bigs with whom he's played have been badly bitten by the injury bug: Camby, Martin, Nene, and Ilgauskas have all missed huges chunks of seasons during their time with Miller. As an aside, if he brings that mojo anywhere near Greg, he'll be sleeping with the fishes in the Willamette.

There are obviously a TON of extraneous circumstances that I didn't consider here, because they're beyond the scope of my ability to comment intelligently about them. In addition, it could very well be that choosing TS% and PP/36 weren't good measurements of Miller's ability to improve the offensive looks that his big men get. But if operationalizing the variable that way was valid, then it's possible that Miller's reputation exceeds his actual performance in terms of setting the table for his big men.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

QUALITY BIGS: CAREER NUMBERS WITH AND WITHOUT MILLER

I took the four "quality" bigs with whom Miller played at least two full seasons: Camby, Nene, Martin, and Dalembert. Ilgauskas and Brand didn't make the cut because of injury; the former with his foot problems, the latter with the torn ACL.

I averaged their PER, TS%, and PP/36 during the time they spent with Miller and compared it to their career averages during the time they played with other point guards. To account for the trade during the 2006-2007 season, I kept Martin/Nene/Camby's numbers for the whole year even though Miller was dealt in the middle, and likewise for Dalembert. I had no way to get pre- and post-trade numbers for those guys so this seemed like the best option.

Dalembert (w/Miller): PER: 14.96 TS%: .557 PP/36: 11.03

(w/o Miller): PER: 14.45 TS%: .527 PP/36: 10.7

Camby (w/Miller): PER: 18.75 TS%: .509 PP/36: 12.1

(w/o Miller): PER: 17.75 TS% .510 PP/36: 12.85

Nene (w/Miller): PER: 16.06 TS%: .580 PP/36: 15.83

(w/o Miller): PER: 15.78 TS%: .565 PP/36: 14.35 (these numbers are skewed majorly downward by Nene's injury-plagued 2007-2008 season, in which he appeared in only 16 games, and which I included for the sake of fairness).

Martin (w/Miller): PER: 17.1 TS%: .527 PP/36: 17.0

(w/o Miller): PER: 15.3 TS%: .515 PP/36 15.2

These numbers are eye-opening. The *only* big man who Miller made significantly better offensively, at least by these measurements, was Martin. Dalembert was marginally better with Miller than without him (but still not good enough for Philly to want to keep him), Camby was essentially the same player, and Nene would actually appear significantly better *without* Miller if you removed his 16-game '07-'08 season from the averages.

Injuries and the regular development of young bigs (i.e., Nene continued to improve after Miller left) obviously make it difficult to state with confidence how much impact Miller has, compared to the dozens of extraneous variables also influencing how his big men play. But it's my opinion that these numbers indicate that Miller's reputation for improving the offensive opportunities of his big men might outstrip his actual history doing so.

SI.com says "Blazers in Good Shape"

BlazersOrBust — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 16:32:54 -0000

SI.com says "Blazers in Good Shape"

Von Wafer to miss Game 6

BlazersOrBust — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 15:58:30 -0000

Von Wafer to miss Game 6

Portland sports-talk radio just reported that (Baron) Von Wafer is battling back problems and will not play tonight. I say huzzah! That guy has been a royal pain in the posterior off the bench for Houston. Anything that saps the scoring punch of their second unit and makes guys like Brooks and Artest think they have to score more to make up the difference is fine by me.

NBA.com poll shows...

BlazersOrBust — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 21:51:04 -0000

NBA.com poll shows...

With more than 52,000 votes, the Blazers are America's darlings -- 35% of all respondents pick Portland as the dark horse most likely to make some noise in the playoffs. I fully expect us to double this number in the next thirty-seven minutes. :)

shaq's not a jerk

BlazersOrBust — Sat, 28 Mar 2009 15:28:33 -0000

shaq's not a jerk

just goes to show that human beings are complicated animals. for all of his obnoxious preening on and off the court, way too many stories come out about the big cactus just like this one for me to really despise the guy. stuff like this is way more important in the grand scheme of things than him falling on joel's face.

Race for the division title: Schedule predictions

BlazersOrBust — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 15:50:09 -0000

This is duplicating JScot and Snake's excellent work to a certain extent, but I wanted to look at our schedule for the rest of the season and how we stack up in the race for the division title against the Nuggets. My guesses for how things shake out are just that -- I don't have any fancy-pants statistical knowledge like those two gents -- but I think it's worthwhile to have all the remaining games in one place.

BLAZERS

3/23: PHIL We should win this game. I'd be more worried about these guys for all the reasons Dave mentioned in his main-page post, but we've been playing great ball the last four games against teams similar to Philly's caliber. They're on a back-to-back to boot. W, 45-26

3/26: PHO 2-0 on the homestand, here we come! Phoenix is not to be underestimated -- it's a team with proud veterans fighting for its playoff life -- but they're coming into the Garden on a back-to-back against the Jazz. They'll be exhausted from playing at altitude and from getting into Portland at 2:30 AM, and the Jazz will have beaten them up as only a Jerry Sloan-coached team can. W, 46-26

3/28: MEM Memphis sucks and we've been outstanding at home against bad teams all year. W, 47-26

3/31: UTAH I think we get this win. Utah is coming into Portland on a back-to-back after playing the high-paced Knicks the night before. Portland is on three days' rest and will be raring to cap off the homestand before headindg out on the road. And the Jazz have been terrible on the road this year against elite WC opposition. W, 48-26

4/03: @OKC I don't think we'll have forgotten what happened the last time we went to OKC. There's not much of a chance of us looking past this game to the Rockets -- Nate will have the troops too focused for that. The Thunder are dangerous, but I think we'll pull this one out. W, 49-26

4/05: @HOU Don't give our boys much of a shot in this one. The Rockets have not one but two elite perimeter defenders to throw at Roy and a bevvy of middling-to-solid big men to hammer him every time he drives. L, 49-27

4/07: @MEM Did I mention that Memphis sucks? Assuming we don't lose a heartbreaker to Houston that causes a mental letdown, the Blazers take this one. W, 50-27

4/08: @SAS The Spurs are too good at this time of year and the Blazers are too green to go into San Antonio and steal this game, especially on a back-to-back. L, 50-28

4/10: LAL Tough, tough game to call. Both teams are going to be fired up after Rudygate, and the Blazers will be jockeying for position to boot. Lakers are on a back-to-back, playing the Nuggets in LA before flying to the Rose City. But the first game back home after a road trip is oftentimes a tough one...my heart says W, but my brain says L, 50-29

4/11: @LAC The Clippers are the most dysfunctional team in the NBA right now...but on a back-to-back, after a hugely emotional game win OR lose against the Lakers, against a team as talented on paper as the Clippers, heading back out on the road for the last time all year, this has all the makings of a trap game. It says here that the Blazers get the win, but a L wouldn't surprise me. W, 51-29

4/13: OKC The Thunder are playing for lottery balls. We're playing for home-court advantage. W, 52-29

4/15: DEN Can we just for a moment imagine the atmosphere at tipoff if this, the final home game of the regular season against our division rivals, decides who wins the Northwest? Damn this being stuck in Boston! We must win. My fandom won't allow me to consider any other possibility. W, 53-29

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NUGGETS

3/23: @ PHO The Nuggets are starting a brutal three-game trip to Phoenix, New Orleans, and Dallas; Phoenix is riding a four-game winning streak and is fighting for its playoff life. This one could go either way, but I'll give the nod to the Suns based mostly on the fact that they're playing at home and are desperate. L, 45-26

3/25: @NO New Orleans has won three in a row against cupcakes, but Billups is a tough matchup for Paul. Again, this could go either way, but I think the Nuggets will get the W, 46-26

3/27: @DAL Dallas has been really up and down over the last six games -- beating us but getting whomped by Golden State, for example. It's a toss-up, but I think the Nuggets are the better team, and usually the better team Wins, 47-26

3/28: GS Only thing that could make this tough for the Nuggets is that they're coming off of a brutal road trip and it's a back-to-back. I'll go ahead and give the Nuggets the W, but 3-1 through this four-game stretch would be absolutely outstanding for them. 1-3 is equally likely. 48-26

3/31: NY Don't see the Nuggets losing this game at home. W, 49-26

4/02: UTAH The Jazz will be on a day's rest after having played in Portland, the Nuggets will have rested for two days after laying the whomp-stick on the Knicks at home. Gotta give the edge to the Nuggets in that comparison, plus the Jazz suck on the road like I mentioned. W, 50-26

4/04: LAC See my comment for the 3/31 game. W, 51-26

4/05: @MIN This is the Nuggets' equivalent of the LAC game for us. Back-to-back, heading out on the road to play an inferior opponent, but one that could rise up and bite you if you don't pay enough attention. They could drop this one, but I don't see that happening. W, 52-26

4/08: OKC The Thunder aren't going to beat the Nuggets in Denver with playoff positioning at stake. W, 53-26

4/09: @LAL At LA on a back-to-back? Ouch. L, 53-27

4/13: SAC Three days' rest against the woeful Kings at home? Chalk up a W for the guys in black hats, 54-27

4/15: @POR We're gonna win this game. Hooray! L, 54-28

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Unfortunately, 54-28 is better than 53-29. If these projections (well, let's be honest, WAGs is more accurate) shake out, the Nuggets win the Northwest. Even a one-game swing the other way isn't enough for us to win, because the Nuggets hold the tiebreaker (which I believe is record against division opponents if head-to-head is tied).

This four-game stretch is crucial for the Nuggets then. 3-1 will effectively win them the division; 1-3 gives us the inside lane to home-court advantage. That Utah game will be key as well...I'm going to be pulling for the Jazz in that one. Utah's closing stretch, which I didn't detail here, is absolutely brutal. You can make the argument that they're only favored in 5 of their final 12 games. I'm not worried about them catching us, so I'd rather have them knock off Denver in Denver and give us some help that way.

Conversely, if we're the Blazers (and we are, right?) then we have to win every game we should win plus at LEAST one of the Hou/LAL/SAS games to really put the the heat on Denver. Dropping those three plus one winnable game is the nail in our home-court coffin, and if we win one of those and lose a game we SHOULD win then at least we get a little bit of wiggle room. If that happens, and Denver doesn't play its best down the stretch, then we could steal the division.

Bottom line: be scoreboard watching like crazy for the next four games. We need the Nuggets to suck in this stretch, because I think they'll make hay in their final six or seven games. And cheer like crazy for the Blazers in the Hou/SAS/LAL games, because we really, really need to get one of those to solidify our shot at home-court advantage.

Go Blazers!

An interesting parallel and lessons to be learned

BlazersOrBust — Thu, 26 Feb 2009 04:23:49 -0000

An afterthought to begin the 2007-08 NBA season, the Blazers drew national attention when they streaked into 2008 riding a 13-game winning streak. By early February, Portland sat comfortably at 28-20, eight games over .500, and posters all over this board salivated at the thought of blowing the roof off the Garden in May. The Blazers proceeded to lose 7 of their next 8 road games, crated to a 13-21 finish, and ended the season nine games out of the playoffs.

Media darlings to begin the 2008-09 season, the Blazers started 2009 in impressive fashion, winning 10 of 13 in January and early February and cruising to a season-high 15 games over .500. Visions of home-court advantage in May danced like sugar plum faries among the BlazersEdge faithful. But like Sisyphus, the Blazers appeared doomed to repeat history, losing 6 out of 8 road games....................

So what's the point?

1) Missing the playoffs last season was not nearly the catastrophe it seemed to be at the time.

I was as bummed as anybody when the Blazers went in the tank. I wanted playoff basketball back in Portland so badly I could almost taste it; thinking about the roar in the Rose Garden during those first playoff player introductions gave me goosebumps. It was my opinion, shared by many around these parts, that making the playoffs and gaining that experience was integral to the Blazers' continued maturation as a team.

I was wrong. Roy has taken the leap from All-Star to All-NBA. Blake is showing that he deserves to be a starting NBA point guard. Travis added a whole new dimension -- three-point shooting -- to his game. LaMarcus continued to bulk up and develop his back to the basket repertoire. Sergio has proved, much like Martell did in his third season, that he belongs in the NBA.

All of that happened without the benefit of playoff seasoning, and it happened because we have the right elements in place for long-term success: coaching staff, front office, and ownership mutually reinforcing one another; and a young, talented, and extremely hard-working group of players. We were winning with smoke and mirrors, and the funny thing about NBA basketball in April and May is it tends to disperse smoke and break mirrors pretty quickly. Our failure to reach the loftiest achieveable goal for last season, reaching the playoffs, didn't change the fundamental fact that we have a special group brewing.

2) In a similar vein, not getting home-court advantage will not be the catastrophe it currently appears to be.

The Blazers were not a playoff team last year, despite what their record in February said; and they are not a top-four team in the West this year, despite what their record said until recently. Right now the cream is going to start separating itself from the crop, and we're still more latter than former. We are highly unlikely to reach our loftiest achievable goal for this season -- procure home-court advantage in the playoffs -- but frankly, we're not good enough for that yet, just like last season we weren't good enough to make the playoffs. Is it frustrating to lose to a Spurs team without Duncan and Ginobli? Hell yes. But gnashing our teeth over a simple reality (we're just not a top-four team in the West -- yet) isn't going to do us any more good this season than it did last season.

3) We're not reaching for the brass ring this year.

KP had the chips and the cards, and he decided not to play. Whether or not you think that's a good decision, there is no doubt in my mind that his performance thus far merits giving him the benefit of the doubt. We could have dealt for a veteran this year and earned home-court advantage for at least the first round; KP deciding against that means that it's not a priority for him this season. Last year making the playoffs would have been icing on the cake; this year a top-four seed would be; but not making a trade indicates that for both seasons for the organization, it was and is just icing -- nothing more.

I'm impatient too. We've suffered through years of incomptence on and off the court, national embarrassment, dark days of dogfighting and drug-doing -- for the love of God, we're so close to being *back* that I can almost taste it again. But this season wasn't the year to lay the cards on the table. Do I wish it had been? Yeah, kinda. But nothing KP and Nate have decided so far has made me doubt their vision for this team.

A Blazers championship this year was a pipe dream. And if that destination isn't feasible, then it's the journey that's most important. Let's hope that both we as fans and the team enjoy it to the fullest.

Breaking: Marion to Toronto

BlazersOrBust — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 17:58:48 -0000

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=3905146

Well, the Bosh-O'Neal dream frontcourt didn't last for very long. This means that any trade sending Bosh to us will be off-limits until the summer...Coangelo just fired the biggest bullet in his gun to placate CB. Too bad for us.

75 words, divide them into thirds, man I think this rule is absurd, my loins I shall gird. BOB out.

Joel Injured

BlazersOrBust — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 20:01:34 -0000

Sorry if this has already been posted somewhere, but I don't see it...this morning's Oregonian reported that Joel has "an avulsion of the scaphoid on his left wrist". Apparently that's when a chunk of bone comes off and chills out in your hand for a while. He's questionable for Friday's game against the Hornets, but much more concerning to me than Joel possibly missing one game was the 6-8 weeks required for recovery. He's going to try to play through it, but if he can't, then he's *not* gonna be day-to-day. I'm experiencing nightmarish flashbacks to last year when we only had one big man, except worse because Greg can't stay on the court. Ugggggh.