I don't know if I'm just naturally pro union in this lockout or just tired of David Stern and owners crying poor (while not actually addressing the actual product, i.e. the quality of basketball their customers will watch, how or what medium they can use to watch it and the scheduling for said event).  If you think reducing player salaries and freedom to move is going to make the incompetent front offices less incompetent, I have an underwater home I'd like to sell you.  If you think those PLAYER CONCESSIONS is going to create more elite players (or better players in general) to spread around the league, I'm sure my neighbor would be happy to offer his.  

There's a scarcity of good basketball players (not just elite players).  To me, preventing good players from going to good teams just means you'll have fewer good teams, more average to mediocre teams, and perhaps fewer really bad teams (by my definition, a good team is one that operates at or near the cap).  If that's the kind of parity the league wants, then I'm not on board because I don't want to watch average basketball.  But in the end, the players knew they'd lose this CBA round, just like they lost the last two according to the same short arm and deep pocket owners (shout out to GZA) crying poor now.  But what they'd be giving up is just too much, and I'm willing to sit out the season for it.  I know that's a big risk and one that might cost them the casual fan, loss paychecks, and an even worse CBA when the dust settles, so I don't envy their position.  In fact, I recognize they have to play a season, however condensed at all costs.      

But at this point, they need to wage some guerilla warfare to get there.  Being a disgruntled player doesn't hurt the owners unless it hurts their pockets.  But that's just part of it.  Come Monday, they need to tell David Stern he'll have his agreement, but make a commitment internally that there will be blood.  Here are my top 5 recommendations:

1.  The players agree to ratify the latest proposal, but require three conditions: (1) David Stern must agree to retire at the end of this season, (2) Adam Silver must also GO AWAY at the end of this year, and (3) the players union be given veto power on the selection of the next commissioner.  The next commissioner must be someone incentivized to have a season every year and not miss any games.  If the league wants the players to get rid of anyone on their executive committee, fine he's gone.  With this approach, the players get some read meat as the political pundits like to say, but more importantly are no longer the ones holding up the season the longer it drags.  They can tell the public... hey they locked us out, we want to play and agreed to give these greedy bastards billions of dollars, but they still won't let you watch us play.

2.  When the season eventually starts, the players better not volunteer to get on the mic and tell the fans how much they're sorry for the delay and happy to have them back.  They better insist the owners grab the mic and do their own ass kissing, so the fans can express whether they approve or disapprove of them.  

3.  Pick a date right now that they agree to strike before the start of the 6th season of the deal, preferably before the start of the playoffs or finals of year 5.  That's plenty of time to start saving for a long battle.  

4.  They need to do something on principal ahead of this year's all star game.  Pick a "B" list issue, i.e. one that wouldn't be worth the owner's time to fight, and threaten not to play the game unless their OFFER is accepted.  This might be some kind of benefit for retired players or better yet some kind of give back to the fans, but something that doesn't come across as the current players being greedy.  And then repeat the tactic every year of the deal.  

5.  This one is very delicate because the PR nightmare might be severe for the players involved.  The only leverage the players ever truly had was via the major broadcast partners, i.e. ESPN and Turner (TNT) because in the end the players are the product.  They need to sabotage games.  What does that mean... every team's top player (or two) sits out a predetermined number of marquee games with some undisclosed injury... enough to have ESPN, Turner, and/or major sponsors bitch constantly to the league that they're not paying billions to see fat ass owners sit in their luxury box.  

Either way, they need to demonstrate that going forward they are permanent adversaries. 

I was reading through the Friday Bullets on TrueHoop and noticed this link to nbaplaybook.com.  It disects a sequence from last night's game against the Cavs that resulted in a tip by Jo on a Derrick drive.  While this typically deserves a FanShot, I thought I'd use it to illustrate my thoughts on the Bullsoffense in these situations.  These breakdowns by nba playbook are great and I've been meaning to disect/post my own breakdowns, but have been too lazy. 

The illustration focuses on Derrick, Jo, and the Cavs defenders, but I'd like to point out my frustrations with how the other players on the Bulls are positioned on this play (courtesy of the 4th picture).

I have a few problems with the scenario above.  First, count how many Cavs have collapsed on Derrick - I count 3 (including Parker who's assigned to Kirk on the perimeter).  Now... if three defenders have turned their attention to Derrick and a fourth (Z) is trailing the play, you'd think the Bulls could generate an easy bucket out of this.  However, how many Bulls players are within an easy pass of Derrick - I count none.  You could make a case for Jo trailing the play, but since Derrick is ahead of him, he'd have to guess that Z hadn't recovered effectively from the initial screen.  This should be a strange circumstance to everyone b/c take a look at the paint - there's no one in it, b/c the Cavs are protecting "it" from Derrick.

Now....Kirk does the right thing (which is to move), but goes in the wrong direction..IMO.  When you watch the play, Kirk moves up the floor, but I think he should have faded to the corner.  If he does this, Derrick will have a line of sight to him for a direct pass instead of having to twist for a pass behind him.  On the other hand, one could argue that moving up will force Parker to chase him, but that's fine.  I feel he should force Parker to follow him to the baseline corner.  The corner three is statistically the best area for a 3pt shot and Kirk will be open (on a night when he shot well) if Parker chooses to help on Derrick instead of staying with Kirk.  

Conversely, Lu and Taj represent my greatest frustrations with this alignment.  Moon is effectively guarding both of them.  The traffic around Derrick will make a cross court pass to Lu virtually impossible.  So much so that Moon might have enough time to recover back to Lu in the event a pass is attempted.  As for Taj, he has allowed Moon to bury himself in his lap, so he aint going anywhere. 

For anyone who watched the game, there were a few times where Lu cut to the basket as penetrators got the attention of Cavs defenders and wound up with good looks at the basket.  That's exactly what he should have done on this play.  IMO...as the sea (painted area) parted, Lu should have been dashing to the paint where he'd be much closer and in perfect position to receive a pass from Derrick.  Remember, Taj is already positioned at the basket, so Moon's first priority is to negate an easy dunk/layup attempt.  Further, Lu is found of catching kick outs just inside the 3pt line.  If Lu insists on taking 2s, why not take them much closer to the basket?

.   

[Thanks to PeteRoc for today's preview. Took last night off, seems like it was a good decision. Sam Smith always warns of the NBA's conspiracy to get the Heat more wins by making them the back-to-back opponent after a team plays Orlando. I wonder who was out last night on South Beach. -ed.]

Mama said there'd be days like this...  The Bulls enter the Magic City losers of six straight.  I signed up for this preview gig in part because I had tickets for tonight’s game and hoped this would be a hotly contested game between two teams fighting for a playoff berth.  I was hoping to provide a bunch of tidbits about the matchup.  Now… I don’t care to write much and am dreading the trip to the arena tonight, so I apologize upfront if this preview is worse than crap. 

Where do I begin?  Well, Joakim Noah is out tonight.  Luol Deng is out tonight.  And barring a miracle, Derrick Rose may be out tonight as well.  Oh, and Pargo still leads the team in shots per minute, bricks per shot, and probably salary paid per brick.  To make matters worse (as if it could get worse), tonight's game is the back end of the dreaded back-to-back.  For those scoring at home, this will mark the 17th time the Bulls have played said back-to-back, and their record coming into this one is 6 - 10.  In fairness, the team lost the first seven, so the back end hasn't been as unkind of late.  Besides, it’s not like yesterday’s game against the Magic counted as a sanctioned, professional basketball game. 

So enough about tonights game, let’s move on to other news...

Once upon a time, the Heat were 24 – 22, which more or less made them seem like a lock for a playoff spot in the eastern conference.  During those good ol’ days, the Heat (a player in the great 2010 cap space race) had dreams of landing King James and pairing him with his sure thing-to-be-resigned buddy Dwyane Wade.  Five straight losses later, the talk suddenly turned to the possibility that DWade might actually leave.  But then those five straight losses were followed by five straight wins.  And then those five straight wins were followed by four straight losses.  And somewhere along the way the status quo settled on 2010 or bust.  So now the prevailing thought seems to be the Heat will either sign a FA desirable (preferably via sign/trade) and satisfy DWade so that he resigns with what they hope is a title contending team.  Or, they won’t sign anyone of significance, thereby prompting DWade to bolt for a contender. 

So where does that leave the Bulls?  Once upon a time, the roster included names like Ben Gordon (25), John Salmons (29), Tyrus Thomas (22), Joakim Noah (23), Kirk Hinrich (28), Luol Deng (23), and Derrick Rose (20)… average age 24.  Sounds like enough pieces that a shrewd GM could leverage to make moves to improve the team hunh?  Tonight’s opponent was once in a fairly similar situation coming off an exciting playoff run featuring a new star who had exceeded everyone’s expectations and was only going to get better.  So what’s a GM to do with Eddie Jones (32), Lamar Odom (24), Rafer Alston (27), Brian Grant (31), Udonis Haslem (23), Caron Butler (23), and Dwyane Wade (22)… average age 26, who had just finished 42-40 (answer not forthcoming)? 

Well….  a FA loss here, a couple trades there, and now the Bulls too find themselves in a 2010 or bust predicament.  The fact the team is in serious danger of missing the postseason probably doesn’t help the cause.   I mean…if you’re DWade and wanted a shot at the title NEXT YEAR, will the Bulls have enough pieces? 

Oh well, I digress…  too late to turn back now…  gotta stick to the "plan."

Yours truly will be in the building tonight, but I can’t promise I’ll stay ‘til the end.  Given Miami is a short trip down from Orlando, I wouldn't be surprised if a few players got their "night out on the town" out of the way last night.  My guess is Tootsies was the best way to blow off steam (didn’t want to post a link, but you can probably guess the spot).  Also, Scottie Pippen has a residence here in S. Florida and often sits courtside when then Bulls are in town, so maybe the team will be inspired to perform well in front of a Bull great.

I was browsing through 82games this morning and their often cited Detailed Player Shooting Stats caught my eye...again.  I don't have a problem with the 82games work, but I still haven't accepted the related argument that mid-range jumpers are an inefficient shot.  My skepticism boils down to an important (IMO) and hopefully obvious element of shooting: not all shot attempts are created equal.

To expand on that last phrase, I limit my argument to four types of jump shots:

1. Off-the-Dribble / Open

2. Off-the-Dribble / Contested

3. Catch-and-Shoot / Open

4. Catch-and-Shoot / Contested

In reality, there are far more variations than the ones I've provided, including coming off screens vs stand-still, fading away vs stepping-into, and turnarounds vs facing-the-basket.  Rather than explore every possibility, I'm hoping not to stray too far into degree of difficulty arguments.  At the most basic level, a shot is attempted either without having dribbled (catch-and-shoot) or after having dribbled (off-the-dribble).  Further (but admittedly more subjective), a shot is either uncontested (open) or contested by a defender. 

First and foremost, I don't have the data nor have I seen a study that evaluates these distinctions and summarizes the results for the league or a particular team, so this post is at best an attempt to either encourage someone to undertake the study, or spur conversation on the conclusion often used and based on studies like the one from 82games - mid-range jumpers are an inefficient shot.  

IMO, raw 3pt shot attempts vs 2p Jump Shots attempts are not an apples-to-apples comparison if the types listed above are not taken into account.  The crux of my theory is (a) catch-and-shoot attempts should lead to a higher make% than off-the-dribble attempts, (b) open attempts should lead to a higher make% than contested attempts, and (c) of the four types I listed above, the weights for 3pt shots are more likely to be skewed towards catch-and-shoot / open attempts while I would suspect 2pt jump shots are skewed farther towards off-the-dribble / contested attempts. 

If the actual data supported the points above, 82games might only be providing support for something we should know intuitively - off-the-dribble / contested shots (whether they are 3pt shots or 2pt jump shots) are an inefficient shot.  But again, I don't actually have the data to support or disapprove this.  If someone has seen anything on the subject and can share, I'd love to see it.  What do you guys think?