And suggested that the best of his career was over because of a fall off when he came back last year.

He is having a typical MVP type start of the season for him, significantly above even his career numbers. Its a long year of course, but at the very least we have to admit it looks like he has recaptured his MVP form.

After Wall's incredible performance in his home debut on Tuesday - when he became the first player in NBA history to ever have a game with 29 points, 13 assists and 9 steals

 He became just the fourth player in NBA history to have at least 20 points and 10 assists in his home debut, joining Hall of Famers Isiah Thomas and Oscar Robertson and former NBA champion Norm Nixon.

 And through his first three NBA games, Wall has 71 points and 31 assists, which makes him the only player besides Robertson to have at least 70 points and 30 assists through three games (Robertson had 72 and 30 as a rookie for the Cincinnati Royals in 1960-61).

 Wall also moved into a three-way tie with Damon Stoudamire and Jamaal Tinsley for the most assists after three NBA games. He tied Gus Johnson and Michael Adams for the franchise record in steals on Tuesday, when he had six steals in the third quarter alone (six NBA teams don't average six steals per game).

Washington Post

While we are very happy that Harris is showing his mettle and skills, one cannot help but notice what is happening to another bad team from last year. There just is a difference between a very good play, and a game changing, or even The Game changing player.

It might have been crazy, but could you imagine TW and Wall running the court?

I've done my fair share of Twill hating here, I'll confess, but this is not the case. I'm actually very enthused about the Twill and Farmar combination Avery is playing with as they seem to have complimentary skills to each other, and might produce something significant. But the Kings game was one horrible to watch game all around, very hard to stomach on both sides of the ball. The Nets showed great fortitude in pulling it out, Harris showing himself to be a game time shot maker, but it was very sloppy and neither team looked good.

One has to note Terrence Williams' line for the game. He had a nice game one, to be sure, but what in the world was happening in game two, in only 11 minutes?

In 11 minutes he managed 5 turnovers, and a plus/minus of -18.

Again, this is not to bash him. With Farmar to inject true PG skills in the context of Twill's creativity might really pay off dividends (if they can get enough outside shooting when he is on the court). But obviously there is also the propensity for Twill to blow up (in the wrong way). One wonders if Avery had given him more minutes he might have worked his way out of it, but Morrow his counterpart was a +14, something was working there.

Not sure what it means, but it seems to suggest that this team has a lot of growing to do.

I liked:

1. TW when he was paired with Farmar. They have complimentary energies and skills. Farmar can shoot and dish back, KNOWS how to play PG in the classic sense. TW still looks for his shot too much here, but these two have a future. TW played nice physical D on Prince in the lane, late.

2. Farmar. Some ill-advised shots (which can be his MO), but no player added more to ball movement, open shots, and ball correctly fed into the post.

3. Lopez.. Completely under-used, especially in crunch time. The Big Man HAS to touch the ball. It pressures the defense. He doesn't have to shoot, he has to touch it.

4. Morrow. At out of control, but when he is on the floor the offense changes. His game has creativity. He also played dedicated D.

I didn't like:

1. Harris. Way too much one-on-one. No natural ball movement when he is on the court. Talented as a play maker, but not as a offense maker. He's played in a losing situation too long.

2. Poor Outlaw.

3. JS. Shouldn't be out there.

For what it is worth I decided to take a brief look at Lee and Morrow who have been in the league the same two years, approximately the same age, and have in some strange way been "traded" for each other: or, we got one and as a result gave up the other. This came out of my and muwu's discussion over at his fanpost Are we overrating Anthony Morrow. I'm liking these graphs so I thought I should just throw it up.

click on the pic for larger image

They are fairly close in some of these fields, Morrow distinguishing himself into elite level when it comes to 3pt shooting, as everyone knows, but Lee doing not so bad with the 2 years. These are career numbers for brevity sake, since Lee had the advantage of playing on the best team in the East, and then disadvantage of the worst. For the 82game data I just averaged the two years since most numbers between years were close. By and large Morrow plain and simple is just a better offensive player almost across the board. Sometimes slightly, but sometimes by a substantial margin.

A few things are left out, like defensive numbers. Morrow actually from the data I have such as +/- or PER vs has the slight edge. Synergy Sports data has some skew towards Lee though (such as iso performance) which can be a finicky stat. Its seems pretty clear that Lee is a fixedly better defender than Morrow thus far one would have to say, no matter the stats, although Morrow was playing for Don Nelson who doesn't really bring out whatever defensive potential you have. Muwu has also raised questions about Morrow's ability to draw fouls which obviously hasn't been part of his game, but he had the same rate of FTs as Lee per 36, and questions about his hands/skills also resulted in essentially the same TOV% as Lee. As with all these things, none of this is conclusive as each small data sample measure has to be qualified, its just meant overall to present a sketch or picture. And of course, whenever compiling these things, there may be some errors.

I'm posting this because people often take my critical view of certain players to mean that I don't like any of the Net players at all, which is not the case one bit. I actually just don't like particular players as much as some do. Not a crime, we all have our judgments and favorites. But sometimes our internal valuing systems get us into ingrained arguments that just repeat themselves.

Below I post my own value distribution of the top 11 players on the roster. The rule is that you have 100 points to distribute among the 11 players, so all of us love the Nets the same amount. But if you love ONE player a lot, its means that you can't give quite as much love to other players Key to this, or the reason why this is an interesting study is that it reflects things like minutes to be played (where when one player who plays he takes minutes away from someone else), or trade questions (where just how much you hate to trade one player vs another comes into view). Its not a perfect measure, and these are off the top of my head, but I'd love to hear from any of the regular posters on their distribution of the points among these players (especially Andres B, but really everyone).

I am also hoping that the way that others distribute their 100 points will get me thinking about my own valuations, and maybe get me to change or rethink them. I used mostly an overall impression of value, but involved are assessments of fit with the team as it IS with its coach, the current salary burden (Outlaw gets a lower number for this reason from me, and Harris a bit), excitement about potential in the system (Morrow gets points as does Lee and James), expected performance this year and trade value. Part of the thinking is that if I traded a person of value x, I would want a person of equal or greater value x (to my team) in return.Mostly, it's designed to force you to make some tough choices. As you can see, for instance, Lee comes out pretty good even though I might not have anticipated this. His combination of youth, salary and perfect skill fit for the team allows him a good point score. I know that there will be some dramatically different distributions, but really I am interested in all of them.

100 points

  9  - Devin Harris
  7 - Travis Outlaw
13 - Derrick Favors
  9 - Anthony Morrow
  6 - Kris Humphries
  7 - Jordan Farmar
  4 - Johan Petro
19 - Brook Lopez
  8 - Terrence Williams
10 - Courtney Lee
  8 - Damion James

There were assurances that Bass would receive more playing time, but those indeed are not really guaranteed. Just two days ago Van Gundy was saying how Bass's playing time depends on him, apparently to a large degree how much he fits into their team defense scheme. The Magic are stacked at PF:

"I don’t know," Van Gundy said. "It’s as simple as that. It will depend on Brandon, number one, if he’s able to improve in some of the areas that we think he has to improve in. Then he’s got a chance of playing more. There are other factors in terms of how lineups work and things like that that may be out of his control. But the biggest thing will be if he plays better in some areas. That’s to be seen.

"Same thing with Ryan [Anderson]. I think that our hope is and our expectation is that they’re both fairly young guys. Particularly on the defensive end, I think our expectations in terms of what they have to know are fairly high and that a second year will help them. Our expectation is that they both will be able to play better on that end of the floor. I hope we’ll see improvement. But I don’t know. We have very good players at the position. We’ll have to see how it all unfolds." here.

As the article suggests, Bass's lack of 3-pt range makes him a less than perfect fit in the Magic scheme. His pluses simply can be gotten elsewhere, including from Ryan Anderson.

Bass’ playing time diminished last season once starting power forward Rashard Lewis returned from his 10-game league suspension to start the year.

Bass did not transition smoothly to Orlando’s defensive scheme. Though he’s a capable one-on-one defender, Bass at times faltered in his team defense.

In addition, while he has an accurate and feathery midrange jumper, he is not a 3-point shooter. His lack of a long-range shot makes him a less ideal fit for the Magic’s four-out, one-in offense than Lewis or Anderson.

Continue reading this post »

Where in the Triangle Does Rubio Fit?

Someone brought up the Triangle offense on the forum, and it made me re-realize that it is dying out with Jackson and Winter. But then I got to thinking that there is one new coach in the league that is all about the Triangle and that is Kurt Rambis of the Wolves. But this is the crazy thing. Everyone knows that Kahn is on a mad mission to stockpile point guards since last year. He drafted a slew and right now has Flynn, just traded for Telfair, signed Ridnour, and has Rubio waiting in Spain. And what is the one thing that the Triangle doesn't need? Point guards, at least point guards that break people down and distribute the ball. What in the hell is going on here?

Here is an interesting article from November of last year that talks about the Triangle the the burden that it put on the young Wolves, in particular Flynn. It turns out that Rambis has modified the Triangle to be more point guard friendly. An excerpt:

"Too much is made of it," said Rambis. "I think a lot of people don't understand it but if you understand basketball it's not very complicated. It's just a format to give the players something to play out of. It's got great spacing. It teaches the players how to move without the basketball. A lot of players struggle in it because they assume the offense starts when the ball is in their hands and stops when the ball is out of their hands. This teaches everybody to play together and see things that are available to them when they get the ball."

Despite calling Jackson and Rex Winter his coaching "mentors," Rambis is quick to point out that he is running a slightly tweaked triangle in Minnesota than the one Winters taught Jackson.

"I'm not really running it the way that Phil runs it," said Rambis. "Some of the aspects of how we flow into the triangle we tried to implement last year with the Lakers. We called it 'Live Ball,' where we run it with a one-guard front. I wanted to be able to give Jonny Flynn and Ramon Sessions space to operate if they had an opportunity to take the ball and go one-on-one."

Unlike Jackson, who surrounded himself with assistants familiar with the triangle (Clemons, Winter and Frank Hamblen) and players who had played in it (Ron Harper and John Salley), when he came to Los Angeles from Chicago, Rambis is basically going it alone in Minnesota. Not only have none of his players ever played in the system before but none of his assistants have ever coached it either.

"Everybody is learning it for the first time," said Rambis. "Even the coaching staff is learning it. There have been pockets of games where they've done it really well but they just haven't been able to put it together for a whole ball game."

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/arash_markazi/11/05/wolves/index.html#ixzz0uvnVz8fQ

Continue reading this post »

Below is a pretty well-written and considered review of Farmar's year in LA, 2009. Amid a few interesting metaphors, C.A. Clark sketches out the perimeters of what is really hard to isolate: just how good is Jordan Farmar as a basketball player. Its all there: the confidence/arrogance, the war with the triangle, the athleticism, the inconsistency and flourishes. In fact the whole article stretches out between the question of the triangle and Farmar's fairly good quantifiable statistical performance within its constraints. Inside that triangle, Farmar's personal Bermuda Triangle, for those that watched the Lakers much there is just the unshakable sense that the eyes were telling you that this guy doesn't get it, all the while you were seeing glimmer after glimmer of almost-excellence: a flash dunk, a steal, the prideful stride and steely focus.

So that is the story. That is why Avery made it a point to say that Farmar should not be called a backup. He came to the Nets in order to fairly compete for the starting job. One knows that this opportunity was likely promised to him at some point in negotiations. And given his confidence he likely feels that if given a fair shake he can take the job from Harris. This is just the competitive camp that AJ says he wants, even though we all know that the job belongs to Harris.

If you read the article by Clark closely, there is one huge question behind all these statistical judgments that just cannot be answered. The question is raised: What will happen when Farmar is unleashed from the triangle? Was it the triangle - which refuses to take advantage of PG penetration and PG dishing - that held Farmar back, or was it set-play Offense itself? And relatedly, will he grow frustrated when Harris takes the reigns?

My sense is that the Nets are going to know the answer within the first two months of the season. Farmar is either going to stand out as a dynamic playmaker and shot-maker, full of focus and intensity, or he is not. He likely feels that he has all the skills to thrive in a triangle-less system, and surely practice against Harris is gong to be fierce. He's got a helter-skelter floor persona, it will be interesting just how much he can achieve. The Nets are likely getting a player who is better than the Farmar of the last years of the Lakers. But is there a ceiling on him that he cannot see?

That's the tragedy (ok, mild sadness) of Jordan Farmar. He didn't fit with the Lakers vision of his role, but not because he lacks the tools. The triangle guard needs only to do a few things well; Be able to initiate the offense properly, play decent defense, and stroke the 3. Farmar knows how to initiate the offense properly, his above average atheleticism counteracts his below average defensive instincts, and he was actually the best 3 pt shooter on last year's team (ok, not really, but I want you to research the two guys ahead of him, it's good for a laugh). But he was never interested in playing the role that this team wanted him to play. Jordan Farmar has always wanted his success to come on his own terms.

That's not a crime. The Lakers happen to have another guard who wanted success on his own terms, and that guy just picked up his 2nd straight Finals MVP. In fact, there are quite a few similarities of personality between Jordan Farmar and the previously alluded to Kobe Bryant. They are both so confident in their abilities that the confidence could just as well be labeled arrogance or smugness. They are both unafraid to take buzzer beating shots (though Farmar's 1st quarter buzzer beaters just don't quite match up to Kobe's versions), and they both have a stuborness that can do more harm than good.

But personality is where the similiarities end. Jordan has good athleticism for his size, but he's not on Kobe's level. His consistency isn't even close, and as for his work ethic? Well, comparing Kobe's work ethic to anybody is unfair, but there's a story about how, on the night the Lakers drafted Javaris Crittenton (one year after drafting Farmar), Jordan came to the Lakers' practice facility. It was a nice little anecdote, putting Farmar's competitive drive on display. There's just one problem ... Kobe would have been there the night before, and the night after, and all nights in between.

Therein lies Jordan's problem. He is determined to seek success on his own terms, but he lacks the superstar pedigree to make teams be willing to bend to his determination.  A superstar can get away with it, but a role player like Jordan is cutting himself off at the knees.

 Wow, 600 words and I haven't said a single thing about Farmar's play this season.  Jordan is the first player we've discussed that has already left, but he's also the first real contributor to be discussed.  If you check out the minutes breakdown of our players, there is a clear top 8, those 8 played 90% of all relevant minutes.  So, unlike in reviewing Luke Walton's and DJ Mbenga's season, this is a guy who actually played important minutes en route to another championship.  So what did he do with those minutes?

As it always seems to be with Jordan, it's a decidedly mixed bag.  Over the course of the season, per 36 minutes, he scored 14.4 points and handed out 3.5 assists.  He ended up with a PER which was a shade higher than Ron Artest (keep in mind, PER majorly fails to compensate for defensive ability), and he and Shannon Brown were, on paper at least, virtually identical in terms of production.  That production isn't impressive, but it's not exactly woeful either.  And don't let that 43.5% FG% fool you, because nearly 1/2 of Jordan's shots were from 3 pt range.  Adjusted eFG shows that only Pau Gasol and Andrew Bynum were more effective at converting shots to points, so Farmar was clearly the best outside shooter on the team last year.  He started off poorly (eFG of 47% in November) and ended very poorly (eFG of 39% in April), but his middle months were full of strong shooting. He did a decent job taking care of the ball, with less turnovers per 36 than all of our big 3.

the rest here.