Monday, October 27, 2008

Tuesday, April 29, 2008

Coaches in the Hotseat

Mike D'antoni, Phoenix Suns: Has accomplished nothing with one of the best teams in the NBA. He isn't even much of a coach, and now that Phoenix has adopted a new style of play - he is expendable.

Likely Scenario: D'antoni out - Jeff Van Gundy in. Now that the Suns have decided to play halfcourt basketball they need a half court coach. They also need defense more than anything, and Van Gundy will provide that.

Avery Johnson, Dallas Mavericks: It seems like just yesterday that Avery Johnson had won his Coach of the Year award and his team was 2 games away from the NBA title. Since then, they have gone 3-12 in the playoffs and have been knocked out for the 2nd straight time in the 1st round of the playoffs.

Likely Scenario: Avery Johnson will be fired and a new style of play will be adopted. There will also be roster changes over the off-season.

Flip Saunders, Detroit Pistons: The Pistons have not accomplished anything since their 2004 Championship. They lost to an inferior Heat team, then lost to an inferior Cavs team, and now they are tied 2-2 with the Philadelphia led 76ers. I exposed Flip in last year's playoffs after Lebron's monstrous game 5 performance.

Likely Scenario: In all honesty, I don't know what will happen. It really depends on the Piston's performance. I was certain that Dumars would fire Saunders after last years playoffs, but he didn't.

George Karl, Denver Nuggets: Has been the coach of a team that has lost in the 1st round of the playoffs 5 years in a row. His team doesn't play defense, and they play uninspired basketball. A lot of it has to do with their cancerous personnel, but without defense the Nuggets are going nowhere.

Likely Scenario: Goerge Karl will either remain the head coach or he will resign before he gets fired. The Nuggets will also see roster changes and player movement in the summer.

KB42PAH Alborz

Thursday, March 6, 2008

Chris Paul: A Leading MVP Candidate Despite Blatant Racial Bias by Mianstream Media.

A True Competitor:

Chris Paul's competitiveness has to be his most overlooked characteristic as a basketball player. Whenever he gets matched up against another upper-echelon point guard, Paul makes sure to bring his 'A-game.' The true measure of competitive greatness is how you perform against the best the game has to offer. Over the past 2 weeks Chris Paul has not disappointed.

Chris Paul vs Jason Kidd:

Paul: 31 points, 11 assists, 9 steals, 5 rebounds, 1 TO ( 11-20 FG)
Kidd: 8 points, 5 assists, 3 steals, 6 rebounds, 6 TO (3-6 FG)

Storyline: Paul dominates Kidd's debut in Dallas. Hornets win 104-93

Chris Paul vs. Steve Nash:

Paul: 25 points, 15 assists, 6 rebounds, 3 steals, 1 TO (9-21 FG)
Nash: 8 points, 13 assists, 0 rebounds 0 steals, 4 TO (1-6 FG)

Storyline: Paul dominates the game offensively and defensively, torching Nash with a 15:1 assist-turnover ratio. Hornets win 120-103.

Chris Paul vs. Deron Williams:

Paul: 24 points, 16 assists, 5 steals, 4 rebounds, 1 TO (5-15 FG)
Williams: 22 points, 10 assists, 0 steals, 2 rebounds, 4 TO (8-14 FG)

Storyline: Paul dominates Williams on National television. The Hornets 38-15 1st quarter lead was too much to overcome. Paul finishes a monstrous 16:1 assist-turnover ratio. Hornets win 110-98.

Racial Bias Against Chris Paul:

Chis Paul has been absolutely amazing all season long, yet the media has been consistently against him. Many so-called experts didn't even have the Hornets in their top 8 seeds, yet to everyone's surprise, Paul has lead his gang to the top of the Elite Western Conference (the toughest conference in NBA History). Many misinformed sportscasters are saying that this years' MVP contest is a two man race between Kobe Bryant and Lebron James. A couple of things strike me as odd:

1) How is Lebron James a top tier candidate? Look, numbers wise, Lebron is an absolute beast. His box scores bring back shades of Oscar Robertson and he is an undisputed force to be reckoned with. No one can argue there. But, the MVP award isn't about having the best numbers or being the best player, its about being the best player on the best team. Thats the unwritten definition that the media has interpreted for the award since 1981. The MVP award is a much a team award as it is an individual award. I don't agree with it, but thats what it has been defined as. So going of precedence alone, Lebron James should not be a legitimate candidate for the award, especially if his Cavs don't crack the 50-win mark.

2) Steve Nash won the MVP award in 2005-2006 for:

A) Making his teammates better
B) Thriving in the West, despite low expectations (Amare's Injury)

That being said, lets compare Nash's numbers in 05-06 to Paul's in 07-08:

Nash 05-06: 18.8 ppg, 10.5 apg, 4.2 rpg, 0.8 spg, 3.5 TO
Paul 07-08: 21.0 ppg, 10.9 apg, 4.0 rpg, 2.7 spg, 2.5 TO

Not only is Paul besting Nash in points, assists and turnovers, but he is leading the NBA in steals per game. Paul is the best point guard on BOTH sides of the floor, unlike Nash who is a one-trick pony that plays absolutely no defense. On top of that, Paul has lower expectations in 2007-2008 than Nash did in 2005-2006.

Steve Nash won an overwhelming victory and was being talked about all season long by the media. They put Nash so high on a pedestal that you'd think he was the next best thing since sliced bread. Paul on the other hand, isn't even considered to be a candidate by most of the media. The media is hyping the 2007-2008 contest as a two man race, even though Paul is by definition both more valuable and more deserving. This proves that either:

A) Nash's 2005-2006 MVP award was illegitimate and was given to him because he was White. Subliminally, the voters were affected by Nash's ethnicity. After all, he is vertically challenged, white, and unathletic. In a sense, he shares a lot in common with the voters. They can relate to him easily because of these mutual similarities, thus subliminally affecting their voting process. This theory, isn't too implausible to believe either. After all, Larry Bird won three consecutive MVP's, but let's not go there.


B) That Chris Paul is being marginalized and overlooked because he's black and because he plays in a smaller market (New Orleans), which struggles to sell out its own home games. The past 3 MVP's have all been white, and apparently it is more impressive to be good at basketball and to be white, than it is to be black. Now, many people will point out that a majority of the MVP winners have been black in the course of NBA history. But that would be a gross oversimplification of what is truly a significant issue.

Conclusion: Do I feel that Chris Paul is being marginalized because he is black? Not necessarily. In fact, I don't feel it that way. After all, all of the five leading candidates are black, so I don't feel race is a factor in this years contest. However, I do feel that Steve Nash was put on a pedestal because he was white. Anyway you look at it, there is no doubt that race has and will continue to affect MVP voting. Chris Paul is doing everything Nash did and then some, yet he isn't getting nearly the same media coverage, appreciation, or recognition. So racially, compared to Steve Nash in 2005-2006, Paul is at a significant disadvantage.

The Ballot: To me, the two true frontrunner's for the award are Kobe Bryant and Chris Paul. Those two should be #1 and #2 on everyone's ballot. Then you have Lebron James, Kevin Garnett, and Dwight Howard as the remaining three candidates, although none of them is in any way deserving of the award. In the end, the winner of the Western Conference will likely take the award.

Friday, February 29, 2008

Team Midrange

The mighty Celtics just got mightier through the acquisition of two key veterans: Sam Cassell and P.J Brown. Both of these players are consistent and deadly mid-range shooters. In fact, Sam Cassell is a midrange legend.

With these acquisitions the Cetlics are arguably the greatest midrange shooting team ever assembled.

Sam Cassell. Ray Allen. Paul Pierce. P.J Brown. Kevin Garnett - all lethal midrange shooters.

Tuesday, February 26, 2008

NBA Finals Leap Year Theory

The 2008 Lakers are well on their way to the NBA finals. That is if you believe in the "Phil Jackson/Lakers Leap Year Theory." Either a Phil Jackson coached team or a Lakers team has made the NBA finals every leap year from 1980-present.

1980: Lakers Win the NBA Championship (4-2)
1984: Lakers lose in the NBA Finals (3-4)
1988: Lakers win the NBA Championship (4-3)
1992: Phil's Bulls win the NBA Championship (4-2)
1996: Phil's Bulls win the NBA Championship (4-2)
2000: Phil's Lakers win the NBA Championship (4-2)
2004: Phil's Lakers lose in the NBA Finals (1-4)
2008: ?

The Lakers are the current favorites to win it, but now you also have this added tidbit to keep yourself busy with. It may be a good time to start placing your bets...