Quick Updated NFL Predictions

NFC Playoff Teams:

Giants, Eagles, Packers, Saints, Falcons, Seattle


AFC Playoff Teams:

Patriots, Jets, Steelers, Ravens, Colts, Chiefs

Colin Cowherd is awful again

Statement: "Bill Belichick is 8-0 after bye weeks"

Fact: This doesn't even pass the smell test because this is his 11th season as Patriots head coach thus his 11th game after a bye week. He lost after a bye week in 2000 and 2002. Therefore, he is 9-2 after bye weeks--still impressive, but not undefeated as Cowherd's words would suggest.

Statement: "Aaron Rogers is 7-13 in games decided by 7 points or less, but he is great in blowouts. He is not clutch."

Analysis: Let's think about the logic of this statement. Isn't it more likely the case that the games are close because his numbers are bad (in those games) than his numbers are bad because the games are close. Similarly, isnt it likely that the blowouts are blowouts because his numbers are good and not the other way around. That is, the game will usually be closer when the quarterback plays worse whereas if he has an awesome game chances are his team wins by more than 7 points.


Last week Cowherd takes full credit for seeing the Moss trade coming and spends 5 minutes replaying the soundbite and taking credit for it. On Friday Cowherd spent 5 minutes detailing how and why Nebraska is going to kill Texas and predicts a 41-17 beatdown. When recapping the weekends games, that game is not mentioned once.

NBA Mega Trade

New Jersey gets:
SF Carmelo Anthony
PG Chris Paul
C Emeka Okafor

Denver gets:
PF Derrick Favors
SF Damion James
PF Troy Murphy
NJ's 2013 and 2015 1st rd. pick

New Orleans gets:
C Brook Lopez
PG Devin Harris
PF Kris Humphries
NJ's 2011 1st rd. pick

Washington gets:
G/F Terrence Williams
SF Quinton Ross
$3 mil cash
2nd rd. pick

Analysis:

New Jersey:
The Nets get there dynamic duo. In Paul and Anthony the Nets get 2 of the 10 best players in league. The franchise now has two young stars in their primes as they gear up for the eventual move to Brooklyn. This move does completely deplete the depth of the team and creates a gigantic hole at PF where NJ will likely be forced to start well past his prime Joe Smith this season before being able to add someone via the MLE next offseason.

Denver:
In return for Anthony who is almost certain to leave after this season, Denver gets Favors, the 3rd overall pick in this year's draft. Favors is raw, but has All-Pro potential. James, the 24th pick in this past years draft, is an athletic forward who can swing between the 3 and the 4. The addition of these two officially begins the Denver rebuilding process and it does so with a bang. Finally, Murphy, who is still a quality player, should net Denver even more assets at the trade deadline on account of not just his playing ability, but because of his $12 mil expiring contract. Financially, Denver goes from $15 million over the luxury tax threshold in 10-11 to $11 mil under the salary cap (before draft picks) next offseason. The cap space and rebuilding assets could be even greater if Denver chooses to shop Chauncey Billups. Denver also gets two future 1st rd. pick from NJ.

New Orleans:
This deal forces the Hornets to part with the best PG in basketball and the face of their franchise. However, it might be a move they have to make given Paul's apparent desire to leave once his current deal expires. This trade gets the Hornets two young pieces including a 23 year old all-star center. Moreover, it gets NO out from under Okafor's burdensome contract. Additionally, NJ's 2011 first round pick could also turn out to be a decent asset as the Nets are forced to deplete their roster in this deal. Finally, but perhaps most importantly, after this trade New Orleans will go into next offseason approximately $31 million under the cap (this assumed David West does not exercise his $7 mil player option, which he wont). Therefore, they will have more cap space than any other team.

Washington:
Washington essentially just gets paid to make this trade work under the cap.

Post-trade lineups:

New Orleans:
C Brook Lopez
PF David West
SF Trevor Ariza
SG Marcus Thornton
PG Devin Harris

New Jersey:
C Emeka Okafor
PF Joe Smith
SF Carmelo Anthony
SG Anthony Morrow
PG Chris Paul

Denver:
C Nene
PF Troy Murphy
SF Damion James
SG J.R. Smith
PG Chauncey Billups

AL Cy Young - Welcome to the 21st Century

On PTI Wilbon and Kornheiser said they would not give the Cy Young to Seattle's Felix Hernandez because he hasn't won enough games.

Hernandez leads the league in ERA, Ks, and IP. But he only has a 13-12 record. (Before moving on consider that the rest of the Seattle pitching staff is a combined 48-84).

Wilbon calls WHIP and Sabermetrics "junk" and says you still have to win the games.

Funny thing is your offense has to score runs for you to win. You cannot get wins unless your team scores runs and a pitcher, especially in the AL has no control over that.

Wilbon instead said Sabathia should probably get it because he has 21 wins. Well, the Yankees have scored an average of 5.61 runs per game in Sabathia's 34 starts.

In Hernandez's 12 losses, the Mariner's scored a combined 14 runs or 1.17 runs per game. Overall, the Mariner's scored 2.97 runs per game in Hernadez's 34 starts.

That is a 2.64 run per game difference.

Wins are a relatively unreliable indicator of pitching performance at least relative to other available measures like WHIP.

In 2003 Jeriome Robertson went 15-9 for the Astros. That is a better record than Hernandez has. That year Robertson's ERA was 5.10, his WHIP was 1.51 and he walked almost as many batters as he struck out. That year though the Astros scored a ton of runs during his starts (5.56).

The win argument makes everyone look dumber. Stop making it.

Added:

Hernandez against the Yankees this season: 3-0, 0.35 ERA (1 run in 26 IP)

Childhood Obesity & Pork Politics

Some of you may know that childhood obesity is a topic I am interested in and feel strongly about. This week the Senate passed a bill that will call for "healthier" school lunches as well as what can be sold in school vending machines. (Story in link below).

The new nutrition standards would not remove popular foods like pizzas from schools completely, but would make them healthier, using whole-wheat crust or low-fat mozzarella, for example. Vending machines could be stocked with less candy and fewer high-calorie sodas.

Decisions on what kinds of foods will be sold — and what ingredients may be limited — would be left up to the Agriculture Department.

I have long advocated action in this area and am hopeful that the Agriculture Department will draw appropriate and meaningful guidelines. This is a tricky area as the temptation to be overly paternalistic is an easy one and one that often gets the best of me.

Furthermore, what this move controls is only the food American students have access to for one meal a day. A breakfast featuring sugar loaded cereal (making students prone to crash in the morning and reduce focus and performance in the classroom) joined with some sugary drinks after school and a less than healthy dinner makes these lunchtime changes almost trivial.

Again, this is a move in the right direction, but it is a culture shift we need not just a dietary adjustment.

The disconcerning political part of all of this comes at the bottom of the story.

Part of the deal to move the legislation this week was to change the way it was paid for. While the committee bill partially paid for the legislation by reducing conservation subsidies paid to farmers for using environmentally friendly farming practices, the Senate-passed bill took $2.2 billion out of future funding for food stamp programs instead after some farm-state senators objected to using the subsidy money.

Hunger advocates who had previously supported the bill said they would now oppose it.

I don't know whether cutting subsidies to farmers or reducing food stamp benefits is the more prudent way to fund this legislation, but it just jumps out at me how these games are played.

NFL Over/Under Picks

Here are my season picks for NFL team wins from the current Vegas lines:

Denver 7.5 -- Under
Dallas 10 -- Over
Patriots 9.5 -- Over
Steelers 8.5 -- Under
Rams 5 -- Under
Redskins 7.5 -- Under
Seahawks 7.5 -- Under

NBA FUTURE POWER RANKINGS

This is my take on an ESPN NBA Feature that ranks all 30 NBA Teams in 5 categories in an effort to rank their relative strength going forward for the 2011-2012, 2012-2013, and 2013-2014 seasons.

The categories are: Players, Management, Money, Market, Draft

Players: Current players and their potential for the future, factoring in expected departures

Management: Quality and stability of front office, ownership, coaching

Money: Projected salary-cap situation; ability and willingness to exceed cap and pay luxury tax

Market: Appeal to future acquisitions based on team quality, franchise reputation, city's desirability as a destination, market size, taxes, business and entertainment opportunities, arena quality, fans

Draft: Future draft picks; draft positioning

Points are assigned for each category: Players 0-400; Management and Money 0-200 each; Draft 0-150; Market 0-100

After assigning values to each the results I came up with fell into fairly clear tiers.

TIER ONE

Miami Heat
Oklahoma City Thunder

TIER TWO

LA Lakers
Chicago Bulls
Houston Rockets
Orlando Magic
Portland Trailblazers

TIER THREE

Utah Jazz
Denver Nuggets

TIER FOUR

San Antonio Spurs
Boston Celtics
Dallas Mavericks

TIER FIVE

LA Clippers
Sacramento Kings
New York Knicks
Washington Wizards
Atlanta Hawks
Milwaukee Bucks
New Jersey Nets
Indiana Pacers

TIER SIX

Memphis Grizzlies
Detroit Pistons
Phoenix Suns
New Orleans Hornets
Toronto Raptors
Golden State Warriors

TIER SEVEN

Minnesota Timberwolves
Cleveland Cavaliers
Charlotte Bobcats

Year-Round School

What are the arguments against year-round school?

I can think of so many arguments for it, but I would certainly like to hear any arguments for why it is a bad idea.

The NBA, Race & Economics

The following is an excerpt from a column by Dr. Boyce Watkins for thGrio.com:

Third, one area where race does enter the picture is the fact that NBA players (most of whom are black) are certainly the property of the league. Most of the players think they're getting rich, when the truth is that they are being financially pimp-slapped.

Collective bargaining agreements keep salaries so restricted that players are not earning anything near their full market value. Not to say that we should ever feel sorry for someone earning millions of dollars per year, but a fair market would have led to Kobe Bryant earning over $50 million per year, since he brings at least that much to the Lakers organization with his presence.

Instead, that money gets pocketed by the owners. Additionally, when one throws in the manner by which players are controlled by the league in almost every aspect of their lives, William Rhoden's concept of the "40 million dollar slave" is certainly in full-effect.

It is frustrating to read things like this. I would like to ask Dr. Watkins if what is being done to NBA players is a financial "pimp slapping" then what would he describe regular employees who are being laid off, who dont have guaranteed contracts, and many of those whom have kept their jobs have seen benefits begin to fall?

I don't want to get caught up in semantics though so let's get to the meat of this. His statements evidence a horribly flawed understanding of the CBA system. The CBA system is not a "star system". The CBA hurts stars and helps your average to below average players. Having a system like he described would be the most damaging thing possible for all except a few. Yes, without a CBA Kobe would make $50 million. LeBron would have made $70 million. What Watkins completely overlooks is the flip-side of that coin. If LeBron is making $70 million, that money is largely coming out of his teammates pockets. There is no way in a non-CBA system Daniel Gibson gets a guaranteed 5 year $20 million contract. There is no way Amir Johnson gets 5 years $32 million. The limit on the exorbitant earnings of the elite players benefits all of the other players (as Dr. Watkins points out, most of whom are black).

Think of it this way. If the Cavs were making a movie last year and their players were the cast how would everyone get paid. You would pay your star Denzel Washington (LeBron) $25-$30 million. Then you probably have your 2-3 supporting actors that lets say make $10 million (Halle Berry, Christian Bale). Guess how the rest of the cast is filled out. Everyone else makes $2 million or less and many below $1 million.

Watkins's idea of what would be a better system for NBA players would drastically cut the earnings of most of the league's players. Right now the least an NBA veteran is allowed to be paid is $1.4 million and the average NBA salary is over $5 million a year.

The idea of control is also slightly misguided. Highly paid professionals in most industries are often controlled in many ways whether directly or indirectly so as to protect the image of business and the relationship of the business with partners, sponsors, customers, etc.

I have no doubt that racism still exists and that it still happens that, a minority will be at a disadvantage and have to work harder than his white counterpart to achieve the same compensation. It is these jobs--the everyday jobs that affect millions more than those unfortunate few subjected to being controlled and forced to play a game they love for $5 million per year.

1 in 4 US households makes under $25,000 per year. One of those households would have to work for 160 years to make what Daniel Gibson made this season playing for the Cavs. Gibson averaged 6 points and 1 assist in 19 minutes per game.

NBA Economics, Kuselias

NBA Economics:

The luxury tax in the NBA is extremely penal -- dollar for dollar. Let's take the Rockets who are now over the luxury tax ($9 mil over). They are paying David Andersen 2.5 mil next year, but because of the luxury tax they are effectively paying him 5 mil.

If I am the Rockets GM I am calling up teams with trade exceptions or cap space like Cleveland and working on a win-win deal. The Cavs lost some guy named LeBron, but they also lost both of their centers. Andersen is nothing special, but he can be a rotation big. Therefore,

Rockets trade Andersen and 1.5 mil in cash for a 2nd round pick.

Effect: With the signing of Brad Miller, the Rockets have Yao, Miller, Hill, and Hayes at C. The chances of Andersen seeing the floor were slight. This trade gives the Cavs a solid backup big that they will only have to pay $1 mil and all they give up is a future 2nd rd. pick. Meanwhile, this deal saves the Rockets $3.5 mil.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ESPN Radio's Erik Kuselias

Called Michael Jordan's comments on LeBron--basically that he never would have called up Bird and Magic and say lets play together because I wanted to beat those guys--disingenuous because he didnt have to call them because the Bulls "hooked you up with great players...they surrounded Jordan with great players. He didnt win anything before they did."

As a side note: Jordan was losing to dominant Celtics teams and the bad boy Pistons. Jordan wasnt exactly losing to the vaunted 2009 Magic or an aging Boston Big Three that didnt have home court.

Then let's look at Jordan's first title team and point out all the great players since Kuselias said Jordan was "surrounded by them" as in more than just Pippen who we know was indeed great.

The Bulls rotation (top 8 guys minutewise): Jordan, Pippen, Horace Grant, John Paxson, Bill Cartwright, Cliff Levingston, Scott Williams, and Craig Hodges

Wow! Cartwright and Paxson!!! Look at that bench too!!! Grant was a very good defensive player, but great is far too strong--he never made a single all-star team.

Getting minutes on the second three-peat was Ron Harper, Luc Longley, Bill Wennington, and Randy Brown. Surrounded.

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

The only player in the modern era to do it without any great players around him was Hakeem Olajuwon in 93-94

That team's rotation was Olajuwon, Robert Horry, Vernon Maxwell, Otis Thorpe, Kenny Smith, Sam Cassell, Carl Herrera

Cassell was a rookie and Horry was in just his 2nd year

The next year when the Rockets won their 2nd title they had to go through:

The Western Conferences top 3 seeds: Utah (Malone, Stockton); Phoenix (Barkley, Kevin Johnson, Dan Majerle, Danny Manning); San Antonio (Robinson)

And Orlando - the East's top seed who had Shaq, Penny, and Horace Grant

All Olajuwon did was put up this line in the playoffs:

33 pts 10 rbs 4.5 assts 2.9 blks 1.1 stls

Result: Dream > LeBron

Not saying it really. I'm just putting it out there.

Charles Barkley on LeBron

"He'll never be Jordan," Barkley told 790 the Ticket in Miami earlier in the week. "This clearly takes him out of the conversation. He can win as much as he wants to.

"There would have been something honorable about staying in Cleveland and trying to win it as 'The Man' ... LeBron, if he would've in Cleveland, and if he could've got a championship there, it would have been over the top for his legacy, just one in Cleveland. No matter how many he wins in Miami, it clearly is Dwyane Wade's team."

Pulling my hair out - Woody Paige

Asked about Cavs owner Dan Gilbert Paige said the following:

If he wanted to keep Lebron he should have spent more money. And he should have signed him to a 10 or 12 year contract to make sure this would not happen.

How can you be a sports writer/commentator and be this dumb?

#1 Only two teams (Lakers, Mavs) spent more money than Gilbert.

#2a Contracts in excess of 6 years are not possible under the current CBA.
#2b He cannot just sign Lebron to an extension. Lebron would of had to agree, something he clearly was not interested in doing.

Woody Paige, we are all dumber for having heard what you said. I award you no points and may God have mercy on your soul.

Breaking down the Miami Big 3 and pumping the brakes on the expectations

Here are the scouting reports for James and Wade:

It's easier said than done, but getting Player A to shoot a jump shot is 90 percent of the battle. Player A tried nearly half his shots in the basket area and made 64.1 percent of them, in addition to the profusion of fouls he drew. As a jump shooter, however, he's ordinary: Player A hit 41.7 percent of his long 2s and only 31.7 percent of his 3s.

Player B devastates opponents with his penetration from the top of the key…Getting him to shoot jumpers is the game within a game, because he isn't terribly accurate from outside. But he's good enough that opponents need to make an effort to challenge his jumpers, and in the meantime he scores or gets to the line virtually every time he gets in the paint.

Just from reading the individual scouting reports (by John Hollinger of ESPN Insider) you do not know if Player A is Wade or James and the same goes for Player B. Heck, you don’t even know if they aren’t the same player based just on these scouting reports. You can tell though that you would love to have either Player A or Player B on your team.

Where this is going and why I am puzzled by the instantaneous crowning of the Heat as champions should be evident. James and Wade are incredible talents—they are both 10s. However, in this case, 10 + 10 does not = 20. The 10 + 10 = 20 misconception in one almost everyone is falling for and must explain the Heat's rise in Vegas to almost overwhelming title favorites. It is a hugely important point that save for a few (John Barry) is being largely overlooked. The thing that makes James and Wade most devastating is the same—their almost incomparable ability to penetrate and either finish or draw a foul (at times, seemingly at will). The problem is that there is only one ball and thus the Heat benefit less than people realize from having two players with this particular skill, as impressive as it is. For all the Cavs failings, what the team was missing was not a second player that duplicated James’ best skill. Next season, when Wade does what he does best—drive to the basket—the king will be standing behind the three point line watching. If Wade is doubled then he could kick it out to James who could shoot a 3, something he is no more than average at. The compliment to a penetrator is a deadly outside shooter (or a team of them) to space the floor and dare the opposition to help on the drive. The natural compliment is not another penetrator.

Let's put this very important point in terms of "usage rate". Usage rate shows what percentage of a team's offensive possession a player "uses" (shot, gets fouled, turnover). Last year, Wade was #1 in the NBA in usage rate and LeBron was #2. Their respective teams benefited greatly from having such high efficiency players dominate their offenses. Together with the Heat though, for every possession Wade uses, that is one that LeBron does not and vice versa. Basically, LeBron was much more valuable to the Cavs offense last season than he will be to the Heat offense this year and the same goes for Wade. Again, it is certainly great to have both of these guys, but 10+10 does not = 20.

Bosh of course is a strong compliment to either Wade or LeBron and arguably, the more significant compliment (Dirk would have been perfect). To be clear, I am not saying that the Heat are worse off having both Wade and LeBron or that the combination will be a disaster. It certainly will have its benefits as neither will be required to carry the same load night in and night out and if either is having an off night, the other can take a more prominent role and pick up the slack. I have heard some say that not having to shoulder such a load will allow Wade and LeBron to be fresher come playoff time, but the opposite is just as likely to be the case. With such a lack of depth, each will have to log as heavy a minute load as ever. As my final qualification, I do think that this team will be a contender in the East right away. That however, falls far short of a 7-5 title favorite. They are almost even money for goodness sakes! It is not clear to me why this team is even favored much less heavily favored over the Lakers (7-2) or the Magic for that matter all the way down at 9-1 (who on MIA is going to check Dwight Howard?). If I had to bet $100 or lose it, I would put it the Thunder (14-1) or Dallas or San Antonio (both 25-1) before I would bet on Miami with its potential $40 payout. It’s just a bad bet.

Debunking Some Talking Head Myths

I have heard a handful of statements supporting the Heat’s place as title favorites that I take issue with.

#1 – “People said just three guys could not work when Boston did it and they were wrong then.”

Well, as it turns out, the Big Three in Boston was actually more than 3. They had a young PG named Rajon Rondo who was in the early stages of becoming one of the premiere PGs in the league. They had a rugged young big man in Kendrick Perkins who rebounded the ball and played solid post defense against the oppositions toughest bigs. Then they had a 6th man who was their secret weapon off the bench in James Posey who shot 40% from the outside and played stellar defense. It was a natural team with players in defined roles at each position (much more so than the Heat). It played tremendous defense with KG being the defensive player of the year, Rondo one of the best in the business and Posey. These are things the Heat simply do not have (yet).

#2 – “Other players will wait in line to take the minimum to come play with these guys.”

There are two major issues undermining this statement. First, evidence is everywhere of NBA players being bankrupt within a few short years of leaving the league. As crazy as it sounds, the way these players spend and manage their money, many of them actually need to make money at a certain level. Important in its own right, but particularly so in light of the preceding point is the impending labor situation after the upcoming season. All signs point to an owner lockout that will not end until the players have been sufficiently rolled. Now is not the time for players to take a pay cut. For many, this might be their last good chance to “get theirs”.

Concluding Thought

My Heat prognosis: They will win a title – maybe two. However, they probably won’t win one this first year and even if they did, which I doubt they will, there is not enough solid reasoning to make them a better than 2 to 1 favorite. Going into 2011-2012 there will likely be a more compelling argument since they will have been able to use their mid-level exception to bring in another really solid piece (preferably a good defensive big that rebounds).

There is a major risk to all of my analysis. That is, that because we have never seen a team like this that all of my reasoning above, based on traditional basketball principles, could be inapplicable. If any team could rewrite the rules, it would be this one. However, until I see it—I won’t believe it.

I am going to pull my hair out if I have to listen to Dan Le Batard anymore

Le Batard continues to compare the Miami big 3 to what Boston did.

He argued with Bill Simmons that it is the same exact situation--that people said "oh this Celtics team only has three guys...it can't work" but it did work says Le Batard.

He went on to say that "the Heat are going to be fine because someone on their team, one of the other guys, is going to turn into a Rondo"

Really? Top 5 PGs who play ridiculous defense grow on trees? That statement alone costs him his credibility.

Celtics had Perkins to play post defense and Posey playing great defense and hitting 3's off the bench.

It is significantly different and I am tired of hearing people make that comparison.

Le Batard went further to say "even if say Wade went out for the year, with LeBron and Bosh the Heat would still be the favorite in the East".

What??? A two person team with 10 nobodies, no PG and no C?

This is homerism at its peak.

I will have more on the Heat later.

The task is a difficult one: rank these PGs in order of who you would take with the 1st pick if all were in the same draft and are the same age they were when they entered the league
Of course we have the benefit of hindsight on some of these guys and we are going largely (Derrick Rose) or entirely (John Wall) off of projection with some others.

Still lets get to it.

The Players:

Stephen Curry
Brandon Jennings
Chris Paul
Rajon Rondo
Derrick Rose
Ricky Rubio
John Wall
Russell Westbrook
Deron Williams

My List:
1. Paul
2. Williams
3. Rose
4. Rondo
5. Wall
6. Westbrook
7. Curry
8. Rubio
9. Jennings

More detailed explanations to come.

Gleaning Anything From the LeBron Announcement Special?

They say LBJ will make the announcement in the first 10 minutes and then there will be Wilbon doing interviews with people in various places. Well lets see...who exactly would be getting interviewed if he was going back to Cleveland (whom I have for most of this process considered the favorite). Now, if LBJ picks the Heat then you have your perfect ESPN interviews: 1) LBJ 2) Wade & Bosh 3) Pat Riley

Since it hasn't happened yet I won't go into much length, but if LBJ joins Wade & Bosh in Miami, they will NOT win an NBA title next year. (Now the year after that and beyond--whole nother story since they own 2 1st round picks, a mid-level exception, and a bi-annual exception they can use to build the supporting cast next offseason).

BTW, the talking heads on Around the Horn are ridiculous (Woody Paige & Bill Plachke chief among them). They said today regardless of who else they got, the Heat were guaranteed going to the NBA finals next season.

The Greatest NBA Trade I Have Ever Come Up With

It can't happen, but only because it makes too much sense. It improves the future of every single team, makes sense financially, and works under the cap.

And the scary thing is I came up with it laying in bed with my eyes closed trying to fall asleep. Is that impressive or sad or disturbing? I don't really know.

The question as you read on is: Which team would not say yes?

T-Wolves trade: C Al Jefferson, SF Wesley Johnson, PG Ricky Rubio
Pacers trade: SF Danny Granger, C Roy Hibbert
Sixers trade: SG Andre Iguodala
Heat trade: PF Michael Beasley

T-Wolves get: SF Danny Granger, SG Andre Iguodala
Pacers get: C Al Jefferson, PF Michael Beasley, PG Ricky Rubio
Sixers get: SF Wesley Johnson
Heat get: C Roy Hibbert

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

T-Wolves Analysis:

It is no secret that Minnesota does not believe that Jefferson and Kevin Love can play well together and that they have actively been shopping Jefferson and his sizable (though in my mind quite reasonable) contract. Not to mention, they just invested 33 million in Darko and 2008 draft pick Nikola Pekovic. Last season, the Wolves starting SF and SG were Ryan Gomes and Corey Brewer. Yuck.

This trade gives the T-Wolves a very exciting nucleus of Love, Granger, Iggy, and Johnny Flynn. Granger is 27, Love is 21, Iggy is 26, and Flynn is 21. All of them are under contract for at least 3 more years. Add in a lottery pick next season (preferably a C) and a solid bench with Martell Webster, Corey Brewer, and Ramon Sessions and you have a legit playoff team. On Rubio, his people clearly were never excited about Minnesota and while Indy is not much better, the starting spot is clearly his when he comes over (after next season) and the roster is a much more natural fit.

New Lineup: Darko, Love, Granger, Iguodala, Flynn

Pacers Analysis:

Indy has been stuck in a rut ever since the 'Malice in the Palace' derailed the franchise. They have been not good enough to contend, but not bad enough to get a real high pick in the draft that might be a difference maker. Instead, they have been relegated to the late lottery getting the likes of Brandon Rush and Tyler Hansbrough--not exactly franchise changers. Granger is a perennial all-star and a stud, but where is this team going as currently constructed?

This move reshapes the roster and gives the franchise a clearer path back to contention. Add in a 1st rd. pick next year at SG to push Rush to the bench and you have something here.

New Lineup: Jefferson, Beasley, P. George (#10 pick this year), B. Rush, Rubio

Sixers analysis:

Is Iggy for Johnson an even swap talent-wise? Not at all. However, this move clears a lot of money off of Philly's books and puts the new face of the franchise Evan Turner in a better position to succeed with Johnson as a much more natural sidekick. They also really like Holiday at the point. Elton Brand will continue to weigh down the roster until his contract comes off the books, but the new financial flexibility will give Philly room to add to its young nucleus without getting into the luxury tax. Add in a high pick in next year's draft in the front court and the team has real upside and direction. (Note: Turner is 21, Johnson 22, Holiday 20).

New Lineup: S. Hawes, E. Brand, W. Johnson, E. Turner, J. Holiday

Heat analysis:

This trade is predicated on the Heat signing one of the premier free agent PFs (Bosh/Amare/Boozer), which seems almost certain. Therefore, on a team with so much money tied up in a few players can you really afford to have two playing the same position (particularly when your GM (and next coach?) does not care much for the other)? Young inexpensive bigs are hard to find and while Hibbert is not a world-beater, he is a legit starting center who makes only $2 mil. This move actually frees up an extra 2.5 million in cap space for Miami. So lets say the Heat get Wade and Bosh, but not LeBron or Joe Johnson. With Hibbert on board and their remaining cap space they could sign say PG Ray Felton (who I am pretty high on and is only 25) for about 5 years 35 mil; SF Mike Miller as the dead-eye shooter to space the floor (hit 48% on 3s last season (41% for his career)) for mid-level type money 4 years 20 million. This leaves Miami with about $4 mil left to pick up a solid bench guy. Again, the theme is that the roster makes more sense after this move. This is a top 4 team in the East and a legit contender to go to the Finals.

New Lineup: Hibbert, Bosh, Miller, Wade, Felton

Who says no?

Chad Ford Tries to Rank Free Agents and Fails

Ford listed his top 15 free agents available and coming in at #12 is Shaq.

The same Shaq that was far more of a hindrance to the Cavs in the playoffs than he was a help. The same Shaq who at 38 has not really accepted what kind of player he is today. Not to mention it would be a shock if he did not miss at least 10 games.

For perspective, according to Chad Ford, Shaq is better than Luis Scola, John Salmons, Mike Miller, Al Harrington, Brendan Haywood, Ray Felton, J.J. Reddick, Tyrus Thomas, Richard Jefferson, and Udonis Haslem among many others.

Most of those guys I named are legit starters or at least 6th man type of players who will not demand minutes according to their will as well as the spotlight.

NBA Free Agency Predictions

New York: Joe Johnson & Amare Stoudemire

Miami: Dwayne Wade, Chris Bosh & Mike Miller

New Jersey: Rudy Gay

Dallas: Dirk

Chicago: Boozer & J.J. Reddick

Cleveland: LeBron

Celtics: Pierce & Allen

I HATE HATE HATE Colin Cowherd

July 1st

"You are telling me I am supposed to believe the Knicks, the class dunce, is going to convince LeBron James to go their organization. I just don't see it happening."

June 30th

"Stop, LeBron is not going to New York. He's just not. They dont have enough talent. The city actually isn't that great to live in."

Cowherd talking about Lebron on May 14th:

"He's either going to New York or he is staying in Cleveland. He's not going to Miami or Chicago or New Jersey. You can send me your emails or pipe dream it all you want. He's going to be a Cav or he is going to be a Knick and you are crazy if you think otherwise."

Cowherd talking with Bill Simmons on May 17th when Simmons predicted LBJ would go to Chicago:

"AGHHH. You have to be kidding me. He is going to be a Knick. I don't by Chicago at all. If you are gonna go to Chicago go to New York its a bigger city."

Like many talking heads, every single thing that comes out of his mouth he says with 100% conviction as if there could not possibly be other reasonable arguments, alternatives or thoughts. And it is blind conviction with no concept of context or history.

His whole take on LeBron's future has been a complete 180 and yet every step of the way every comment he made was with complete conviction. The Knicks did not become the "class dunce" between May 14th and July 1st. They did not lose talent between May 14th and July 1st. The city didnt change between May 14th and July 1st.

On another note, I can't let Simmons, whom I love, off the hook either.

His free agency prediction has Bosh, LBJ, and Joe Johnson all going to the Bulls (Johnson via sign-and-trade for Deng). If it happens the Bulls will be really good, but I am just extremely skeptical that Jerry Reinsdorf will pay that team. Think about it:

In year 3:

James - 20 mil; Bosh - 20 mil; Johnson - 18 mil; Rose - 14 mil; Noah 11 mil; 1 1st rd. pick - 2 mil; 1 MLE guy - 6 mil; 6 minimum contract guys - 5 mil

Total = 96 million.

Lets generously assume the luxury tax line by then is up to 71 million (5 mil higher than next year). That means that Reinsdorf will have to pay $25 million in luxury tax bringing the total bill to $121 million.

To make it worth it financially, the Bulls would have to increase their revenues by more than 50%.

Oh and that is just year 3 (the first year of Rose's extension kicking in). In year 4 the total bill will go up to $137 million. In year 5 it will be $153 million and in year 6 it will be $171 million!!!

And all that is assuming just the 3 max guys plus Rose & Noah, 1 1st rd. pick and 1 MLE guy and 6 minimum contract guys for the whole time. If they had another 1st rd. pick or used the MLE in say year 3 it gets even crazier.

Holy Crap Why Can't I have Ric Bucher's Job or Why Does He Have His?

Breaking down offseason plans for every NBA team along with Chris Broussard (another gem of a writer) had this golden tidbit for the Hornets and Clippers:

"If, say, they offered Paul and Stojakovic for Chris Kaman and Blake Griffin, wouldn't the Clippers have to think about it? And wouldn't it make the Hornets a playoff lock?"

Hmm so the Clippers would now have Paul and Baron Davis both on huge contracts playing the same position? The Clippers would also have no C and no PF on the roster.

Clippers w/o trade

C - Kaman
PF - Griffin
SF - A. Aminu (#8 pick this year)
SG - E. Gordon (#8 pick 2 years ago)
PG - B. Davis

Clippers w/ trade

C - DeAndre Jordan
PF - Craig Smith
SF - A. Aminu
SG - E. Gordon
PG - C. Paul / B. Davis

Yeah that makes sense.

For the Hornets, PG, PF, and C are the only positions they have anything at. After this trade their 4 highest paid and best players would play PF and C (C - Kaman/Okafor, PF - West/Griffin). Meanwhile, they would have NOTHING at SG and SF and no depth at PG.

Oh yeah the Hornets roster that is a lock for the playoffs in the West:

C - Kaman / Okafor
PF - West / Griffin
SF - James (I have been garbage for 2 full years) Posey
SG - Marcus Thornton
PG - Darren Collison

Yeah thats a lock for a top 8 pick not the playoffs.

Other good Bucher Ideas:

T-Wolves: Should use their cap space to land a scorer from a team trying to shed payroll like Rip Hamilton from Detroit.

Thats probably a good idea - take on the 32 year old Hamilton coming off his worst ever season with 3 years 37 million left on his contract.

He also suggested they "Move Al Jefferson to one of the teams with cap room that strikes out in free agency. Don't worry about getting equal value back because a seven-figure trade exception is sure to have great worth come the trade deadline."

Thats also one way to build a winner - trade a 25 year old C that averages 18-9 (those guys grow on trees) -- in order to get a trade exception.

Sixers: "Getting Wizards guard Randy Foye in a sign-and-trade for Iguodala would be a perfect example, if feasible."

Iguodala for Randy Foye. The same Foye that couldn't get minutes on the Wizards and has a career PER of under 13.5

Bucher should be a GM.

This guy is paid well and this is what he comes up with?

2010 NBA Draft Recap

Sharing an interesting draft thought I heard from Daryl Morey: When asked about drafting for talent vs. need he said you have to take talent. Thats not groundbreaking. However, he said that he views things in terms of 3-4 year windows. Need is not irrelevant, but since rosters turn over so much the question should not be can he help us in year 1, but with what might happen to our roster can he be an important part of our team by year 3 or 4. His example was Aaron Books.

Here is Chad Ford's (ESPN's draft guy) draft night analysis of the Aaron Brooks pick: "Brooks is the first real surprise of the draft. How does he fit in Houston? With Mike James, Rafer Alston and Luther Head on the roster, Brooks will be stuck at the end of the bench."

If you look at it, yeah the Rockets had a glut of PGs, but were any of them what I call "build around" guys? No. Alston was 31, James was 32, and Head was nothing more than a decent bench shooter. So even though Brooks was unlikely to get minutes in year 1 thats not what was important. Morey's idea makes a ton of sense. Should you really be drafting 19-22 yr old kids to be difference makers in year 1? For 95% of teams the answer should be no.

On that note I think it is ridiculous when commentators said things like: "The T-Wolves really liked Wesley Johnson because they felt like he was NBA ready and could contribute right away."

That should not be a concern for Minnesota. Thats fine--he is NBA ready--now you will only lose 57 games next year instead of 62 with a higher upside player.

Another random note: I could be totally wrong on this, but I think some franchises particularly in unattractive cities and/or very bad track records need to swing for the fences with their draft picks much more so than their counterparts in major cities or teams with great track records. I just think those teams have more trouble luring star players in free agency. They can get that mid-level guy because he just needs to get paid. The stars though--they aren't coming to Milwaukee or Salt Lake City. Even though those players may end up leaving you almost always get the full 6 years out of them.

Another reason why I dont like Chad Ford. Every time he talks about the Pacers he says the same thing: "You have to give them credit for taking a safe smart approach to the draft. That is they dont try for homeruns, they take safe, sure things, college upperclassmen from major programs. They go for singles and doubles and usually hit. Lets look at their last 3 1st round picks before this year: Tyler Hansbrough, Brandon Rush, Roy Hibbert. Are you building a contender like that? You got two bench players and (I actually like Hibbert) a serviceable starting C. Combined career all-star teams for that group 10 years from now--probably 0.

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

Finally on to the commentary of the actual draft.

What I liked & What I didn't like:

Again this is purely my opinion about how I feel a team approached the draft. You can't really give out grades when historically 1/3 of 1st round picks are out of the league by the time their rookie contract expires.

Liked:


What Milwaukee did - I like Sanders and I like Hobson (particularly where they got him). Based on upside I like Sanders every bit as much as Ed Davis. Also, the Bucks have nothing like him on their roster. Tiny Gallon is a good gamble in round 2. (On the topic of swinging for the fences -- thats what round 2 is all about in my opinion -- non-guaranteed contracts -- players w/ baggage might have a chip on their shoulder and be motivated -- if not -- cut them).

The Lakers 2nd rd. picks - Not going to spend much time on 2nd rd. picks, but I like both of the guys they got. Particularly Ebanks - he reminds me of Trevor Ariza - can really defend, which is a skill that I feel translates well even if his offense never develops.

Quick Likes:

Raptors - Needed size upfront and got it

Kings - Got drafts 2nd best player (with all of his red flags) at #5. Double-dipped with another very talented baggage carrying big in round 2. Simmons joked its ok to have 1 head case on a team, but you cant have 2 because they might start hanging out together.

Thunder - Needed size and got size (as low upside as it may be). Also, got a future #1 from the Clippers -- thats usually a good thing.

Didn't Like:

How it was a weird year at the top.

I have already disclaimed how you do not draft for need and if I was the Wizards I take John Wall (only, only way I would pass is if I got a really premium piece and could still end up with DeMarcus Cousins (maybe something like Ricky Rubio, the #4 and #23 picks for #1)).

The point is I am very skeptical and worried about the John Wall/Gilbert Arenas experiment. Arenas could really hurt John Wall's development both as a player and as a winner and nobody is trading for Arenas. You still have to take Wall, but its just not an ideal situation.

Same sort of deal in Philly. Their best player is Andre Iguodala who plays the same position as Turner. A.I. is their "build-around" guy (that is probably also part of why they are not very good because while he is a very good player he is not high up on the "build around" guy totem poll). He is certainly much more tradeable than Arenas, but it is hard to get equal value. In any event that team will continue to be bogged down by the Brand contract for the next 2 years at least. Again, a good pick, but not an ideal situation.

More I did not like:

The Warriors taking Epke Udoh. Every year almost GS spends a lottery pick on a long athletic (though slender) PF that Don Nelson gives little to sporadic to no playing time. So Udoh gets to join two other lottery picks on the bench of a 25 win team. There are a lot of dysfunctional franchises out there and Im not sure GS gets enough credit in this category.

Utah taking Gordon Hayward - Maybe I am just a racist, but I dont see it. What is the ceiling here? I am not sure who he will guard and he is not even an above average outside shooter. Winner? Sure. Character? Sure. High basketball IQ? Sure. Im sorry, but thats not enough for me at the #9 pick. Especially if you are a good team like Utah who wont be picking this high often at all. Swing for the fences a little -- Paul George or Ed Davis -- even Xavier Henry a guy I really like who has an NBA body and an NBA skill (3PT shooting).

What the T-Wolves did - Either me or Bill Simmons should be the GM there. David Kahn is a retard. I vote for me because while I really like Simmons, sometimes he is just off (and of course I never am). The year after "the point guard draft" Kahn decided to have "the small forward draft" bringing in 3 "3s".

I have to give Bill Simmons credit for this next one - the Heat traded the #18 pick to anyone who would take Daequan Cook's contract (which is only 3 mil for 1 year). The Thunder stepped up and did the deal. So who didnt I like here? The Clippers and Wizards. To get the #17 pick the Wizards took on 2 years and $17 mil of Kirk Heinrich when they could have just gotten in on the Heat deal. The Clippers traded a future 1st rounder to OKC for...the #18 pick they could have had simply by taking Cook's contract. Does not make a whole lot of sense.

Correcting Maddow on the Stimulus

I like Rachel Maddow. She is very bright and she often analyzes issues with significantly more composure than the other talking heads.

She commented recently on unemployment benefits and the stimulus.

Her comment: “Giving money to people who have no income so that they can spend it is the definition of stimulus.”

Analysis: Not really. The economic actors whom the stimulus is aimed to please (i.e. convince) are the people who decide whether or not they should put their money on the line and invest, whether it be working capital, pure investment, or maintaining higher inventories, and work forces. Unemployment benefits don’t really convince them to do anything to truly promote long-term growth and recovery. The economy is not a blind machine you pump money into and it reacts based purely on the amount of money being spent and floating around. The economic actors are largely aware of how money is being spent. There is no incentive to invest in long-term growth and expand inventory capabilities much less inventory and workforces if this marginal consumption provided by unemployment benefits is temporary, which it is. Investment is encouraged when the future streams of consumption money (i.e. what will be used to make the investment profitable) come from more permanent and reliable sources—primarily wage income. Unemployment benefits do not reduce unemployment and thus increase wage income—though economists disagree on the magnitude of the effect most agree that at least marginally, unemployment benefits tend to increase the duration of unemployment. Again, not a commentary on unemployment benefits, which I do find useful and will not rail against—just saying her comment was incorrect.

Michael Wilbon -- I'm Losing Respect Quickly

More on this later, but his comments on the Scott Van Pelt show on 6/16 concerning NFL management and its lies was so ridiculous I can hardly contain myself, but must go study now so more later.

Basically, he said teams say "We signed this player for 6 years 42 million", but they always "lie" and "never keep their promise" referring to when the team cuts that player after 3 years.

So absurd everybody knows the contracts are non-guaranteed outside of the signing bonus. The players know that, the teams know that, and the agents know that. Therefore, the players and agents get as much money as they can in the signing bonus and the first 2-3 years. There is no deception. When a team cuts a player with a non-guaranteed contract, they aren't "lying" or "breaking their promise". It is just easier to say 6 years 42 million than 1 year 17 million (year 1 salary + signing bonus) with a team options for years 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 at 5 mil per which is roughly what such an NFL contract is.

He was irate about this when clearly he is missing the entire point.

This is the second time in a few months that he has said something absolutely absurd.

In May following the NFL Draft he said that Florida State safety Myron Rolle fell to the 6th round because "people dont know what to make of a black scholar who is a football player so they make excuses for not taking him".

Actual facts:

Rolle had not played football for the last year before the draft.
He ran the second slowest 40 of any safety in the draft.
He was never that great at FSU.
He went right where he was projected to go.

There are 3 black GMs who made a combined 21 picks before Rolle was selected by the Titans a team w/ a white coach and GM.

There are also 6 black head coaches. All of them passed on Rolle.

Rolle went in the 6th round because thats how good of a prospect he was. Race is still a very sensitive issue and for a person in Wilbon's position w/ such a large audience to recklessly make assertions like that without any basis other than his emotional (and unreasonable) suspicions is irresponsible.

2010 NFL Mock Draft

BCS National Championship Game

Alabama is a 4.5 point favorite in this game and that is about right. They are an immensely talented team and proved it with a convincing win over Florida.

Meanwhile, Texas enters the game coming off of an unconvincing, almost disastrous, 1-point escape against Nebraska. This has been the focus of much of the national football writers' articles on the game as well as much of the discussion. I find myself increasingly frustrated with this phenomenon and here is why.

Texas was unimpressive and it does raise valid questions as to how Texas might perform against Alabama's dominating defense. I do not dispute this at all. However, most commentators continue to overlook two potentially relevant/important points:

1st -- It might be fair to slightly reevaluate that Nebraska game in light of Nebraska's performance in its bowl game in which it absolutely annihilated an Arizona team (that averaged 27+ points per game) 33-0.

2nd and most importantly, not one of the articles I have read or tv segments watched has mentioned either of its close calls against Tennessee and Auburn (its last game of the regular season).

If you will recall, Bama needed a blocked field goal to escape the Volunteers at home and trailed the entire game against Auburn. Neither of these teams could rightly be called world-beaters. One different play in either game and we are not even talking about Bama just like we would not be about Texas had one more second ticked off the clock.

These games show that Bama is not invincible, rather they are fallable and this was shown on not one, but two occasions.

Again, Bama is rightly the favorite, but when so much of the analysis is being based on a single game, ignoring Bama's closest calls seems absurd.

My Prediction:

Texas limits the Bama ground attack, but Bama is still able to move the ball between the 20s (passes to RBs may become an important part of the Bama offense to take advantage of an agressive Texas defense). It is in the red zone where the Bama offense stalls leading to three Tiffin FGs. A key McCoy INT (one of two McCoy turnovers) sets up one of Bama's two TDs.

Bama also limits the Texas running game, but McCoy has some success scrambling to keep a few plays alive. Bama employs a 1-deep safety look to take away the short passing game that makes up so much of the Texas offense. However, this leaves Bama vulnerable deep and McCoy capitalizes hitting Malcolm Williams for a long TD.

In the end Texas gets a defensive or special teams TD that turns out to be the difference.

Texas wins 24-23