Erick Blasco

But all stats are impacted by teammates! A shooter playing with players that command double teams will probably have a better FG% than if he were on a worse team. A player with crappy teammates will probably average more points than a player with four other scorers. Dwight Howard gets tons of rebounds because he doesn't play with any rebounding power forward. Steve Nash gets assist because of the raw firepower of his teammates. If you're dismissing +/- on that front, then you'll have to dismiss every stat. I don't consider Varejao the best sixth man in the league because of his plus/minus, I consider him a leading candidate based on his play which his plus/minus references. Not only is he playing well, but he's playing well on a winning team, on a team that plays far better with him than without him, and on a team that plays far better with him than without him adjusting for circumstances. I'll never consider anybody for any award purely based on statistics. I've seen enough of Varejao's play to realize that he's been exceptional defensively, on the boards, and in making little plays here and there on offense (he beat the Hawks with a game winning three). The numbers just back up his strong play. According to percentages, Vujacic is the best 3-point shooter on the Lakers this year, and was second best last year. His numbers blow Kobe's out of the water. Would you say Vujacic is a better shooter than Kobe at face value? Probably not. All statistics are are information that must be interpreted. For some cases, the information is cryptic, others, more obvious. Would I have to explain Kobe being ahead of all three players for example, or can we take for granted that he's really really good. Last year Odom played on a Lakers bench that massacred opponents. Odom spearheaded that bench. He also played on a starting unit that was very good. While Kobe, Gasol, and Odom all share good +/- numbers from the starting lineup, Odom rakes in raw numbers because of the Lakers' bench differential, gets a boost in the plus/minus for playing on a bench with several poor performers, and doesn't get killed for playing purely against opposing benches because he spent a bunch of time in the starting lineup too. He gets the best of both worlds. Ariza was also low because he wasn't that good. Look up his percentages in the regular season. He didn't explode into an awesome shooter until the postseason and wasn't an all-class NBA defender either. You're assuming that the stat is a be all, end all way of categorizing players. It's not trying to be. Is Tyreke Evans a better player than Tim Duncan? According to points per game he is. Is Rodney Stuckey a better player than Tony Parker? Is Kendrick Perkins the best player in the NBA(FG%)? Is Monta Ellis (3rd in steals, 6th in points) the best two-way player? Of course not, and you'll need to interpret the data. Evans has more scoring responsibility in a faster system than TD. Stuckey has often times been Detroit's only scoring option while Parker shares the ball more. Ellis plays in a hyper-fast system that emphasizes gambling and transition offense. Most of Perkins' shot attempts are cookies. All stats are are data that tries to reflect what's actually happening on the court. All it is is data. You can't strictly use it to qualify. But it is information that should be looked at when qualifying, especially for normally unqualifiable measures like individual defense, offensive continuity, and the like. I love the game. If I ever get to a point where I actually do run out of answers as to why things happen, then it's time for me to start watching another game. But those statistics become useless too. Is Brandon Jennings a better scorer than Tony Parker, is Chris Duhon a better playmaker than Chauncey Billups, is Gerald Wallace a better rebounder than David Lee? and what do the stats mean? If you give an answer, should I just dismiss the answer because the players are not like kinds? If you use the like kinds argument, then all statistics are useless because you will never be able to compare equally similar players in equally similar roles. Even look at probably the best two-way stars in the game, LeBron, Wade, Melo and Kobe. Is Melo the best scorer cause he scores the most, even though LeBron has the best percentage? They all have far better supporting cast members than Wade though. However, Wade also plays at the slowest pace. Wade is the only one who averages over a block and a steal a game. But Kobe has two steals. But Kobe rarely guards a team's best player while Wade will do. Melo never does. LeBron sometimes does. Do all stats become irrelevant?

Fisher and Farmar both were pretty bad, and you don't have to take everything as gospel. Nobody is arguing that Vujacic doesn't suck, and especially with small sample sizes, you'll get an anomaly or two like Vujacic being in the positive. For a team as good as the Lakers were last year, being at only 0.6 isn't that good, and he was still behind all the major players from last year's team besides Farmar, Fisher, and Ariza. Farmar and Fisher were pretty bad last year, and Ariza probably is hurt by numbers adjusting for what his teammates did to him. You can still apply common sense and call Sasha's numbers a fluke, that doesn't mean that every single result is a fluke.

Over the past two seasons, starting with Golden State’s stretch run in 2007-2008 and continuing today, Baron Davis has wasted his considerable basketball talents. Selfishness, passiveness, and a profound languor have palled over him, resulting in the listless play that led to a second-half benching with just a couple of games left in the 2008 regular season and the Warriors still alive for a playoff spot, and the dismal performances he’s turned in since joining the Clippers two offseasons ago. In the Los Angeles Clippers’ 102-91 victory over the Los Angeles Lakers, Baron Davis burned away the mist that’s been shrouding him and showed just how great he could be when he decides to be great. Davis lived in the paint against Derek Fisher, Jordan Farmar, and Shannon Brown, collapsing the Lakers defense before dropping passes off to bigs near the basket or kicking the ball out to open shooters depending on the Lakers rotations. Davis’ vision allowed him to see everything unfolding—10 AST, 4 TO. Plus, of his four turnovers, one came when he posted up and didn’t anticipate a double team stripping the ball, and a second came on a bad pass during garbage time. Only twice did he make inappropriate passes. When Davis drove to score—10-18 FG, 1-3 3FG, 4-5 FT, 25 PTS—he usually got to the cup or unleashed a tricky step-back jump shot going left. Otherwise, his mid-and long range pull-up game was on target and he simply shot over the shorter Lakers point guards. Davis also made great push passes in transition to teammates beating the Lakers down the floor. In fact, it was the Clippers ability to get out in on the break which gave them the extra points they needed to persevere. Most impressively of all was Davis’ pitbull defense. While he wasn’t challenged much by Fisher, he made Shannon Brown look like a D-Leaguer. On one possession he stayed in front of Brown’s attempts to drive for ten seconds, poked the ball away, and then swatted Brown’s emergency three-point attempt. On another possession, he simply rode Brown to the baseline where Brown was forced to step out of bounds. It’s no surprise that with Davis playing like a star, the Clippers earned a gold-star-caliber victory. He got plenty of help. Rasual Butler is a streak-shooter who hasn’t found too many hot streaks this year—2-6 3FG. But because he always ran the floor hard, he found several transition dunks and assists out ahead of the Lakers defense—5-12 FG, 3 AST, 0 TO, 14 PTS. And while his shot wasn’t falling, he dropped a critical late triple that put the Lakers to bed. If Eric Gordon were a couple inches taller, he’d be a star. He’s fearless in finishing around and through defenders at the basket, is a terrific broken-court scorer, can handle the ball and shoot—7-12 FG, 1-4 3FG, 3-4 FT, 18 PTS. Defensively, he worked hard in denying Kobe Bryant easy post position and was proactive rather than reactive. On the other hand, he turned his head several times, and was way too aggressive defending Kobe on the perimeter, leading to several bad fouls on jump shots. He was also shot over at will and allowed a third-quarter hot streak that almost single-handedly kept the Lakers in the game. Indeed, the Clippers had their best success defending Bryant with Butler. Still, Give Gordon another year to learn the difference between aggression and over aggression and he’ll be a terrific two-way player. Chris Kaman—7-19 FG, 7-7 FT, 14 REB, 21 PTS—was generally ineffective around the basket and had trouble navigating Andrew Bynum’s length and quickness. And while he has a soft touch, he was short on most of his jumpers outside of 16 feet. What Kaman has developed is an excellent turnaround jumper over his left shoulder that is near automatic. Defensively, Kaman made a handful of good rotations but was late on the majority, plus he was beaten too often on the glass by Bynum and Lamar Odom. Marcus Camby took three shots outside of the basket, in other words, three bad shots. He missed all of them. He also chased the ball too often on defense failing to box out, another reason why the Lakers had some success crashing their offensive glass. His best attribute was his passing. A high-low connection, and a zipped interior pass led to two Kaman layups, and two of his five assists. Craig Smith was a bulldozer—6-7 FG, 6 REB, 3 AST, 1 TO, 12 PTS. He carved space for himself on the glass, was able to take his right hand to the paint and finish or kick, and showed a nice counter move, spinning to the baseline to hit a layup. Smith is the first smart, hard-working energy guy the Clippers have had on their bench in a long while, and he paid dividends against the Lakers. However, the rest of the Clippers bench is seriously inept. Sebastian Telfair—0-6 FG, 3 AST, 1 TO, 0 PTS—never got into the paint, was a bricklayer from the perimeter, didn’t push the ball, couldn’t run the offense, and didn’t have a prayer of slowing down Farmar and Brown. Is there a worse backup point guard in the league than Telfair? Ricky Davis executed a nice pick-and-roll with Smith (the first play he’s ever executed?) for an assist, forced two shots, and played no defense—1-3 FG, 1 AST, 4 PTS. Al Thornton short-armed two jumpers, buys pump fakes, and doesn’t play with any discipline. He’s an athletic mistake player, but a mistake player nonetheless. DeAndre Jordan moves fluidly, was usually in the right place in the right time, and has promise as a fifth big in a four-big rotation. Indeed, the Clippers run fast and furious gameplan was too much for the Lakers who were playing their second game in as many nights. Also, the Clippers did an effective job walling off the paint, particularly when their starters were in. In fact, as a unit, the Clippers showed that their starting five can compete with any team in the league when Davis is playing like a baron and not a proletariat. What do they need to seriously contend for postseason games? The return of Blake Griffin.An NBA-caliber backup point guard.An athletic, shooting wing who can move Butler to the bench.An overhaul of the current bench.More experience for Gordon. However, given Davis’ history of disappearing for long stretches, count on the Clippers falling short of whatever goals may otherwise be attainable.

I agree wholeheartedly. I haven't seen Tyler play but reports are that he's a good role player. He'll probably take over the Jeff Foster role after this season. But how many role players do the Pacers have? They need talent and the only talent they have come with red flags, like Murphy's softness and defense, and Ford's inability to defend, shoot, or run an offense. They were right to blow things up but they don't have anything to rebuild around, except Granger who I feel is mostly just a jump shooter, and not a franchise player.

Hibbert's slow and he's soft, and almost every player on the Pacers has that problem. That game against the Magic may be one of the flukiest performances of the season. They were embarrassed by the Knicks and came otgether against Orlando but that won't happen too often this year. You're right that they haven't had premium draft spots, but they could really use a Ty Lawson right now, just somebody with speed, who can pass and make plays. Troy Murphy, Earl Watson, T.J. Ford, these players don't contribute much now, and aren't young either. They're so fed up with Ford that they've simply benched him. They missed on Rush, time will tell that they missed on Hibbert. They have Granger and a whole lot of nothing.

From the definition of how adjusted values are calculated. That assures that the data is adjusted for exact scenarios where players are playing with the same teammates and against the same opponents. When a substitution is made, the variable adjusts again. It is also said that the variable adjusts for crunch time and garbage time. Source for above True Hoop Adjusted Plus/Minus does account for statistics when qualifying players, especially offensively. When adjusted, LeBron's would be higher than Varejao's as long as LeBron's 30 wasn't wildly inefficient (30 points on 11-34 shooting). Like all statistics, they're only tools for arguments, not be all, end all's. If Varejao, as a defensive specilaist, isn't doing a damn thing defensively he wouldn't play. Coaches wouldn't play him so often. Or, if Varejao's man gave up 20, but he did good things on offense to help LeBron score (set more effective screens, executed the right cuts, etc) and as a result Cleveland played great, it wouldn't matter. Cleveland would be scoring enough probably to offset, and therefore winning. You're looking at two-year ratings from 2008-2009 which slightly factor in Gasol's time in Memphis, and Vujacic's season where he was a useful shooter. If you're on the 2008-2009 page, only use the one-year ratings if you strictly want last year's data. Also, the overall rating is raw and unadjusted. When Bynum was out, Gasol probably paired more with the horrendous Josh Powell and Mbenga. When adjusted, Gasol comes out to 6.04, which is about 32nd in the league. And when adjusted, it becomes 0.76. The numbers on him are low because the team was considerably better defensively without him than with him (considering Hinrich was his backup, it makes sense). Rookies will tend to have low marks because their defense is bad, especially on mediocre teams like the Bulls. For the most part, it holds up to scrutiny as well as any other statistical measurement.

:lol:

I know exactly why Deng is high on the adjusted plus/minus. Chicago is horrendous when he's not on the floor (probably because the Bulls have no real backup wing besides rookie James Johnson) and fall apart without him. With him they play average basketball. The difference is so substantial that he rises to the top of the adjusted list. You do know that when the site adjusts for Fisher, his plus/minus goes from +11 (or whatever the raw number is) to -6.66, 6th among the 8 Lakers who qualify. The numbers know that Fisher has been terrible. He's an example where you must account for lineup discrepancy with his plus/minuses. Shannon Brown has not been a good defensive player this year at all, and I haven't been too impressed with his offense. The few times I've seen him, he was getting lit up by opposing guards and he hasn't been consistently making plays. His adjusted plus/minus is even worse than Fisher's, and it's no surprise why considering how bad all of LA's backups have been. Felton I have no idea. I don't follow Charlotte enough. Then again, can anyone explain why exactly Gerald Wallace has gone bananas with his rebounding? Sometimes there aren't easy answers.

Agreed, and I don't see why they cut him either. He'll drum up fan interest on a listless team. Don't expect him to be back next year though.

It just shows that those players are vital to their team's success because the teams play much better with them as to without them, even with adjustments to teammates. It doesn't mean that they're better---maybe it means they're more important? I don't know, I don't think it's that cut and dry---but it does show that adjusting for circumstances, those teams do really well with those players on the floor. Then it's just a matter of forming your own conclusions as to why. Deng's an anomaly. The Bulls are about -2 with him, but are about -20 without him. The Bulls just suck a lot less with Deng. The Nuggets get great statistical production from their centers, and regardless of injured teammates, Denver produces when Andersen and Nene don't both get in foul trouble. Dirk is Dirk, Wade is Wade, LeBron is LeBron, D-Will is D-Will, Kobe is Kobe. Varejao is really a good player under the radar who does wonders for a team's defense, its offensive continuity, and its rebounding. Haywood stabilizes Washington's defense as a post-defending shot-blocking presence, and sets good screens to open up the Wizards' perimeter game. With Washington's lack of any other screener and any other good interior defender, it's no surprise that his numbers are exceptional. Raymond Felton...uhhhhhh.....ummmmm, no clue. It's not like because Chris Andersen is second that he's the second best player in the league, but it DOES mean that his team really plays well with him and doesn't play as well with anyone else. And most of the time there are reasons if you look for them.

Let's get real here, how many lineups is Kobe playing exactly with Sasha Vujacic? You're bringing up problems that are horrible in theory but not in execution because Jackson isn't going to field many competitive lineups with Vujacic in. Just like obviously that LeBron fellow gives Varejao a boost in his plus/minus. Nobody is saying that the only way to measure a player is by his plus/minus numbers, just like a fan will be misled if he only judges a player based on how many rebounds he gets, or what his assist to turnover ratio is, without seeing a big picture. But just like somebody leading the league in points per game, or blocks per game, defensive rating, eFG%, 4th quarter points, Clutch FG%, etc, leading the league is a pretty big deal. You can clearly see that a player plays well with one player on the court but not another. Cleveland's best 11 lineups involve Varejao. Ten of those lineups also include LeBron. One of them doesn't. Obviously Varejao is playing good basketball as the team is producing exceptionally well when he is in there. And fortunately, this site already does this work: http://basketballvalue.com/topplayers.php?year=2009-2010&mode=summary&sortnumber=94&sortorder=DESC Adjusting for teammates and opponents, Kobe comes out to the 11th best +/- in the league. LeBron is 4th, Varejao is 9th. Luol Deng, Chris Andersen, and Dwyane Wade are 1, 2, and 3. When you get to overall ranking, Kobe is 3rd, Varejao is 1st, with Dirk and Wade buffering Kobe. LeBron becomes 9th. It's hard to do simple percentages allowed for individuals. What individual is at fault when a guard can't get around a screen for example. And with Varejao's defense, does anyone have a stop percentage for him, or a percentage of shots missed because of him? The points produced metrics at basketball-reference have Varejao with a 116 OFF rating compared to Kobe's 114, and a defensive rating of 100 to Kobe's 101 (LeBron is 119, 101). Varejao also has a better eFG than Kobe by a few percentage points. Looking at a player with a 116 OFF rating and a 100 DEF rating (both ratings better than Kobe, who has excellent numbers in his own right), that player is doing damn good things on the court. Nobody is going to consider Varejao an MVP candidate but when his defensive rating blows all potential 6th man candidates out of the water, and his rating differential is rivaled only by Carl Landry, he's going to deserve significant consideration for 6th man of the year.

Like all basic stats, you can adjust for lineup discrepancy. That's how Morey and others use plus/minus. If that lineup you mentioned struggles, it would be reflected in the horrible plus/minus numbers of Morrison, Vujacic, Powell, and Mbenga. When you adjust, Kobe's numbers would look better. It's a raw stat like points per game that on its own doesn't offer a total picture, but like every stat, you can refine and refine and refine to get a better portrait of true value.

I'm glad Ziller wrote this article. As far as America has come, veiled racism is still abound with the ways many fans view NBA culture.

They got me three years ago. That defense is nasty.

He's been a little better than KG this year and Cleveland is starting to put up the defensive numbers to prove it. Duncan's never been a great one-on-one defender in space, Martin's good but not elite...is there anyone else in the discussion? Maybe Rasheed?

lol, Thomas doesn't pay decent players $11millon, he only pays horrible players $11 million.

C: Kendrick Perkins: The guy blocks shots and is the best post defender in the game right now. Dwight intimidates more penetrations but you can sucker him to the ball and drop in layups underneath him. You can't do that to Perkins. Both are foul prone. PF: Anderson Varejao: I always sell his defense short and then I watch him play. He's fluid enough to guard perimeter isolations, his rotations are terrific, he's strong, has good technique, hedges screens exceptionally well and plays all out. SF: LeBron: He's a much better on ball defender this year than he was last year. SG: Shane Battier: Battier doesn't really deserve this. He's been only good on defense this year, not great as in year's past. No other shooting guard really deserves the honor though. PG: Rajon Rondo: He swallows point guards whole with that crazy wingspan. He can guard isos, screens, and post ups better than all.

Looking at NBA.com every single raw +/- 5-man unit the Lakers have fielded has a positive plus/minus. The only unit that the Lakers have fielded that has a decent sample size, has Kobe in it, and isn't exceptional is a lineup with Kobe, Fisher, Brown, Odom, and Bynum. The best lineup the Lakers field in +/- per minute with over 10:00 playing time is Farmar, Kobe, Artest, Odom and Gasol. Their best lineup with over 100 minutes is Fisher, Kobe, Artest, Odom, and Gasol. Their worst with over 10 minutes and 100 minutes is Fisher, Kobe, Odom, Artest, and Bynum Judging from this, you can tell that the Lakers struggle more with Bynum on the court than with Gasol. The worst four-man lineup on the roster is Kobe, Fisher, Odom, and Bynum. Again, Bynum is there, Gasol and Artest aren't. The on-court off court numbers heavily favor Kobe (Fourth in the League) so for the most part, the Lakers are exceptional with him. Artest's numbers are also exceptional, while Gasol, and Fisher are also way up there. Yeah they all start and play together, but Bynum starts too and his numbers relative to his teammates are horrible. The second unit numbers are horrible, aside from Farmar who is just bad. You can see a trend. The Lakers play great with Gasol and not with Bynum. Their second unit is also terrible. Artest and Kobe are vital to the team's success. Is this not something you haven't intuitively concluded yourself Brandon?

If you're going to use tiny sample sizes like one game and not give context, then yeah. Fisher's helped by the fact that he doesn't make mistakes and plays with the starters. The Lakers bench has been terrible so Fisher's off-court numbers will look great. Gasol's +/- should also be really good considering how mediocre Odom has played this season. One game sample sizes will skew, but if you look over a big picture and you see a team that clearly performs better with one player on the court as opposed to off of it, it becomes a trend. And I just saw the Pacers give up a billion points to the Knicks. Please, don't disrespect Parker's defense by calling it "pathetic," when there are entire rosters in the league like Indiana's. Parker's slightly above average. Go put Luther Head on Jackson and see what happens.

The Indiana Pacers’ decision of blowing up their roster and rebuilding two years ago was absolutely the right one to make. However, the Pacers haven’t procured the necessary amount of talent to have any semblance of a bright future. Instead, the stiffs and mediocrities that currently comprise the Pacers roster have steered the Pacers to a 10-23 record, with the latest loss the most humiliating one—a 132-89 annihilation at the hands of the New York Knicks. While individual losses are often overblown, the performance exposed the myriad reasons why the Pacers will be dismal for seasons to come. The Pacers starting lineup consisted of Earl Watson, Luther Head, Mike Dunleavy, Josh McRoberts, and Roy Hibbert. Three career backups, a brittle wing still gathering his bearings after returning from injury, and a gentle giant. Has there been a more impotent starting lineup fielded by a team this season?Roy Hibbert had some success in the paint, but his hooks are too slow-developing and mechanical to elude shot blockers coming over once Hibbert begins his moves.Hibbert had some success from the high post, hitting jumpers from up to 20-feet out and making nifty passes from the high post—7 AST, 0 TO.However, Hibbert showed zero athleticism. He had difficulty finishing near the hoop, he made no effort to show on the far side of screens, he was ineffective on nearly all his interior rotations, he was beaten on the glass, and he had to give David Lee too much room to shoot because of Hibbert’s lack of foot speed. As a result, Lee was able to shoot 18-foot jumpers to his heart’s content and finished with 22 points on 9-16 shooting.Because of Hibbert’s defensive tardiness, his game is synonymous with foul trouble. Indeed, Hibbert fouled out against the Knicks.Mike Dunleavy may be the weakest player pound-for-pound in the entire league. He was abused on the boards and defensive end of the court, displayed a questionable handle, and made awful outlet passes. His only redeeming quality was his ability to curl off of two weak-side down screens to free himself at the top of the key where he sank a trio of jumpers.Aside from one half of the 2007-2008 season, Dunleavy has always been a disappointment in the pros.Josh McRobers turned his head, misread defenses, and airballed a layup in 19 forgettable minutes.Earl Watson has been pressed into starters duty recently after Jim O’Brien deservedly benched T.J. Ford for being a shooting guard in a point guard body. However, Watson is at his best as a tempo-pushing backup who can pressure the ball and make plays in a broken field.As a starter trying to initiate Indiana’s offense, Watson was a disaster—4-12 FG, 1-6 3FG, 1 AST, 4 TO, 9 PTS.As a smallish shooting guard, Luther Head was simply posted or shot over by New York’s assortment of oversized wings. And he couldn’t shoot away his liabilities—7-15 FG, 2-7 3FG, 18 PTS—with most of his points coming well into garbage time.Solomon Jones offered no resistance on Lee’s jump shot, had no presence in the paint, and didn’t do anything to warrant being in the rotation.A.J. Price is a not-so-quick shooting guard in a point guard’s body who couldn’t get into the paint. In other words, a pine-rider.Brandon Rush is a shooter who shot too many blanks—2-13 FG, 0-6 3FG, 0 AST, 2 TO, 6 PTS. Like Price, his defense was a disaster.Travis Diener can’t run an offense, can’t penetrate, can’t defend, and only has value when he’s knocking down his threes.Dahntay Jones was the only Indiana player who sometimes made acceptable baseline rotations, who spoke on defense, and who played with any muscle whatsoever, though he too was guilty of losing focus on the defensive end. Perhaps after half a season away from Denver’s defensive organized chaos, Jones’ chops have been dulled playing with his new sad-sack teammates?Offensively, Jones was at his best as a baseline runner and doesn’t quite have three-point range on his jump shot.The Pacers took 30 threes out of their 91 shot attempts, the majority of them quick triggers with no exploration inside the arc.The Pacers didn’t have any player who consistently broke down the Knicks defense, nor who could create offense for either himself or others.Because Indiana’s wings either are too small or play too small, Wilson Chandler, Danilo Gallinari, and Al Harrington feasted on Watson, Head, Rush, Price, Dunleavy, and Dahntay Jones and were able to finish at the hoop with ease.Besides Watson and Dahntay Jones, Indiana has nobody who puts defensive pressure on opponents. As a result, other teams just run what they want to run against the Pacers.Indiana didn’t compete on the defensive end, and their youngsters made too many mistakes.Indiana’s injured starters can’t be used as an excuse for the team’s struggles. Danny Granger is a gunner who does most of his work on the perimeter and none of it on the defensive end. Troy Murphy can shoot and board but can’t do anything else. Jeff Foster isn’t the athlete Indiana needs, and neither is Tyler Hansbrough.Of their youngsters, Price and Rush look like D-Leaguers while Hansbrough and Hibbert project to backups or role players at best.Of their veterans, too many Pacers are journeymen with no track record of achieving measurable success.Of course Larry Bird should give the embattled O’Brien a vote of confidence. Bird’s the player who signed off on building such an inept roster. The Pacers are a soft, defenseless, jump-shooting team that can’t create open looks for those shooters, and lacks talent all over the roster. In other words, a bad basketball team with a bad future.

Zero for $11 million.

Huh? Kobe has a net +/- of +19.9 this year. It has to be top ten in the league. Edit: Third in the league behind Dirk, Artest, and if you want to count his somewhat small sample size, Rip Hamilton.

He sure changed the Lakers game around with his defense. And he sure changed the way Atlanta tried to score under the hoop. Plus that three pointer against the Hawks to seal the second win.

Actually it does, Battier hasn't been first class defensively, Ariza's struggled, and Houston's starting lineup hasn't exactly dazzled. The Rockets just decimate people when Landry and Lowry come in off the bench.

I wonder if they're also going to protest D'Antoni deciding to let Nate Robinson play.