Kris and Dan Answer NBA Questions

Question: Who is your least favorite player in the NBA?

Kris:

My least favorite NBA player? Hummm…that is a good question, the Knicks don’t really have a nemesis like back in the day when it was easy to root against the flat face retard Scottie Pippen. I am not sure if I just clearly don’t like anyone in the league ... Oh wait a minute, yes I do, Larry Hughes.

Now this hatred stems way back before he became a New York Knick. It comes from his overall terribleness.

A few years ago he literally dribbled Cavalier playoff games off of his foot. It was truly painful to watch him just ruin a complete season of NBA title chances for LeBron as he continually made a mockery of the game.

Muhammed Ali once said “I’m so bad I make medicine sick.” Well Larry Hughes is similar just not in the funny or ironic sense. Cancer wakes up everyday and prays that it doesn’t have Larry Hughes. Diabetes has yearly checkups to make sure it hasn’t contacted Larry Hughes…is that enough…one more, okay. Heart Disease has to get its prostate checked twice a year to make sure it doesn’t have Larry Hughes.


Dan:

Larry Hughes is a good choice, sure.

But my least favorite player in the NBA is my least favorite for no reason I can put my finger on.

I hate Earl Watson.

There is just something about Earl Watson - no, wait, there is just everything about Earl Watson - that makes me not just disgusted and annoyed but actually angry.

Maybe it's the look on his face. Maybe it's that really crappy thin mustache he has. Maybe it's that he played for UCLA, and I have a residual dislike for everything UCLA. Maybe it's his game, which is simply not very good, with the added fact of him carrying himself like a player who is good, which he isn't. He takes bad shots. He doesn't make enough of them. He doesn't pass as well as he should. He doesn't really play particularly good defense. When he does something positive, it strikes me as wrong, anwyay.

I don't really understand it completely, to be honest. But every time I watch him play, I start cursing uncontrollably.

In fact, in December 2007 I had the opportunity to attend a game in Seattle, while the Sonics were still there and Earl Watson was on that team. I wanted to go to the game for three reasons:

1 - To see a Sonics game before they left Seattle
2 - To see Kevin Durant in person (that was awesome, I saw him dunk on Rasho Nesterovic)
3 - To boo Earl Watson. Which I did, from when he was introduced to any time he did anything good or bad on the court. Loudly.

And I enjoyed it. I really felt good, booing Earl Watson.

My friend Greg, who was at the game with me, didn't understand it. Like I said, I don't really understand it. But there it is.

I hate Earl Watson.

I wish he would go away from the NBA forever, and not ruin my league with his craptitude and his mustache and his awfulness.

Knicks Trade Deadline Aftermath

The NBA Trade Deadline has passed, and Your New York Knickerbockers were active.

First, they traded Tim Thomas, Jerome James, and Anthony Roberson to the Bulls for Larry Hughes.

Then, they traded Malik Rose and Cash Considerations (imagine if someone named their kid Cash Considerations, would that make the NBA more awkward?) to Oklahoma City for Chris Wilcox.

Net result for the Knicks:

- Chris Wilcox, 26 years old, and serviceable. Also, he only has a contract for this year.

- Larry Hughes. He's terrible, but he's equally as terrible as Tim Thomas, and at least he plays the 2, where the Knicks need a guy. His contract is the same length as Thomas'.

- Two open roster spots. They can fill these with D-League guys (Ewing Jr? Richard Hendrix? Rod Benson - bring the Boom Tho Movement to New York!)

- No more Malik Rose, Jerome James, and Anthony Roberson wasting space.

- David Lee and Nate Robinson are still on the team.

It's not going to do much for them this year, most likely. They'll still be competitive, more or less, and maybe will get the last seed in the playoffs, or a lottery pick and a good feeling for next year.

However, it gives them more roster space, doesn't mess up the 2010 plan, and doesn't give up anything worth worrying about.

All told, as a Knicks fan, you have to be pretty happy about today. Despite being forced to actually root for Larry Hughes for the next year or two.

Getting You Back In The NBA Swing

As Sherman Avenue Block Party readers know, I am a big NBA fan. Now that the NFL season is winding down, I thought I'd share some NBA-related things with you, to help get you excited about watching basketball again, if you're not already.

If you've been away from watching pro basketball for a while, now is a great time to come back. The league is experiencing a renaissance right now. The quality of play is fantastic. The young talent entering the league is real. The rule changes that were made earlier this decade has opened up the game and made offense more prevalent.

What I'm saying is, this isn't slug-it-out-defense, clear out for one star to either drive or pull up for a jump shot, 82-78 basketball. At the highest levels of the game, the offense being played is beautiful to watch.

You know about LeBron (though what he's doing this year surpasses anything he's done before, which I didn't even think was possible.) You probably know about Wade and Paul and Amare. You should know about what Dwight Howard has turned into (give some credit to our boy Patrick Ewing.) You also need to see what Rudy Gay, Danny Granger, Nene, Kevin Martin, Derrick Rose, Kevin Durant, Russel Westbrook, Caron Butler, Deron Williams, Paul Milsap, and many others are doing.

You know about the Lakers and the Celtics, maybe the Cavs. You need to see how Orlando is playing. And Utah, and Denver, and Phoenix (Shaq is a real baskeball player again), and Portland, and the Hawks (seriously).

Also know about these things:

If you're a Knicks fan, like many of the readers here are, you should be reading Posting & Toasting. It's a well-run and well-written site, with good insight and a good sense of humor. As an example, read this recap of the Knicks win over the Wizards the other night.

Also Knicks-related, read this article called "The Expected" from KnickerBlogger.net for a smart take on the value of David Lee.

One more Knicks-related link: check the video work at Seven Seconds or Mess. Genius stuff. If you're like me, living away from New York and not watching all the games, this will show you what's been going on with the team.

A plug for the Disciples of Clyde NBA Podcast? Here? Well, even if you haven't been listening, which you should be, we also have a new website where we've been doing blog posts as well. I think you all will enjoy this one - it has a cool graph I made!

The best league-wide NBA blog is by far Ball Don't Lie on Yahoo!. That's the first thing I read everyday, without fail.

Have I plugged the FreeDarko book, The Macrophenomenal Pro Basketball Almanac, on here yet? If not, I should have. I couldn't recommend it more - the essays are smart, the illustrations are jaw-dropping, and the stuff they did with stats is brilliant. This isn't like anything else you've ever seen in sports books.

Chales Oakley has a cooking show. Do you think I'm kidding? Watch this.


And in case you didn't think basketball was truly back and ready to take over:

More Reasons To Get Excited About The NBA

How about some preseason dunks?

DeAndre Jordan dunking on Chris Mihm (always fun to see big goofy white guys get dunked on - we miss you, Shawn Bradley!)



Bill Walker on Theo Ratliff (always fun to see Theo Ratliff get dunked on, because it's Theo Ratliff)



Wilson Chandler on Jermaine O'Neal (Knicks! Kris, I think you were wrong about Chandler, he's going to be a player)



Only a couple of weeks away...

My Life Is Soon To Be Consumed

Just a quick reminder, everyone, that the NBA season approaches. Soon.






Time to order League Pass....


UPDATE:

Kris wanted a non-Knicks video to get excited about the NBA.

How about 10 dunks from Darryl Dawkins?



NBATV comes with League Pass...

It's All Said And Done

Let us say goodbye to the NBA season, with a quick Finals wrap-up:

The Celtics turned out to be the better team, and by a wider margin than most expected.

Kevin Garnett goes from "can't get it done in the clutch" to "can (sometimes) get it done in the clutch."

Paul Pierce goes from "excellent player" to "top 20 or 30 of his generation."

Rajon Rondo goes from "enigma" to "awesomely talented enigma."

Kobe Bryant goes from "maybe like Mike" to "maybe like Dwyane Wade."

Doc Rivers goes from "cosmically inept" to "my unbuntu trumps your Zen."

Lamar Odom stays exactly like Lamar Odom.

And Dan Filowitz needs to find something else to occupy his time. A frightening thought.

So instead of thinking about that, let's just watch this video, and remember that while this was a truly awesome NBA year, next year stands to be even better (and, shhhh, the Knicks might even be a part of it.)



(Thanks for the video, Odenized)

As I Remember It, I'm Always Right

Despite Martin's protestations otherwise, the outcome of Game 5 of the NBA Finals was just about preordained.

Of course the Lakers were able to pull out one more home playoff win.

These teams are very evenly matched - all the games have been pretty close, with both teams showing themselves capable of going on big runs.

Boston made more mistakes in this game then they had in any previous game - more turnovers, missed assignments on defense, bad fouls (especially by KG.) That cost them the game, ultimately.

Those same mistakes likely won't pop up as they play in Boston, where they've only lost 7 times this entire season, including the playoffs. The Lakers didn't look like they finally figured out the Boston defense in this game, which would lead me to believe that this ends Tuesday night.

Unless, that is, Boston can't handle the pressure of closing it out. Should be interesting to see how they cope with it in Game 6. Can KG keep it together, or will his incredible intensity get the best of him? Can the rest of the team execute if it's close towards the end, as it typically has been in this entire series? It's probable, but not definite. So we'll see.

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

On Saturday night, I went to see Swervedriver at the Metro here in Chicago.

Swervedriver plays what I like to call a more muscular kind of shoegaze - it has the swirling guitars and the feedback but there's also songs about cars.

Swervedriver also hasn't released an album in about 10 years. I used to listen to them a lot back in high school - my friends Greg and Eric turned me on to them. In particular, Eric used to have the CDs in his car, and we'd listen to it driving around northern Jersey, which we would do often.

So, yes, this was a reunion show. I was going out on Saturday for a bit of nostalgia.

Greg had gone to see them in Seattle a few weeks before. He was extremely disappointed. He wrote us all a short and depressing email that ended with "wish i had left that band as a memory."

My expectations for the show were low, to say the least.

As it turned out, I had a great time. The Metro was nicely packed on this Saturday night, and it is one of the better places to see a show here in Chicago (it's where the Smashing Pumpkins famously got their start way back in the early 90s.) Especially since the smoking ban.

The band sounded great. I recognized about 80% of the songs, and it was cool to hear them played live right in front of me - and I was standing fairly close to the front of the stage.

Yet while I enjoyed it thoroughly, I also saw the problem, and where Greg got left so cold. Because, sure, it was fun, but it certainly wasn't as exciting as hearing something brand new, experiencing it all in that particular moment. I was happy, but I wasn't taken to some new height.

Nostalgia isn't as visceral as we'd like it to be.

It got me thinking about the NBA Finals (shockingly enough) with all the Lakers-Celtics history that's been force-fed to us for the last month.

Everyone was going off of this idea of "hey, remember how awesome it was then? I bet it will be even MORE awesome now!"

That never works. It's never more awesome now. Because we only choose to remember the good parts of what happened back then. We don't remember if there was a game or two of one of those "classic series" that were absolute blow outs or unwatchable bores. We remember the overall outcome, and the parts that were classic.

Just like with bands that we fell in love with long ago. You're never going to get to re-hear them for the first time, and experience that full-body wow that happens with the stuff that's truly transcendent. But that's the part you remember - the intense pleasure you felt when you were first getting into it all.

It can't be repeated. You can't feel it like you remember. Like Johnny Thunders said, you can't put your arm around a memory.

Which doesn't mean you can't enjoy these things in their own right, for what they are right now. That's what I've been feeling about these Finals, which have generally pleased me with the back-and-forth between Pierce and Kobe, the incredible Boston defense, the surprisingly good coaching of Doc Rivers, the rebirth of Jesus Shuttleworth, the Leon Powe Game, and especially the comeback game. Who cares that this isn't a replay of the 1987 Finals? I like this one just fine.

And that's what I felt about Swervedriver on Saturday. Sure, it wasn't a life-altering experience (not like the High on Fire show I saw last year). But I've seen plenty of crappy bands play crappy shows, and plenty good bands play mediocre shows. This was an excellent band, with a surprising number of songs that I really like (I need to start listening to them again more often) playing an excellent show. What else could I have wanted?

Filowitz's Friday Five

1) Shock, noun, a disturbance in the equilibrium or permanence of something (like a seemingly insurmountable 24 point lead by the Lakers disappearing into a 6 point defeat); a sudden or violent mental or emotional disturbance (what the Lakers have to be feeling after losing a 24 point lead); a state of being so disturbed (what the Lakers fans sounded like after losing this game.)

2) In the second half, Paul Pierce played some of the best individual, one-on-one defense I've ever seen, and he did it against arguably the most difficult guy to defend in the league in Kobe Bryant. Pierce was able to keep Kobe out of the lane most of the time. He contested shots, including an incredible block on an attempted turn-around by Kobe (have you ever seen one of these elite guys have their turnaround jumper blocked cleanly like that?) He forced Kobe to give the ball up when he drove (and the Lakers other players, especially The Machine, didn't shoot well.) Paul Pierce is by far the MVP of the series so far, and it has as much to do with his defense as his offense.

3) Eddie House was HUGE for the Celtics. Not so much because he made a ton of shots, but because of a couple of other reasons:

a- the threat of his shot helped spread the floor and keep LA's defense more honest, as opposed to when Rondo is in the game, since Rondo can't shoot and thus the Lakers can help off of him. This helped Paul Pierce and James Posey and Kevin Garnett score more easily, which was key to the comeback.

b- Eddie House played 24 minutes and did not turn the ball over at all, and his individual +/- was +20. He did not do anything stupid from the point guard position, and if he did Boston would not have won. Rondo looked to be playing hurt, so putting in the effective House was a key move for Doc Rivers - it actually makes him look smart, especially since House stepped up so huge.

Bottom line for tonight, no Eddie House, no comeback win for the Celtics (and who would have thought you'd be writing THAT sentence ever, let alone in the NBA Finals?)

4) The only thing more improbable than this huge comeback by the Celtics on the road is the fact that Ray Allen, who looked all but washed up not two weeks ago, has played at a ridiculously high level in every game this series. In Game 4 he had 19 points on only 11 shots, 9 rebounds (not a typo - Ray Allen had NINE rebounds), 2 assists, and 3 steals. And he's playing really solid defense, which is just as shocking. All I could talk about before the series was "who will Ray Allen be able to guard?" Who knew the answer was, "anyone he wants, including Kobe." I don't know where this Ray Allen was earlier these playoffs, but this Ray Allen is awesome to watch.

5) Can you picture the Lakers being able to beat the Celtics three times in a row, including two in Boston? I can't. I'd pick the Lakers to win Game 5 at home, and the Celtics to take it in Game 6. And I have to admit, I wouldn't have guessed this series to go anything like this (which is why I like to watch it, after all - who the hell wants to watch the inevitable unfold?) As much as some of these games haven't been that 'great' I've still found this to be an incredibly compelling Finals (history having nothing to do with it.) I've loved watching the story unfold as it has, unexpectedly, confusingly, with heroes coming from all sorts of odd places. I can't wait to see how it ends.

NBA Finals: Game 3

There isn't much to say about Game 3.

The home team won, as expected.

The home team got more foul calls, as expected.

Kobe had a big game, as expected.

What was unexpected was how bad Pierce, KG, Gasol, and Odom all played. Of those four, only KG scored in double figures, and that was only 13 points.

Actually, only four guys scored in double figures for the entire game: KG, Kobe, Ray Allen (Jesus is reborn!), and Vujacic. That's pretty bad for an NBA Finals game.

Plus, there was atrocious foul shooting for both teams (Boston: 68%, LA: 62%) which is inexcusable.

The overall point here, though, is that there is nothing really to take away from this game. It wasn't particularly well played, except for a few stretches in the third and fourth quarter, and the outcome was more or less inevitable.

It does set us up for a perfectly awesome Game 4, though. I can't wait for that.

Where We Praise The Awesomeness Of Jeff Van Gundy

The NBA announcing team of Mike Breen, Mark Jackson, and Jeff Van Gundy has been good all year.

Breen is a solid and generally capable play-by-play guy. Not spectacular, but never bad.

Mark Jackson, well, he has a tendency to sound kind of dumb.

And Jeff Van Gundy will not hesitate to point it out. Like in this video below, after Mark Jackson compares Leon Powe to Dr. J in a dunk contest. Seriously.



(H/T Ball Don't Lie)

Thank you, Jeff Van Gundy. For being awesome.

NBA Finals: Game 2

Some thoughts from Game 2:

-- The officiating was pretty bad. The refs decided early on that they were going to call some cheap fouls (on both sides, Lakers fans - the early fouls on Perkins were BS, too) so as not to let the game get too physical. Unfortunately, the early foul trouble had too much of an impact on the game, in terms of taking players out and affecting the rhythm of both teams. The refs aren't supposed to be a main focus of the game, and they were this time far too often.

-- The Lakers defense was not good because they couldn't stop Rondo, Pierce, and Allen from penetrating. Because of that penetration, they were able to move the ball so that either someone (Allen, Pierce, Garnett) got an open jump shot or that there was a dump off in the paint for someone (like Leon Powe) to get an easy layup or get fouled.

-- Conversely, the Boston defense once again was terrific at keeping the Lakers guards from penetrating. Kobe did not have a single dunk in the game, and only attempted a couple of layups. Everything else was jump shots, many of them contested. This is where not having a real point guard hurts the Lakers (Derek Fisher is more of a two-guard in my opinion.)

-- Kevin Garnett doesn't get taken out of his overall game when he's shooting poorly. He only shot 7-19 in the game, but he still only took shots within the offense, rebounded effectively, and played great defense (as per usual.) This should be more notable - we all know there are some stars that lose their entire game when their shots aren't falling. KG plays through it, and it helps his team win.

-- Radmanovic has to play less if the Lakers are going to win. His stats ended up looking pretty good for this game (13 points and 10 rebounds) but it just seems like he's outclassed by anyone he's guarding. I'd rather see Turiaf get more minutes at the 4, see if he can bring something to the table.

-- Likewise, Lamar Odom has to show up at home if the Lakers have any hope. He's looked terrible in both games so far. He's not getting enough rebounds, and he's getting eliminated on the offensive end. He should be a tougher matchup for either Pierce or Garnett, since Odom is a big guy with quickness and the ability to take people off the dribble. He simply hasn't been yet (which is the knock on him his whole career.)

-- I'm finding the ESPN/ABC production to be very good. I'm rarely annoyed by the announcers, the studio hosts, or how they decide to show us the game (camera angles, replays, stats shown, etc.) The worst thing is the choice of music as they go to commercials (really, guys, More Than A Feeling every single night? We get it, we get it, it's by Boston, and they're playing Boston. Great.)

Kobe Bryant Is A Marketing Genius

Yes, I've missed posting for a couple of weeks. Vacation and otherwise.

So for now, enjoy this video of Kobe Bryant jumping over a pool of snakes with the boys from Jackass.

(hat tip: Ball Don't Lie)

Reasons Number 1,275 to 1,278 Why "Inside the NBA" Is The Best Show On TV

Tonight on Inside the NBA on TNT, the following things happened:

- Ernie, Kenny, Charles, and Magic made fun of LeBron's mother for getting into it with Celtics players after Paul Pierce dragged LeBron into the first row where his mother happened to be sitting.

- Charles Barkely introduces America to the phrase "anal glaucoma." Which is a reason to stay home since "I can't see my ass going to work today."

- In an end segment about embarrassing performances, they showed a clip of "The Magic Hour".


The point of it all is that these guys make the show fun, and make the sport fun. Yes, it's the playoffs, and, yes, the games are all important. But it's still just sports, and it's supposed to be entertainment.

There are no smarmy jerks yelling at each other, and not as much rote spewing of cliches and talk of "storylines." It's three guys (sometimes four, though Magic is usually terrible) who enjoy the game, and in particular enjoy making fun of each other.

I mean, they are not afraid to "go there" just because someone might get offended. Now, can you picture them doing the same "Magic Hour" bit on ESPN? Of course not - ESPN takes itself way too seriously. When it's not trying to be the MTV of sports, anyway.

This is why I continue to call it the best show on television. By far.

Coach D'Antoni

As you all are by now no doubt aware, the Knicks have hired Mike D'Antoni to be their new head coach.

A lot of the focus of the "pundits" has been related to whether or not the current personnel of the Knicks can play D'Antoni's up tempo offensive style.

The answer, of course, is no, not with the team as currently constructed.

The problem is that the question is all wrong.

If anyone really thought that the Knicks had all the right pieces and were really just one good coach away, then we're dealing with insane people who probably also think that deep down Dick Cheney really is a good guy who wants to be loved.

As it stands, though, the Knicks need to be completely and utterly overhauled, gutted, and built back up from scratch. The current team was put together by one of the most incompetent and misguided NBA executive of all time, a man whose name we would do well never to speak again, because I fear that even the sound of his name in the air can poison it with the stench of failure and misguided arrogance.

If you're going to strip a team down and build it back up again, then you would do well to bring in a coach that has a unique vision of exactly what he wants to do and exactly who the right people are to do it with. Mike D'Antoni is this indeed.

In addition, you'll want someone with experience and a record of success so that he can withstand a couple of rough years. Because make no mistake, and harbor no illusions: the next year or two isn't going to be necessarily pretty. Expect no magical one-year turnaround like the Celtics had this year, unless D'Antoni can bring Amare with him. Which he can't.

The point is, this isn't a hire intended for the short term. This is a hire to prepare for three years from now. If everything goes to plan, they'll be able to rid themselves of the bad contracts and useless players, adding draft picks and getting the rest of the team experience in the Seven Seconds Or Less system. Then they'll have the cap space necessary to get a big-name free agent that can put them over the top and in position to make a run at the Finals for the next four or five years after that.

That's the plan, anyway. And if Donnie Walsh is as smart as he seems to be, then the fans and the media will give them the leeway to make that plan happen. Which will include allowing for another mediocre and possibly playoff-less year next year.

We should also keep in mind that they are obviously not going to be keeping these same 12 guys next year. I'm as curious as anyone to see exactly what they do (can they trade Curry or Randolph? do they bring back Steph at all or pay him to stay away? etc.) Ultimately, though, a little patience is necessary.

So while I personally would have preferred Avery Johnson to have been the coach (mostly because I like rooting for him, for reasons I can't adequately explain) I am ultimately happy that we have someone like D'Antoni instead of a retread like Rick Carlisle or Scott Skiles or Sam Mitchell.

And the optimist inside me (I can't seem to kill it, no matter how much vodka and rib tips I ingest) imagines if maybe one day the Knicks can be as exciting and as fun to watch and root for as the Suns were the last four years. Wouldn't that be something? Isn't that what we've been dreaming of? Wouldn't that be the cure for what the last eight years has done to us Knicks fans?

At least with this hire, it is possible. And possibility is all you can ask for at this point.

Filowitz's Friday Five

NBA Trade Deadline Winners/Losers Edition!

1) Winner: Cleveland. They are a much better team post-trade, adding Delonte West and Wally Szczerbiak in the back court, and only having to give up Larry Hughes (who stinks and has a ridiculously large and long contract) and Drew Gooden (who is pretty good, but Joe Smith can split his minutes with Varejao.) LeBron has to be pleased that he has people on the team besides him that can actually score. And adding Ben Wallace can't hurt, especially since they still have Big Z, so Ben doesn't have to play all the minutes at center - they can play him a more manageable 20-25 minutes, and have him play defense against the other big people in the league. All in all, this should make Cleveland one of the definitive top teams in the East, just a bit below Boston and Detroit and maybe just ahead of Orlando.

2) Loser: Chicago. At about this time last year, the Bulls had many young pieces (Deng, Gordon, Hinrich, Tyrus Thomas), PJ Brown's expiring contract, and the Knicks' #1 pick (which turned out to be Noah.) They probably could have had KG, Gasol, Marion, Rashard Lewis, or some other talented player. What do they have to show for all that instead? A team that'll be lucky to win 35 games this year, many fewer tradeable assets since some of their young pieces have devalued (Deng, Gordon, Hinrich), and they now employ Larry freakin' Hughes. If Paxson isn't fired at the end of the season, then he and Isiah Thomas must have made the same Faustian bargain.

3) Winners: San Antonio and New Orleans. The Spurs didn't do anything crazy, but the Kurt Thomas trade was awesome for them. They didn't give up much (Francisco Elston and the aging/injured Brent Barry) and they get a super-solid guy that can play defense, rebound, score, and not cause any problems in the locker room. The Hornets got deeper and more talented (and a bit more crazy) adding Bonzi Wells and Mike James, with only having to give up Bobby Jackson (still has some game, but not like he did with the Kings back in the early part of this decade.) That sets them up nicely to make a run in the playoffs.

4) Losers: Seattle fans. Sure, the moves may be smart from a salary cap perspective. But the Sonics are probably (and unfortunately) leaving the city, so these moves will likely pay off for the people of Oklahoma City. For now, they have to try to get excited about the likes of Ira Newble, Francisco Elston, Donyell Marshall, and Adrian Griffin. That sound you just heard was the Sonics fanbase collectively trying to drown themselves in the Puget Sound.

5) Winners: NBA fans. You can trace this back to the summer, as the Celtics got better with KG and Allen, and as the Magic picked up Rashard Lewis. Follow it through to the Jazz getting Kyle Korver, the Lakers getting Gasol, the Suns getting Shaq, Dallas getting Kidd, the improvement of the Piston's bench, the improvement of the entire Toronto roster, the further emergence of Dwight Howard and Chris Paul, the Warriors still being the Warriors, and the trades mentioned above. What it all adds up to is that the league is in as good a shape as its been in a long time. There is going to be exciting basketball played from now through June, just about every night. What could be better than that?


Bonus Losers: Knicks fans. The NBA is awesome right now, and our team stinks (they just lost by 40(!) to the Sixers (!!!)) On top of that, they probably have the most hopeless situation of anyone. We don't get to share in the fun, and all we have to look forward to is the day when Isiah Thomas is finally fired. I feel like Isiah is holding us hostage, but there will be no Stockholm Syndrome here - the hate I feel in my heart for this situation is brutal and ugly and should not be aired publicly. All I should say is that in this dawning of a new glorious age of the NBA, we are being left in the shadows.

As It Was In The Beginning, So Shall It Be In the End

That didn't take long, did it?

It only took 5 games for the Knicks to revert back to being a complete mess. Who knows what will end up happening with Marbury? None of the options are particularly appealing at this point.

If they let him come back, how can that be good for team chemistry? Not to mention the fact that he looks like exactly the wrong point guard to be running this team. They need a pass first point guard who makes good entry passes into the post, and who can hit open long-range jumpers. That sentence in no way defines Starbury.

If they buy him out, how is that good for the team? Another $40 million down the hole, with a lingering stench of ineptitude and failure. And a mindset is further entrenched, so everyone knows that all you have to do is bitch enough and the Knicks will just buy you out, so you can go somewhere else.

They can't trade him. Who wants an aging shoot-first point guard that's not exactly known for being a good team guy and that's still making $20 million a year for the next two years? What can they even get in return? More problem players and bad contracts? How does that help?

They can't really afford to get rid of him either, from a basketball perspective. Who else is there to play the point? Mardy Collins? Yikes.

I can't even form a decent opinion about what I think they should do. Part of me wants them to keep him, and just take their lumps with him this year and buy him out at the end of the year, when they have a better idea of where the rest of the team is and what other point guards might be out there for them to acquire or draft.

And the rest of me would just like to see him go already. I'm beyond tired of Steph and his antics. Unlike people like Rasheed Wallace or Stephen Jackson or even Ron Artest, Starbury's play on the court doesn't make me want to forgive him his toxic personality and craziness off the court. If he never plays another Knicks minute, I won't miss him.

And we were just starting to get a little optimistic about this year. Silly us.

Like a large whole fish that's been sitting in the sun, this just stinks no matter what you do.

The only possible upside is that maybe this is what finally brings us the end of the reign of Isiah. Which would be fitting, since getting Marbury was his first big move as GM. If the handling of getting rid of him was Isiah's final undoing, it would be a kind of poetic end. Well, one of those poetic ends to a Shakespeare tragedy where everyone dies, but still.

Good riddance to all, and to all a good night.

Kris and Dan Answer NBA Questions

Welcome to the second installment of "Kris and Dan Answer NBA Questions" here at the Block Party.

Over the next couple of weeks, to get ready for the NBA season, Kris and Dan are going answer a bunch of questions. One question and two responses per post. Pretty straight forward.


Question 2: Do the Bulls have enough to really challenge for the Eastern Conference title?


Kris Says

I am on the band wagon of the baby Bulls. Of course this is a tough question to answer because of the lingering Kobe saga. I do believe that if the Bulls were going to pull the trigger on the deal they would have done it earlier in the summer. That being said I will evaluate the Bulls on their current roster and not try and make any Kobe predictions.

I love they way the Bulls are built, especially they way they have acquired role players. Everyone knows they can score with the electric backcourt of Hinrich and Gordon and budding superstar Luol Deng. But up front they have a steady diet of role players, which sort of reminds me of other Bulls championship teams. They will start veterans Joe Smith and Ben Wallace. Now I have made fun of Joe Smith in the past, but this is a team where he can flourish, there is no pressure on him. There is plenty of scoring in the backcourt and Ben Wallace will always be the defensive stopper in the front court. In the draft the Bulls added Joakim Noah (by the way his name is simply pronounced JOE-KIM, nothing fancy) and Aaron Gray which were both nice picks. Also they have last years #2 pick Tyrus Thomas and third year man Andris Nocioni. What this gives them is scoring (Nocioni & Gray) defense (Wallace & Noah) and rebounding (Smith & Thomas). Now obviously all of them won't play but it is a nice rotation of players to choose from.

Like I said most of us know about their backcourt abilities. But besides the starters they have quality experienced backups. Chris Duhon has proved to be a consistent bench PG in this league, more than I ever thought he could. Also they signed free agent guard Adrian Griffin who can be a defensive stopper off the bench and second year man Thabo Sefolosha. Again like the front court it makes for a good mix of players with varying abilities.


The Bulls have the pieces in place, a team that has been together for awhile, a solid starting five, a mixture of veterans & quality young backups and a coach who has been with the team. However, basketball for the most part has always been a game of superstars (with certain exception like the ’04 Pistons). I feel that Luol Deng needs to now make that jump from promising young player to NBA superstar, be a an All-Star starter and someone his team can count on in big games. I think if he elevates his scoring to the 25ppg. range then the Bulls will be the best team in the Eastern Conference.

Dan Says:

To make a run at the Eastern Conference? Yes, certainly.

Let's take a look at why:

- This is a team that won 49 games last year, and destroyed the Heat in the playoffs.

- They didn't lose any major player in the offseason.

- They didn't go through any major player or coach related offseason turmoil.

- The nucleus of the team is young, just entering their prime. If anything, most of these guys should get better.

- There is no dominant team in the East.

The biggest question mark about this team is that they don't have any consistently dominant scorers. Ben Gordon, Kirk Hinrich, and Luol Deng are all decent scorers, but as evidenced in the Detroit series in last year's playoffs, they can be stopped by certain types of tough defensive teams.

But let's take the optimistic approach. Let's say Hinrich and Gordon have typically solid years. Let's say Deng continues to be one of the best small forwards in the league, as he showed most of last year. Let's say that Tyrus Thomas furthers his development, and plays more dominant, explosive minutes. Let's say that Joakim Noah and Andres Nocioni prove to be good energy guys for the second unit. Let's say that Thabo Sefolosha gets to show what he can do for more minutes. Let's say Ben Wallace doesn't die this year.

Then I'd say you're looking at a young, talented, and deep 50-win team that can contend with any other team in the East.

They'd still struggle against Detroit most likely, as that is a bad matchup for them. But they're deeper than Boston, they're tougher than Toronto, and they are superior to Washington, Cleveland, and Orlando.

And none of this is to mention that they have the assets to trade for Kobe. Which is a whole other story.

So, bottom line, this Bulls team certainly has enough to contend for an Eastern Conference championship. They won't beat any of the Western teams in the Finals, though. No chance there.

Kris and Dan Answer NBA Questions

Welcome to the first installment of "Kris and Dan Answer NBA Questions" here at the Block Party.

Over the next couple of weeks, to get ready for the NBA season, Kris and Dan are going answer a bunch of questions. One question and two responses per post. Pretty straight forward.

One twist: if there's a question you want Kris and Dan to answer about the NBA, submit it in the comments. And if it's not totally dumb, we'll answer it in a post. Cool? Cool.


Question 1: Will the Eastern Conference be legit this season after the additions of All-Star caliber players like Ray Allen, Kevin Garnett, Zach Randolph, Jason Richardson, and Rashard Lewis?

Kris says:

The Eastern Conference teams definitely did what they needed to do in order to compete. Some teams went with youth additions on their bench like the Pistons or some like the Celtics and Magic made the big splash by acquiring All-Star players. Clearly the East is not as top heavy as the Western Conference, there are still no dominant forces like the Texas Two and the team in Phoenix, but the East can compete this year.

Last year I would have told you that I didn’t really believe any of the Eastern teams could win the title. However, this season I can see Chicago, Detroit , Boston , and Miami all being title contenders. Furthermore, I think teams like Cleveland, Washington, and New Jersey if they were able to add pieces during the year via trade could clearly make a move. Just remember by the February trading deadline there could be some interesting Western Conference players looking to be dealt, including Kobe Bryant, Tracy McGrady (if the Rockets struggle again), Pau Gasol and Shawn Marion.

At the very least the East will be much more compelling this year. Clearly the story of the offseason was made in Boston and you can’t argue that even non Boston fans might be pulling for this team a little because of the quality of people and players that Ray Allen and Kevin Garnett are. We also have the drama of watching LeBron and see if he can follow up that unbelievable playoff performance and take his game to an even higher level, which is scary to think about. Add those factors to the fact that the Big Fella says he is healthy and ready for one more shot at glory and you have an Eastern Conference worth watching this year.

Dan says:

If the question was “will the East be more compelling this year” then the answer clearly would be yes.

Of course there is the new Big 3 in Boston. The Bulls seem like they should be better, with a lot of the young talent (Deng, Heinrich, Gordon, Tyrus Thomas) having more experience going into this year. The Heat still have Wade and Shaq. The Nets still have Kidd and Carter and Jefferson. The Pistons still have their core, and some intriguing young guys (Amir Johnson, Jason Maxiel, Rodney Stuckey) to work into their rotation. LeBron still plays for the Cavs (though no one else seems to.) Washington’s big three (Arenas, Jamison, Butler) could have given the Cavs trouble in the playoffs last year if they were healthy, and they’re all back this year.

In tier two, the Hawks have some players worth watching (Josh Smith and Joe Johnson) along with two top-10 picks from this past draft (Horford and Law IV) so they could bring some excitement. Same with the Bobcats, adding Jason Richardson to a team that already has the best and most exciting player to watch you don’t hear enough about, Gerald Wallace (worth the price of League Pass by himself.) And the Knicks, well, they won’t be boring with all those characters on the team, if nothing else (though they will sure to be maddening, frustrating, and ultimately heartbreaking for their fans. That's another topic for later.)

But the question here is “will the East be 'legit'?” And, despite being better than last year, I don’t think they are quite legit yet.

These teams in the West would be favored to win the East if they switched conferences tomorrow: Dallas, San Antonio, Phoenix, Houston, and Utah.

These teams in the West would be considered strong contenders to be in the top three in the East if they switched conferences tomorrow: Denver, New Orleans, Golden State, and the Lakers.

That’s nine teams in the West that are better than or just about as good as the top three teams in the East (Detroit, Boston, Chicago.)

Think of it this way: if you put Detroit in the Finals, which team in the West would they be favored against? Any of the top five in the West? Maybe Utah? What about Boston or Chicago? Would they really be favored against any of those top five?

So while there is certainly a lot to watch for this year in the East, and while there is certainly a lot of future potential, I don’t think the addition of those All Star players makes this conference any more of a legitimate threat to win a championship in 2008.

Filowitz's Friday Five

1) Good for you, Joe Torre. I applaud a man that leaves with both his head and middle fingers held high. This is actually a win-win situation, though. It is probably a good time for a change for the Yankees, and this, in the end, will be best for both Torre and the team, in the long run.

2) Speaking of the Yankees coverage, have you heard what the Orioles and White Sox have been doing this offseason while the playoffs are still going on? You haven’t? What about the Cardinals, or the Padres? No? Weird.

3) Right now, I’m hoping that the Red Sox force a game 7, only for them to lose in that game 7. That will be the most entertaining outcome, as who doesn’t love playoff game 7’s, and is also guaranteed to simultaneously create the most joy (Cleveland fans) and the most pain (Red Sox fans.) No word on how much sunshine and rain it’ll cause, though.

4) Amaré Stoudemire just got a tattoo on his the inside of his bicep that says “Knowing is Knowledge”. That is so tremendous, on so many levels. You need to read the FreeDarko guys talking about it, here and here.

5) I’m officially excited about the start of the NBA season. I’ve realized that for me the NBA has now surpassed baseball as my second favorite sport to follow, behind the NFL. In fact, this year, I’m going to get League Pass so I can watch more games (I need to see Kevin Durant play, and the Suns, and the Warriors, and the Bobcats, seriously, and to see more Knicks games than I would here, and so much more.) There will also be some other NBA-related projects I’ll be involved in coming soon. For those of you that fell out of love with the NBA five or six years ago, I’m telling you, come back now. Or just keep checking in here.

Talking Loud Ain't Saying Nothing

Since we are a sports blog, you'd think we'd comment on the Tim Donaghy scandal.

But we're not big-time journalists, so what are we really supposed to be saying that isn't being said everywhere else over and over and over again?

And since now ESPN only covers sports from a "story lines and scandals" perspective instead of a "what's actually happening on the field" perspective, you'll get plenty of this sort of thing from them.

The only thing I'm going to make sure to dispel is the part of the story that says "NBA refs don't make enough money so that there wouldn't be temptations."

Certainly, NBA refs don't make as much as the athletes. But to say they don't make enough money is ridiculous.

According to Marc Stein's ESPN.com article, entry-level officials make $85k a year. Most with experience earn six figures. They say Donaghy, with 13 years of experience, was making about $200k a year. They also earned more if they worked the playoffs.

Now, keep in mind that basketball season is from November to June. So they get about 4 months off a year. And that they probably don't even work 5 days a week. And they maybe are at their job for four or five hours total.

Let's just get it out there: most of the rest of us don't even earn $85k a year. And we work five days a week with maybe two or three weeks off a year. And we're at our jobs at least 8 hours a day, most likely more.

And most of the rest of us aren't tempted to be criminals.

So this guy makes significantly more money than most, and works significantly less. But his salary is the reason he had to work with the mob to gamble on games?

No sale.

This guy did what he did because he had a gambling problem. And a personal ethics problem. Not because of how much he earned for doing his job.

This guy would have done the same thing even if he earned the same salary as Kobe and KG. So let's stop it with that reason already.