Wednesday, January 17, 2007
A Closer Look: NBA in the New Year
* Detroit Pistons head coach Flip Saunders may have lost his best chance to win an NBA championship when Ben Wallace departed to the division-rival Chicago Bulls in the offseason. It seems to me that Saunders, who Kevin Garnett once described as "a very players' coach," has a limited shelf-life in Detroit.
When he arrived in Motown, many of the players, eager to show that they were a championship team regardless of who the coach was, seemed to tune him out at times. This was especially evident when he butted heads with Big Ben last year. This year, Saunders has already somewhat alienated Detroit's two main free agent acquisitions, Nazr Mohammed and Ronald Murray. On top of that, Rasheed Wallace seems to be reverting back to some old bad habits from his Portland days and that obviously just makes Saunders' job that much harder.
In my opinion, Saunders' exuberant style of coaching and his "players' coach" mentality would serve him much better in the college game. Coincidentally, there is an open job in the college ranks that would seem to suit Saunders to a tee. This is the University of Minnesota job. Not only is Saunders a former Golden Gopher himself, but he is well-known and well-respected in the Twin Cities due to his success as coach of the Timberwolves. The cherry on top is that Saunders' son, Ryan, is on the University of Minnesota squad right now. So, if Saunders were to take the Gophers' job, he would not only be coaching the type of players that suit his style the best, but he would be coming home with an opportunity that many coaches can only dream of — the opportunity to coach their own kid.
* Speaking of Minnesota, don't sleep on the Timberwolves. The aforementioned Kevin Garnett is playing like an MVP again (not that he ever stopped). There are two differences between this year and last year, however, that should put K.G. in the MVP discussion by the end of the year. The first is that he's got a pretty decent squad around him. Mark Blount, Ricky Davis, and Trenton Hassell have been playing out of their minds and two rookies, Randy Foye and Craig Smith have been real finds and legitimate contributors. Second, this team has been building a chemistry that's very reminiscent of the Detroit team that won the title a few years back.
Offensively, the Wolves are improving game by game and the team is already one of the best defensive squads in the association. Evidence of this improved chemistry can be found by looking at the team's recent hot streak. Their only loss thus far in 2007 was a one-point loss to the Los Angeles Clippers and they aren't beating patsies for their victories. For instance, two of their most recent victories were against an incredibly hot Houston team and the always-dominant San Antonio Spurs.
Considering that the team's big offseason signing, Mike James, has still not totally asserted himself, that talented big man Eddie Griffin has been a non-factor thus far, and that last year's first-rounder, Rashad McCants, still has yet to play this season, the surprisingly 20-16 T-Wolves look as though they have enough to actually improve. Once again, don't sleep on this team. If Minnesota can continue to gradually build chemistry throughout the year and become a team comparable to the well-oiled machine that the Pistons were a few years back, they may be a force to be reckoned with come playoff-time and the Big Ticket may once again hoist the MVP trophy.
* The Chicago Bulls are definitely a championship contender based on defense. Offensively, however, they need to improve in order to be considered as championship front-runners. Kirk Hinrich has not been as aggressive this year as he has been in the past. Although Ben Wallace is a great defensive player, his offensive woes have been legendary throughout his career. When the Bulls need scoring, they look to Ben Gordon. Unfortunately, Gordon isn't the type of player the Bulls should be counting on to win games for them. His shot and his production are very inconsistent and he has never shown the ability to be effective as a starter. The Bulls need to add one more scorer, preferably in the front court, to make sure that they have the ability to put up points even if Gordon is off.
Chicago sportswriters have become famous for concocting hypothetical trades for Kevin Garnett, but with Minnesota's recent success, these hypos are looking more and more like pipe dreams. Recently, Pau Gasol's name has been bandied about and he would be a great fit for this team. The one name to keep an eye on, however, is Jermaine O'Neal, who has recently been making noise about possibly wanting to leave Indiana. Although it would take a lot to get the Pacers to trade their superstar — especially within the division — these teams have made blockbuster deals before and the Bulls are loaded with talent up and down the roster. If they wanted to make a play for a big man like O'Neal, they definitely would have the pieces.
* A friend recently re-introduced me to that old Eagle-Eye Cherry song, "Save Tonight." Okay, I guess there is only that one Eagle-Eye Cherry song, so the name isn't all that important, but I digress. Anyway, the point of the song is that Eagle-Eye is leaving his girl and he wants to make sure that he and the girl both make the most of what they have and appreciate their past together during their one final night with each other. How does this relate to basketball? I'm glad you asked. When I hear this song, I can't help but think of the New Jersey Nets and their fans. I'm sure that's exactly what Mr. Cherry intended, right?
Allow me to elaborate. New Jersey fans, it's time that you start looking at Jason Kidd as if he were Eagle-Eye Cherry and you were his girl. (By the way, this analogy has nothing to do with Kidd's well-publicized marital woes. I promise.) He's probably leaving. As each day goes by, the rumors of Kidd's departure become louder and louder. Sure, rumors are circulated about many athletes without ever coming to fruition and I would discard these particular rumors if the idea of Kidd leaving didn't make so much sense.
The Nets are operating with a big three (Kidd, Richard Jefferson, Vince Carter) that is as good or better than any three-man combo in the league. The problem is that none of these guys is a big man and the Nets are in desperate need of a big man. Compounding the problem is that the Nets don't have too many players on their roster outside of this big three that have any trade value except for Marcus Williams. Williams, however, is the heir-apparent to the aging Kidd, so he's not going anywhere. Furthermore, Kidd, although aging and reaching the point in his career where many players start physically breaking down, is still a very productive player with significant trade value. That value, however, is going to continue to decline and Kidd himself will probably be a less happy camper as time goes on because his history tells us he often wears out his welcome.
Nets fans, don't kid yourselves. The days of this team reaching the NBA Finals are over. If the Nets want to make it back to the championship, then they need to take a serious look at rebuilding while their superstars have high trade values. Kidd should be the first to go because he's older, has been known to make waves, and has a successor waiting in the wings. Kidd would be happy because anyone who acquires him now would be trying to win a title. A Jason Kidd deal makes more sense now than ever. So, Nets fans, pop in the Eagle-Eye Cherry CD and "save tonight and fight the break of dawn." You never know — come tomorrow, Jason Kidd might be gone. Enjoy him while he's still there.
* Please read carefully before reading the rest of this. Steve Nash is a great player. Steve Nash is a great ambassador for the game. Steve Nash is one of the classiest players in the NBA. These are my opinions. It's also my opinion, however, that Nash is a little over-hyped and overrated. Yes, he has in the past and still continues to produce gaudy statistical numbers. How much of that has to do with him, however? How much can be attributed to the system? How much can be attributed to the fact that the Phoenix Suns play no defense?
Steve Nash is one of the best point guards in the league, but the fact that he's a two-time MVP is ridiculous. There's a reason Nash never put up the same types of numbers in Dallas that he's putting up in Phoenix. The reason is because Phoenix runs a different type of offensive system. Granted, it is a system that ideally suits Nash, and because of this I have a hard time believing that Nash can have the same impact on a different team. Suns games feature more possessions than normal games, thus increasing the ability to accumulate more numbers. At some point, Phoenix coach, Mike D'Antoni should get some of Nash's credit.
Moreover, part of the reason that the Suns play in games with so many possessions is because they are such a lousy defensive squad. Nash is one of the worst defenders on this lousy defensive team. Part of the reason the Suns can generate so many possessions is because they allow their opponents to score pretty easily. The easier the opposition scores, the sooner Phoenix gets the ball back. The bigger impact is that Nash is allowed to kick back on defense and exert all of his energy on offense.
This is not something that should be overlooked. Watch any NBA game and you will instantly see how defense takes a physical toll on those actually attempting play it. Name another recent MVP that has had this luxury of playing only one side of the ball. Garnett? Tim Duncan? Shaquille O'Neal? There isn't one. How is this offense-only approach different from the designated hitter in baseball?
Sure, one can argue that Nash makes his teammates better, but is it just Nash himself that does this? No. It's a combination of Nash's greatness coupled with D'Antoni's system that makes those around Nash better. One can point to the improvement of the Suns since Nash's arrival as evidence of his greatness, but I, in turn, will point to Nash's former team, the Dallas Mavericks, to demonstrate that the argument goes both ways. After all, the Mavericks actually improved without him. Steve Nash is a fantastic NBA player. I just don't think he's a one-time MVP, let alone a two-time MVP.