RealGM

Nivek wrote:[url=http://broomonthewarpath.sportsblog.com/post/63/2012_13_nba_power_rankings.htmlUpdated my power rankings.[/url] Wizards still rank 30th.

I read your post and thought; No way Tyson can sustain that level of shooting efficiency... then found that he shot nearly 70% last year well.

Remember when Oklahoma City rejected a trade for Chandler because of his toe?

Chandler appears to be a guy who has figured out what he does well in the NBA and has made himself content doing that and nothing else. So far this season, he has attempted exactly 10 shots from outside of 3 feet. Just 3 shots from beyond 15 feet. He shoots when he's around the rim and that's about it. And, he makes those shots. 72.8% or better in each of the past 3 seasons. Better than 63% every year since 2009. He's over 72% on at-rim attempts in 5 of the 7 years in which we have that data available.

A lot of players could be more effective if they'd focus on doing what they're good at doing instead of trying to be The Man. Paradoxically, Chandler is becoming The Man by limiting his game to what he does well.

Nivek wrote:Remember when Oklahoma City rejected a trade for Chandler because of his toe?

Luckily for OKC, Chris Wilcox and Joe Smith turned out to be very valuable assets.

Don't remember which thread it was in, but the question was about whether bigs actually do develop slower than guards. I pinged the guys at APBRmetrics and got a couple responses. Best one was from Crow, who did a "brief, small, rough and simple inquiry."

His findings that at least among players in the 2007-08 rookie class, shorter players were slower to develop (using Win Shares per 48 minutes as the productivity measure).

This is a pretty limited look, and results might not be typical. Still pretty interesting, though.

My weekly update at the blog on the Wizards, in which I praise Leonsis and Grunfeld for assembling the best 3-18 team in NBA history.

Also worth noting that three of the eight worst starts in franchise history have occurred in the past three seasons. Those teams -- all constructed by Ernie Grunfeld.

As for the individual numbers -- kinda depressing. Pretty much status quo, except for the guys who got worse.

The way the lottery is constructed, once you become a 3-18 team it is really difficult to become a good team. The key to success is to be maybe the 5-10 worst team in the league and then luck into the #1 pick. You can't build from worst.

How is Sacramento doing, btw? I remember in the 90s they were similarly the laughingstock of the league. And the injury bug bit them just as they were starting to climb out of the cellar. They seemed to do ok for awhile, when they had Webber and Bibby and Divac. How did that come about?

One way of looking at NBA lottery odds -- being worst gives that team a 75% chance of NOT getting the top pick.

How did that come about for Sacramento? You're a funny dude.

The Kings deserve an asterisk IMO for the 2002 playoffs, when IMO the referees stole a pivotal game from them in the playoffs against the Lakers. I think the Kings had the best team in the NBA that season.

http://scores.espn.go.com/nba/recap?gameId=220531013

The Lakers won thanks to O'Neal's brute brilliance and a steady parade to the free-throw line that infuriated the Kings, who felt the officials had caved in to O'Neal's week-long carping about disrespect and poor calls.

"I feel sorry for our team, because they did everything they could to win the game,'' Sacramento coach Rick Adelman said. "It's a shame, a real shame. ... Our big guys get 20 fouls, and Shaq gets four. You tell me. Obviously, they got the game called the way they wanted to get it called.

"We tried to play through it ... but obviously, it was a huge change tonight over the last few games.''

Los Angeles went nearly six minutes without a field goal down the stretch in the fourth quarter, but made 18 free throws over the final 6:21 to hold off the Kings. Bryant made four free throws in the final 19.8 seconds for the Lakers, who shot a jaw-dropping 27 free throws in the fourth.

I did not end well for the Kings.

(That was the worst-officiated game I had ever seen, but I think the Wizards recent loss to the Lakers might have been equally bad.)

It's funny -- Roland at 82games went back and graded every call in that game. http://www.82games.com/lakerskingsgame6.htm

Thanks for posting that, Nivek! It's funny how two people can watch the same thing and come away with entirely differing perspectives.

The way I saw it the refs utterly stole that game with some terrible calls that all seemed to go the Lakers way. I felt sorry for the Kings and was infuriated that the Lakers were given something I didn't think they earned.

Nivek wrote:One way of looking at NBA lottery odds -- being worst gives that team a 75% chance of NOT getting the top pick.

How did that come about for Sacramento? You're a funny dude.

I mean how did they get Divac and Bibby? They drafted Bibby, right? And they got Webber in a trade. Did they sign Divac as a FA or did they trade for him too?

Zonkerbl wrote:

Nivek wrote:One way of looking at NBA lottery odds -- being worst gives that team a 75% chance of NOT getting the top pick.

How did that come about for Sacramento? You're a funny dude.

I mean how did they get Divac and Bibby? They drafted Bibby, right? And they got Webber in a trade. Did they sign Divac as a FA or did they trade for him too?

I think they traded Jason Williams to get Bibby.

Zonkerbl wrote:

Nivek wrote:One way of looking at NBA lottery odds -- being worst gives that team a 75% chance of NOT getting the top pick.

How did that come about for Sacramento? You're a funny dude.

I mean how did they get Divac and Bibby? They drafted Bibby, right? And they got Webber in a trade. Did they sign Divac as a FA or did they trade for him too?

Oh. I thought you were being funny. I withdraw my laughter.

Bibby came via trade. The Kings sent Nick Anderson and Jason Williams to Vancouver for Bibby and Brent Price. IF I recall correctly, Bibby was unhappy in Vancouver and wanted a trade. He'd just completed his third season in the league so his rookie deal was running low on time. Looks like he played his option year in Sacramento, probably with that old 7-year extension already signed.

Divac signed with Sacramento as a free agent. He was an 8-year veteran at that point, who'd been traded by the Lakers to get Kobe.

So when Sacto finally turned things around, it was by acquiring Webber in a trade, Bibby in a trade, and Divac as a FA pickup. They also had that kid Christie who was a good defender, I think they drafted him. But they didn't draft their big three. It's just having Webber and Divac, who are both great passers, on the floor at the same time turned out to be a brilliant idea.

Really goes against the grain, doesn't it? Lakers and Celts rivalry was based on Magic and Bird, both playing for the teams that drafted them. Detroit won two with Isaiah Thomas, who they drafted. Houston won two 'ships with Hakeem who they drafted. San Antone has Duncan and Parker and Ginobili, all picked up in the draft. OKC has Durant and Westbrook. So it really shows what a crazy thing they had going in Sacto. Almost as weird as what Detroit did with all our castoffs. And really shows how important it is that your #1 pick turn into an all-world superstar.

Now I'm really, really, really depressed. I'm gonna go lie down and cry now.

It doesn't have to be an overall #1 (Jordan, Bryant, Nash, Wade, Nowitzki), but usually someone has to turn into an all-world superstar. Who's our world beater?

Zonkerbl wrote:So when Sacto finally turned things around, it was by acquiring Webber in a trade, Bibby in a trade, and Divac as a FA pickup. They also had that kid Christie who was a good defender, I think they drafted him. But they didn't draft their big three. It's just having Webber and Divac, who are both great passers, on the floor at the same time turned out to be a brilliant idea.

Really goes against the grain, doesn't it? Lakers and Celts rivalry was based on Magic and Bird, both playing for the teams that drafted them. Detroit won two with Isaiah Thomas, who they drafted. Houston won two 'ships with Hakeem who they drafted. San Antone has Duncan and Parker and Ginobili, all picked up in the draft. OKC has Durant and Westbrook. So it really shows what a crazy thing they had going in Sacto. Almost as weird as what Detroit did with all our castoffs. And really shows how important it is that your #1 pick turn into an all-world superstar.

Now I'm really, really, really depressed. I'm gonna go lie down and cry now.

Nope, didn't draft Christie. Christie was well-traveled by the time he got to the Kings -- stints with the Lakers, Knicks and Toronto. He was 30 years old when the Kings traded for him from Toronto (for Cuttino Mobley and Michael Bradley).

I think what it shows is that smart decision-making can build a good team in ways other than just lucking out in the draft.

Don't know if this has already been posted, but it's a good read.
http://dc.sbnation.com/2012/12/17/37763 ... statistics

The Wizards current offensive efficiency of 93.2 is 4.1 points lower than the team in 29th place. Getting close to last years 92.3 mark by the Bobcats.

The Wizards are currently 11th in defensive efficiency and 10th in defensive rebounding rate. Too bad their offense is a train wreck.

I think the defensive rating is especially impressive given how many fast break opportunities the opposing teams get off the Wizards missed shots.