Championship: why not, or how. Strategy, tactics, best hopes

[doclinkin]

...continuing the thought:

And further, I'd go on to explain why I feel oversized SFs (who play game changing defense) qualify as "game changing bigs." In other words, a guy who can cover the two forward positions, or roam to zone off the lane, can lead a championship team.

I break this up into two different players. The perimeter defender -- most often a Long Forward-- who can guard the three but still collapse to form a one-man zone, and the true game-changing Big who can intimidate in the paint, force players away from the basket, and snatch contested boards.

Dat disagrees and suggests that the defensive perimeter forward is a luxury, provided you have a sufficiently mobile and intimidating Big. The Celts won with no Tayshaun/Artest/Bruce Bowen. Maybe, but they had KG, who can play both roles as needed, and Rondo who can approximate the rest.

Mostly I'd point my finger towards the best defensive X's & O's coach in the game and defer to his opinion: notice that Larry Brown is stockpiling all the multi-tool lanky defenders he can land. With Crash Wallace on the roster, he traded for Tyrus Thomas, then added Dom McGuire on the cheap. He has no intimidating Big, but he can clog the rest of the court with active hustlef@cks who will contest everything. And a track record that says he knows how to read the situation and improve his teams.

The method to win a championship is pretty simple. You want to deter the opponent from scoring easily. It's axiomatic. The single stat with the strongest correlation to consistent championships is opponent eFG%. Scoring a basket is difficult. The best players, world class champions, manage to score about half the time they have the ball. Not easy. It's easier to simply make it a little harder every time; shade the odds in your favor.

That's it. We're talking about simply slicing a few % points here and there. Taking a raw 46%+ opponent scoring rate to a 44% or less. That's all it takes. Make it a difficult shot, give up no second chances.

But the league and fans like to see teams score. So the NBA fiddles with the rules as much as they can to de-emphasize this defensive aspect. You can't have any Detroit vs. Spurs games-- that kills your ticket sales and revenue. No old school NYKnicks force basketball where a logjam of bigs would bump and rumble under the basket, clogging the funnel.

Used to be the easiest thing in the world to simply choke off the basket. All activity has to end here-- if you have the biggest, toughest, fiercest thugs in the league, nobody can get near. And refs can't whistle every foul, since no fan wants to see a zebra-dominated slogfest.

They would much rather see Celtics/Lakers with superior perimeter talents and active dynamic Bigs who can hit a jumper from the midrange, sure, but the real action is dominated by the little guys. Nobody loves a Giant. Shaq (and Gheorghe!) excepted.

The rules were tweaked to emphasize the perimeter players. Your most reliable source of 'free' points is from that perimeter attack. Fouls on the dribble drive not the 'pound it in' Bigs who used to feast at the line.

So, yes, all action still does flow towards the basket, and a dunk is still the most efficient easiest field goal, and it is far easier for a Big Fella to reach up there and shove it home, and you need Bigs who can prevent that from happening as well as making it happen themselves. Game-changing Bigs, especially on defense, make all the difference in the world. All plays still have to finish at the basket.

But you also have to have that all-purpose multi-level defensive predator with the dedication of a Secret Service agent willing to put himself in the way of the point of attack and make it difficult. Make it difficult for the ball to get anywhere near the basket, starting with the point of the dribble.

Larry Brown seems to think if he has 18 fouls worth of these then he'll be a-okay. Especially now that an offensive freight train like LeBron is in his division. They can't call every play. Make the refs work. Most refs hate to be the focus of the game, under the spotlight. At some point they will swallow their whistle. This is a tough defensive team, you just have to let them play. (Hack, hack, hack...).

I'd watch Larry carefully anytime you need to know what the new order of defense needs to be. Nobody defensively adjusts in real time or long term as well as Larry Brown, even if he is whiny as a hungry toddler with a wet diaper.

SO you're looking to add these sorts of players:

Superstar raise-the-game scorers, who get the benefit of the glamor-whistles.
One-man zone swarm, outside/inside defensive predators.
Defensive thug who prevents easy buckets and won't allow second chances.
Multi-tool mobile two way Big who allow room underneath for those perimeter attackers, and on defense can play the 2.9 second mambo: defend the rim but avoid ref whistles.

Something like that.

[Kanyewest]

This is one key reason why LeBJ was able to get away with his travels for so many years: he never faced Pat Riley or Phil Jackson in a playoff series. We never had a coach who could go productively ballistic or superlatively sardonic to draw attention to the cause.

I submit we still don't.

LBJ wasn't able to get away with traveling in Boston back in 2008. While it was refreshing to see that traveling was actually called, I was wondering where that officiating was back in the 1st round versus the Wizards. Maybe coaches are a part of it like Jackson and Riley, but I never thought of Rivers being that guy, especially before winning a championship. I personally think that Boston got those calls, much like Lakers, because they are known as one of the elite franchises in the NBA. It will be hard for the Wizards to earn that reputation until they win championship/championships.

[doclinkin]

This is one key reason why LeBJ was able to get away with his travels for so many years: he never faced Pat Riley or Phil Jackson in a playoff series. We never had a coach who could go productively ballistic or superlatively sardonic to draw attention to the cause.

I submit we still don't.

LBJ wasn't able to get away with traveling in Boston back in 2008. While it was refreshing to see that traveling was actually called, I was wondering where that officiating was back in the 1st round versus the Wizards. Maybe coaches are a part of it like Jackson and Riley, but I never thought of Rivers being that guy, especially before winning a championship. I personally think that Boston got those calls, much like Lakers, because they are known as one of the elite franchises in the NBA. It will be hard for the Wizards to earn that reputation until they win championship/championships.

Agreed, the Celts have the mystique of history working for them, they also had counteracting starpower and fundamentally sound defensive philosophy, and reputation. All of those things conspire to even the playing field. Doc Rivers did articulate a compelling narrative for his team: the Space Cowboys over-the-hill gang who shucked individual glory for their Ubuntu moment of selflessness in pursuit of a ring.

In the absence of all that though, it does help to have a Coach who can throw a productive tantrum, catch a vein-popping tech and be proven right in postgame videotape, to be looped and re-looped on Sportcenter. Or who can intimidate with his very presence or impress with his charisma. Or who can move the chess pieces ahead of time so that refs and the viewing audience will be looking for the opposing player's pet cheat.

There were a few times when my guy Eddie Jordan would merely roll his eyes, or remain seated and simply smell the finger of defeat, maybe make a wry comment afterwards. But no ref was terribly impressed. And Flip, you know, no offense but, if your basset hound barked or howled it wouldn't have the same effect as your if Cane Corso simply raised his head to see what stepped in his yard.

Paul Silas of the Hornets used to be able to get calls merely by being huge and sour-looking.

That said, like I said, we may prove to have some of the starpower necessary with a #1 pick on our team, with his dynamic and exciting game. I submit we may see somewhat fewer goaltending calls on McGee's blocks once John Wall can loft him a few dunks at ionosphere height and he becomes known as a player who can reach those improbable heights. Why yes he actually can block a three point shot at the apex of its arc, check the replay.

The proactive PR aspect aspect of the game ought not to be overlooked is all I'm saying. Often that requires a compelling figurehead, sometimes that's a coach, sometimes a star player, sometimes a front office exec, sometimes an owner.

In this case it will be up to our boy Ted to get the message out in a compelling way. Somehow I think he'll be up to the task.

[BigA]

^Yeah, that facial tick that Filp has isn't intimidating anyone.

[doclinkin]

I do have additional doubts about whether Flip's system is a winning formula in the post season.

The modified Hawk offense that Flip runs is predicated on a few simple principles: Take what the Defense gives you. Hit open shots. Work to get open.

All sounds like reasonable and sound ideas. However, in practice this proves to be iffy. The fact is the one shot that every team in the league is willing to give up is the long two pointer. It's a lower percentage shot that nets you fewer points than the three and rarely results in a foul called. That's what the defense will 'give' you. By all means, please, help yourself, take a doggie bag, load up.

Flip's system works doubletime to get these open shots. The skilled forward is often posted at the freethrow line or the top of the key. The offball guard is running baseline crosses past pin screens to spring loose for a catch and shoot inside the arc (Rip Hamilton). The secondary Big man is floating free of the paint to allow the guards room to run those patterns, is encouraged to take that jumper if he catches himself wide open (McDyess). And there's no particular focus or emphasis on delivering the 3pt ball to an outside sniper. He takes the shot if he's open just to keep defenses honest.

If you check the statistics you'll see that (for the available years) Flip's teams consistently lead the league in long jumpers (Attempted FGs from 16-23 feet). And trail behind the rest of the league both in outside threes and attempts at the iron.

The teams that attempted the fewest long twos?

EC Finals runner-up Orlando
Surprisingly efficient (sans Yao) Houston
EC Champion Boston
Larry Brown's MJCats
Champion LA Lakeshow
Cleveland...
Pheonix (who shoots a scorching 61% eFG from 3pt land. Not scared of a long jumper).

It's a bad shot. The best shooting teams from this distance still only hit at a 43% clip. And teams that are willing to give up this shot in the regular season are able to tighten up and contest every shot in the postseason when your legs are fresher since there are more days off between games.

But Flip's system works overtime to get this shot. Running and screening and re-setting and working until late in the clock.

Thing is he knows it's a bad shot. In fact Flip's defenses consistently give up the greatest number of long jumpers, and consistently starve teams of shots at the rim and from the outside. And his teams consistently improve defensively because of it.

Maybe it's personnel. Maybe if he had the right players he'd add wrinkles to the system. Because he's a bright guy you'd expect Flip to come up with an angle to add better high-efficiency scoring plays, plays that force fouls on opponents or that hit from outside. Maybe he's just never had a low-post destructive force or a pinpoint long-range rifleman.

Maybe. But maybe he doesn't work really hard to pick them up. Consider this year where the team added two face-up Bigs who take long jumpers (Yi and Hilton Neck-long). Consider last year where our (league-best) 3pt shooter basically never felt comfortable lofting that shot, and nobody was shouting at him to take it or designing plays to feature it. Take that extra pass why don'tcha. Wait 'til someone else is open, nice...

It's no wonder that our former allstars struggled coming out of a system that consistently asked them to jack from outside, break down their man off the dribble, or attack the rim. A system that proved offensively fairly efficient when factoring in eFG on that three point shot or Free Throw attempts per Field Goal attempt (when it's best players were healthy). That team was a threat to come from behind at any point (good thing, since with the undersized defense they were often falling behind, especially when the bench players got minutes).

Anyway, despite adding a dribble-drive attacker par excellence and a potential low-post bruiser, I have some concerns that the system is a little too frills and lace more than bread and butter. Playoffs may be a long way away, maybe not, never know, but head coaches shape a team. Both in personnel, in minutes played, and in mindset, player development.

We have a young team, you want to make sure they learn correct principles, fundamental basics. And in a game where wins and losses are determined primarily by shaving percentage points here and there while increasing your own pool of success %'s you want players to learn to value the high percentage plays: at the rim, at the free throw line, or from the three point line.

Those are your most efficient scoring plays, worth designing a system around. That midrange jumper, while it may have been reassuring to an undersized under athletic college PG like Flip, and it may have looked pretty from his multi-tool tall Forward teammate Kevin McHale, well in the Big Boy leagues it's a cute trick, but not worth wasting all that time on.

[Kanyewest]

Perhaps the Wizards could make Sam Cassell the head coach. He was a role player for 3 different championship teams. Generally tends to make teammates better, even those that play the same position. He's a bit talkative and maybe could get in face of some officials. Then again, it's a HUGE gamble to fire someone like Flip and take a chance on Cassell who doesn't have a known system in place. l'm also curious how Cassell would immprove his defense. But he appears to have a chance to be a championship caliber coach, moreso than Flip- although the risk is higher.

[doclinkin]

I like Sam to run our D-League squad for a few years once Ted buys us a local squad. A couple years grooming him, then Boudreau him into place. Sammy has the right temperament and attitude to garner respect from players, refs, etc. When you're right you get a pat on the butt and praise, when you're wrong better know you're gonna hear about it, loudly, vociferously, profanely, and usually in a funny manner.

[hands11]

This is one key reason why LeBJ was able to get away with his travels for so many years: he never faced Pat Riley or Phil Jackson in a playoff series. We never had a coach who could go productively ballistic or superlatively sardonic to draw attention to the cause.

I submit we still don't.

LBJ wasn't able to get away with traveling in Boston back in 2008. While it was refreshing to see that traveling was actually called, I was wondering where that officiating was back in the 1st round versus the Wizards. Maybe coaches are a part of it like Jackson and Riley, but I never thought of Rivers being that guy, especially before winning a championship. I personally think that Boston got those calls, much like Lakers, because they are known as one of the elite franchises in the NBA. It will be hard for the Wizards to earn that reputation until they win championship/championships.

All I can say about this is CRAB DRIBBLE. The tide did start to finally turn. When was that ?

[alucryts]

as a bit of an outsiders POV, i thought id share my opinion on the wiz and how they can turn into a contender in my eyes:

wall to begin with is a great start. if he can blow up into a superstar, you will be well on your way. this is obvious, obviously lol.

second, hinrich must not start. i saw him a lot with rose, and he is a great backup pg.

third, arenas is going to have to learn to play off the ball and off of wall. this will be absolutely key. if arenas can learn to do this on top of wall blowing up, thats a very scary back court, and would contend with best in the league for sure, likely winning that title.

4th, the big man. you'll need a defensive big man, and a low post threat. blatche is interesting here, and might eventually fill that need.

whats promising is that the wizards are one of the teams who seem to have a viable path to contend. like every team, its a long and unlikely road, but they have a path. most teams in the league have no idea other than suck and hope for a wall or they used up all of their cap space and are now stuck in a decent, non contender team (hawks).

[hands11]

We don't need to put a $ sign next to our needed player... We don't need a Ray Allen when we have Gilbert Arenas... I'm sorry...

What people seem to forget is that for our max contract in Gil, we have a potential All-NBA PG and a potential All-Star PF on the cheap... That pretty much balances things out until the contracts need to be extended/renewed... When all is said and done, we'd have pretty much the same payroll in about 4 years, maybe even less... (Gil making making much less, Blatche making more)

And like hands said himself, there aren't enough balls to go around...

Well then why not just use Gil (since we already got a elite scoring option in him anyway) as said stud...??? Then use the rest of our recources to get a big defensive SF with some range to put next to him... There's no need for a stud SF if you have a stud wing player anyway... And we have 2 (Arenas, Wall)...

Oh and a defensive C who's a beast on the boards is needed, he doesn't even have to have an offense...

Not sure you followed what I was saying from how you responded. I wasn't saying we trade for R Allen. Gil is going to be playing SG this year. That means he won't be dominating the ball as much while the team is setting up. When he gets it, he has less decisions to make now which I think is going to help his really shine and be more effective. Shoot, Drive or Pass and I think he will be an effective shooter. This is what I meant by more like R Allen. As apposed to what he was, more like AI. And like you said, paying him less would fit better but we don't have a choice in that.

But even as an effective/elite SG, that players IMO doesn't measure up to that SG/SF or SF/SG type who has handles, can pass, dunk, rebound, hit FTs, etc.

I have no idea how long we will keep Gil. We just have to see how it plays out. All I know is we have him right now and I think he is going to play really well for us. Regardless if we keep him or trade for what we think is a better piece, him playing well is good for us. I believe keeping him will in some part do with what Dray shows us this year. If Gil was making more like 14M a year, I don't think it would be as big of an issue but at 17.7/19.2/20.8/22.3 you have to question if what you need for that kind of money is a productive player are a different core position given the rest of your talent. But looking at the projected salaries, looks like both could fit.

My dream scenario is that Gil plays great this year with a rounded efficient game and the fans and the franchise gel back together. Then we keep him one more year where Gil rejects the player option and resigns for less.

He does have a player option in three years doesn't he ?

But this is very risky and just a pipe dream. First who knows what the CPA will look like. Second, if doesn't take the player option doesn't he get to walk and we get nothing ? If that is true, that would be very risky when compared to trading him while is value is high. Plus the biggest issue. Gil would have to want to leave money on the table. He did it once. But we will see. To hard a call from sitting this far back in the theater. First things first. Gil makes his come back.

[Dat2U]

...continuing the thought:

And further, I'd go on to explain why I feel oversized SFs (who play game changing defense) qualify as "game changing bigs." In other words, a guy who can cover the two forward positions, or roam to zone off the lane, can lead a championship team.

I break this up into two different players. The perimeter defender -- most often a Long Forward-- who can guard the three but still collapse to form a one-man zone, and the true game-changing Big who can intimidate in the paint, force players away from the basket, and snatch contested boards.

Dat disagrees and suggests that the defensive perimeter forward is a luxury, provided you have a sufficiently mobile and intimidating Big. The Celts won with no Tayshaun/Artest/Bruce Bowen. Maybe, but they had KG, who can play both roles as needed, and Rondo who can approximate the rest.

Not a luxury but a secondary concern. The one constant that EVERY NBA champion had is low post defense. I don't think there are any outliers out there where teams that didn't excel defensively in the post were able to get a ring.

You can win with a Trevor Ariza, a defensively motivated Paul Pierce or James Posey at SF. All solid defenders in their own right but I wouldn't call them game changers on that end of the court. Ariza & Posey were both the quintessential role player, which was to play tough physical D & knock down open shots. A guy like that would suit us just fine IMO.

Bur you can't win a title with a Jamison & aging Shaq upfront or with our frontline as currently comprised. Even Bulls of old didn't starting winning titles until they addressed their hole at C and got the 7-2 Bill Cartwright to clog the middle. In the Wizards situation, I'd be hesitant to spend any money long term unless its to address the issue at C. Whatever is leftover thereafter then could be used to address the SF position. But I do agree that we need defenders at both positions. Especially with a Wall/Arenas backcourt.

[doclinkin]

...continuing the thought:

And further, I'd go on to explain why I feel oversized SFs (who play game changing defense) qualify as "game changing bigs." In other words, a guy who can cover the two forward positions, or roam to zone off the lane, can lead a championship team.

I break this up into two different players. The perimeter defender -- most often a Long Forward-- who can guard the three but still collapse to form a one-man zone, and the true game-changing Big who can intimidate in the paint, force players away from the basket, and snatch contested boards.

Dat disagrees and suggests that the defensive perimeter forward is a luxury, provided you have a sufficiently mobile and intimidating Big. The Celts won with no Tayshaun/Artest/Bruce Bowen. Maybe, but they had KG, who can play both roles as needed, and Rondo who can approximate the rest.

Not a luxury but a secondary concern. The one constant that EVERY NBA champion had is low post defense. I don't think there are any outliers out there where teams that didn't excel defensively in the post were able to get a ring.

You can win with a Trevor Ariza, a defensively motivated Paul Pierce or James Posey at SF. All solid defenders in their own right but I wouldn't call them game changers on that end of the court. Ariza & Posey were both the quintessential role player, which was to play tough physical D & knock down open shots. A guy like that would suit us just fine IMO.

Bur you can't win a title with a Jamison & aging Shaq upfront or with our frontline as currently comprised. Even Bulls of old didn't starting winning titles until they addressed their hole at C and got the 7-2 Bill Cartwright to clog the middle. In the Wizards situation, I'd be hesitant to spend any money long term unless its to address the issue at C. Whatever is leftover thereafter then could be used to address the SF position. But I do agree that we need defenders at both positions. Especially with a Wall/Arenas backcourt.

Dunno, with the exception of Medical Bill Cartwright, the Bulls never had anything more than a defensively passable center. Will Perdue, Bill Wennington, Luc Longley etc. -- none of their true Bigs were defensively intimidating, nor offensively dominant. They were skilled enough to be on court to make smart passes, take open jumpers from midrange and keep out the way. Granted Ho Grant and The Worm were solid defenders and rebounders, but they even made due with Toni Kukoc at PF for a minute there.

Really the prototype of the versatile lockdown 3-position defender was Scottie who made the thing work. You could afford to play without a dominating lowpost Big because he was long enough and tenacious enough to deny the interior pass. Teams that relied on a pound it in offense would find their rhythm stalled long enough for the double to arrive. He was also strong enough and clever enough to cover the PF as necessary, as well as snatching the dirty work rebounds at times when the team had to make do without a PF.

I agree with you that a prodigious defensive boardsman is necessary, even if they don't block a ton of shots or whatnot. But since the handcheck rules have changed, show me a champion who didn't have that versatile swing defender player. Basically we agree to agree here. You say before we talk contender we need an interior defender and rebounder. I agree, though even a Kendrick Perkins will do. But before the team really can consider a championship, you got to have that all-court free safety type defender who can take responsibility to take the opponents best exterior attacker and is versatile enough to cover interior players as well as needed.

[Ruzious]

The Bulls were an exception to a lot of big man rules, simply because of the presence of MJ and Scotty.

Here's another tactic to build a champeenship level rooster after this season. Granger. I zillion dollars in contracts for average players come off Indy's books after this season. They will literally have tons of dollars in cap room next year. And Hibbert's about all they have up front. They're not going anywhere, but they need young talent and a gate attraction. Next offseason, we give them McGee and Arenas for Granger. Also toss in Booker to seal the deal. Granger gives us a Paul Pierce - though perhaps with a little less offensive creativity offset by even better catch and shootability. And he's a very good defender - to go with being a # 2/1 scoring option - the ideal 3 for the Wiz.

And that trade opens up more cap room - about 9.5 million (more with Booker included) - according to the hoopshype.com numbers. There's enough room to sign one of the free agent bigs - Gasol/Oden/Nene/? - in addition to possibly keeping Yi and signing our 1st round pick.

People are going to say - there's no guarantee we sign one of the bigs. Well, there's no guarantee we re-sign both McGee and Blatche the year after that. I'd rather not be in the situation that we need to sign them both at the same time.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

I break this up into two different players. The perimeter defender -- most often a Long Forward-- who can guard the three but still collapse to form a one-man zone, and the true game-changing Big who can intimidate in the paint, force players away from the basket, and snatch contested boards.

Dat disagrees and suggests that the defensive perimeter forward is a luxury, provided you have a sufficiently mobile and intimidating Big. The Celts won with no Tayshaun/Artest/Bruce Bowen. Maybe, but they had KG, who can play both roles as needed, and Rondo who can approximate the rest.

Not a luxury but a secondary concern. The one constant that EVERY NBA champion had is low post defense. I don't think there are any outliers out there where teams that didn't excel defensively in the post were able to get a ring.

You can win with a Trevor Ariza, a defensively motivated Paul Pierce or James Posey at SF. All solid defenders in their own right but I wouldn't call them game changers on that end of the court. Ariza & Posey were both the quintessential role player, which was to play tough physical D & knock down open shots. A guy like that would suit us just fine IMO.

Bur you can't win a title with a Jamison & aging Shaq upfront or with our frontline as currently comprised. Even Bulls of old didn't starting winning titles until they addressed their hole at C and got the 7-2 Bill Cartwright to clog the middle. In the Wizards situation, I'd be hesitant to spend any money long term unless its to address the issue at C. Whatever is leftover thereafter then could be used to address the SF position. But I do agree that we need defenders at both positions. Especially with a Wall/Arenas backcourt.

Dunno, with the exception of Medical Bill Cartwright, the Bulls never had anything more than a defensively passable center. Will Perdue, Bill Wennington, Luc Longley etc. -- none of their true Bigs were defensively intimidating, nor offensively dominant. They were skilled enough to be on court to make smart passes, take open jumpers from midrange and keep out the way. Granted Ho Grant and The Worm were solid defenders and rebounders, but they even made due with Toni Kukoc at PF for a minute there.

Really the prototype of the versatile lockdown 3-position defender was Scottie who made the thing work. You could afford to play without a dominating lowpost Big because he was long enough and tenacious enough to deny the interior pass. Teams that relied on a pound it in offense would find their rhythm stalled long enough for the double to arrive. He was also strong enough and clever enough to cover the PF as necessary, as well as snatching the dirty work rebounds at times when the team had to make do without a PF.

I agree with you that a prodigious defensive boardsman is necessary, even if they don't block a ton of shots or whatnot. But since the handcheck rules have changed, show me a champion who didn't have that versatile swing defender player. Basically we agree to agree here. You say before we talk contender we need an interior defender and rebounder. I agree, though even a Kendrick Perkins will do. But before the team really can consider a championship, you got to have that all-court free safety type defender who can take responsibility to take the opponents best exterior attacker and is versatile enough to cover interior players as well as needed.[/quote]

Who was the prodigious defensive big on the Showtime Lakers? Surely, not a 35-40 yr-old Kareem. Pau Gasol is not a prodigious defender. Andrew Bynum's big and a good defender, but I wouldn't call him elite. Same with Odom. Artest is very good but not nearly what he was defensively. Kobe is great defensively in spurts. Overall, the Lakers are very good defensively and they're IMO even better offensively.

I believe the Wiz have the athleticism and length and offense to compete at a very high level. The dominating big will be needed to advance in the playoffs, but I think Washington's really close talent-wise to having a team that compete if they can dictate tempo and run.

Remember the Phoenix team that didn't advance after Horry got dirty on them? That team didn't lose because it didn't have a defensive big. Stoudemire was beasting that year against Duncan. That team could have won it all if they had got past the Spurs.

I like Washington if they can run, score, and get calls.

[doclinkin]

Who was the prodigious defensive big on the Showtime Lakers? Surely, not a 35-40 yr-old Kareem. Pau Gasol is not a prodigious defender. Andrew Bynum's big and a good defender, but I wouldn't call him elite. Same with Odom. Artest is very good but not nearly what he was defensively. Kobe is great defensively in spurts. Overall, the Lakers are very good defensively and they're IMO even better offensively.

I believe the Wiz have the athleticism and length and offense to compete at a very high level. The dominating big will be needed to advance in the playoffs, but I think Washington's really close talent-wise to having a team that compete if they can dictate tempo and run.

Remember the Phoenix team that didn't advance after Horry got dirty on them? That team didn't lose because it didn't have a defensive big. Stoudemire was beasting that year against Duncan. That team could have won it all if they had got past the Spurs.

I like Washington if they can run, score, and get calls.

Kareem forced the miss, Magic grabbed the board then initiated the break.

Problem here is that you can dictate tempo and run best if you can collect the defensive board. PHX's 7seconds or less philosophy works well with Nash running (and running) it. But in general you can run uptempo upcourt and in transition best off opponent misses.

Point is in the playoffs they allow players like Horry to get dirty. At this point refs are loathe to determine the outcome of a game simply on whistles, so you need a gritty ugly option that doesn't require fancy tricks. They let you ugly it up a bit more in the paint.

Personally I think the Wiz are pretty close to having an approximation of all the players they need, but not quite there. Fun to watch is a probability. I expect we'll be fun to watch even in defeat. Player development is the biggest question mark though. And mental ability.

Floor general: John Wall.
Multi-tool Big: Dray.
Physically intimidating Frontcourt player: hallucinations of JaVale with better positioning and quite possibly a post weight-room KSeraphin.
Raise the game scorer: flashback-era Gilbert. Nick at his high-percentage best. John Wall in jitterbug mode. JaVale spoonfed on the alley oop diet.

Chemistry, development of young talent, and opium dreams can envision this team into a dynamic and invigorating offensive machine.

But we lack quality defensive rebounding. Unless Booker is what I hope he can be (or Josh Howard recovers quickly, 100%, and signs cheap longterm) we lack a shutdown outside-inside defender; a long or strong perimeter smothering blanket.

And unless Flip tweaks his system, and McGee/Seraphin (even Booker from the crash wing) develop into featured forces, we lack a go-to easy option high percentage interior offense when you simply need bread and butter buckets regardless of the opponents' efforts to stop you. Risking Gilbert and Wall in the paint all the time would make me nervous. Shooting a quarter of your shots from the long midrange ain't a high percentage system. And we have few enough outside shooting options when you need that 2nd-most efficient scoring shot (3pt artillery) since they've packed the lane.

Ultimately it would also help to have a savvy playoff-seasoned role-playing veteran with a championship on the resume. For now we have Sammy on the sideline; and Kirk will sub in this role on the floor. But yeah, we have interesting raw materials. We can play giant killer and spoiler a few games a year. But we're still leagues away from real contention.

[doclinkin]

I do think we'll be able to run, score, and get calls though. John Wall alone adds all that.

[barelyawake]

I got a big post a brewin' for when I get home. Just want to chirp in and agree we are exactly like the Showtime Lakers -- minus the 6-8 hall of famer, number one overall pick; the 6-9 hall of famer, number one pick, and the 7-2 hall of famer, number one pick (oh and leadership, rambis, etc, etc).

And indeed Wall will suddenly vault Arenas from being the current symbol of what is wrong with the NBA, back into a guy who got calls (after half a decade), because he was a feel good story. Wall will also give Arenas back that halfstep he's lost (which is the solitary reason he had a shot at getting so many calls in the first place and earned a reputation leaguewide of being the top player bailed out by the refs). Wall will also transform Blatche into the second round pick who gets calls over top NBA products in the playoffs. Dare to dream.

[sfam]

I got a big post a brewin' for when I get home. Just want to chirp in and agree we are exactly like the Showtime Lakers -- minus the 6-8 hall of famer, number one overall pick; the 6-9 hall of famer, number one pick, and the 7-2 hall of famer, number one pick (oh and leadership, rambis, etc, etc).

+1

My feeling exactly! We're nothing at all like Showtime. Just a dose of reality - if we're good enough to get the #8 seed to be swept in 4 yet again by Lebron, we'll be on a pretty good path. That means Wall is making everyone better, Arenas has been rehabilitated and Blatche is probably working out. It will take a few years for this group to really gel and reach for the later rounds of the playoffs, assuming everyone with potential reaches close to their potential.

[hands11]

The Bulls were an exception to a lot of big man rules, simply because of the presence of MJ and Scotty.

Here's another tactic to build a champeenship level rooster after this season. Granger. I zillion dollars in contracts for average players come off Indy's books after this season. They will literally have tons of dollars in cap room next year. And Hibbert's about all they have up front. They're not going anywhere, but they need young talent and a gate attraction. Next offseason, we give them McGee and Arenas for Granger. Also toss in Booker to seal the deal. Granger gives us a Paul Pierce - though perhaps with a little less offensive creativity offset by even better catch and shootability. And he's a very good defender - to go with being a # 2/1 scoring option - the ideal 3 for the Wiz.

And that trade opens up more cap room - about 9.5 million (more with Booker included) - according to the hoopshype.com numbers. There's enough room to sign one of the free agent bigs - Gasol/Oden/Nene/? - in addition to possibly keeping Yi and signing our 1st round pick.

People are going to say - there's no guarantee we sign one of the bigs. Well, there's no guarantee we re-sign both McGee and Blatche the year after that. I'd rather not be in the situation that we need to sign them both at the same time.

Book mark it. One of the many ways we can roll moving forward. Granger could be that kind of player I hope we get if the time presents itself. Still looking at Melo also though.

But first things first. We have to see what we have this year but defiantly a good book mark.

[hands11]

I got a big post a brewin' for when I get home. Just want to chirp in and agree we are exactly like the Showtime Lakers -- minus the 6-8 hall of famer, number one overall pick; the 6-9 hall of famer, number one pick, and the 7-2 hall of famer, number one pick (oh and leadership, rambis, etc, etc).

+1

My feeling exactly! We're nothing at all like Showtime. Just a dose of reality - if we're good enough to get the #8 seed to be swept in 4 yet again by Lebron, we'll be on a pretty good path. That means Wall is making everyone better, Arenas has been rehabilitated and Blatche is probably working out. It will take a few years for this group to really gel and reach for the later rounds of the playoffs, assuming everyone with potential reaches close to their potential.

Hard to say it will take a few years since we don't know who we will keep.

I say this team is a capable of reaching and getting out of the first round as any team we have had the last 20 years.

I expect Wall to be solid with flashes. Kirk backing him up adds a lot. Kirk is solid.
I expect Gil to blow up this year and with Dray and Howard we have three primary scoring type plus whatever Wall gives you.

Then we have lots of roll players. Nick can score. McGee is a freak. AT shouldn't be over looked. When he was healthy, he played pretty well and also defended. Just needs to be more consistent. Solid dude off the bench. Yi is a solid enough long roll player. Now if we can just get solid defense from Seraphin and Armstrong enough to fill in for McGee and Dray if needed, that is the best team we have seen in many many years. Then its up to injuries for us and for other teams. The luck factor counts a lot.