NBA.COM Mid-Season Report Card Grade = F

dangermouse · Post #1 » by **dangermouse** » Tue Jan 29, 2013 11:41 am

Sekou Smith, do you even watch any Wizards games?

I can't even read it all. Martell is described as our backup swingman, our defensive improvements are ascribed in part to Trevor Ariza (even though in the previous paragraph Trevor is blasted for failing to live up to promise), and the Wall/Beal combo apparently has chemistry issues.

FAH1223 · Post #2 » by **FAH1223** » Tue Jan 29, 2013 1:31 pm

Wall and Beal seem to have great chemistry... Beal is hurt though and its knocked off his improved shooting

Nivek · Post #3 » by **Nivek** » Tue Jan 29, 2013 1:38 pm

The overall grade is correct, but the "analysis" is garbage.

He gives the frontcourt an F, but Okafor and Nene have been the team's most productive players. He sorta backhandedly rips Ariza, but doesn't seem aware of Webster having the best season of his career at SF. Obviously the grade would be dragged down by Vesely, Seraphin and Singleton, but they're not mentioned in that first write-up.

He gives the backcourt a D, which seems probably about right. I might go lower because of how badly the PGs played until Price and Wall came back. Beal hasn't been good, but he gets a bit of a pass because of his youth.

Defense has been good, though it's bizarre to have a "defense" category and not have a corresponding "offense." Seems odd to credit Ariza for the defense, though when a) the team was actually not bad defensively last season, and b) Ariza is 8th in minutes. Ariza IS a good defender, but the team's defense, but credit for the good defense goes primarily to the coaching staff, Nene and Okafor. Yet...

...he gives Wittman an F and then blames Wittman for the team's offensive failures. The offense has been bad because the players have shot like ass. Defense is about system and coordination -- the coaches deserve credit for having a well-coordinated, well-executed defensive plan.

Jimmy Recard · Post #4 » by **Jimmy Recard** » Tue Jan 29, 2013 1:38 pm

The national media, just like the majority of thee general board, is generally clueless when it comes to this team. It's clear they don't watch the games when you read stuff like that. It's like hearing all of these so called experts over the past week attribute our recent wins to the fact that the effort level has risen dramatically and the defense is coming together. I've heard at least 3 analysts say that. When in actuality, the effort and defense has been there from day 1, the talent hasn't. Idiots.

Nivek · Post #5 » by **Nivek** » Tue Jan 29, 2013 1:51 pm

Jimmy Recard wrote:The national media, just like the majority of thee general board, is generally clueless when it comes to this team. It's clear they don't watch the games when you read stuff like that. It's like hearing all of these so called experts over the past week attribute our recent wins to the fact that the effort level has risen dramatically and the defense is coming together. I've heard at least 3 analysts say that. When in actuality, the effort and defense has been there from day 1, the talent hasn't. Idiots.

Here's the thing -- They don't even need to watch games to do a mid-season "grades" piece. There are excellent statistical tools that can tell you a lot about a team. This is probably 7-8 years ago now, but I did some "pro bono" stat work for a college team in Argentina. One of the assistant coaches read something I wrote and wanted to know more. He sent me a bunch of numbers, which I crunched. Then I wrote what I saw in his team and his opponents based purely on the data. He said my analysis was accurate. Never had a chance to confirm it for myself. This wasn't nitty-gritty detailed stuff, but you don't need that for one of these overview pieces.

This lack of authentic analysis -- or, opinion without knowledge or analysis -- is a problem with NBA punditry. It's a problem more generally as well, but that's too big an issue. It's why we continue to get absurdities like the Spurs being a boring, grind it out team when they're actually fast-paced and have been for several seasons now. The national NBA media seems to decide what the story is first, and then fill in whatever cliche is necessary to support that story.

tontoz · Post #6 » by **tontoz** » Tue Jan 29, 2013 2:07 pm

This analysis is a joke but it seems in line with my experiences with NBA.com. I rarely go there any more.

Deivy202 · Post #7 » by **Deivy202** » Tue Jan 29, 2013 9:10 pm

I give it C+ INJURYS have hurt us but when healthy we should be a winning record team. Webster been a good pick up and Ariza is a good defender while Okefor been pretty good.

We still lack a dominating player how ever but I do think Beals improved and Wall will next year explode.

dandrews · Post #8 » by **dandrews** » Wed Jan 30, 2013 12:53 am

Deivy202 wrote:I give it C+ INJURYS have hurt us but when healthy we should be a winning record team. Webster been a good pick up and Ariza is a good defender while Okefor been pretty good.

We still lack a dominating player how ever but I do think Beals improved and Wall will next year explode.

It has to be less than a C+. Injuries or not they have the second worst record in the league. A C+ is considered slightly above average. Do you really think the Wiz have been slightly above average this year?

I'd probably give them a D+ so far. That's actually quite the accomplishment considering they were a hard F less than a month ago.

Kanyewest · Post #9 » by **Kanyewest** » Wed Jan 30, 2013 2:32 am

F when Wall was injured, and a B+ since Wall has been back- so that averages to a D+ or C-.

AFM · Post #10 » by **AFM** » Wed Jan 30, 2013 6:32 am

stupid article by a stupid writer. Hope he dies alone.