Random NBA Pre-Postseason Thoughts
The NBA always seems to stay one step ahead of boredom, and this season is no different. A Ja Morant on Instagram Live with a gun feels like a wrestling storyline. To keep matters mostly on court, I have a bunch of random scattered thoughts I thought I’d share heading into the final 10+ games of the regular season.
The West
Maybe it’s Denver’s small market, maybe it’s Jokic’s laissez-faire nature and lack of narrative around his mentality, also related to some subconscious Euro-bias (or apathy) that we have. It feels like it’s under-discussed how critical this season is for the Nuggets. Their time is now. The West is wide open. And the East is competitive as ever, meaning the second and third round will be difficult outs that could leave the East Champs worn out compared to the West Champs. The Grizzlies tumultuous last few weeks has only given me more belief that it is a disaster if the Nuggets don’t post a strong conference Final showing. I don’t even think a mildly competitive loss to the Suns (my other West fav) is good enough. The time is now. And a 4-game losing streak, including giving up 49 points to the Raps in the first quarter (a franchise record), is not what championship teams are supposed to do.
Speaking of the Suns, I tweeted the other day following Durant’s injury, that the funniest outcome in the league would be if KD is discredited for not having played with the Suns long enough to be deserving of his ring. That he is a mercenary. That he didn’t earn it. That modern player movement has even blurred the lines of what a team really is.I want someone to invoke the Ship of Theseus. I like Durant very much by the way. Yet, I think there is credence to those arguments. I don’t think there has even been a Hall of Famer even close to his prime that has been traded at the deadline and gone on to lead his team to a ring. Even Kawhi playing only a year for the Raptors felt a little bizarre. Assuming KD stays, this narrative would fade. But it will happen if the Suns win — which I absolutely think they can — it will be there.
A Chris Paul aside — I turned on the Warriors-Suns game last night (Mar 13th) at the end of the 3rd quarter. CP3 savvily forced a jump ball on a tangle up with Donte DiVincenzo. He then proceeded to foul DV on the jump, forcing a re-do. He then proceeded to foul him again, with DiVincenzo’s height and athleticism advantage winning in spite of Paul’s funny business. DV tipped it to a Warriors player, and Paul went to defend, with the ref getting in the way as he exited the play post-jump ball, resulting in a Warriors basket. Paul, visibly rattled, went down the floor, iso-ed, and drained a patented elbow jumper. Turning back on D, he yelled to the refs “get out of the f***ing way!”, loud and clear for the broadcast mics to pick up. This is the CP3 experience. How can the refs ever properly give Paul benefit of the doubt when he is A) such a prick, and B) so unreasonable. I’m not sure of the proper rules, but the refs probably could have just called a foul on the second jump ball and handed the Warriors the ball. Instead, they let it play out, and in a highly incidental and accidental play, some combination of the Sun’s bad defensive set on the jump ball, and the ref’s inability to teleport, resulted in a Warriors basket. How do you give a player like this credibility in conversations when he has a point? It’s impossible.
Furthermore, it’s terrible leadership. Everyone knows that despite the many mistakes refs make in a game, it’s only detrimental to the focus of the team to continue to stay mad at the call, and harp on what cannot be undone. You have to move on and play your game. It’s less fun when you stay mad. Everyone’s played golf with a friend who can’t stop complaining about his unlucky shot 6 holes ago. It’s never made their score lower. Paul’s prickly personality in the context of his championship failures has been analyzed to death, but the situation I saw the other night was just a perfect encapsulation of some of his issues on the margins that do not help his team. In every facet of life, you have to pick your battles. You have to let things go. And Paul has proven to be incapable of doing that. *Deep breath*.
If there was even one contender without major blotches, I would be writing the Warriors off. But they are currently the 5-seed, one game off of the Suns for 4 (who could easily drop to the 7–8 seed if they’re not careful. The entire West is so tight, it’s useless making a prediction right now. The Warrioss are visibily weaker than last seasonn — no stat would indicate otherwise. Many have discussed the Poole contract, the young guns struggles, and the inconsistency of pretty much everyone outside Curry, Wiggins, and Looney. But the ceiling is high, and that’s what matters. There is a road for them to win. This reality still separates them from the T-Wolves. You have to bet on blue-chip talent come playoff time, and with little confidence, I currently have the Warriors third in my West power rankings.
Can we just admit that Bill Simmons, and the parody of him on , was correct? We should have seen it from the Clippers before we made them a West frontrunner. They have proven nothing. I wholeheartedly agree with Zach Lowe that the Clippers highly questionable trade deadline moves were a massive red flag indicating a major vote of no-confidence from Clippers management in their belief in the team’s championship pedigree. Despite Kawhi’s strong recent play, I’m all the way out.
I’m sure I’ll write about it more after the season, but for Lillard to return to his All-NBA form after murmurs of him being washed swirling last season, is an amazing feat. Small guards age like milk. His shotmaking has me believe he could be a serviceable spot up shooter or 6th man later in his career. But to keep his dribble penetration, playmaking, and free throw drawing at such a high level is straight up awesome to see. Fair or not, for me, this season cements him as a true Tier 2 guy of his generation, and has me reconsidering his placement on the fringes of my Top 100.
I really hope this final stretch of play will see the glut of 4–10 seeds pushing for the 6-seed at minimum. That’s not a shot at the Kings and Grizz who are likely going to finish 2–3. But they are of course more vulnerable than the Nuggets. Literally any of the Grizz, Kings, Suns, Warriors, Clips, T-Wolves, Mavs, Lakers could rightfully envision themselves in the Conference Finals if seeding breaks right. Jockeying may take place in a couple weeks with the Durant injury, but for now, wins are what matters.
The East
I believe in the Cleveland Cavaliers. Is that a hot take? I can’t even tell anymore. They’re not my pick to win the East. But I do think they have the ability to win the championship. They are a true fringe contender to me. A titleI would not offer to other good teams such as the Knicks or Kings. I think Mitchell is that good of a scorer to steal a game or two. I think Garland is enough of a floor-raiser as a distributor, and Allen a floor-raiser in his own right. Both provide stability that is needed to ground playoff teams when the game slows down. Mobley’s recent mini-leap has been mentioned by many. And the four of them together are quirky enough that they could throw off other teams. That advantage somewhat dissipates over a 7-game series, but it’s still causing extra mental effort to opposing teams that can tilt favour in the Cavs direction. It all adds up over the 336 minutes of a playoff series.
I still have the Bucks as my pick to come out of the East. The Sixers have real defensive questions. Celtics recent woes aside, they were a slightly under qualified Finals team last year. Experience is very important, and the Tatum and Brown jump is very obvious. The Williams’ are theoretically slightly better as well. But Horford and Smart are a year older. In the aggregate they are definitely better, but the randomness of the East last year indicates there is by no means a significant difference in their chances of making the Finals. The Sixers are better. The Cavs are in the mix. Beating the Bucks again after a coin-flip series last year is going to be difficult. Not having to deal with the Nets was a huge break. Brogdon is a great add. Derrick White has now been with the team for over a year. Every team needs luck to win. Without taking away too much credit from their accomplishments, everything broke right for the Celts until Game 4 of the Finals (Game 5 of the Bucks series in R2 not withstanding). If I had to bet on them repeating that history of last season, I wouldn’t.
The Magic are easily the most fascinating team in the league to me. If there were a quantitative measure of upside we could apply to under-27 players on every team, I think they lap the field. Banchero and Wagner fully project as future All-NBA players, if not higher. Jonathan Isaac is a DPoY level talent. Fultz has anchored himself as the starting PG, leveling out as a player while continually showing his first-overall pick level athleticism. Wendell Carter Jr. easily projects as a 4th best player on a championship team. If that sounds crazy, what is Deandre Ayton? Jalen Suggs can be an All-Defensive talent. And there are many young guards that take 6 or 7 years to actually become primary ball handlers (albeit not often with the team that drafted them). Cole Anthony can continue to grow as a strong backup and microwave scorer. I haven’t even mentioned Bol Freakin Bol. What a beautifully bizarre collection of talent. There are other players to be packaged out. Gary Harris. Chuma Okeke. Mo Wagner. All of that being said, it shows how difficult it is to win as a young team. Veterans get stuff done. Athleticism and potential don’t translate to wins in the same way that a consistent 4/5th starter on a decent team does — a Danny Green, Kyle Anderson, or Grant Williams type.
I’ve heard cynics critique the Nets for trying too hard to win despite little aspiration of anything beyond even a first round playoff berth. I find that ridiculous. For one, it goes against principles of the sport, and why people play. It is also not why fans come to see. Beyond my “ethical” point of view, I think encouraging young players to play in a winning and development first environment is much more important than the fractional lottery odds Brooklyn would see increase if they dropped further down in the standings. It is already fairly random in the middle. I think building a good team culture is more important. How is letting Bridges get way more reps as a ball handler than ever before a bad thing long term?
Same goes for the Raps. Being decent matters. Even longer term than the context of the Nets and Mikal Bridges career with them — being bad often adds up. Unless you’re a franchise with a major historical legacy like the Lakers — who can turn around a franchise quickly with one free agent signing, it takes years of decency to gain a good reputation. The Raptors have one, because they remained decent. At this stage, that’s what ownership’s view should be. Build a Spurs/Raps reputation. Never be bad. The Pacers, Jazz, Grizzlies, Blazers, all have this to some degree as well. More so than the Clippers, Kings, Hornets, and T-Wolves, who people still expect to spoil overnight. It’s very difficult to measure how a city’s viewpoint of their team affects on court basketball, but I believe it does. When an entire home crowd’s collective and literal sphincters tighten up when they begin to blow a lead — because they know deep down it’s their destiny to lose — the players can feel that. You’re talking to a Maple Leafs fan here. Again, beyond my “principled” view of sports, analytical writers inciting the Nets need to tank to move from a 10% chance of the 5th pick to 20%, in a bad draft no less, feels unbelievably shortsighted to me.
NBA Awards
To end with the MVP race, I’m not here to dissect the toxicity of it. I also wholeheartedly reject any mention (beyond this) of people who refuse to even hear any argument of a side different than theirs.
What this year has done, has made me rethink my thoughts of viewing the race in a vacuum, a viewpoint I’ve traditionally held. I do think that there is a small degree of one-upping yourself that is required. Joining the hallowed list of back-to-back MVPs should be more difficult. And winning three in a row — done by only Wilt and Bird, and not by MJ, LeBron, Kareem, or anyone else, is an entirely different feat. I think there should be further differentiators. I think being a dominant 1-seed — in terms of record and others stats, should be relevant. I think being head and shoulders above everyone else should be relevant. Even if I think Jokic is the best and most valuable player this season, him winning two prior actually is shifting my standard.
Furthermore, I think there’s a question about what is being subtracted. Do the players you’re voting for instead of Jokic deserve an MVP? There have been years where this may not have been the case. But Embiid and Giannis are well-worthy this year. Their seasons are MVP-quality. The MVP conversation is perfectly imperfect to me. The moving target, and shifting criteria amongst voters on a year-by-year, and placement-by-placement ranking (within their annual top-5 votes) actually coagulates into a semi-coherent methodology of how we parse out the award. Given Embiid’s two prior seasons, I think Embiid deserves an MVP to his name. This doesn’t happen for everyone, of course. It never broke right for D-Wade, CP3, Elgin Baylor, or Jerry West. Even if voting in a vacuum sounds correct, while providing some extra level of consistency, I think it’s fine to bend the rules on occasion, to try and give as many players as possible their proper due.
I would also hear the argument that Giannis could be deserving of a third, thus reflecting his unbelievable night-to-night consistency, and putting him alongside the short list of legends to win three. All in all, I think precedent does in matter, something I wasn’t sure I thought I would say. Anyway, at least all three players are deserving, and in a vacuum, and fortunately we won’t have any sort of travesty on our hands come voting time.
To add one final separate note to the MVP debate — much like I would like to see the All-Star Game expanded given the league talent level, I would be for expanding the MVP ballot to a 10-man roster. I think there are too many good players worthy of a top 5 finish nowadays. After the big 3, right now Doncic and Tatum are the frontrunners for the 4 and 5 spot. Many other top players — Curry, SGA, Mitchell, Lillard, Booker, Durant, Morant, have enough knocks against them to split votes.
When only 5 can be voted for, and there are usually 2–4 consensus picks that everyone have, it creates a much smaller sample of the 4 and 5 slot players, in a way that muddles any differentiators amongst the bottom two-thirds of players voted for. For crying out loud, look at the 2020–21 ballot. Some lunatic voted Rose first! First!(!!!). Because other votes are so undervalued comparatively to first place votes, Rose skyrockets to 9th overall, instead of giving the worthy 9th and 10th best players their proper due. It’s picking hairs, I know, but if done correctly, top-10 MVP finishes being a telling stat would be helpful. At this point, as you can see from the voter share below, it’s functionally useless.
Yes, opening up ballots to 10 votes will make the list of total players on the ballot even longer. it opens up an even greater likelihood of say, beat writers voting for hometown players out of a lack of education on the rest of the league. But there will be more clarity amongst the 5–10 best players. All-NBA is supposed to be for this, in part, but positional rigidity clouds that picture as well. If Giannis were to be considered a centre — a semi-feasible argument — then there’s a chance the 3rd best player in the league could finish on 3rd Team All-NBA. DeAndre Jordan and Andre Drummond have made All-NBA teams ahead of many better players. We’ve had years where Third Team forwards are better than some First Team guards. No voting method is perfect, and watching games still only gets you so far. But as time passes and memories of a given season become blurrier with each passing day, more data and a more accurate picture of the season is only helpful.
As I’ve started to look at All-NBA picks, it is going to be a seachange year, even greater than last year’s new look First Team. Last season still had LeBron, Durant, Curry, and Chris Paul. Based on games played, it is unlikely any of those players cracks All-NBA. They will barely be cracking 50 games each, if that. Most voters usually have a threshold around 55–60 games.
Load management aside, it’s a shame so many great players have missed ample time this season. Player health is important, but fans pay to see games. Whether these players are truly hurt or not, there are too many games missed. I’m not sure what health precautions need to be taken. Less games, better “pre-habiliation,” a push by the NBA to emphasize health even more and in the earlier stages (AAU, HS, college, G-League) of a player’s basketball career. It’s some combination of all this and more. The science is better than ever, yet players still aren’t playing. Again, I am not giving any reasoning or critique, but the legends above, plus the many other unhealthy players, are putting an even greater damper on the importance of the regular season — something I just wrote about recently in regards to rings culture. Freak accidents happen. Some humans will always be more injured than others. Not everyone will have the work ethic to take care of themselves to the degree that LeBron and Tom Brady have. But we want good players to play, and we want the best players to be in MVP and All-NBA discussions to (again) form an actual portrait of who the best basketball players on the planet are in a given window of time.
