Are SI.com writers huffing paint fumes? I swear sports writers are getting worse

[westkoast]

I cannot believe some of these guys get paid to write about basketball for a living.  Could you imagine writing for SI and saying some of this crap below?

From an article on their site giving teams grades for the first part of the season....

"If they continue under new coach Randy Wittman, the T'wolves could well ruin the postseason plans of any number of Lakers or Bulls fans."

How exactly are The Wolves going to ruin post season plans of the Bulls?  They play them twice....and they won't see them in the playoffs as these teams are not going to make it to the finals.  I finally realize why teachers use to ask students to have somoene proof read their papers before they turned them in.

Shall I continue?

"Along the way came familiar reports of team frustration with Artest as well as Artest's frustration with not being "the man."

Is down right lying to make your "grade" sound more appealing part of the game now?  I guess if you huff enough paint fumes things like Bibby frustrated about being 'the man' turns into Ron Artest....

Here is another......

"The optimist says the Spurs have been the league's top defensive team in terms of points allowed (90.5 a game); the pessimist says that is a result of the Spurs' plodding pace. "

What does the Spurs offense have to do with the fact they keep all teams, including the 70% of this league involved in trying to outscore oponents, to a league best 90.5 points a game?  Isn't it good to have a plodding pace defense if they are getting the job done?!

[Randy]

koast,

I actually don't believe that lowest points per game is an effective means by determining the best defense in the league -- point differential or fg% (IMO, fg% is the best) is a better way of determining who has the best defense.  SA's offense is played in a slower manner -- it's definately not comparing apples to apples to state that SA plays better defense than the Suns or Mavs simply because their opponents average less points per game -- the Spurs prefer to slow down the game and the Suns, Mavs like to run.  I'm not saying that the Mavs or Suns play better defense -- I haven't even looked at the stats but to simply say they are better because they hold their opponents to fewer points per game than anyone else in the league isn't a true measure of defense. 

[Lurker]

Randy would it help to say the Spurs are second in point differential?  (Suns #1 & Mavs #3)

Maybe the fact that Spurs are #4 in offensive FG% would help.  BTW that offensive juggernaut Dallas ranks 11th.

Or maybe the fact that Spurs rank higher than the Suns or Mavs in defensive FG%.

The Spurs are not a slow down Van Gundy type team.  Actually Avery has taken the Mavs in the same direction as the Spurs...an efficient offense coupled with a stingy defense.

There is another small item that many tend to overlook.  And that is the minutes played by your top 6....

Spurs:
Duncan  34
Parker   33
Bowen   32
Manu     27
Barry     21
Finley   21

Mavs:
Dirk        36
Howard   35
Terry     35
Harris     27
Dampier  26
Stack    23

Suns:
Marion   38
Bell       37
Nash     36
Diaw     32
Amare   30
Barbosa 30

When playoffs come and it is time to tighten up the rotation the Spurs' top players will have played less minutes in the marathon called regular season.  Pop...as he usually does...spends the first half of the regular season looking for the right substitution patterns.  Also who performs best in different situations. 

[westkoast]

koast,

I actually don't believe that lowest points per game is an effective means by determining the best defense in the league -- point differential or fg% (IMO, fg% is the best) is a better way of determining who has the best defense.  SA's offense is played in a slower manner -- it's definately not comparing apples to apples to state that SA plays better defense than the Suns or Mavs simply because their opponents average less points per game -- the Spurs prefer to slow down the game and the Suns, Mavs like to run.  I'm not saying that the Mavs or Suns play better defense -- I haven't even looked at the stats but to simply say they are better because they hold their opponents to fewer points per game than anyone else in the league isn't a true measure of defense. 

Hay maybe you are right.  I am sure a combination of many stats would give us a better answer who the best defensive team in the league is......but the point is, how does their half court offense make their defense better?  When Rik Smits was on Indiana they played a half court game...that did not improve their defense.  The Jazz offense is similar, dump the ball to Boozer or run a pick and roll.....yet it's the weak side support and their rotation that makes them a strong defensive team.  When Larry Brown was with the Sixers and they went to the finals they had a much more uptempo offense then the Spurs currently have yet they were one of the best teams in the league.  The Lakers are not a run and gun team.  Compared to most of the league, when Kwame and Odom are in, is pretty slow but their defense stinks.  Pretty much what I am saying is, the idea that a slower offense improves your defense is retarded at best.

I still cannot understand how the Wolves are going to stop the Bulls chances of going to the playoffs or going deep in the playoffs.

[Randy]

Lurker,

I wasn't trying to say that the Spurs didn't have a top defense -- only that lowest point totals for opponents isn't the best way to determine who has the best defense in the league.

Personally, I still feel like fg% is the best determination -- but, along with point differential, it too has it's drawbacks.  I think a combination of the two gives the best perspective -- while I think the lowest points per game isn't something to really be considered.

The Spurs run a lot more than they used to but they still don't run as much as the Mavs -- the Spurs bread and butter is the halfcourt -- I think the Mavs would prefer to run but can operate in the halfcourt as well (which was a key in helping them get the "monkey" off their back last year in the playoffs).  

As for Pop's limiting minutes to his rotation -- look at the age of his players: (none of these players have had a b-day in '07 yet)
     Horry is 36
     Barry is 35
     Bowen is 35
     Finley is 33
     Fabs is 31
     Duncan is 30
     Manu is 29
     Parker is 24

With the exception of Parker, the Spurs team is aging and you don't want to use their energy up in the regular season (the Lakers did that one year with Horry and he was shot for the playoffs).  

[Rolando Blackman]

Hey Randy!!!
   
I really don't have anything else to tell you other than that I have a big grin on my mug, seeing your handle...happy, happy, happy!  There are few things better than re-connecting with old friends, one of which I consider you to be.
   
- Rolando
Shaq #1 forever