General NBA season thread: 24-25 edition

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
14,280
SF
You and I are typically making the same points. I think in this case, there's two places we differ. One is that I believe fit matters a great deal and the defense and passing fit here is just 'ehh'. The second (which has come up before in our exchanges) is that while we both think wings are critical, I put some more weight on bigs and size than you do (or than benhogan does). I'm far from the group that thinks Embiid is the bestest, because most of us know it is not 1985, or even 2005, anymore. But I think most recent champs have had an above-average 5 and that's worth noting. That's not directly relevant here, but it is part of my roster building concern around theoretical Mitchell/Ant (as you proposed not getting Gobert and dealing KAT)

Who is the team that won a title with two primary ballhandlers who were middling passers, in your mind? That is where we differ perhaps in terms of fit and playabilty. Here's the last ten champions - which I think you'd agree is 'modern basketball' and I don't think it really fits the theory very well.

24 Celtics (Tatum for sure a better passer; White, as third guy also is)
23 Nuggets (Joker, obviously)
22 Warriors (Curry)
21 Bucks (GA, and probably also Middleton and Jrue...I guess one could try to argue this one?)
20 Lakers (LBJ)
19 Raptors (this is the closest---though Kawhi, Siakam, and FVV are all better passers than Ant or Mitchell, albeit sorta close)
18 Warriors (Curry, Durant)
17 Warriors (Curry, Durant)
16 Cavs (LBJ)
15 Warriors (Curry)
14 Warriors (Curry)

There's a plus passer in the top pair of ballhandlers for all of those teams. Often two. That is what I'd worry about with the admittedly fun and versatile Mitchell/Ant pairing. Maybe you can pull it off---those guys are super talented. But the concern I raised is pretty clearly supported by modern basketball history, too
Bucks and Raptors make me feel ok about Mitchell+Ant.

I do agree that this would be a bet on Ant getting better as a passer: Minnesota is cooked in all scenarios if he doesn't, so may as well go all-in on that.

For bigs: I think bigs are important, and having enough scoring/shooting lets you acquire bigs who are good but not DPOY defensively, and useable but not All-Star offensively. That's my issue w Minny's resource allocation.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
22,210
Santa Monica
Echo'd by this Reddit thread that asks the same question you do: https://www.reddit.com/r/nba/comments/1d4togj/why_do_people_say_that_the_timberwolves_built/.

Although one poster put it well: "They didn't build the team to beat DEN but the team is built to beat DEN."
I have someone on Reddit agreeing with me? Giddy up, put me down for 10 SoSH points!:drunk:
I hope you're keeping track Wade

All these teams had a better record than the Nuggets in 2021-22:
1. Warriors had just won the Championship. Had young pieces they could move. Should have been good for years
2. Celtics were in the Finals with two young superstar Wings.
3. Suns were 64-18 and had by far the best regular season
4. Mavs. Luka had just knocked off the Suns in the playoffs, making the WC Finals
5. Memphis smoked the Wolves in the playoffs a few months earlier and were the only team singled out by the Wolves front office. They needed rim protection to stop Ja rim runs. They were young and exciting
6. 76ers had the 2nd best big man in the game
7. Bucks Were one of the favorites going into the '22 playoffs & had won the LOB the year before.
8. Utah Danny wanted to tear it down and rip off some eager teams. They found a willing partner with a new ownership group and a well-compensated GM that wanted to make a splash
9. Miami #1 seed in the EC

Toronto had the same record as the Juggernauts. The Lakers had AD/Bron coming back.

Denver got smoked in the First Round of the 2022 playoffs. The narrative around them was they weren't serious contenders with their defense. They also had frail players like Murray/MPJ. Joker was easily the best player in the NBA, but the team fell apart whenever he sat. Their Dynasty was far from a certainty. Nobody mentioned the Nuggets in any thread around here in regards to the Gobert trade.

No reporter or Timberwolves Executive at the time was saying "The Wolves needed to add Rudy to solve the Joker & Denver Nuggets dilemma" because that was never a thing in the Summer of 2022.

Fast forward to Summer 2023. Year 1 of Gobert in Minnesota was a disaster. They had a worse record. Walker Kessler's production was pretty close to Rudy's. Wolves got blown out in Round 1 with Gobert and Slo Mo fighting in the huddle. The entire NBA community was laughing at the Gobert Heist by Danny. Especially after Brad Stevens got KP for flotsam + a 2nd, then extended him on a team-friendly deal.

I'm not accusing @PedroKsBambino of endorsing the Gobert trade.

I just believe the NBA Media spoon-fed us a completely made-up narrative last year. Why? Because it would make Connelly + Lore + ARod look clever. I've seen that narcissistic, ESPN-employed freak pull the same PR schtick before with steroids.

Not buying the BS.

Fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again. - GWB
 

Bosoxian

New Member
Aug 17, 2021
237
The Bucks 1-6 on the road is misleading as it doesn’t match their performance . Two of those losses at Brooklyn and Memphis during the first two weeks when they struggled badly which isn’t where this team is today. The other losses include one in Boston when they were leading late 3Q, in Cleveland when they were leading late 4Q, and the Hornets game where the refs blew a whistle when Ball tripped himself but they couldn’t challenge after winning a previous bad call.
I think a lot of the Bucks improvement is schedule related. They’re something like 1-5 against teams with winning records this month and 6-1 against teams with losing records.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
32,088
I think a lot of the Bucks improvement is schedule related. They’re something like 1-5 against teams with winning records this month and 6-1 against teams with losing records.
I’m not looking at W/L records for when a team is turning the corner. The improvement that I’m referring to came in their losses which then carried over to their wins. This was similar to last years Harden trade to LA when they were making big gains with each game that they ended up losing prior to that crazy winning stretch that followed.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
22,210
Santa Monica
I think a lot of the Bucks improvement is schedule related. They’re something like 1-5 against teams with winning records this month and 6-1 against teams with losing records.
The BUCKS are taking advantage of the EC underbelly & home court.

They've recently won 6 of the last 7 against Charlotte 2x, Detroit, Chicago, Houston, Toronto, & Indiana—6 HOME games

Their 1-pt HOME win against Houston (coming off the 2nd night of a road B2B for the Rockets - a classic schedule loss) has been their only victory against a winning team this season.

Off Rtg:113.4 (14th of 30)
Def Rtg: 113.2 (17th of 30)
Net Rtg: +0.2 (16th of 30)

Between now and Jan. 7, over the next 15 games, the Bucks will play 2 winning teams.
So HRB is correct, the BUCKS should go on a Clipper-style run over the next six weeks. Which will appear like a two-month run of sustained "good play"... EC sugar-high.

@wade boggs chicken dinner discussed teams stacking wins against bad EC teams before the season. It's playing out exactly that way.

If I'm a fan of a WC team, I'm shaking my head. Reverse of the 1980s
 

snowmanny

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
16,664
Incredible. Tangentially, whether or not the T-Wolves were built to beat the Nuggets, so far it seems that the Lakers are still not built that way.
 

LA_33

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 26, 2005
126
MN via MA
I’m not going to argue that “need to beat Denver” was the ONLY reason that Connelly and the Wolves made the Rudy trade. Or maybe even the #1 reason.

I also don’t have anything that was written at the time of the trade that clearly said it was an important factor.

But being local in Minnesota, with a media group that takes the Wolves seriously, and in particular has real conversations about the team on the radio, including a regular weekly radio appearances by Connelly and Finch, Denver was DEFINITELY coming up regularly when the trade was discussed, from day 1.

I think it’s clear the #1 motivation was the internal decision that they absolutely couldn’t contend with KAT as the defensive center and rim-protecting anchor. They had pushed up to 13th in team defense the year before the trade, but they did it with a hard-hedging, borderline gimmick scheme that was still bad at protecting the rim.

They flirted with a number of other trade targets, for a year or two, including some loudly whispered rumors that they were close on Myles Turner more than once.

Eventually, though, and I heard Connelly say this directly in his own words, when Gobert became an option, they felt he was the best version of the rim-protecting defensive anchor they o pair with KAT, and even though the price was very high, they thought the talent differential between Rudy and the next tier of options (let’s just keep using Turner) was bigger than the difference in price (Turner was reportedly going to cost them multiple 1sts, too, and in the end, I’d rather overpay for the legit All-D level guy in Rudy, rather than overpay for Myles Turner).

The incoming ownership had also given Connelly high confidence that they would sustain a Three Max Contracts perennial tax-payer payroll.

Then more than a full year after the trade, the new CBA and the 2nd apron making that nearly impossible, and forcing a KAT trade no later than this coming summer.

But back to the need to pair KAT with a defensive center, Denver DID come up constantly when Connelly and Finch talked about that need. Denver had a down year immediately prior to the trade, but that was also the year they got 9 TOTAL games from Murray AND MPJ, and Jokic had ascended to being the MVP and clear best player in the league.

Denver had won at least one playoff series each of the 3 prior years, though, and made the WCF the last time all three of Jokic/Murray/MPJ were fully healthy for the playoffs. And Connelly had just completed the Gordon trade in his last year there, adding the guy that gave them a Championship level defense the next season (Booth added KCP, but Gordon was the guy who made them contenders, IMO).

Connelly also knew them better than any other team, because he had just built them, and while he never said it outright because it was another team and he was talking publicly in the radio, it was clear that he thought Denver were the rising favorites in the West, younger than the Warriors or Suns (and Lakers), and with a better, more durable franchise player than Memphis. He clearly felt they were the top threat in the conference for the next half decade. He was very confident about the previous team he had built.

And then it immediately played out that way in the first year after the trade happened.
 

Euclis20

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 3, 2004
9,684
Oakland
I'll say it was impressive just how fast he jumped up after getting hurt:

View: https://twitter.com/heavenlybuckets/status/1860522536473084019


Like Tatum after a Grant Williams cheapshot.

Is that a career-ender for Grant?
Is it more than just the ACL? Everything I've seen just references the one ligament, not like that's not bad enough. Good thing for him is that he's signed through 2027 for a team that's not seriously trying to compete so he's got plenty of time to recover.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
20,202
Is it more than just the ACL? Everything I've seen just references the one ligament, not like that's not bad enough. Good thing for him is that he's signed through 2027 for a team that's not seriously trying to compete so he's got plenty of time to recover.
There's conflicting info:

https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/42584530/sources-hornets-grant-williams-done-season-torn-ligaments

Charlotte Hornets forward Grant Williams sustained season-ending tears to the ACL, meniscus and associated ligaments in his right knee, sources told ESPN on Sunday.
...
The Hornets on Sunday only said that a preliminary diagnosis revealed an ACL tear and that Williams would be out indefinitely.
It's not the kind of injury that would look career ending. An MCL tear to go along with an ACL (aka, Tom Brady) is certainly possible, however. Wouldn't call it career ending just yet.
 

slamminsammya

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
11,017
San Francisco
There's conflicting info:

https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/42584530/sources-hornets-grant-williams-done-season-torn-ligaments



It's not the kind of injury that would look career ending. An MCL tear to go along with an ACL (aka, Tom Brady) is certainly possible, however. Wouldn't call it career ending just yet.
I guess I didn't mean career ending just because of the injury itself but more because Grant was already on such a razor's edge with his athleticism. Remember his second season when he was out of shape and suddenly couldnt stay in front of anyone?
 

Euclis20

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 3, 2004
9,684
Oakland
What’s wrong with Indy? They looked great against the Celts
Haliburton is playing like a borderline all-star on offense, not looking anything like the modern Steve Nash that he resembled at times over the last couple of years. Combine that with his bottom of the class defense, and there you go. They match up well with Boston because of their speed, but they need more from Hali.

Today was my first time watching Dillingham play, and while he certainly provided a big spark offensively, it's not hard to see why he's barely played (just 47 minutes in 8 games before today). He's always going to have trouble defensively given his size (listed at 6'1 176, 20 pounds lighter than Pritchard), but my god, it was like he'd never seen a pick and roll before. It wasn't that his size was a problem (like Trae young) and it wasn't that he was lazy (Luka), it was that he had no idea what he was supposed to be doing. He'd hedge at the guy with the ball but only for a split second, allowing multiple wide open shots. More than once he picked off his own man trying to recover. He had no clue what he was doing, and very much looking the part of a guy who doesn't belong on the court for a team with title aspirations.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
33,487
I’m not going to argue that “need to beat Denver” was the ONLY reason that Connelly and the Wolves made the Rudy trade. Or maybe even the #1 reason.

I also don’t have anything that was written at the time of the trade that clearly said it was an important factor.

But being local in Minnesota, with a media group that takes the Wolves seriously, and in particular has real conversations about the team on the radio, including a regular weekly radio appearances by Connelly and Finch, Denver was DEFINITELY coming up regularly when the trade was discussed, from day 1.

I think it’s clear the #1 motivation was the internal decision that they absolutely couldn’t contend with KAT as the defensive center and rim-protecting anchor. They had pushed up to 13th in team defense the year before the trade, but they did it with a hard-hedging, borderline gimmick scheme that was still bad at protecting the rim.

They flirted with a number of other trade targets, for a year or two, including some loudly whispered rumors that they were close on Myles Turner more than once.

Eventually, though, and I heard Connelly say this directly in his own words, when Gobert became an option, they felt he was the best version of the rim-protecting defensive anchor they o pair with KAT, and even though the price was very high, they thought the talent differential between Rudy and the next tier of options (let’s just keep using Turner) was bigger than the difference in price (Turner was reportedly going to cost them multiple 1sts, too, and in the end, I’d rather overpay for the legit All-D level guy in Rudy, rather than overpay for Myles Turner).

The incoming ownership had also given Connelly high confidence that they would sustain a Three Max Contracts perennial tax-payer payroll.

Then more than a full year after the trade, the new CBA and the 2nd apron making that nearly impossible, and forcing a KAT trade no later than this coming summer.

But back to the need to pair KAT with a defensive center, Denver DID come up constantly when Connelly and Finch talked about that need. Denver had a down year immediately prior to the trade, but that was also the year they got 9 TOTAL games from Murray AND MPJ, and Jokic had ascended to being the MVP and clear best player in the league.

Denver had won at least one playoff series each of the 3 prior years, though, and made the WCF the last time all three of Jokic/Murray/MPJ were fully healthy for the playoffs. And Connelly had just completed the Gordon trade in his last year there, adding the guy that gave them a Championship level defense the next season (Booth added KCP, but Gordon was the guy who made them contenders, IMO).

Connelly also knew them better than any other team, because he had just built them, and while he never said it outright because it was another team and he was talking publicly in the radio, it was clear that he thought Denver were the rising favorites in the West, younger than the Warriors or Suns (and Lakers), and with a better, more durable franchise player than Memphis. He clearly felt they were the top threat in the conference for the next half decade. He was very confident about the previous team he had built.

And then it immediately played out that way in the first year after the trade happened.
Thanks. That's consistent with what I remembered, though you are certainly closer to it.

Ultimately, as you note, the problem Minnesota had was that you simply can't build a really good defense around KAT at center. So that is the problem Connelly had to deal with, and he took one of the paths to do so---adding a legit defensive center. This offseason, after his ability to carry salary changed, he then took the other obvious one---trading KAT. We'll see which of those ends up looking better, but I really do think that is the core challenge he (correctly, imo) recognized---you can't build a credible defense with KAT.

We'll see how this all plays out for the Knicks, but I am dubious even with two plus-plus defensive wings, that you can make it work.
 

jmcc5400

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 29, 2000
5,859
I’m not going to argue that “need to beat Denver” was the ONLY reason that Connelly and the Wolves made the Rudy trade. Or maybe even the #1 reason.

I also don’t have anything that was written at the time of the trade that clearly said it was an important factor.

But being local in Minnesota, with a media group that takes the Wolves seriously, and in particular has real conversations about the team on the radio, including a regular weekly radio appearances by Connelly and Finch, Denver was DEFINITELY coming up regularly when the trade was discussed, from day 1.

I think it’s clear the #1 motivation was the internal decision that they absolutely couldn’t contend with KAT as the defensive center and rim-protecting anchor. They had pushed up to 13th in team defense the year before the trade, but they did it with a hard-hedging, borderline gimmick scheme that was still bad at protecting the rim.

They flirted with a number of other trade targets, for a year or two, including some loudly whispered rumors that they were close on Myles Turner more than once.

Eventually, though, and I heard Connelly say this directly in his own words, when Gobert became an option, they felt he was the best version of the rim-protecting defensive anchor they o pair with KAT, and even though the price was very high, they thought the talent differential between Rudy and the next tier of options (let’s just keep using Turner) was bigger than the difference in price (Turner was reportedly going to cost them multiple 1sts, too, and in the end, I’d rather overpay for the legit All-D level guy in Rudy, rather than overpay for Myles Turner).

The incoming ownership had also given Connelly high confidence that they would sustain a Three Max Contracts perennial tax-payer payroll.

Then more than a full year after the trade, the new CBA and the 2nd apron making that nearly impossible, and forcing a KAT trade no later than this coming summer.

But back to the need to pair KAT with a defensive center, Denver DID come up constantly when Connelly and Finch talked about that need. Denver had a down year immediately prior to the trade, but that was also the year they got 9 TOTAL games from Murray AND MPJ, and Jokic had ascended to being the MVP and clear best player in the league.

Denver had won at least one playoff series each of the 3 prior years, though, and made the WCF the last time all three of Jokic/Murray/MPJ were fully healthy for the playoffs. And Connelly had just completed the Gordon trade in his last year there, adding the guy that gave them a Championship level defense the next season (Booth added KCP, but Gordon was the guy who made them contenders, IMO).

Connelly also knew them better than any other team, because he had just built them, and while he never said it outright because it was another team and he was talking publicly in the radio, it was clear that he thought Denver were the rising favorites in the West, younger than the Warriors or Suns (and Lakers), and with a better, more durable franchise player than Memphis. He clearly felt they were the top threat in the conference for the next half decade. He was very confident about the previous team he had built.

And then it immediately played out that way in the first year after the trade happened.
This is a great post. It’s awesome to have someone on the board who can speak with this level of authority about a rival franchise. I defer to your perspective!
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
33,175
For those who listen to Dunker's Spot you already know this but the pod pointed out that the one big strategic trend in the NBA was full-court pressure on defense. Makes sense as eating up any of the shot clock makes it harder to run the various reads/multiple screens that some teams run to get the matchup they want.

5 years ago, full court pressure occurred on approximately 12 possessions per game. Last year it was 16.7. This year, at one point it was 26 and now it is 24 possessions per game.

Pretty interesting to watch.

Nekias also said that PnRs are down, replaced by DHOs and just cut and passing.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
22,210
Santa Monica
5 years ago, full court pressure occurred on approximately 12 possessions per game. Last year it was 16.7. This year, at one point it was 26 and now it is 24 possessions per game.

Pretty interesting to watch.

Nekias also said that PnRs are down, replaced by DHOs and just cut and passing.
Thanks for posting that. The Celtics are unbeatable when Jrue/Jaylen go extra physical, full-court, body-bumping the ball handler defense

You know the Celtics are serious when they turn up the on-ball defense (instead of picking up slightly above the 3pt break).
 

TripleOT

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 4, 2007
8,422
The Cavs at 17-1 have three wins against top 10 teams (by record today) beating the Magic, Lakers, and Warriors at home

3-1 against top third teams
4-0 against middle third teams, beating the Nets and Bucks at home, and Knicks and Bucks on the road
10-0 against bottom third teams
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
14,280
SF
The Cavs at 17-1 have three wins against top 10 teams (by record today) beating the Magic, Lakers, and Warriors at home

3-1 against top third teams
4-0 against middle third teams, beating the Nets and Bucks at home, and Knicks and Bucks on the road
10-0 against bottom third teams
The East has a lot of weak teams (at least by current record), and Cleveland and Boston can't play themselves.

So, despite both teams having easy schedules to start, they also sit at #24 and #25 for remaining schedule difficulty (higher number is easier).

The Cavs are very good and doing exactly what you'd expect a good team to do.
 

TripleOT

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 4, 2007
8,422
The East has a lot of weak teams (at least by current record), and Cleveland and Boston can't play themselves.

So, despite both teams having easy schedules to start, they also sit at #24 and #25 for remaining schedule difficulty (higher number is easier).

The Cavs are very good and doing exactly what you'd expect a good team to do.
I’m guessing that if both teams are healthy and face off in the playoffs, top end talent will win out, assuming Boston can get good play out of Hauser and PP off the bench. The Cavs have a good bench.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
33,175
The Cavs at 17-1 have three wins against top 10 teams (by record today) beating the Magic, Lakers, and Warriors at home

3-1 against top third teams
4-0 against middle third teams, beating the Nets and Bucks at home, and Knicks and Bucks on the road
10-0 against bottom third teams
The ORL win was the second game ORL played without Banchero and at home - is ORL a top 10 team under those circumstances (I know you said by record now) - they are currently 2-6 on the road without Banchero (although ORL hasn't lost at home since apparently last April).

GSW was the game after their big win at BOS.

LAL I doubt will be top 10 team at the end of the season (same caveat as above).

CLE's schedule is about to toughen up after the next 2 games with ATL - BOS, DEN, @MIA, MIL (maybe), and then a west coast road trip at the end of December. CLE is deep and talented enough that they should feast on weaker teams so I wouldn't be surprised if they ended up as the one seed but the upcoming stretch will tell us how good they might be.
 

Silverdude2167

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 9, 2006
5,109
Amstredam
The Cavs at 17-1 have three wins against top 10 teams (by record today) beating the Magic, Lakers, and Warriors at home

3-1 against top third teams
4-0 against middle third teams, beating the Nets and Bucks at home, and Knicks and Bucks on the road
10-0 against bottom third teams
Cleveland is shooting 41.5% from 3 and 52% overall. If they can keep shooting at historic rates they are a problem, but those #'s will probably come down a bit though as only two teams have shot over 41% from 3 in the last 10 years and no one is close to 52%.
 

InstaFace

The Ultimate One
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
24,246
Pittsburgh, PA
At this moment, per Tankathon:

- 13 of the 14 teams currently in the lottery retain their own pick; only Minnesota is scheduled to convey (to Utah)
- Of those 14 lottery teams, 8 would have conveyed their draft pick, but-but pick protections.
- Of the 16 teams not in the lottery, 11 are currently scheduled to convey their draft picks to another team. Brooklyn is scheduled to receive 3 of these (MIL, NYK, HOU)!

So basically, two thirds of the league have traded or encumbered their first-round draft picks at the moment; about 40% of those are only not conveying due to lottery protections.

I wonder if this reflects an excessive herd mentality that is under-valuing picks, an inability to say no to trading the future for some magic beans at present, or if the value of non-high-lottery picks is in fact minor compared to what those later picks fetch in NBA talent, and thus the trades properly value them.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
22,210
Santa Monica
I wonder if this reflects an excessive herd mentality that is under-valuing picks, an inability to say no to trading the future for some magic beans at present, or if the value of non-high-lottery picks is in fact minor compared to what those later picks fetch in NBA talent, and thus the trades properly value them.
I will not stand for this 76er blasphemy, no way they end up in the TOP6:popcorn:

Due to most Firsts being 19-years-old and a longer development curve
1. Rebuilders should value Firsts
2. Contenders should value Veterans

That's what makes a market...
 

LA_33

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 26, 2005
126
MN via MA
At this moment, per Tankathon:

- 13 of the 14 teams currently in the lottery retain their own pick; only Minnesota is scheduled to convey (to Utah)
- Of those 14 lottery teams, 8 would have conveyed their draft pick, but-but pick protections.
- Of the 16 teams not in the lottery, 11 are currently scheduled to convey their draft picks to another team. Brooklyn is scheduled to receive 3 of these (MIL, NYK, HOU)!

So basically, two thirds of the league have traded or encumbered their first-round draft picks at the moment; about 40% of those are only not conveying due to lottery protections.

I wonder if this reflects an excessive herd mentality that is under-valuing picks, an inability to say no to trading the future for some magic beans at present, or if the value of non-high-lottery picks is in fact minor compared to what those later picks fetch in NBA talent, and thus the trades properly value them.
In terms of your conclusions, I'd think it's a combination of all those things.

I'd note, though, that the actual control/encumbrance of picks in a specific year is a far-trailing indicator of when the contributing attitudes and valuations happened. Because most of the traded picks were likely traded multiple years ago.

I'd suggest that at some point in the medium-term past, picks were probably undervalued. 3-7 picks+swaps had become the going rate in every deal for an All-star, and we're still seeing players on the level of Smart command 2 real 1sts. There have also been a LOT of those star-level-player trades in the past few years that involved at least three 1sts, and often several more than that.

Like, Harden alone was traded three times since 2021 in deals that are still active in terms of future 1sts being owed, with ELEVEN 1sts changing hands across those deals either outright or as swaps (2 swaps have already passed and not conveyed, but still). He hasn't made a single All-NBA team in that time, but he's individually responsible for more than a third of an entire draft class worth of picks being tornadoed around the league.

The flip-side, though, is that the teams receiving those large swaths of picks are also learning that there is serious diminishing returns for holding more than two firsts in a given year, especially if that's true for multiple years in a row. OKC has already started doing seemingly poor-value consolidation trades on draft night, and unless teams like Houston, Utah, Brooklyn, etc. start using their big piles of extra picks more aggressively, they're going to end up needing to do similar things. That seems to indicate that the picks are over-valued, so who the hell knows.

Then that value question is mixed with consistent use of long-term protections in most cases that don't involve "All of the picks for an All-star" trades, especially 3-5 years ago (I think this is also decreasing a bit more recently). So the current lotto teams scheduled to keep their picks because of protections have likely owed that same pick for multiple years, while they've stayed bad. When you can trade one 1st, but it technically encumbers your 1st for 4-5 years, it makes that list of encumbered picks look larger than it actually is on some level.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
32,088
For those who listen to Dunker's Spot you already know this but the pod pointed out that the one big strategic trend in the NBA was full-court pressure on defense. Makes sense as eating up any of the shot clock makes it harder to run the various reads/multiple screens that some teams run to get the matchup they want.

5 years ago, full court pressure occurred on approximately 12 possessions per game. Last year it was 16.7. This year, at one point it was 26 and now it is 24 possessions per game.

Pretty interesting to watch.

Nekias also said that PnRs are down, replaced by DHOs and just cut and passing.
Excellent timing for this post as the Clippers defense has been among league best since Kris Dunn was inserted into the starting lineup a couple weeks ago.
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
14,583
Real bummer. Shoulder charge on Tatum aside, he was playing really well and contributing to that team, and I wish him well. Hope he gets a good recovery but man that sounds like a total shredding of his knee. ACL and meniscus and other stuff besides... big yikes.
I hate to kick someone when they're down, but not sure Grant was playing "really well". He is not very good and has continued to be not very good this season. When he gets his 3PT% over 40% he has some value there, but this season he was at 36%.


GW.png



As far as the injury, I suppose it could be career "threatening" for a guy who is already only a fringe NBA player. Hard to know given the conflicting reports, but ACL + meniscus + other ligament stuff could be pretty bad. It's possible the other ligament issues are just minor sprains and the meniscus tear isn't that bad, in which case might be on a more traditional ACL timeline.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
14,280
SF
I hate to kick someone when they're down, but not sure Grant was playing "really well". He is not very good and has continued to be not very good this season. When he gets his 3PT% over 40% he has some value there, but this season he was at 36%.


View attachment 92297



As far as the injury, I suppose it could be career "threatening" for a guy who is already only a fringe NBA player. Hard to know given the conflicting reports, but ACL + meniscus + other ligament stuff could be pretty bad. It's possible the other ligament issues are just minor sprains and the meniscus tear isn't that bad, in which case might be on a more traditional ACL timeline.
Yeah, it just hasn't happened for him. Brad definitely was smarter than I am on that one. Although, I suppose Dallas was able to trade him as at least marginally positive value.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
22,210
Santa Monica
By the end, nobody around here shed tears when Grant walked.
I liked him a lot & he was a very nice complementary piece on his rookie contract.
He developed the CornerOffice and played the role of Giannis' punching bag over 7 games in the 2022 playoffs.

But there were rumors that he was looking for $20MM/yr :oops: kind of delusional.
Nice Guy Brad: "no sweat Grant, we'll just take this to RFA."
Then found a better defensive version of Grant (worse shooter) to play the small ball 5 in Tillman at the minimum
 

LA_33

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 26, 2005
126
MN via MA
The Hawks cared so little about winning that the league fined them for it, and they still beat us. That's somewhat embarrassing.
It's funny, because when I saw that report, my first and overwhelming reaction was, "Oh come ON, they WON that game, probably in significant part because Trae didn't play, the C's had a little "opposing star is out" let-down, and Daniels was awesome at both ends and he and Jalen Johnson were really effective as the primary playmakers." (The rookie who started in Trae's place also had 8 assists, but that felt secondary to me, and is probably covered in the "C's had a let-down with the opposing star out" point...).

I get that the league needs to be consistent in investigating and punishing violations of these rules (even if I'm a junkie, and don't personally care when "stars" are out for whatever reason the team has for holding them out). It's also probably fair that there were fans who were excited about that game in part because they wanted to see Trae Young play, and the rules are really about marketing more than competitive issues.

But it also feels stupid to punish them for a game that ended up being fun, and where the Hawks won against the defending Champs, especially in an IST game the league wants to market as adding early-season competitiveness. The move helped from a competition standpoint.
 

nattysez

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 30, 2010
9,389
For those who listen to Dunker's Spot you already know this but the pod pointed out that the one big strategic trend in the NBA was full-court pressure on defense. Makes sense as eating up any of the shot clock makes it harder to run the various reads/multiple screens that some teams run to get the matchup they want.

5 years ago, full court pressure occurred on approximately 12 possessions per game. Last year it was 16.7. This year, at one point it was 26 and now it is 24 possessions per game.

Pretty interesting to watch.

Nekias also said that PnRs are down, replaced by DHOs and just cut and passing.
I thought picking up full court was seen as too taxing on defenders and too likely to lead to the defense being poorly set up once the ball got across half-court (usually because the guy on-ball got beaten, so the defense is briefly playing 4 on 5). What's made those concerns go away?
 

astrozombie

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 12, 2022
705
It's funny, because when I saw that report, my first and overwhelming reaction was, "Oh come ON, they WON that game, probably in significant part because Trae didn't play, the C's had a little "opposing star is out" let-down, and Daniels was awesome at both ends and he and Jalen Johnson were really effective as the primary playmakers." (The rookie who started in Trae's place also had 8 assists, but that felt secondary to me, and is probably covered in the "C's had a let-down with the opposing star out" point...).

I get that the league needs to be consistent in investigating and punishing violations of these rules (even if I'm a junkie, and don't personally care when "stars" are out for whatever reason the team has for holding them out). It's also probably fair that there were fans who were excited about that game in part because they wanted to see Trae Young play, and the rules are really about marketing more than competitive issues.

But it also feels stupid to punish them for a game that ended up being fun, and where the Hawks won against the defending Champs, especially in an IST game the league wants to market as adding early-season competitiveness. The move helped from a competition standpoint.
This is where I am at. I think some stars (Embiid, Young, etc.) want to be the focal point so bad and are so embedded in their team that they get all the offense and everyone else is clearly a roleplayer on their team. When those guys miss a game, suddenly everything opens up, is a bit more democratic and every possession is not "give the ball to [player X] and let them do what they want". Combined with a probably more than a little hubris on the Cs part looking past this game on the schedule and the fact that stuff happens over an 82 game season, it was disappointing but not completely shocking.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
33,175
I thought picking up full court was seen as too taxing on defenders and too likely to lead to the defense being poorly set up once the ball got across half-court (usually because the guy on-ball got beaten, so the defense is briefly playing 4 on 5). What's made those concerns go away?
I think when teams pick up (1) I think teams have to have a guy who is both good at full court pressure plus has the stamina to do it (good thing Cs have at least 3 guys who do it and don't seem to tire - Jrue, PP, and JB), (2) the pressure isn't necessarily to steal the ball but slow offenses down, which helps prevent defensive breakdowns, and (3) realize that letting most modern day NBA teams go through 3 or 4 sequences on offense is going to be really hard to guard on a regular basis.

As Duncan mentioned, it's been going down a bit as the season goes on so it will be interesting to see how much teams use the strategy going forward.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
32,088
I thought picking up full court was seen as too taxing on defenders and too likely to lead to the defense being poorly set up once the ball got across half-court (usually because the guy on-ball got beaten, so the defense is briefly playing 4 on 5). What's made those concerns go away?
The old full court pressure was what Pitino tried bringing to the NBA which is the part that leaves you susceptible to numbers and wouldn’t work with todays elite offensive players. What teams are doing now is utilizing ball pressure from one defender in preventing the offense from getting started until :14 or so left on the shot clock while his teammates are positioned properly to defend a short shot clock in the halfcourt. It is increasing the value of these specialists in a money ball type of way.
 

Sam Ray Not

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
9,318
NYC
Gabe Vincent per 36 minutes in his 500+ minute career as a Laker:

6.0 points on .361 TS
1.8 rebounds
2.2 assists

Yes, that’s his actual true shooting percentage, and those are his actual numbers *per 36 minutes.* It almost seems impossible to be that bad.

$11,000,000 a year ain’t what it used to be…
 
Last edited:

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
32,088
Gabs Vincent per 36 minutes in his 500+ minute career as a Laker:

6.0 points on .361 TS
1.8 rebounds
2.2 assists

Yes, that’s his actual true shooting percentage, and those are his actual numbers *per 36 minutes.* It almost seems impossible to be that bad.

$11,000,000 a year ain’t what it used to be…
Iirc his first knee surgery didn’t go well and they had to go back in. It’s too bad as he worked to turn himself into a contributor out of nothing.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
22,210
Santa Monica
Gabe Vincent per 36 minutes in his 500+ minute career as a Laker:

6.0 points on .361 TS
1.8 rebounds
2.2 assists

Yes, that’s his actual true shooting percentage, and those are his actual numbers *per 36 minutes.* It almost seems impossible to be that bad.

$11,000,000 a year ain’t what it used to be…
Avoid Spoelstra's pixie-dusted players: Vincent, Strus, Caleb Martin

Even their GM got tricked with Duncan Robinson