The October Surprise

(John Lund/Riser/Getty Images)

NBA fans were treated to a sweet shock when the James Harden trade abruptly disrupted a cool, calm Saturday evening. In an offseason that included over 210 transactions, the weekend before the start of the season was suppose to be the moment of silence before the grind renewed. Many writers have broken down why the deal happened so suddenly, but I am curious about what this episode could possibly reveal about future transactions in the NBA.

During the NBA lockout, a new, harsh set of taxes was agreed upon as a form of competitive balance and revenue sharing. The prevalent thought among fans was that big market teams could no longer disregard the luxury tax limit. Doing so would make the team victim to very punitive measures such as the repeater tax (which greatly increases the monetary penalty a team faces for being over the luxury tax limit for 3 or more consecutive years). However, similar to public policy decisions, an action focused on solving a single problem will always have multiple side effects.

These side effects vibrate through many aspects of the NBA such as its teams' contending windows, its D-league, and its draft system. The details on how each are individually affected will be looked at in future posts, but one of the main consequences would be more fluid rosters in order to game things such as the repeater tax window. For example, draft picks become more valuable as cheap contract options, and the D-league becomes a more enticing entity to nurture assets. Additionally, every time a star gets traded in the upcoming seasons, more questions will be asked in hope of framing a narrative for the ever changing league.

It is easy to brainstorm many scenarios involving everyday league transactions and the questions they may generate. Drafting and developing a star might mean abandoning that player due to the stingier luxury tax, but teams will be able to benefit from their hard development work by trading the star for younger players and draft picks to replenish their future outlook. Will more teams become "farm" teams until they find that franchise player? Will this continue until an equilibrium is reached and every team has 2 stars? How much disruption in team rosters will be created when a team must drop out of the luxury tax after spending 2 years in it?  How will leverage for trades change? Will league average players lose job security? There are many more questions that can be asked, but there is no doubt that most teams in the the league (like the Thunder and Mavericks as recent examples) have preemptively made transactions to ensure flexibility in this evolving environment.

It will be exciting to watch the NBA continue to morph and new player combinations frequently emerge. What should not be surprising now is a future November, December, or March Surprise as the reality of the side effects of the new CBA ripples through the league.

The Triplet Towers

(3 towers, via NTbits.com)

Earlier today, Lamar Odom let the media know that he was going to start for the Lakers today in place of the suspended Ron Artest. To many fans, this seemed like a desperate measure for desperate times. This "triplet tower" lineup of Odom, Gasol, and Bynum has only played 3 minutes together in the regular season. While the Lakers look to have an advantage with length, rebounding, and interior defense, they seem to be foregoing spacing, quickness in defensive rotations, and transition defense. If there is any team that can be successful with this lineup, it is the versatile Lakers. Here is why:

Lineup Comparisons

In the sections below, I am going to compare 5 lineups in the areas of: spacing, rebounding, and assisting. The Lakers have an additional lineup to show how their regular front court would compare with the proposed supersized one. All the stats used in this analysis are from the 2010-2011 regular season from NBA.com and NBA StatsCube.

1) Mavericks 1: Dirk Nowitzki(Height: 7-0, Weight: 245lb), Brendan Haywood(7-0, 263), Tyson Chandler(7-1, 235)

2) Clippers Lineup: Blake Griffin(6-10, 251), Chris Kaman(7-0, 265), Deandre Jordan(6-11, 265)

3) Thunder Lineup: Kevin Durant(6-9, 230), Serge Ibaka(6-10, 235), Kendrick Perkins(6-10, 280)

4) Lakers Lineup 1: Lamar Odom(6-10, 230), Pau Gasol(7-0, 250), Andrew Bynum(7-0, 285)

5) Lakers Lineup 2: Ron Artest(6-10, 230), Pau Gasol(7-0, 250), Andrew Bynum(7-0, 285)

Spacing

(NBA Statcube shooting % via nba.com)

In the above picture there are 5 shooting regions: "A" for restricted area scoring, "B" for paint scoring, "C" for 2-point jump shot scoring, D for corner 3s, and E for wing 3's. In this exercise, we will examine 4 interesting "triplet" lineups and how their shooting percentages fair as they are overlapped.

For each lineup, we divided their collective field goal makes over collective field goal attempts in each region. This calculation made more sense to do than averaging because the players do not take the same number of field goal attempts in every regions (this was especially helpful to balance out the 3 point shooting. The columns on the charts correspond to the shooting regions (A to E) from left to right. In the listed data, we also mention which player contributes most to a particular region to give a sense where players should be positioned.

Mavericks Lineup:

Region A: 70.26% - Chandler with 318 out of the 660 attempts (owning 48.18% of region attempts)

Region B: 38.46% - Nowitzki with 163 out of the 247 attempts (owning 65.99% of region attempts)

Region C: 51.77% - Nowitzki with 667 out of the 734 attempts (owning 90.87% of region attempts)

Region D: 55.26% - Nowitzki with 38 out of the 38 attempts (owning 100.00% of region attempts)

Region E: 34.62% - Nowitzki with 129 out of the 130 attempts (owning 99.23% of region attempts)

Clippers Lineup

Region A: 65.71% - Griffin with 738 out of the 1181 attempts (owning 62.49% of region attempts)

Region B: 34.86% - Griffin with 245 out of the 327 attempts (owning 74.92% of region attempts)

Region C: 37.5% - Griffin with 369 out of the 560 attempts (owning 65.89% of region attempts)

Region D: 0.00% - Griffin with 2 out of the 2 attempts (owning 100.00% of region attempts)

Region E: 35.00% - Griffin with 20 out of the 21 attempts (owning 95.23% of region attempts)

*With Kaman missing the majority of the season, the stats have a much heavier bias toward Griffin shooting mid range jumpers. A look at the last quarter of the season would give a better sense of how this lineup would do.

Thunder Lineup

Region A: 69.91% - Ibaka with 297 out of the 678 attempts (owning 43.81% of region attempts)

Region B: 38.97% - Durant with 175 out of the 272 attempts (owning 64.34% of region attempts)

Region C: 41.09% - Durant with 663 out of the 920 attempts (owning 72.07% of region attempts)

Region D: 40.74% - Durant with 27 out of the 27 attempts (owning 100.00% of region attempts)

Region E: 34.54% - Durant with 387 out of the 388 attempts (owning 99.74% of region attempts)

Lakers Triplet Tower Lineup

Region A: 67.72% - Gasol with 450 out of the 1134 attempts (owning 39.68% of region attempts)

Region B: 40.24% - Gasol with 328 out of the 574 attempts (owning 57.14% of region attempts)

Region C: 43.76% - Gasol with 339 out of the 537 attempts (owning 63.13% of region attempts)

Region D: 36.36% - Odom with 20 out of the 22 attempts (owning 90.91% of region attempts)

Region E: 39.74% - Odom with 155 out of the 156 attempts (owning 99.36% of region attempts)

Lakers Regular Lineup

Region A: 64.10% - Gasol with 450 out of the 947 attempts (owning 47.52% of region attempts)

Region B: 37.76% - Gasol with 328 out of the 482 attempts (owning 68.05% of region attempts)

Region C: 41.44% - Gasol with 339 out of the 526 attempts (owning 64.45% of region attempts)

Region D: 39.20% - Artest with 123 out of the 125 attempts (owning 98.40% of region attempts)

Region E: 31.53% - Artest with 110 out of the 111 attempts (owning 99.10% of region attempts)

With these stats, we are able to see which front courts are the most accurate in each region and which front court is the most versatile (the lower the ownership percentage of attempts in a region for a particular player the more versatile the front court is).

Here, we list the top front court in each region first based on accuracy then based on versatility.

Region Accuracy

Region A Accuracy:  Mavericks: 70.26%

Region B Accuracy:  Lakers Triplet Towers: 40.24%

Region C Accuracy: Mavericks: 51.77%

Region D Accuracy: Mavericks: 55.26%

Region E Accuracy: Lakers Triplet Towers: 39.74%

Region Versatility (ownership percentage: the lower the more versatile)

Region A Ownership:  Lakers Triplet Towers: 39.68%

Region B Ownership:  Lakers Triplet Towers: 57.14%

Region C Ownership: Lakers Triplet Towers 63.13%

Region D Ownership: Lakers Triplet Towers: 90.91%

Region E Ownership: Clippers: 95.23%

While not much can be taken from the spacing provided by the 3 point range, this analysis shows that the Lakers are able to space the floor relatively well inside the arc. 

*In the following 2 sections, averages are for the average player in the front court, not for the entire front court.

Rebounding

Rebounding Averages:

1) Lakers Triplet Towers: 9.43 Rebounds/Game

2) Clippers: 8.77 Rebounds/Game

3) Lakers Regular Frontcourt: 7.63 Rebounds/Game

4) Mavericks: 7.2 Rebounds/Game

5) Thunder 6.8 Rebounds/Game

Offensive Rebounding% Averages:  Percent of Available Drebs collected while on the floor

1) Lakers Triplet Towers: 10.5% 

2)  Clippers: 9.9%

3) Mavericks: 8.7%

4) Lakers Regular Frontcourt: 8.67%

5) Thunder: 8.07%

Defensive Rebounding% Averages:  Percent of Available rebs collected while on the floor

1) Clippers 23.3%

2) Lakers Triplet Towers: 22.67% 

3) Mavericks: 22.63%

4) Thunder: 21.1%

5) Lakers Regular Frontcourt: 18.43%

Rebounding% Averages:  Percent of Available Orebs collected while on the floor

1) Lakers Triplet Towers: 16.77% 

1)  Clippers: 16.77%

3) Mavericks: 16.0%

4) Thunder: 14.83%

5) Lakers Regular Frontcourt: 13.67%

*You can multiply any of the averages by 3 to get a sense of the total collected by the particular front court.

Assisting

Assist Averages:

1) Lakers Triplet Towers: 2.57 Assists/Game

2) Lakers Regular Frontcourt: 2.27 Assists/Game

3) Clippers: 1.9 Assists/Game

4) Thunder 1.3 Assists/Game

5) Mavericks: 1.1 Assists/Game

Assist% Averages:  Percent of Available Drebs collected while on the floor

1) Lakers Triplet Towers: 12.7% 

2) Lakers Regular Frontcourt: 11.2%

3) Clippers: 10.5%

4) Thunder: 6.5%

5) Mavericks: 6.07%

*You can multiply any of the averages by 3 to get a sense of the total collected by the particular frontcourt.

Conclusion

Looking through these rankings, the Lakers Triplet Towers seem to dominate most of these rankings. One of the biggest reasons is the ability of Odom and Gasol to space the floor with their jump shooting, look for the open man with their passing, and gobble up tons of rebounds. Much of their success is both due to the triangle offense and both players' natural versatility. 

While all this seems to indicate that this new Lakers lineup may be more successful than their current front court, there are a few things to note. This analysis is heavily biased toward the Lakers due to the rotation between those 3 players (maybe that is just smart rotations), injuries with some of the other listed teams, and not including the Artest/Odom/Bynum lineup or the Artest/Odom/Gasol in the analysis. I also did not include many defensive stats too which may be the biggest worry in these big lineups.

Today, the Lakers are going to attempt to get out of their 0-2 hole against the Mavericks. If the Lakers can rotate well defensively, they have the potential be able to execute the triangle offense as well as they did during the 17-2 run, and they should be able to dominate the boards and get mismatch postups at the same time.

Blake Griffin Dunk Contest Idea and Product Placement

An In-N-Out meal via http://www.in-n-out.com

Over a month away, Blake Griffin will stand on the center of the basketball court in Staples Center as lights dazzle the stage and crowds cheer on. This is when Griffin pulls his trump card.

As Griffin walks to get the ball for his dunk, Deandre Jordan brings Griffin a bag from In-N-Out. Griffin smiles then pulls out a double-double (get it)  hamburger, animal style (has to be). At this point the commentators are busy talking about how good In-N-Out is as the crowd goes crazy because they instantly recognize the In-N-Out logo.

Griffin then places the In-N-Out double-double hamburger on the rim. Griffin does his powerful tomahawk dunk as he takes a bite out of the hamburger.

The crowd reaction should propel Griffin to a high score (similar to Dwight Howard's superman dunk). In-N-Out would also get a nice PR win with the huge Twitter storm that would follow. The interesting thing to observe here is how crowd reaction can affect the score of a dunk contest. If you can get the audience in the palm of your hand, you control the contest (ask Nate):

So to competitors of the NBA 2011 All-Star Dunk Contest: Remember that you are competing in front of a large audience from Los Angeles; be sure to adjust your routine to this crowd.

Giving What the Defense Reads you Part 1

 
What if I told you that whenever you play the game of basketball on offense, there is someone near your right shoulder telling your defender exactly what move will make. Whether it is a call for a flash screen, a jab step, shot fake, or hard drive, your opponent knows it. What if I told you that same someone tells your defender your move before you even think about the move? 

Clearly, this "someone" is costing your team a lot on the offensive end. Don't you just want to stop this thing from talking to your opponent? Actually, there is a better solution. What if you could train this someone to lie?