Murphy's Pub: Adaptation is good for the soul

As Gene Hackman would say, "My team is on the floor!" Today's Illinois team is the same team we, as Illini fans, are going to have to deal for the next year and a half (Michael Orris, a lightly recruited point guard, is next year's sole addition). Yes, they are going to compete and play hard, and we will love them for that. But they are going to have days like today where they just cannot buy a basket (contrast today to the Gonzaga game).

When you are a fan of a basketball team, there are things you can forgive (a team that competes hard and just misses shots - much of today's issues) and there are things you cannot get over. Today, there were several instances where the Illini made mistakes a 7th grade team wouldn't have made.

Case in point. Illinois cut UNLV's lead today to 8 late in the second half. They had the ball. Sam Maniscalco (a fine point guard, but one who is already horribly overrated by the Illini fan base - the people who say that Maniscalco is better than McCamey was are insane) pounded the ball at the top of the key for 25 seconds and the Illini turned the ball over. Now, if you have played basketball, you know that the fault on this particular play isn't on Maniscalco. The point guard brings the ball down, the big men set screens, and you have two guys popping out to the wing, the point guard makes the entry pass and the offense is moving. When no one popped out on that particular play, Bruce Weber needed to take a timeout and just berate his team. This is basic basketball. You can't play winning basketball when your point guard is wearing out the ball at the top of the key without any outlet.

The problem for the Illini is that they only really have three solid offensive options. Brandon Paul and DJ Richardson are solid Big 10 guards. When they have it going (and DJ did today with 17 points and 5 threes), you can run offense through either of them (see Brandon Paul late against St. Bonaventure). But Illinois needs to run offense through Myers Leonard to maximize their potential.

Leonard is a lottery pick in waiting. He's a 7'1" freak athlete. He has soft touch offensively (1-6 from the line today notwithstanding) and he's a surprisingly good passer for a guy his size. Not to go all Gene Hackman on the readers (reader), but any time Leonard is on the floor, he absolutely must get a touch in the post. This is simple. Guard pops out to the wing, Leonard posts and gets the ball. Double team comes, Leonard finds the open man. Double team doesn't come, Leonard scores. Bruce Weber MUST run the offense through his best player and if he doesn't, then he is over coaching and needs to go.

And here is the problem with coaches like Weber. They put the system ahead of the pieces on the floor. Weber's offense was perfect for the '05 team. Absolutely spot on perfect. But the '05 team isn't walking through the Assembly Hall tunnel. Other than Leonard, there isn't an NBA player on the roster. So simplify your offense. Play to your team's strengths. This Illinois team has plenty of strengths. They are very strong defensively they compete like mad, but other than DJ and maybe Maniscalco, they aren't going to shoot anyone out of the gym. And other than Brandon Paul, they don't have a guard that can create their own offense.

So let this be an informal plea to Bruce Weber. Simplify your system, run offense through Leonard, play to your team's strengths, and get the most out of a likeable, hard working Illini squad.

Cheers from Murphy's Pub.

Kenny Williams Makes a Trade!

The Hobbserver is back! Yes my loyal reader, I'm writing again with a goal to make two posts a week. Much like Cosmo Kramer's late Merv Griffin show, we took some time off to re-tool and are back - scandals and animals and all.

There's a lot to talk about in the world of sports. The Illini and UCLA will meet in what is likely to be the worst bowl game ever. Illinois basketball is off to an 8-0 start and is back in the Top 25. The NBA released its schedule and the Bulls are allegedly chasing Dwight Howard. With all that going on in the Hobbserver world, however, Kenny Williams was the man who forced my triumphant return to be about my beloved Chicago White Sox.

Kenny Williams made his first step on the road to rebuilding, trading closer Sergio Santos to the Blue Jays for 22 year old minor leaguer Nestor Molina. Why would the Sox trade an affordable closer with a live arm, under team control for the next 3 years (with an additional 3 years of club options) for Nestor Molina? And why do I actually love the trade?

(1) Nestor Molina immediately becomes the White Sox second best prospect (more on number 1 in a minute). Some scouts love Molina. Some don't. According to John Sickels, he was the number 2 prospect in a deep Blue Jays system. Another publication has Molina as the number 44 prospect in baseball period. According to Baseball America, on the other hand, he's a career reliever. The things I know: (1) The Sox scouts love Molina - they would not have traded a valuable chip like Santos for him otherwise. (2) Molina's numbers last year were absurd. In 130+ innings between A and AA, Molina struck out 148 batter and walked 16. That is just an absurd ratio. So even if Molina's stuff is average, you can't teach that kind of control.

(2) Closers are a luxury and their value fluctuates wildly. Santos had a great year last year. But he's 28 years old. His out pitch is a slider (meaning he has to pitch out of the strike zone to get outs). I mean, the Sox didn't move Mariano Rivera here. Plus, in what is likely a rebuilding year, a closer is the last thing you. Accordingly, there's no rationale for not getting value for a closer. I have absolutely no problem with the Sox selling high on Santos.

(3) And then there's the insurance policy - the top prospect in the White Sox system is Addison Reed. Reed was the Sox third round pick in 2010 and advanced insanely quickly through the Sox system last year going from A ball to AAA with an insane WHIP of .738 and 155 Ks in 108+ innings. At AAA Charlotte, Reed allowed 11 base runners in 21 innings. As a poster on Soxtalk.com said today, Addison Reed is "a machine designed to get people out." Reed is your closer next year and is the closer on the next White Sox contender.

(4) Really the only criticism of this trade that I can get behind is that Kenny Williams was too in love with Molina, fixated on him, and didn't explore other ideas that might have netted a greater return. No matter who much you love a prospect, prospects have an extremely high attrition rate. That's why most teams look to get multiple prospects back when they deal an asset. Peter Gammons indicated that Baltimore and Boston would have paid more for Santos. So Williams is taking a gamble that Molina is going to be a #3 starter or better at the next level. There is no room for error with this trade...

So there you have it. I love that the Sox moved Santos. I just really, really hope that Nestor Molina was worth the risk.

An Ode to Bob Bradley: Closing a Solid Chapter of US Soccer

Sigh. I know. Another post about soccer. Don't worry. Football season starts soon enough and then there will be more than enough Big 1G posts to go around.

With that being said, US soccer is entering into an exciting new chapter. The United States Soccer Federation (USSF) ended a five year flirtation with former German national team coach and diver extroardinaire, Jurgen Klinsmann, and unveiled him as the newest coach of the United States Men's National Team (USMNT).

Believe it or not, I have thoughts about the Klinsmann hire. Those thoughts can wait for another day. Today, I would like to take a moment to pay homage to the most under appreciated coach in USMNT history, Bob Bradley.

Bradley engineered a particular level of hatred from the most vocal portions of the USMNT fanbase. Carles over at Grantland brought up one of the more ridiculous reasons for the Bradley hate. For some reason, fans of US soccer underrated the coach's son to an absurd degree. To listen to those critics, Michael Bradley, arguably the best American field player at the World Cup, was only on the National Team because his coach was the dad. Pay no attention to Bradley's 18 goals at SC Heerenveen in the Dutch top division (the most goals in a single season by an American in a top European league). Pay no attention to Bradley's beautiful goal against Egypt that helped the US move onto the knockout round at the '09 Confederation Cup. Pay no attention to Bradley's fantastic goal against Slovenia at the World Cup salvaging a draw. Any unbiased observer would say that Michael Bradley is a pretty good soccer player.

Bradley haters liked to say that he hated Latinos. Let's ignore the fact that Bradley handed a critical start to Jose Torres against Slovenia at the World Cup (where Torres was awful by the way). That hasn't stopped Torres from reaching mythic proportions amongst the US fanbase. David Hirshey at ESPN rated Torres as the only true number 10 (playmaking midfielder) in the US player pool. Of course Hirshey failed to acknowledge the fact that Torres played sparingly in Mexico in the season following the World Cup. Is Torres a promising young player? Yes. Does he have a future with the national team? Yes. Does he need to play consistently for his club in Mexico before he passes Bradley, Maurice Edu, Jermaine Jones, Stuart Holden, Benny Fielhaber and Alejandro Bedoya on the US depth chart? Yes. Does Bob Bradley hate Latinos? There is no evidence to support that conclusion.

Bradley haters talked about how he never called in new players. Bradley gave 60 players their first cap (national team appearance). Bradley's haters somehow managed to criticize him for calling Freddy Adu onto the Gold Cup roster AND for not playing him soon enough. Bradley could never win. This was not a vocal minority of the fan base. This was the majority of the fan base.

To an objective viewer, Bob Bradley has an unmatched resume amongst USMNT coaches. Bradley coached the US to a Gold Cup win in '07 (Benny Fielhaber with a wonder goal to beat Mexico in Chicago). Bradley led the US to a win over Spain in the '09 Confederation Cup (ending Spain's 35 match unbeaten streak against essentially the same Spain team that won the World Cup the next year) and took the USMNT to its first ever final in a major tournament. Bradley's '10 World Cup squad drew with England and somehow managed to actually win their group.

Did Bradley fall in love with certain players? Rico Clark, Jonathan Bornstein, Robbie Rogers and Robbie Findlay certainly suggest that was the case. But Bradley was working with a talent pool where Clint Dempsey (a very good player on a mid table Premier League side) was his best field player. American soccer fans seem to have an overly optimisic sense of how good American soccer players are. No single field player on the US roster would make the 18 (11 starters + 7 bench players) for Spain, Brazil or Argentina (Tim Howard notwithstanding). The US should always be one of the top two teams in CONCACAF (with Mexico), but that's what they are, a regional power that just does not have the talent to compete with the best on the international level. For some reason, American fans put the blame for that lack of talent on Bob Bradley which is incomprehensible.

Was moving on from Bob Bradley the right move? Absolutely. No soccer coach should ever get more than one World Cup cycle with the National Team. You need fresh ideas after four years. And the USSF has apparently given Klinsmann unprecedented control. Klinsmann will have input at every level, from the youth teams on down, that Bradley never had. Klinsmann has the potential to actually influence the direction that USSF takes, from the national team on down to American youth soccer. So yes, the USSF made the right decision moving on. They ended their 5 year flirtation with Klinsmann and moved on. Let's just all acknowledge that Bradley's stewardship of the USSF left the national team in a better place than it was when he took over. So, I raise my glass to Bob Bradley tonight for a solid, and at times spectacular, 5 years as the head coach of US soccer. To an under appreciated coach. Cheers.

Kenny Williams Makes a Controversial Trade?

It must be July. In an annual rite of spring, Kenny Williams set the White Sox message boards aflame by making a deadline deal. The facts are these: the White Sox moved soon to be free agent Edwin Jackson and the awful Mark Teahen contract (3 years, $14 million for almost no production and awful fielding) to the Blue Jays for reliever Jason Frasor and prospect Zach Stewart. The Blue Jays then moved Jackson to the Cardinals for enigmatic center fielder Colby Rasmus.

I like how the Sox came out in this deal. I assume (probably making an ass out of me) that the Sox will use the Teahen money to re-sign Mark Buehrle. I like that Jason Frasor is a solid back of the bullpen guy with a cheap option for 2012 (3.75 million). I like that Zach Stewart is a live arm and jumps into the Sox five best prospects immediately (Stewart was rated as the Jays top prospect in '09 before regressing slightly this year - though it should be noted that the Blue Jays have a White Sox bad farm system). And I like that the Sox didn't really give anything up. Jackson is walking next year and with the emergence of Phil Humber this year, the Sox had an excess starter to move.

Ultimately, how you feel about this trade depends on how you feel about Colby Rasmus. Obviously the Sox could have had Rasmus. A 24 year old center fielder who, in his second full season ('10) hit .276 with 23 home runs and had an OPS of .859. Rasmus regressed this year (.246 BA and .753 OPS) but has all the tools to be a steal for Toronto. But you can't discuss Rasmus without also discussing his baggage. Rasmus wore out his welcome with Tony LaRussa (who, to be fair, has never had much patience for young players). He employed his own hitting coach. His dad is rumored to be, essentially, a stage dad (shocking considering his son is 24 years old).

To read the White Sox message boards, the Sox missed out on the second coming of Willie Mays for the benefit of adding an ok prospect and a decent reliever. The reality is that the ceiling for Rasmus is probably Carlos Beltran, a guy that will give you above average defense and hit .270 with power and the ability to run. The floor is Corey Patterson. I think it's telling that the Cardinals gave up Rasmus for 2 months of Edwin Jackson. That is all I need to know to tell me that Rasmus (1) has never had lower value and (2) is probably closer to Corey Patterson than Beltran.

Ultimately, the deal makes the Sox better today. The deal allowed them to call up De Aza who hit a huge homer in his big league debut, a two run bomb in a 2-1 win over Detroit, makes the bullpen better this year and next, gives them additional payroll flexibility going forward, dumps the Teahen contract, potentially opens the door for Viciedo to get a call up, and adds a promising young arm to the farm system. I give Kenny Williams and this trade a hearty, Hobbserver thumbs up.

Murphy's Pub is BACK

Apologies to the Hobbserver’s loyal reader for the long hiatus. A dying laptop, the mediocrity of the Chicago White Sox, and a busier than expected work schedule have conspired to keep me from writing. With that lame excuse out of the way:

It’s time for the Hobbserver’s First Annual Hugely Optimistic Preseason Post about Illinois Football. I’m not delusional. Illinois isn’t winning the National Title. They probably aren’t going to play in the inaugural Big 10 Championship Game (at Lucas Oil in Indy!). But I am utterly and completely convinced that Illinois is going to win not fewer than 8 games this year and will make back to back bowl games for the first time since... cringes... 1992.

I know what you are thinking, Rational Illinois Fan. Why on earth would I think that an Illinois team that lost their three best players to the NFL could possibly be as good this year as they were last year? Am I new to Illinois football? Why hasn’t all optimism been beaten out of me?

I know it isn’t easy to be optimistic about Illinois football. And I’m well aware of the history. I was crushed when the ‘94 Illini (starring Kevin Hardy and Simeon Rice, the second and third picks in the next NFL draft) were annihilated by the hated Michigan Wolverines on the opening day of the 100th season of Big 10 football (my first game at Memorial Stadium). I suffered through the anemic Lou Tepper era, the 0-11 Ron Turner team, the loss at home to San Jose State the year after making the Sugar Bowl, the heartbreak of John Mackovic leaving for the greener pastures of Texas after the Illini went 10-2 in ‘89. And, well, the Illini have been Zooked more often than they have Zooked their opponents during the Ron Zook era.

But this year, I believe. I believe that Akeem Spence will do a reasonable Corey Liuget impression. I believe that Jason Ford will come into Camp Rantoul at something less than the 245 pounds he weighed in at last year and that he will mimic the production of Mikel Leshoure. I believe Ian Thomas will slide into the MLB spot and adequately replace the production of Martez Wilson.

More importantly, I believe that Nathan Scheelhaase’s noodle arm has improved to the point that defenses won’t be able to sit on short routes. I believe that AJ Jenkins is going to be a game changing receiver again this year. I believe the o-line is going to be fantastic and that freshman Donovan Young is going to be the Next Illinois RB in the NFL. And I believe that Terry Hawthorne and Justin Green are going to anchor one of the best defensive backfields in the Big 10.

I believe that Illinois will be 6-0 when they host Ohio State October 15. I believe that Illinois will beat a tough Arizona State team at home, that they will overcome Western Michigan (who the Illini lost to in 2008), that they will beat Northwestern at home and Indiana on the road. Include two easy home games (Arkansas State and South Dakota State) and the Illini are 6-0. Ohio State could be reeling that deep into the season. An inspired Illinois team could gut out a win (a win they almost stole last year at Memorial Stadium) and then they are 7-0. I believe that will absolutely, maybe, happen.

Why do I believe? Honestly, the schedule really is favorable and a lot of people really do believe that Spence and Ford will be able to replace lost production. But more than anything else, it’s more fun to believe than not. That eternal optimism is what makes sports fun. That is why Opening Day is one of the most fun days of the year. That’s why I watch the NBA and NFL Drafts every year. And that’s why I will be in front of the TV every Saturday that I’m not actually at Memorial Stadium. Cheers from Murphy’s Pub. Go Illini.

Hakeem v.s Shaq Historically

Shaq retired yesterday. Just like that, one of the most interesting NBA careers ever is over. Shaq was a physical freak the likes of which the NBA has never, ever seen. He hung on for too long, so for many people the image of Shaq is a slow, plodding, giant of a man, effective for 10-15 minutes a game only if he stayed within 8 feet of the basket. They will remember how effective (and annoying) Hack-a-Shaq was. I can think of only two players who were so good that other teams resorted to literally beating them up to have a chance (Jordan being the other - remember how much punishment the Bad Boy Pistons and Ewing Knicks gave Jordan? Could you imagine if someone did that to Lebron now?). Shaq’s struggles at the foul line fed the party line that he was not a basketball player, he was just a physical specimen. His detractors always said that he dominated because he was so much bigger and stronger than his peers (the actual reason Shaq only won a single MVP when he should have won 3 or 4). But young Shaq, the Shaq that led the Magic to the finals in ‘95, was an incredible, destructive, athletic force. He had a reliable baby hook and could actually run. He peaked at the perfect time, stepping easily into the competitive void post-lockout as the best player on three straight champions and added a 4th ring with Miami for good measure after he and Kobe had a messy divorce in LA (a divorce, by the way, that did more good for Shaq’s legacy than anything - I would wager 95% of NBA fans took Shaq’s side of that argument).

His playoff dominance was incredible. In ‘01, the Lakers went 15-1 en route to the NBA title, sweeping the Blazers, Kings, and the Duncan Spurs along the way. Shaq averaged an astonishing 30.4 points and 15.4 rebounds per game. Not since Jordan averaged 43 a game in the ‘93 Finals had anyone dominated like that in the playoffs. That was by far the best post-Jordan team and the only post-Jordan team that could have played with the ‘96 Bulls.

So where do you rank Shaq historically amongst centers (note that I relish writing posts like this)? There are only four centers who can compete with Shaq’s resume: Russell, Wilt, Kareem and Olajuwon (five if you consider Moses Malone a center). Shaq lacked Russell’s rings, the sheer audacity of Wilt’s numbers, the MVPs of Kareem, or the wide array of post moves of Olajuwon (and it bears mentioning that Hakeem’s Rockets swept Shaq’s Magic in the ‘95 Finals). But remember that when Russell and Wilt played, they were the only elite, athletic centers. If you unleashed Shaq on the NBA in 50s and 60s, wouldn’t his numbers have looked just like Wilt’s? And remember that Kareem won 4 of his 6 MVPs in a diluted league when the ABA was siphoning talent from the NBA. Hakeem peaked at the perfect time to take advantage of Michael Jordan’s 18 month absence from the league.

I cannot objectively or subjectively rate the careers of Wilt, Russell or Kareem. I didn't witness their primes, so I cannot accurately rate them. But I can discuss Hakeem vs. Shaq as they battle for the coveted title of "Hobbserver's Best Center of the Past 25 Years."

The Case for Shaq

Shaq won 4 titles to Hakeem's 2. He won one MVP but should have won at least 3. Shaq was the best player on the best post-Jordan team. He destroyed Dikembe Mutumbo (the best defensive center that season) in the '01 Finals. When Shaq left the Magic, they regressed horribly while he turned the Lakers into contenders. When Shaq left the Lakers, they barely made the playoffs as the Heat soared to a title. You can objectively say that from '00 to '06 Shaq and Tim Duncan were the two best players in the league, something you cannot say for Hakeem.

The Case Against Shaq

Abysmal free throw shooter. In the 2000 Finals, Shaq was actually 36/93 from the foul line. A convincing argument could be made that Shaq could not win a title without another elite scorer. Since his free throw shooting was so bad, you could not run offense through him in a close playoff game. Shaq was fortunate to play with 3 elite guards during his prime (Penny Hardaway in Orlando, Kobe for 3 titles in LA, Wade in Miami). And finally, for a guy his size, he never made 1st team All-Defense (2nd team three times).

The Case for Hakeem

Destroyed David Robinson, Ewing, and Shaq in '94 and '95 en route to winning two titles, effectively destroying all three of his rivals. Only one MVP, but he absolutely should have won two. He wasn't blessed with Shaq's supporting cast, playing with only four All-Stars in his career: Ralph Sampson, Otis Thorpe, Clyde Drexler, and Barkley (at the tail end of career). Made the Finals in '86 and could have made several more if Sampson's career wasn't derailed by injury. For his first 11 years, he never averaged worse than a 20-10 and never averaged less than 2.7 blocks or 1.2 steals a game. He was the best defensive center of his era (nine time First Team All-Defense, Defensive Player of the Year in '93 and '94). Hakeem was the best low post scorer of his generation, superior to Shaq in terms of the variety of ways he could score. Better than 70% from the line for his career so he wasn't killing you in crunch time.

The Case Against Hakeem

Missed the playoffs during his prime ('92). Hakeem was fortunate historically that he peaked during the two years Jordan was off playing baseball so that he had the two titles on his resume. He was never as dominant as Shaq was from 2000-02.

Conclusion

It's close, but my vote goes to Hakeem for two simple reasons:

(1) He was a superior defensive player; and

(2) You could run offense through him at the end of games.

Shaq's larger than life personality will make his make him resonate longer than Hakeem, but I watched them both and I pick Hakeem. Feel free to chime in.

Dirk and Lebron's Place in NBA History

I love sports history. Nothing makes me happier than an inane argument about baseball hall of famers (anyone who has sat through my “Frank Thomas is a no doubt first ballot Hall of Famer" can attest to the unnecessary passion I bring to my arguments). While baseball has its Hall of Fame, the NBA has its 50 Greatest Players of All-Time. Every year, come June, we get a chance to debate and dissect the historical importance of athletes. Baseball is a game that we ultimately quantify by numbers (have you ever heard anyone argue that Dimaggio was a better hitter than Ted Williams because Williams never won a title). But in basketball, titles are the true mark of the greats. That is why a convincing argument can be made that Bill Russell was a greater player than Wilt Chamberlin, even though the numbers tells us that cannot possibly be true. Kobe enhanced his historical legacy by winning in ‘09 and ‘10 because he finally won without Shaq. No one can rationally argue that Kevin Garnett was better than Tim Duncan because the rings (4-1) tell us all we need to know. With all that being said, two players stand at a historical crossroads this year: Lebron James and Dirk Nowitzki.

Dirk
Dirk is entering his second finals (losing to Miami in ‘06) and has been, hands down, the best player this postseason. Who do we compare Dirk to historically? From a playing style standpoint, there is no apt comparison. Dirk is a 7 foot jump shooter who has developed a stunning low post game and is a German to boot. No one in history had his offensive game. And as a quick tangent, I blame Dirk for the erosion of low post skills in the NBA. Where is the Kevin McHale, the Hakeem Olajuwon, the Tim Duncan among the current crop of NBA players? All the big guys want to be jump shooters. Think of the big men still in the playoffs: Boozer, Bosh and Dirk are all way more comfortable facing up than with their back to the basket. Dirk made tall jump shooting attainable. But I digress.

If I am looking to compare Dirk historically, his contemporaries are probably Barkley (‘93 MVP, ‘93 finals runner up), Malone (‘97 and '99 MVP, Finals runner up in ‘97 and ‘98), Ewing (runner up in ‘94 and ‘99) and Garnett ('04 MVP,‘08 Finals winner). I would have an extremely difficult time arguing against any one of those guys being outside the top 40 players ever (I could make a case against Ewing but that’s it). Depending on how you feel about KG (ie, do you blame him for Minnesota’s years of mediocrity), doesn’t a title put Dirk ahead of that entire crowd?

Dirk’s legacy has taken some shots. His ‘07 MVP award is consistently derided because Dallas was knocked out in the first round by 8 seed Golden State that same year. He missed a free throw that would have tied the game late in Game 3 of the ‘06 Finals and griped about the refs (valid gripes, the Mavs were playing 5 on 7 from Game 3 on, but still) constantly as Dallas saw a 2-0 lead evaporate, ultimately losing in six (causing everyone to forget how unreal Dirk was until that point). A title in 2011 puts all that behind him. I say it puts him ahead of Barkley, ahead of Malone, and yes, ahead of Garnett as the second best power forward of his generation (no one is catching Duncan).

Where would a title put him among active players? Well, he’s behind Kobe, Shaq, Duncan and Lebron (he’s a 2 time MVP already, I don’t care that he hasn’t won a title... but we’ll get to him in a minute). And I have him ahead of Nash, Garnett and Wade. If he wins a title this year, Dirk becomes the 5th best active player historically. In my lifetime, he’s behind Jordan, Magic, Bird, Isiah, Kareem and Olajuwon as well (and maybe Pippen). A title this year makes Dirk one of the 10 best players of my lifetime. Without a title? He ranks right with Malone, Barkley, Ewing, Iverson, Nash and Kidd as the best players in my lifetime with no titles to their names.

Lebron
What is Lebron’s legacy going to be? Maybe the most difficult thing for Lebron is that he is not the player we expect him to be. We want him to have Jordan’s killer instinct. Lebron goes to Miami in free agency, taking the path of least resistance to a title. We want him to be Magic running the break. Lebron has never shown a desire to be a point guard. We want him to average a triple double. No one has even come close to that since Oscar Robertson back in an era with inflated numbers. Expectations on him are so high, he is destined to never live up to them. A title might let Lebron be Lebron. Comparing him to Jordan or Magic does a disservice to everyone involved.

A title for Lebron legitimately makes him one of the five best players of my lifetime. He would not have the resume of Jordan, Bird, Magic, Isiah, Kareem or Olajuwon. But he would win his first at 26, two years ahead of Jordan. In my lifetime, Magic, Bird, Jordan, and Duncan are the only players with multiple MVPs who also won a title (I don’t count Kareem since his last MVP was in ‘80 and Moses Malone won his last MVP in ‘83, the year I was born). Shaq, Kobe and Olajuwon never won multiple MVPs (though each of them probably should have). Malone and Nash never won a title. That is a pretty impressive list.

Lebron is nearly a mortal lock to be the best player of his generation. Bird and Magic dominated the 80s. Jordan was the player of the 90s (with Olajuwon filling the role for the two non-Jordan years). Shaq and Duncan ran the show for the first part of the ‘00s. Kobe owned the last half. Lebron’s only real competitors are Derrick Rose (youngest MVP in league history), Kevin Durant and Dwight Howard, but Lebron is leaps and bounds ahead of those guys. The glaring hole in Lebron’s resume? No title. If the Heat let the Bulls back in the series or if they ultimately fall to Dallas, that hole will be a little more glaring.

The One That Got Away

Game 4 was the One That Got Away. Looking back on Game 4, there isn’t a whole lot to be critical of. I disagreed with clearing out the floor for Rose with 8 seconds left at the end of regulation (especially given how unreal Lebron was defensively on Rose), but I understand the decision. So without further ado, a breakdown of my thoughts on Game 4:

(1) Ronnie Brewer was spectacular. When you are defending Wade or Lebron, you know that they are going to make shots. Your job is to make it as difficult as possible for them to make shots. Brewer did that on Lebron in the 1st Quarter when Deng picked up his 2nd foul and he did it in the 4th Quarter on Wade. Brewer even hit a huge 3 in overtime that kept the Bulls fading hopes alive. In a series where Kyle Korver has been non-existent, Brewer’s minutes late kept the Bulls alive.

(2) Welcome back Carlos Boozer. I don’t know why I thought Boozer was “The Back to the Basket Scorer the Bulls missed” since he is amazingly ineffective with his back to the basket, but he has finished well around the basket, made jumpers, made free throws, and rebounded over the last two games. If you told me Boozer would get back to back 20-10s at Miami, I would have expected at least one win. Unfortunately, Boozer still is a complete and utter liability defensively. His soft foul on the Lebron “And 1" late and his dubious flagrant foul on Bosh forced Thibs to put a cold Taj Gibson in up 84-83. Taj bit on a Bosh shot fake and hit a 12 foot jumper.

(3) Lebron James is a freak of nature. Lebron’s defense on Rose gave me PTSD style flashbacks to March 2001 when Richard Jefferson absolutely locked down Frank Williams in the Elite 8. I think it is important for everyone to take a step back, remember that Rose is 22 years old and the only player that can create offense for himself on a 62 win, Eastern Conference Final participant. Rose will improve, the Bulls will continue to play great team defense, and they will come back hungrier next year. Tip your cap to Lebron. But for his late game heroics in Games 2 and 4, the Bulls are up 3-1 heading back to Chicago to close the series out. Lebron may be an egomanical (see his tattoo of the “Chosen One” on his back), poorly advised (see the Decision), overgrown child, but there is no denying the fact that he is the most destructive athletic force in the NBA and the most dominant player in the game today. So there you have it, I can give credit where credit is due.

(4) Loul Deng deserves a lot of credit this year. In order for this Bulls team to have the season they had, two things had to happen. The first is that Rose had to evolve into an elite player (check). The second was that Luol Deng had to accept his role as the third option offensively and, most importantly, his role as the Bulls high minute, defensive stopper. Deng did both of those things. Watching him harass Lebron this series has been a thing of beauty. Watching Deng trudge off the court at the end of Game 4, you could tell that he left everything he had on the floor. So long as Deng continues to accept that role, the Bulls will be contenders for a long time.

(5) This series is not over. The Bulls were in Games 2, 3 and 4 in the 4th Quarter. If they can win Game 5 Thursday and figure out a way to get Rose going offensively (how good has Miami’s defense on him been? Since Game 1, Rose has had no room to breathe), the Bulls have shown they can play with Miami on the road. This will take a Herculean effort, but the Bulls are not dead in the water yet.

Reflecting on Heat-Bulls

The second half of Game 1 was a dream. The second half of Game 2 was a nightmare. In a world where you are only as good as your last game, but more importantly, where the media and fans assume that the most recent game will necessarily equate to results the rest of the way, everyone handed the Bulls the Eastern Conference crown after an inspired Game 1. Those same people are now handing the crown to Miami after Game 2. Sifting through all that mess, what do we actually know about this series:

(1) Ultimately, the superstars decide the games. Derrick Rose was great in Game 1, he was awful in Game 2. Lebron and Wade were poor in Game 1 and really good in Game 2. It’s not a surprise then that we are even at 1-1. Rose’s Game 1 success was instrumental in his struggles in Game 2. Rose was an effective jump shooter in Game 1. I have written about how Rose is at his best when he attacks. But Miami plays very, very good defense and they have prevented Rose from being successful in the paint in back to back games. Steve Kerr harped on this Game 2 but it bears repeating. When Wade guards Rose, the Bulls need to set high screens for him with whoever Bibby or Mike Miller or Mario Chalmers is guarding. The Heat were extremely successful in the 4th quarter last night getting Lebron matched up with Korver and Rose and away from Deng who has made things very, very difficult on Lebron.

(2) Kyle Korver may not have a place in this series. I was really looking forward to Korver helping the Bulls offensively in 4th quarters this series, but Korver cannot guard Wade or Lebron and last night showed exactly how detrimental to matching up Rose on Wade is to the Bulls offensively. Now, if Korver knocks down shots, I’m probably singing a different tune today. And if Rose gets a rest at the start of the 4th quarter, he probably has the legs to both adequately defend Wade and remain effective offensively. The fact remains, however, that if Korver is on the floor, the Bulls only player who can create his own shot is expending tons of energy on the defensive end which is clearly detrimental to Rose’s offense. Also worth mentioning, my favorite use of Korver is when the Bulls bring him off screens and he catches around the elbow. For ease of explanation, let’s say Taj Gibson sets the screen, Haslem is guarding Taj, and Bibby is guarding Korver. If Haslem jumps out on the screen at Korver, the Bulls have a mismatch and Korver can find Taj cutting hard to the basket alone. If Haslem stays home, Korver has an open 15-18 footer. But I don’t remember the Bulls using that set once in the 4th quarter last night when they were really struggling to find offense. If Korver is not helping on offense, the Bulls need to have Ronnie Brewer or Bogans on the floor in the 4th quarter.

(3) Udonis Haslem is the guy that can swing this series for Miami. Chris Bosh is not an energy guy. Joel Anthony is a stiff. Jamaal Magloire and Juwan Howard are done. Ilguaskas and Dampier haven’t even suited up yet. Haslem, on the other hand, brings a swagger and energy that absolutely turned Game 2. The Bulls picked up something like 7 offensive rebounds in the 1st quarter against the Heat’s horrible frontcourt. Haslem came in and changed the energy and changed the course of the game, potentially saving the Heat’s season. Ultimately, Haslem is not going to score like he did in Game 2, and he clearly does not have the fitness level to give the Heat more than 20 good minutes a night, but the Heat don’t need him to score, they need his energy and hustle. He is the only Heat big that can counter the energy that Noah, Asik and Taj bring to the floor.

(4) This series is going to be an absolute war. You have two extremely good defensive teams, three of the five best players in the league, and scrappy energy guys in spades (Noah, Asik, Haslem, Taj). Is it any surprise that the team who won the rebounding battle won each of the first two games (Heat outrebounded the Bulls 45-41 in Game 2). Going into the series, my heart said Bulls in 7 but my head said Heat in 6. Nothing I have seen thus far has changed that. For the Bulls to win this series, they need to get to the majority of loose balls, out rebound the Heat every game, challenge Wade and Lebron every single time they attack the basket (loved how Asik looked like a volleyball blocker at the net on that Wade drive in the 4th quarter). 3 of the 4 best offensive players in this series play for Miami so the Bulls need to win the intangible battle. They did in Game 1 and until Haslem showed up last night, they were doing the same thing in Game 2. Steal one in Miami and the Bulls are back in the driver’s seat. I cannot wait. Go Bulls.

What is Wrong With the Bulls??

There has been a significant amount of criticism thrown Derrick Rose’s way in this playoffs. Rose has defined “volume shooter.” And beyond occasional moments of offensive brilliance from Kyle Korver and Luol Deng, Rose has had no help offensively. The issue with Rose, however, is not the number of shots he has taken, but rather the quality of the shots.

Derrick Rose is Lebron James in a smaller package. The freak athleticism, the unnatural ability to finish at the rim in spite of contact. But Rose has the same offensive limitations as Lebron. He isn’t a great three point shooter. Like Lebron, he can become a volume three point shooter. The Hawks have goaded Rose into taking a total of 25 three through four games (he has made 8). I get it. The three is an important part of Rose’s arsenal. The threat of the three forces defenders to go over screens rather than under them. But when you are shooting 33% from three, you should not be taking over 6 of them per game.

Good things happen when Rose attacks the basket. He draws absurd amounts of help meaning that the Bulls bigs have opportunities for easy baskets off the dish or on weakside putbacks. Ultimately, the reason the Bulls and Hawks are tied at 2 right now is that Boozer and Kyle Korver are struggling. They are the two most important offensive players other than Rose on the roster because they are the only other players the Bulls can run offense through. Boozer was effective in Game 3. His effectiveness, however, was 12-18 feet from the basket. Boozer needs to be able to score on the block. Additionally, the only player besides Rose that the Bulls love to run offense through is Korver. The Bulls run Korver off screens constantly for open jump shots or for him to find a big slipping the screen for an easy basket at the rim. Korver’s problems against Atlanta are two fold: (1) he is just 9-30 this series. Korver needs to be a threat offensively for him to have any value whatsoever. (2) The Bulls cannot hide him defensively. Korver cannot guard Jamal Crawford or Joe Johnson. Jeff Teague has been extremely effective against Korver as well. The Bulls like to use Korver late in close games but he has to be able to score to be a net positive for the Bulls under that scenario (note that they will be able to hide Korver against Miami. Korver can “guard” Mike Bibby just fine).

At the end of the day, if Rose attacks the basket tonight, the Chicago home crowd will lift the Bulls to a Game 5 win and we will all feel a lot better about the Bulls chances of moving on to the Conference Finals.

NBA Playoffs: Previewing the Second Round

The NBA playoffs have reached the Conference Semifinals (a fancy term for the 2nd round) and some very interesting storylines remain. In fact, I could make a very persuasive argument that, even as a Bulls fan, the Bulls-Hawks series is the most blase of the 2nd round matchups (that won’t stop me from devoting lots of words to that series). Without further ado:

(3) Dallas v. (2) LA

This has been repeated ad nauseum, but it really is a fascinating stat that bears repeating here: Dirk and Kobe have never faced off in the playoffs. That is incredible. Over the past decade, four teams have been relevant in the West and each team had a long time superstar associated with them. You had the Duncan Spurs, the Nash Suns, the Dirk Mavericks and the Kobe Lakers. To have two of those superstars never meet in the playoffs is fascinating.

Anyway, this should be a great series. Dallas outplayed Portland in 5 of the 6 games in the first round. Dirk was an assassin late, Jason Kidd looked about 10 years younger than he actually is. Shawn Marion looked like he cared. If Dallas is more than just the Dirk show, they could give the Lakers problems. Ultimately though, this is a fairly good matchup for the Lakers. Kidd cannot penetrate like he once did so he won’t expose the Lakers’ glaring weakness defensively (inability to guard point guards). And Dallas does not have a great defensive matchup for Kobe. I see the Lakers winning this one in 6.

(8) Memphis v. (4) Oklahoma City

Memphis has been outstanding in the playoffs. Zach Randolph has played exactly like Carlos Boozer should play. He is a little unorthodox for a big man, falls in love with his jumper a little too frequently, but when his head is on straight, he is a pretty reliable 20-10 power forward. Plus, he pulls Kendrick Perkins or Serge Ibaka away from the basket where both are not that comfortable defensively. With Marc Gasol and Randolph playing inspired basketball, Memphis is winning the war in the trenches and that was the difference in Game 1.

Russell Westbrook is the Achilles Heel for OKC right now. All the talent in the world, but he is not efficient offensively (settling for jumpers far too often late). And in crunch time, he is taking the ball out of Kevin Durant’s hands. If Westbrook embraces his role as the Robin to Durant’s Batman, OKC should be ok. Perkins veteran experience added to the fact that Kevin Durant is the best player in the series will get OKC through a surprisingly tough 7 games.

(3) Boston v. (2) Miami

This is a very, very interesting series. It is worth noting that Boston pretty clearly made the Kendrick Perkins for Jeff Green trade with this series in mind thinking that Green would be another perimeter defender to throw at Wade and Lebron. With that being said, the two keys to the series are Rajon Rondo and Chris Bosh. Wade is going to get his points. Lebron is going to get his points (though I really think that each guy is, at best, 85% as effective as he would be without the other since they both need the ball to be effective and neither guy is an elite shooter). If Bosh can score against Garnett, the Heat will win in 5 or 6. If Boston is to win, Rondo needs to be a threat offensively. In Game 1, the Heat “guarded” Rondo by playing as far off of him as possible. Mike Bibby in his prime could not have stayed in front of Rondo, so if the Heat are forced to respect a jumpshot, the Celtics gain a huge edge. Ultimately, the Heat had to have Game 1 and need Game 2 as well to set the tone for the series. They cannot go to Boston at 1-1. But Miami has the two best players in this series and I don’t think Rondo will make an impact. Miami in 6.

(5) Atlanta v. (1) Chicago

Not a lot of storylines in this matchup. There isn’t a whole lot of bad blood (Kirk Hinrich and Jamal Crawford are former Bulls, but neither really left on bad terms). This is an ideal matchup for the Bulls. Hinrich is a scrappy, underrated defender, but he isn’t 100% and does not have the elite athleticism to challenge Rose in the air. Atlanta lacks an elite shot blocker to give Rose problems and lacks anyone that can score with Rose on a consistent basis (Jamal Crawford and Joe Johnson both have their moments, but neither have showcased the ability to carry Atlanta night in and night out). The key for the Bulls in this series is getting Carlos Boozer going. Boozer was terrible against Indiana. The Bulls will need a healthy, effective Boozer to make it out of the East and this series is the ideal time for Boozer to get going. The Bulls win in 5.

Can an Elite Point Guard Win an NBA Title?

If the Bulls win the NBA title this year, it will be an unprecedented achievement in modern NBA history. You are reading that and thinking: Wow, that’s a fair amount of hyperbole from a Bulls homer. But I have the facts to back it up. Since 1984, the list of NBA champions with their best player in parenthesis:

1984: Boston (Bird)
1985: Lakers (Magic/Kareem)
1986: Boston (Bird)
1987: Lakers (Magic/Kareem)
1988: Lakers (Magic/Kareem)
1989: Detroit (Isiah)
1990: Detroit (Isiah)
1991: Chicago (Jordan)
1992: Chicago (Jordan)
1993: Chicago (Jordan)
1994: Houston (Hakeem)
1995: Houston (Hakeem)
1996: Chicago (Jordan)
1997: Chicago (Jordan)
1998: Chicago (Jordan)
1999: San Antonio (Duncan)
2000: Lakers (Shaq/Kobe)
2001: Lakers (Shaq/Kobe)
2002: Lakers (Shaq/Kobe)
2003: San Antonio (Duncan)
2004: Detroit (Billups)
2005: San Antonio (Duncan)
2006: Miami (Shaq/Wade)
2007: San Antonio (Duncan)
2008: Boston (Pierce/Garnett)
2009: Lakers (Kobe)
2010: Lakers (Kobe)

Of those teams, only the ‘89, ‘90 and ‘04 Pistons won the title when their best player was their point guard (arguably every title won by the Showtime Lakers falls in this category as well, but the fact that Magic had the second best center of all-time and the guy who scored the most points in NBA history excepts those Lakers teams from this discussion). The ‘04 Pistons were unique in that their entire starting lineup was, at a minimum, a fringe All-Star. The Isiah Pistons were the closest approximation to the current Bulls team. They had a rugged frontline, a deep bench, and clearly, their best player was their point guard (Lambieer = Noah, Vinnie Johnson was their Kyle Korver - a guy they can run offense through for extended minutes off the bench, Deng was Mark Aguirre). But Isiah Thomas had a perfect complement in Joe Dumars. Dumars was good enough to carry the Pistons offensively for stretches, and an extremely good defender (at 6'3" you could argue he defended Jordan better than anyone ever). The Bulls lack their Joe Dumars (though if you could combine the best attributes of Korver and Bogans you might create a Dumars clone - the other half of Keith Borver would be the worst player in the league). And therefore, they run afoul of the fundamental rule in modern NBA history, to which only two Pistons teams are the exception: you do not win a title with a point guard as your best player and the focal point of your offense. You win with a dominant, taller scoring guard, a dominant big man or both. The 2010-2011 Bulls have neither. The counter to this argument, of course, is that Isiah proved that what mattered was not whether you had the taller scoring guard or a dominant big man, but rather whether you had the best player. And the Bulls should feel comfortable that, other than against the Heat, in the East, they will have the best player on the floor at all times.

But think about the great point guards over the past 20 years: Gary Payton made the ‘96 Finals with Kemp, but when Kemp lost his edge, Payton never made it back. John Stockton made the ‘97 and ‘98 Finals, but it was his relationship with Karl Malone that got them there - and again, no titles to their credit. Jason Kidd made the Finals with New Jersey in ‘02 and ‘03 when he quite literally was their team (with all due respect to Kerry Kittles, Kenyon Martin and Richard Jefferson). Kidd was at his apex those two years and made everyone 20% better offensively. But Kidd failed to win a title. Steve Nash won MVPs in ‘05 and ‘06 but he never made a Finals. Chris Paul and Deron Williams have yet to make a Finals as the best player on their respective teams. The last small guard to have the offensive responsibilities of Rose was Allen Iverson, and he made the Finals only once, in 2001 (although it should be noted that the Sixers destroyed Iverson’s title chances by never giving him a remotely decent supporting cast).

Rose is a great player; in a few weeks, the smart money has him winning the MVP award at the age of 22. He is brilliant with the ball in his hands, a combination of Iverson and Lebron offensively with an improved jump shot that forces defenders to go above, not below, high screens to defend the shot. Every team in his way has weaknesses. The Celtics are aging and, after the Kendrick Perkins trade, lost some of their edge. The Heat have absolutely no bench and will be destroyed by the Bulls on the inside. Orlando and San Antonio may not get out of the first round. The Lakers clearly cannot defend a quick point guard (see the re-emergence of Chris Paul as he kills the Lakers). Dallas is as much of a one man show on offense as the Bulls are. The Thunder are younger than the Bulls (though if the Bulls make the Finals and run into OKC, that’s a nightmare matchup for the Bulls - Westbrook is as athletic as Rose and Durant fits the bill of tall, elite scorer that wins titles). The Bulls aren’t competing against the Showtime Lakers, the Bird Celtics, the Jordan Bulls, the Shaq/Kobe Lakers or even the Duncan Spurs. There is no dominant NBA team this year and the title is there for the taking, just like it was for a unique Pistons team in ‘04. But years of recent NBA history tell us that high scoring point guards don’t win titles. Then again, before '91, Jordan wasn't going to win a title without a big man. Six titles later, conventional wisdom changed again. Rose is going to need a lot of help from Boozer and Deng to change that conventional wisdom and hoist the Larry O’Brien trophy.

Pat Forde and I hate the NBA Age Rule

Pat Forde wrote a column on ESPN today about Josh Selby over at Kansas. Basically, Josh Selby was one of the top 5 recruits in the country in the high school class of 2010. If the NBA’s age limit was not in place, he would have been a lottery pick last year. Then, he arrived at Kansas, broke his hand, and never lived up to his hype. He is heading to the NBA draft anyway, even though he will probably be a late first round pick at best. Millions of dollars disappeared due to the college age rule. Forde’s thesis was that the age rule does a disservice to athletes and universities alike and that the NBA’s age rule should be abolished. I agree.

College provides kids with an education and a degree that maximizes their earning potential over time (even if they major in Philosophy). Those lucky few, people like Josh Selby, or Kevin Garnett, or Lebron James, or Gerald Green, have been blessed with abilities that make college unnecessary (much like Bill Gates was blessed with an ability that made college unnecessary). They can make millions of dollars right out of high school. For some of these kids (see Gerald Green) college could have either (a) exposed weaknesses in their game and cost them millions or (b) provided them with the valuable coaching and maturity needed to maximize their career and earning potential over time. The kids that are ready for the NBA immediately are the exception, not the rule. But shouldn’t the NBA recognize that exception instead of creating barriers to earning a paycheck?

There are talented players who come to college, recognize how much fun it is, and realize that the money will still be there in a few years. Harrison Barnes and Jared Sullinger both fall into that category. But who is David Stern to say that, at 18, a kid who needs the money has to turn back in his winning lottery ticket to go to “school” for a year. Isn’t it incredibly paternalistic to tell a kid that they have to go to school for a year when they neither want to go or need to go? And doesn’t that, in turn, take a scholarship away from another kid that both wants to and needs to go to school? I mean, I get it, NBA teams like the age rule because it gives them an extra year to evaluate players. Fans like the age rule because it prevents the college product from becoming overly diluted. The rule protects the kids who get bad advice from the wrong people and throw away their college eligibility to never get drafted. But the age rule needs to be abolished, a true minor league system put in place, and sanity needs to be restored to college basketball.

NBA Playoffs: The First Round in the East

Today we are talking about the first round in the East. I touched on the two series I thought would be close in yesterday’s column (New York-Boston and Atlanta-Orlando) but today we will go in depth:

(8) Indiana Pacers v. (1) Chicago Bulls

The Bulls have a hard fought 2-0 series edge as the series heads back to Conseco Fieldhouse. Believe it or not, but Tyler Hansborough is an extremely difficult matchup for the Bulls. All year, the Bulls defense has thrived because they are such good help defenders. As a result, the Bulls are able to hide Rose (an average - but improving - defender) and Boozer (an average defender at best). Well, the help defense leads to open shots for Hansborough, and with Boozer struggling to close out, Hansborough gets 18 footers to his heart’s content. Ultimately, though, late in both Game 1 and Game 2 when the defenses tighten up, the Pacers lack a go to guy to make the Bulls pay. They may steal a game either Thursday or Sunday in Indy, but I cannot imagine this series going past a 5th game. *Note, expect a very long post later this week or over the weekend detailing my thoughts about the Bulls playoff chances as a whole*

(7) Philadelphia v. (2) Miami

Not a lot to say about this series after the rout that was Game 2 in Miami yesterday. The Sixers overachieved all year behind a pretty good coaching job by Doug Collins. But they just have a weird roster. Andre Iguodola improved greatly this year, embracing his role as a defensive stopper, but they really lack anyone with offensive punch. The Heat’s weaknesses (lack of size, who gets the ball at crunch time, lack of any semblance of a bench) will not be tested by the Sixers. This series will be lucky to go 5.

(6) Knicks v. (3) Celtics

One of the more intriguing postseason matchups on paper (made slightly worse by the Chauncey Billups injury). Boston and New York are rife with basketball history, the Knicks have been waiting since Ewing retired to root for a good basketball team, the Celtics, for the third striaght year have been pronounced to be on their last legs, oh, and there was something about a Carmelo Anthony trade this offseason? This series is a story in contrasts: the Celtics are a strong defensive team, the Knicks are all offense. Ultimately, this Knicks team has two fantastic pieces in place for the future (Melo and Amare) but they need to model themselves after the Bulls. Surround two subpar defenders with good defensive players, surround them with a defensive minded coach (not Mike D’Antoni), and see if you can contend with Chicago and Miami for the next 5 years. In a series of offense vs. defense, you pick defense (especially with Billups out). Celtics will win in 6.

(5) Atlanta v. (4) Orlando

John Hollinger had a pretty good article today about how Jason Collins is the key to the series because he is in the league for the sole purpose of defending Dwight Howard and Shaq. Now, Howard went off for 46 points and 19 rebounds in a Game 1 loss, but, according to Hollinger, Howard has 12 points and 6 turnovers when Collins was on the floor. This is not the same Orlando team that made the finals in ‘09. Remember that Hedo Turkoglu was the crunch time scorer on that team (before completely destroying his career for a year in Toronto and returning to Orlando a very different player). Jason Richardson and Gilbert Arenas have given Orlando very little of late. Atlanta, on the other hand, has one of the better young players in the game in Al Horford and high scoring, but somewhat streaky and certainly overpaid scorers in Joe Johnson and Jamal Crawford. And they have the most athletic player in the series in Josh Smith - a guy that for some reason fancies himself a jump shooter. The Hawks lost their last 6 to end the season and nearly every basketball writer decided they had quit on their coach. On top of all that, the Bulls would run through Atlanta in Round 2. So I am trying desperately to talk myself into Atlanta winning this series. At the end of the day, Arenas will get hot one game, Orlando will get some offense from Brandon Bass and Ryan Anderson, and the Hawks will regress to the mediocre offensive team they are. Orlando wins in 7.

NBA Playoff Edition: The First Round in the West

I am going to piggyback off of every major NBA writer here today and say that this year’s playoffs have the potential to be the best in my lifetime. After everyone has played one game, I am going to preview the conference’s and preview each first round matchup. I am previewing the West today because there is a lot more uncertainty in the early rounds out West (I’ll go out on a limb and say that the Hawks and, maybe, the Knicks are the only lower seeds in the East who could pull off a round 1 shocker). Without further adieu:

(8) Memphis v. (1) San Antonio

Memphis stole game 1 in San Antonio yesterday and, really are in a position to star in the most interesting 1 v. 8 matchup since Golden State shocked the Mavs in 2007. In basketball, it is all about matchups. Zach Randolph and Marc Gasol (with an underrated Darrell Arthur coming off the bench) have the talent and strength to wear down an aging frontcourt of Tim Duncan and Antonio McDyess. The Spurs desperately need Manu Ginobli back because he is the only guy they have who can draw a double team and create for his teammates. Really, it is unfortunate for the Grizzlies that they lost Rudy Gay to injury. A healthy Gay would give them the pieces to beat a full strength San Antonio. As it stands, if the Spurs get Ginobli back, they should move past their hiccup in game 1 and move on to the next round.

(7) New Orleans v. (2) Lakers

Another massive upset pulled off in the West. Chris Paul looked like CP3 circa 2008 in shredding the Lakers defense in game 1. Of course, everyone overreacted to this game by telling us that “Chris Paul is the greatest point guard ever” (let’s ignore the fact that Paul actually went scoreless in 29 minutes against Mike Conley and Memphis two weeks ago) and “What is Wrong with the Lakers?!” The reality of the situation is that the Lakers are not built to stop an elite point guard. Derek Fisher can’t guard Chris Paul and neither can Kobe or Artest. The Lakers last two titles were won against a team without an elite point guard (Orlando) and in spite of their inability to stop Rondo (Boston). For the Hornets to win this series, they will need vintage Chris Paul every single game in addition to continuing no shows from the LA frontline. Extremely unlikely. The Lakers will win this series, but Paul exposes their glaring weakness defensively (how many points would D Rose score in a finals matchup against the Lakers?).

(6) Portland v. (3) Dallas

JA Adande from ESPN had a great point about this series on Bill Simmons’ podcast the other day. He essentially compared this series to Wisconsin v. Belmont in the tournament this year. Portland has become such a trendy upset pick that they almost feel like the favorite. And this should be a great series. Dirk v. Aldridge is a matchup of two of the top 15 players in the league. Portland has a better supporting cast as well (Gerald Wallace was the perfect addition to their team). But in a close game late, I would rather have Dirk than anyone on Portland. Dirk will shoot over Wallace and Aldridge will not be able to stay in front of him. I will balk conventional wisdom and take the Mavs in 7.

(5) Denver v. (4) Oklahoma City

A dream matchup for fans of up tempo, attractive basketball. A nightmare matchup for the Nuggets. Since the Melo trade, the Nuggets have run their opponents into the ground. Led by Ty Lawson’s speed, Denver plays fast and scores a lot of points. In fact, I would have liked Denver’s chances against any of the other seeds above them. But Oklahoma City is just as young and their legs are just as fresh. Serge Ibaka, Kevin Durant and Russell Westbrook will gladly get up and down the floor with the Nuggets. And late in a close game, Kevin Durant certainly trumps Aaron Aflalo, Lawson or any other Nugget. Ultimately, the two best players in the series (Durant and Westbrook) play for the Thunder and the Nuggets lose the advantage that their style of play brings to the table; that swings the series to the Thunder in no fewer than 6 games.

Closers Wanted: Ranting About Ozzie Guillen and Closers by Committee

The White Sox sit at 7-8 right now, 3.5 games behind the Royals and Indians in the AL Central race. But the story is not the record, the story is not the offense, the story is their failure to close out games. Matt Thornton came into the season as the closer, but he has been nothing short of awful this year. Thornton is 0-4 in save attempts. Now, to be fair, 6 of the 10 runs he has allowed in those situations were unearned, but Thornton is not getting the job done. And now, Ozzie Guillen is confused and making things worse. Case in point, on Wednesday, the White Sox were holding a 4-1 lead in the 9th. Thornton, the closer, doesn't get the ball. Chris Sale gets the ball. Great, this means the Sox have a new closer! Sale gives up a leadoff double and two singles. The game is now 4-2 but, as the new closer, Sale should have the opportunity to pitch out of this jam. Instead, Ozzie goes to the bullpen. On comes Jesse Crain. What?! Is Crain the closer? No, he walks Dan Barton and strikes out Suzuki. Bases are loaded, one out, Sox up 2. And here comes Matt Thornton. Thornton strikes out Ryan Sweeney, then gives up a two out single. Tie game. Ok, blown save for the closer. They happen. But then Ozzie brings Thornton back out in the 10th in a tie game. Thornton gets lit up for 3 runs. Game over. Sox lose 7-4.

So what is the problem in all this? I believe that closing is the most difficult job in baseball. As a closer, you are charged with getting the three toughest outs in a game. You only come in with the game on the line. Closing requires great stuff, but more importantly, it takes the right mentality. Baseball history is paved with pitchers who either never had that mentality (see Letroy Hawkins), or guys that lost that mentality (Byung Hung Kim after the '01 World Series, Brad Lidge for a short time after giving up countless huge homeruns in the '05 postseason). The worst thing a manager can do with a closer is make the closer's job more difficult. Think of it this way: athletes thrive on routine. A closer knows exactly when they will be called on and can start their routine. Closer by committee takes that away. And that's where Ozzie failed Wednesday. If Sale is your closer (and presumably he is coming in to close in a 3 run game in the 9th), then let him close. If Thornton is your closer, after 3 straight blown saves, why bring him in with one out in the 9th and the bases loaded in a 2 run game? And if Thornton is your closer, why bring him back out in the 10th when the game is tied? Define the role and pick a closer. I don't care if it's Matt Thornton, if it's Chris Sale or even if it's Sergio Santos. Instead, Ozzie is overmanaging and making the toughest job in baseball more difficult than it already is.

Ultimately, we're 15 games into a 162 game season. Kansas City and Cleveland probably won't be there in September and Minnesota is off to a miserable start. But there are going to be plenty of close games this year and the White Sox will need a closer. Define the roles in the bullpen and the Sox will be fine.

The Statistical Revolution: Why Both Sides Need to Calm Down

The Derrick Rose MVP debate brings to a head an issue that has been simmering in the sports community for the better part of a decade. Sports have undergone a statistical revolution in recent years. Words like VORP (value over replacement player), WAR (wins above replacement) and PER (Player Efficiency Rating) have become a casual part of conversation amongst sports fans. Each one of these stats aids in providing a greater understanding of the game; Sabermetrics add a great deal of context to any statistical debate and their importance should not be understated. Unfortunately, the proponents of advanced statistical metrics thumb their noses at the traditional stats thereby undervaluing stats like wins and RBIs. Two camps have formed on the statistical landscape. In one camp, you have the traditionalists. They see advanced statistical metrics as confusing simple games. Their thinking is simple: as a pitcher, the ultimate goal is to win the game. Hence, wins are an important stat. The ultimate goal of the offense is to score runs. Hence, RBIs are an important stat. They are easy to calculate and easy to understand. Advanced metrics complicate a simple game. In the second camp, you have the stat heads. The people that come up with these advanced metrics aim to give a better sense of what is actually happening on the field. They are correct that arbitrary factors outside of a pitcher’s control lead to wins (bullpen blows the game, offense is shutout, defense commits errors), just like errors are not indicative of a shortstop’s defensive value (Jeter committed fewer errors last year than Alexi Ramirez, but Jeter’s limited range - as calculated by range factor - shows that he reached far fewer balls than Ramirez and was a weaker defensive shortstop). But the proponents of Sabermetrics tend to look down at the traditionalists as simple minded people unable to understand a complex game. I am here today to say that there is value in both approaches and each leads to a greater understanding and enjoyment of the game. As baseball has the most developed advanced stats, in addition to being the sport that holds statistics most dear, this analysis will be limited to that topic.

I would argue that traditional statistics offer a fairly complete picture of an athlete’s career over time in the context of pitching and hitting, but fail to adequately address fielding. The advanced metrics are correct in that a lot of variables determine stats like wins and RBIs. The problem with wins is that a 10-6 win counts the same for a pitcher as does a 1-0 win and for more than a 1-0 loss. Bullpen, run support and defense are external factors beyond the pitcher’s control. Stats like WHIP (walks and hits per inning pitched) more accurately measure a pitcher’s effectiveness because it takes the majority of those variables out of play. Felix Hernandez’s Cy Young season last year is example A. Hernandez had a record of 13-12, but with an ERA of 2.27 and a WHIP of 1.057, he was far and away the best pitcher in the American League, out pitching 21 game winner CC Sabbathia and 19 game winner David Price. Wins fail to account for the fact that the Mariners had a truly putrid offense and only won 61 games while the Rays and the Yankees won 96 and 95 respectively. Now, over the course of his career, many of those variables will even out. Hernandez should eventually have seasons with a better offense providing him run support and a better bullpen to maintain leads. Thus, if Hernandez pitches like he did last year for the next several years, his wins should, over time, correlate to his value as a pitcher. As a metric to determine how well a pitcher pitched in a single season, however, a stat like WHIP is more indicative of a pitcher's performance.

The same holds true with RBIs, a stat that is clearly influenced by opportunity. Adam Dunn, toiling away with the Nationals, had far fewer RBI opportunities than he will for the White Sox this year. If Dunn knocks in more runs this year, does that mean that he is a better player? Not necessarily. And that is where stats like OPS (On Base Plus Slugging) come into play.

Where advanced metrics really help, however, is in analyzing fielding. Errors provide such a limited view of defensive prowess because they start from the premise that each player is exactly the same defensively. As noted above, Derek Jeter can no longer make a play deep in the hole like he used to. Alexi Ramirez, on the other hand, gets to far more ground balls than Jeter. Does he make more errors? Yes. But errors fail to quantify the number of additional hits conceded by the Yankees because of Jeter’s lack of range and the number of additional hits Ramirez saves. That is not to undermine errors as a stat. Errors are relevant (anytime you give a team an extra out in baseball, it is relevant), but stats like range factor put errors in the proper context, as one of several metrics to quantify how many additional outs you give the opposing team defensively over the life of a season.

The ultimate problem with advanced metrics, however, are twofold. The first is that, while advanced metrics provide a greater picture of what is happening on the field, they are much more difficult to calculate. When I was a kid, falling in love with baseball, I loved stats. I kept track of my favorite players’ batting averages, I scoured box scores to see how Frank Thomas’ rivals were doing and what Frank needed to do to win the homerun, RBI, or batting average titles (I have a vivid memory of Frank Thomas, down a single RBI to Albert Belle in 1993 on the final day of the season, being intentionally walked with a runner on first against Cleveland - and swinging at two of the pitches - and how livid I was that Cleveland would resort to that tomfoolery to get Albert Belle the RBI title). They were easy stats for me to track and follow. Ask me to calculate VORP and I look at you blankly. VORP is an extremely valuable stat, but 10 year old me would not have been able to follow VORP with the same zeal that I followed batting averages and ERAs (note, I probably would have loved VORP, I just would not have been able to calculate it).

The second is that the real die hard stat heads seek to remove the human element from baseball entirely. They add all these metrics that really do provide a more accurate tool to compare players, but they are not all encompassing the way many proponents of advanced statistical metrics would have you believe. Two examples of this: (1) Tadahito Iguchi played second base for the White Sox in 2005. Iguchi was the consummate professional that season. He gave up outs to move runners over and was, arguably the most valuable offensive player on the Sox that year. Now, if you look at his OPS, you are going to be underwhelmed. To my knowledge, there is no stat that takes into account sacrifice for the team (Iguchi did lead the league in productive outs that year, but you are digging pretty deep to reach that stat). (2) Javy Vazquez is the type of pitcher who defies stats. If you need someone to throw a two hitter against the Royals in July, he’s your guy. But to my knowledge, there is not stat that can show how terribly Vazquez performs in big games. The point in all this is that, even the most advanced metrics fail to account for the space between an athlete’s ears. Iguchi was willing to give up his numbers to benefit the team. Vazquez pitches terribly when the chips are on the line. Stats do not tell me that.

The ultimate point here is that there is a place in baseball for both traditional stats and advanced stats. But for some reason, both sides have a tendency to shout each other down. The goal of statistics is to make the game easier to understand and more fun to follow. I love a good argument about the relative merits of Player A vs. Player B. I will call on advanced stats when it matters (see discussing how good Adam Dunn is offensively) and I will fall back on stats like batting average when necessary to make a point (see my famous argument with one Tom Smith over the merits of the Mets giving Carlos Beltran the contract they gave him - a truly epic argument over beers in a Breckinridge, Colorado bar our Senior year of undergrad). They both tell a story, and they both are important when it comes to enhancing interest in the game. If only the two sides could see eye to eye.

Murphy's Pub: Jereme Richmond to the NBA and Other Illini Thoughts

It is never too early to talk about Illinois basketball circa 2011-2012. And the offseason got off to a roaring start today when Jereme Richmond made himself eligible for the NBA draft. While no one has stated whether Richmond has hired an agent, everyone seems to be on the same page that he will not be back. Whether grades or attitude led to this departure, the general internet wisdom seems to be that Richmond would not have been welcomed back at Illinois. Richmond had enormous potential, but it is hard to believe an NBA team will spend a first round pick (and guaranteed money) on a guy with no jump shot who struggled to beat players off the dribble (props to Tom Smith - real name - for making the comparison to James Johnson earlier today). Richmond's potential adds him to the All-Time Illinois What If team (off the top of my head, Ben Wilson (tragically killed before stepping on campus), Marcus Liberty (the last number 1 recruit in the country to land at Illinois - left early for the NBA draft due to financial issues before making the impact everyone expected), Richmond, Marcus Griffin (what if he hadn't had to go to JUCO for two years), and Charlie Villanueva (committed to Illinois until Self left for Kansas)).

More importantly, however, is the impact Richmond's departure has on next year's lineup. Illinois looks solid at guard (PG: Bradley transfer Sam Maniscalco should start while freshman Tracy Abrams learns the ropes; Wings: DJ, Brandon Paul, Head, Bertrand and freshman Mychael Henry) but they seriously lack for depth in the frontcourt (Myers Leonard is the only guy who played any real minutes last year; Tyler Griffey and freshmen Nnanna Egwu and Michael Shaw will compete for minutes). The lineup I was looking forward to next year had Richmond at power forward with Leonard as the center. Unless Griffey starts making shots, Shaw or Egwu play like veterans, or Weber manages to pick up a Junior College big man who can play right away, we may see Head or Henry guarding power forwards, which is not an exciting prospect.

But there is something to be said for the importance of chemistry in basketball. If Richmond was as much of a problem as anonymous posters on internet message boards would have us believe, then the loss of Richmond could be a case of addition by subtraction. Ideally, Paul and/or DJ turn into a legitimate scorer, Maniscalco stays healthy and plays like he did at Bradley his Junior year, and Leonard makes the leap most big men make from their Freshman to their Sophomore year and becomes a force on the low block. If that happens, Illinois could compete in a weakened Big 10 next year. If it doesn't, there won't be enough Guinness at Murphy's Pub to get us through the season. Go Illini.

John Hollinger is Full of Crap

I strongly dislike John Hollinger. Allow me to explain. Wait, you don’t like him either? Well, let me explain anyway. Hollinger wrote a column today explaining a litany of reasons why he doesn’t believe that Derrick Rose is the MVP of the NBA this year (and actually saying Rose should finish 6th or 7th). I can take off my Bennie the Bull glasses for long enough to recognize that there are other legitimate candidates for MVP, but Hollinger misses the legitimate arguments against that candidacy. Hollinger argues that Dwight Howard is the MVP of the league this year because (1) there is no one that can replace him, (2) Howard has a worse supporting cast and (3) that he makes a team of weak defenders elite.

Howard is Irreplaceable while Rose is Replaceable

As a physical force protecting the basket, I agree. Dwight Howard is far and away the best defensive player in the league and the most imposing player since Shaq. He is absolutely the best center in the league. But we don’t give the MVP out because you can’t find another player that is the same. Otherwise, Shaq would have won every single MVP award while he was in the league AND Dwight Howard would win every MVP for the foreseeable future. Shaq and Dwight Howard, however have the same fatal flaw. You cannot run the offense through them at the end of close games. Why? The other team will put them on the line every single time the ball goes into the post. At the end of the day, basketball is still about putting a round orange ball through a basket. If you replace Howard with Lebron or Rose, I think the Magic are still the 4th or the 5th seed. Their team just looks much, much different. The argument is not “value over other guy at their position” but rather value over the other elite players. Dwight Howard is replaceable. He is replaceable with any other elite player.

As for Rose, Hollinger argues that Russell Westbrook or Deron Williams would make the Bulls just as good (a ludicrous argument - that would be like voting against Lebron for MVP last year because with Kobe the Cavs would have been a top seed in the East). (1) Comparing Westbrook to Rose is comparing apples and oranges. Westbrook plays with Kevin Durant, the league’s leading scorer. Guess who carries the scoring load and draws all the defensive attention. Could Westbrook carry the load offensively like Rose has this year? There is absolutely no way to tell. Hence, the comparison is not apt. (2) Deron. I love Deron Williams, but wasn’t Utah’s team last year essentially the Bulls this year? Substitute Okur for Noah (offense for defense) and Kirilenko for Deng (close to a wash actually). Utah grabbed a 5 seed in the West while Rose is on the doorstep of the top seed in the East.

To sum up this argument, there are more good point guards than centers in the NBA. But that is an absurd reason to give someone the MVP.

Supporting Cast

Yes. The Magic have a crappy supporting cast. But to say that Rose has an amazing supporting cast is extreme revisionist history. Last year, the Bulls were the 8 seed by the skin of their teeth. That they were not in the lottery was as much because Chris Bosh broke his face as any spectacular play by the Bulls. The difference this year: an improved Rose, the addition of Boozer, Loul Deng buying into his role as “third scorer/defensive stopper,” and an improved bench (Korver, Watson, Brewer, Asik, and Gibson beat up on other team’s second units). Is the Bulls supporting cast better than Orlando? Yes. But it is flat out wrong to imply that the Bulls have this amazing supporting cast.

Defense

Hollinger says that Howard makes a team of weak defenders an elite defensive team. This is true. Who else has done that over the past 15 years? Tim Duncan. Duncan was the best help side big man in my lifetime. He continues to make a San Antonio team that employs both Tony Parker and Manu Ginobli an elite defensive unit. Admirable, yes. Is Howard better than Rose defensively? Yes (which is why Howard will win Defensive Player of the Year - again). But Rose is improving defensively (we aren’t talking about Nash in ‘05 or ‘06 on the defensive end when it was akin to giving the MVP to a DH). And he can’t be an awful defender since the Bulls are an elite defensive team. Is Howard’s defense something that pushes one candidacy over another when they are equal on the offensive end? Yes. But that is where Hollinger’s argument falls apart. If Rose and Howard (or Howard and Lebron or Kobe) were equal on the offensive end, then yes, Howard’s defense would add relevance to this debate. But Rose is light years ahead of Howard offensively. When you quantify value to a team, I’m sorry, I need a guy I can run my offense through over the last two minutes of a game. Howard draws double teams leading to open shots for his teammates, but he is an atrocious foul shooter, so when the Magic are down two with a minute to play, he isn’t getting the ball. Rose uses the last two minutes of the game to impose his will and put the other team away (see this week in Milwaukee).

Is Howard a top 5 candidate for MVP? Absolutely. If I had a ballot (shocking my credentials as writer for the Hobbserver has yet to translate to an MVP vote), my ballot would go: (1) Rose - does anyone honestly think the Bulls compete for the top seed in the East without him (other than Hollinger); (2) Lebron; (3) Kobe. I could see Lebron as MVP. I understand the argument for Howard. Calling Rose the 5th or 6th choice for MVP is just plain absurd.

Murphy's Pub: Illinois Beats UNLV and Previewing Illinois-Kansas

Illinois-UNLV

I was the Bulls-Pacers game at Conseco Friday night. As the game started at 7 pm, I set the Illinois-UNLV game to record and embarked on the always dangerous game of "hope no one spoils the game for me." The guys I was at the game with played along and as I filtered out of Conseco, I was blissfully unaware of anything going on in Tulsa, Oklahoma. Literally as I hit the exit, some inconsiderate individual in front of me pulled out his diabolical I-Phone and yelled for all to hear "ILLINOIS IS WINNING 31-16!!!" Thanks douche.

Anyway, Illinois played about as well as they can play through the first 35 minutes. They made tough shots, they defended, they rebounded. McCamey and Davis both played with an urgency you would have expected all year from seniors with NBA dreams. It was both exciting and frustrating to watch. Exciting because if the Illini play like they did Friday night for the rest of the tournament, they could stun Kansas and make a deep run. Frustrating because for a full season, the Illini underachieved to the point that, after blowing another lead late in their Big 10 Tournament exit to Michigan, I actually said, "Eff it. I don't care if the Illini miss the tournament. They don't deserve to be there. This team is awful."

Still, at the end of the day, this is the first tournament win for the Illini since Dee Brown and James Augustine were in Champaign, so savor the win and enjoy the fact that the Illini live to fight another day.

Illinois-Kansas

For a second round matchup, this game is loaded with storylines. Self-Weber has been beaten to death by all manner of media. But the Illinois-Kansas story does not begin there. This will be the third time in the last decade the two schools meet in the NCAA tournament. In 2001, Frank Williams abused Kirk Hinrich in an 80-64 Sweet 16 victory. In a press conference before the game, Roy Williams complained to no end about the physical play of Lucas Johnson and Robert Archibald. Before the game! In 2002, Frank Williams ended a disappointing season, and a polarizing career at Illinois, when he missed a wide open 18 foot baseline jumper that would have tied the game at 71 in a 73-69 loss in the Sweet 16. Nine years later, Kansas and Illinois meet again in the tournament's second round.

Bruce Weber should not need to work hard to motivate his seniors for tonight's game. We remember teams by their ultimate result. Frank Williams' legacy at Illinois is hurt by the missed jumpshot against Kansas in '02 and for the fact that he was shut down by Richard Jefferson in the Elite 8 in '01. I have friends who continue to dislike Brian Cook, forgetting his Big 10 Player of the Year Senior year, but remembering that Cook was awful in a second round loss to Notre Dame that year. If Illinois were to upset Kansas tonight, the narrative of the careers of the Illinois Seniors changes from "underachievers who never reached their enormous potential" to "seniors that beat number 1 seed Kansas and Bill Self." The chance to change the historical narrative should be a powerful motivational tool.

As to how the teams match up, Kansas is led by two twin juniors: Marcus and Markieff Morris. Marcus is the rugged inside presence, Markieff is a good shooter outside. Mike Tisdale will have his hands full inside. The Illini will probably need some good defensive minutes from Myers Leonard as well. Kansas is an extremely balanced team that can beat you in a lot of ways.

So what are the keys for the Illini? (1) They need to win the game on the defensive end. They need to defend like they did against UNLV and force a Kansas team that shoots better than 51% (number 1 in the country in that category) to work for every point. (2) The Illini cannot give away possessions. Illinois turns the ball over 13 times per game. Illinois is going to give up second chance points. Kansas is a very good rebounding team. And that is why the Illini cannot waste possessions offensively.

At the end of the day, Illinois is an 8.5 point underdog for a reason. But if they play like they are capable, they have a chance to win this game and change how this team is remembered. Go Illini.

The Big 10 Tournament!!

I spent three days at the Big 10 Tournament (deciding to skip the final so I can sit on the edge of my seat while watching to see if the Illini back their way into the NCAAs) and, man do I have thoughts.

Indianapolis is the perfect venue for the tournament. Downtown Indianapolis is small; all the teams stay within a few block radius of Conseco Fieldhouse. Each school has its own restaurant/bar associated with it, all within a 4-6 block radius of Conseco. The Big 10 tournament is THE event of the weekend and Indianapolis caters to the tournament. Chicago, on the other hand, would need to hold the tournament at the United Center. There are few hotels in the area necessitating public transportation to get to the tournament. There are just a few bars/restaurants around the UC. And in Chicago, the Big 10 Tournament is just AN event. Come to Indianapolis for the Big 10 Tournament next year. You will not regret it.

The basketball varied from exciting (Northwestern/Ohio State or Michigan/Illinois) to mind numbingly awful (see the crime against basketball that was the Penn State/Wisconsin game).

The Big 10 Tournament took on a special significance for the teams on the bubble. This was a unique Big 10 season with three teams solidly in the tournament and four teams mediocre enough to sneak into the NCAAs.

As an Illinois fan this tourney was an unmitigated disaster. Heading into the tournament, Illinois was pretty clearly the fourth Big 10 team. After losing to Michigan (in a game I am still not really ready to talk about), Michigan State beat Purdue handily, and Penn State beat Wisconsin and Michigan State. After all that, it is very possible that the Selection Committee considers Illinois the 7th Big 10 team and may end up on the outside looking in. Again.

To sum up, the Big 10 tournament is an awesome spectator event. This year, it was a disaster for the Illini (that I'm not ready to talk about).

Check back here next week for a discussion of Big 10 teams and their tournament hopes.

Big 10 Year End Awards

End of the line in the Big 10 regular season. At the Hobbserver, we will give out our Player of the Year, Freshman of the Year, 1st, 2nd and 3rd team All Big 10, the All Freshman team and the Defensive Player of the Year. Should be an exhausting post to read.

Player of the Year

No matter what anyone says about Jordan Taylor and what he has done at Wisconsin this year, Player of the Year in the Big 10 is a two man race. The award must go to either JaJuan Johnson or Jared Sullinger. I'll make the case for each.

Sullinger is the focal point offensively for the Big 10 Champ and arguably the best team in the country. Sullinger is a classic low post player with range out to the three point line. His numbers speak for themselves, averaging 17.1 points and 9.8 rebounds per game over the course of the full season. Sullinger's overall numbers do not look as good as Johnson's, but that is in large part because Ohio State has more weapons offensively than Purdue so Ohio State does not need a 20 and 10 from Sullinger every night to win. His marquee game was a 27 point 16 rebound performance in a 73-68 win at Illinois. And in Ohio State's two losses, he had 25 and 6 at Purdue and 19 and 12 at Wisconsin.

JaJuan Johnson averaged 20.5 points and 8.1 rebounds per game to go along with 2.4 blocks on the second best team in the Big 10. Johnson is not your classic big man. He is much longer than Sullinger (hence the higher block totals), but he is not as solid so he needs to work harder to get position inside and has a tendency to turn himself into a jump shooter. Unlike Sullinger, however, Johnson really only had one other scoring option on the floor with him (E'Twaun Moore) so he needed to carry the load night in and night out. His best game was a 20 point 17 rebound 7 block night against Michigan State. In Purdue's losses, Johnson had 29 and 11 at Minnesota, 22 and 7 at Ohio State, 23 points and 4 rebounds at Wisconsin and 22 and 12 at Iowa.

So who gets the nod? JaJuan Johnson is the Hobbserver Big 10 player of the year. Johnson gets the nod because, without him, Purdue is at best a bubble team. With Johnson, they are battling for a 2 seed in the tournament. If you take Sullinger off Ohio State, Dallas Lauderdale has to play more minutes at center and Buford, Diebler and Lighty have a greater scoring load, but the Buckeyes comfortably make the tournament (think a poor man's version of the 05-06 Villanova team). The combination of slightly better numbers, the fact that Johnson had a greater ability to change a game with his shot blocking (re-watch the 7 block game at Michigan State), and the fact that he was more important to his team makes JaJuan Johnson the Hobbserver 2010-2011 Big 10 Player of the Year.

1st Team All Big 10

F - Jared Sullinger
F - JaJuan Johnson
F - Jon Leuer
G - Jordan Taylor
G - Taylor Battle

We talked about Sullinger and Johnson already. Jordan Taylor is clearly the best guard, and third best player in the league. Taylor averaged 18.6 points 4.9 assists and 4.2 rebounds per game while shooting 47% from the floor. But here are the stunning numbers for Taylor: over the course of the Big 10 season, Taylor never turned the ball over more than twice in a game. Read that again. That is an utterly absurd stat for a point guard. Taylor ended the season with a 4.15 to 1 assist to turnover ratio. Add to that the games Taylor put Wisconsin on his back (18 points in 8 minutes in the win over Ohio State, 39 points in a close win over Indiana) and you have the best season from a guard in the Big 10. Not a lot of draft buzz about Taylor (a Junior) yet. If he comes back, he is the prohibitive favorite for 2011-12 player of the year.

Taylor Battle is a guy we have talked A LOT about this year. And his numbers (20.4 points, 4.4 rebounds, and 3.1 assists) speak for themselves (and shot 43.6% from the floor). The amount of attention Battle drew made life good for his teammates. Penn State put themselves into bubble consideration for a decent part of the season and made Happy Valley a very difficult place to play. And you can thank Taylor Battle for that.

Jon Leuer was the toughest addition to this team. He edged out E'Twaun Moore and Kalin Lucas for the final spot. While Moore and Lucas may have had more spectacular games, they were not nearly as consistent as Leuer, who scored in double figures in every single game in the Big 10. Leuer averaged 19 points, 7.4 rebounds, and 1.8 blocks per game, while shooting 48% from the floor, 40% from 3 and 85% from the free throw line.

2nd Team All Big 10

G - Kalin Lucas
G - E'Twaun Moore
G - Darius Morris
F - Trevor Mbakwe
F - Mike Davis

I know, I know. Mike Davis as 2nd team All Big 10?! Well, I can't have a 4 guard 2nd team (maybe a good reason to have moved Leuer down - but it isn't fair to penalize Leuer because the Big 10 frontcourts are terrible). After Sullinger, Johnson, Leuer and Mbakwe, the best forwards in the Big 10 are Davis and Draymond Green. Green has been awful in the last month of the season (scored in double figures once in his last five games). Davis, on the other hand, has been Illinois' most consistent player over the last month, failing to score in double figures just once in the last 8 games for the Illini. Davis may mope around sometimes, and he may not grab the tough rebounds in traffic, but his consistent jump shot from inside 17 feet and active movement around the basket makes him a good scorer. Davis averaged 12.2 points and 7.1 rebounds per game for the Illini this year.

Now that we have that out of the way, E'Twaun Moore was the toughest omission from the 1st team. His stats speak for themselves (18.3 points 5.2 rebounds and 3.2 assists). And he had maybe the best shooting game in the Big 10 this year, scoring 38 points on 13-18 shooting in a home win over Ohio State. Keeping Moore off the first team, he was 2-14 in a road loss at Minnesota and 4-13 in a road loss at Ohio State. He also had games where he shot 2-10 (win over Penn State), 5-15 (win over Iowa), 3-13 (win over Minnesota) and 8-19 (win over Wisconsin). Just too many inconsistent nights to make the first team. Now, to his credit, Moore drew the other team's best perimeter defender every single night. And without a reliable third scorer, Moore needed a lot of shots for Purdue to win games. E'Twaun Moore headlines the second team.

Kalin Lucas was the other difficult omission from the 1st Team. Lucas has absolutely willed Michigan State onto the bubble. Lucas scored fewer than 17 points once in his last 11 games (14 in a loss at Ohio State) and with the season long disappearance of Durrell Summers and the late season struggles of Draymond Green, Lucas has essentially been a one man offense for the Spartans.

Darius Morris is one of my favorite players in the Big 10. And yes, I took Morris over any of the Ohio State guards. No guard in the Big 10 filled up a stat sheet better (15.1 points 6.8 assists and 4 rebounds on 49% shooting). Morris is a unique player. He is a 6'4" point guard who is not an elite shooter (only 25% from 3). But he runs Michigan's offense so well and is the key to them being on the tournament bubble heading into the Big 10 Tournament.

Trevor Mbakwe is Mr. Consistent. The leading rebounder in the Big 10 (10.4 a game) and a double double machine, Mbakwe lacks the scoring punch of the big guys above him (13.9 points per game), but Mbakwe is the big guy everyone in the Big 10 wishes they had.

3rd Team

G - William Buford
G - Juice Thompson
G - David Lighty
F - Draymond Green
F - Keaton Nankovil

Buford averaged 14.3 points per game and carried the scoring load for Ohio State in several games. The 6'5" Junior shooting guard will be one of the favorites for Player of the Year next year if he comes back. More than anyone on this list, Buford's numbers are deflated because he is not the number 1 option (behind Sullinger) and he needs to share the ball with Diebler and Lighty in the backcourt.

Juice Thompson was Northwestern's best player during the Big 10 season. He stepped up after Shurna's injury, scoring fewer than 16 points just once in Northwestern's final 10 games. Plus, Thompson was amazing in Northwestern's marquee win (71-70 home win over Northwestern where Thompson scored 22 points). That squeezes Thompson in over the bigger names (Shurna and McCamey).

David Lighty does not have the best numbers (12.3 points 4 rebounds 3.4 assists and 1.7 steals) but Lighty certainly has the scoring ability. He sacrifices shots for his teammates while drawing the other teams best offensive option night in and night out. Lighty's value to Ohio State gets him onto the third team.

Draymond Green is too good to keep off an All Big 10 team in spite of his major struggles down the stretch (reaching double figures only once in the Spartans last 5 games), but he is a great rebounder (8.3 per game) and opportunistic defensively (1.7 steals per game as a power forward). Third team is the right place for Green.

Keaton Nankovil is an interesting player. He's 6'8", but averages just over 4 rebounds a night. Still Nankovil is a 47% 3 point shooter and acts as Wisconsin's third scorer. When Nankovil plays well, so does Wisconsin. And for that, Nankovil edges out Mike Tisdale, Jeff Brooks and Christian Watford for the final forward spot.

Toughest omissions - Christian Watford (missed three games with injury and for a scorer, only had more than 14 once in the 5 games since he came back), John Shurna (numbers inflated because he was significantly better prior to the Big 10 season), and Demetri McCamey (say what you will about McCamey - and I have in this blog - but McCamey had an excellent start and end to the Big 10 season. He is off the team because of a 6 game stretch where McCamey had games of 5 points, 6 points, 6 points and 4 points in losses to Ohio State, Indiana and Purdue. Juice Thompson didn't have bad games like that, Lighty is too good defensively, and Buford's numbers would have been far better if he and McCamey traded places).

All Freshman Team

F - Sullinger (Freshman of the Year and covered in the Player of the Year section)
F - Melsahn Basabe
F - Jereme Richmond
G - Aaron Craft
G - Tim Hardaway Jr.

I've written about Basabe a lot. Four 20-10s in Big 10 play. Over his last 7 games, he had (points and rebounds) 20-13, 13-11, 4-4 (Trevor Mbakwe owned him), 13-7, 19-8, 17-7, 13-4 and 11-8. Basabe is an extremely athletic 6'7" and he is going to be an absolute handful next year.

Jereme Richmond was something of a disappointment his Freshman year. We have been hearing since his Freshman year of high school that he was one and done. Richmond beat the buzzer against Texas to force overtime in November. But Richmond is more limited as a scorer (needs to improve his jump shooting) than advertised. Still Richmond showcased a high basketball IQ, moving without the ball and finishing around the basket. He ended up averaging 7.7 points and 5.1 rebounds per game and had an 18-10 against Ohio State. Richmond sneaks onto the team.

Aaron Craft's impact is not as a scorer (7.1 points 4.6 rebounds 2.6 rebounds and 2.1 steals). Craft defended hard every night and played around 30 minutes a night for the best team in the conference and that's enough for him to make this team.

Tim Hardaway Jr is the best scorer other than Sullinger on this list. Hardaway absolutely came into his own down the stretch. He scored 30 in an overtime win at Iowa. He scored 26 in a close win over Indiana. He scored 22 in a crucial road win over Minnesota. And he scored 20 points (all in the 2nd half) in a must win victory over Michigan State, matching Kalin Lucas shot for shot down the stretch. With Morris and Hardaway, Michigan is in good shape heading into 2011-12.

Defensive Player of the Year

David Lighty. David Lighty's impact defensively is best quantified by a sequence in a home win over Illinois. Over the stretch of 3 or 4 possessions, Lighty had 2 steals that led to dunks as Illinois was creeping back into the game. The steals effectively sealed the game for Ohio State. The best defender on the best team in the conference is the easy choice for this award.

Thanks for reading. I will be at the Big 10 Tournament all 4 days (probably will miss a couple games Thursday and maybe the first game Friday for work) but will try to post reports after each day.