20 Second Timeout

Pablo Torre's Pulitzer Win is the Latest Example of Declining Journalistic Standards

Jay Mariotti made an excellent point about the Pulitzer Prize that has been awarded to Pablo Torre's New York Times-sponsored podcast: 

In Analyzing the Media Storm Surrounding the L.A. Clippers, I raised some of the same concerns that Mariotti mentioned:

I deliberately left the words "accusation" and "scandal" out of this article's title because I don't know if the L.A. Clippers violated the NBA's salary cap rules. You don't know, either, even though you may think that you do. The only things that we know are (1) there is a media storm surrounding the L.A. Clippers, and (2) the NBA is investigating the Clippers for a possible violation of the league's salary cap rules. 

Unless you avoid all media outlets and social media outlets--which may not be the worst way to live--you are aware that podcaster Pablo Torre accused the L.A. Clippers and their majority owner Steve Ballmer of circumventing the NBA's salary cap rules by arranging for Kawhi Leonard to be paid $28 million by a sustainability startup called Aspiration for an allegedly "no show" job that involved no work (feel free to insert a joke about Leonard also not working at his main job due to load management).

Torre was armed mainly with anonymous sources speaking about a stack of documents allegedly pertaining to the business dealings, bankruptcy proceedings, and federal prosecution for fraud of Aspiration. Joe Sanberg, Aspiration's founder, pleaded guilty to two counts of wire fraud for his role in a $248 million scam...

It is fascinating to listen to non-lawyers talk about legal issues. An anonymous source speaking on a podcast is not presenting evidence from a legal standpoint; a person testifying under oath or a person submitting a sworn affidavit is presenting evidence.

So, not only do we not know for sure the facts concerning the relationships that may or may not exist among the L.A. Clippers, Kawhi Leonard, and Aspiration, we also do not know the legal significance of such relationships.

It is wise to reserve judgment about the credibility and motives of the anonymous sources interviewed on a podcast sponsored by "The Athletic," which is owned by The New York Times. The New York Times has been a shady organization in a variety of ways for a long time, including treating writers shabbily, and refusing to apologize after falsely accusing three Duke student athletes of rape. Torre assures everyone that he has total editorial independence, notwithstanding the funding he receives from The New York Times. It must be just a fortunate coincidence that Torre happened to break such a big story in the first edition of his podcast after his partnership with "The Athletic"/The New York Times was formalized; there is no doubt that Torre and "The Athletic"/The New York Times are not motivated at all by such crass concerns as money or clicks, and that they live by a credo consisting of truth, justice, and defending the sanctity of the NBA's salary cap rules...

All we have for sure right now is a media storm generating clicks, page views, ratings, and social media activity. That is not to say that there is no substance here; the NBA will investigate the assertions, and make a determination regarding whether the L.A. Clippers circumvented salary cap rules. The NBA's announcement of the results of that investigation is news; Torre's podcast and the ensuing media storm is what Daniel J. Boorstin called a "pseudo-event" in his seminal book The Image. Boorstin described what constitutes a pseudo-event (p. 11):

1) It is not spontaneous, but comes about because someone has planned, planted, or incited it. Typically, it is not a train wreck or an earthquake, but an interview.

2) It is planted primarily (but not always exclusively) for the immediate purpose of being reported or reproduced...The question "Is it real?" is less important than, "Is it newsworthy?"

3) Its relation to the underlying reality of the situation is ambiguous...

4) Usually it is intended to be a self-fulfilling prophecy...

Torre could have presented to the NBA privately the information that he found. If the NBA determined that the Clippers had violated rules, that announcement would have been a news event--but a debut podcast sponsored by a legacy media outlet and expected to deliver a big attention-grabbing splash is not a news event: it is Torre talking about something less from the standpoint of "Is it real?" and more from the standpoint of "Is it newsworthy?" or how much attention it will bring to Torre and his new partnership with "The Athletic"/The New York Times.

It is important to be able to distinguish events from "pseudo-events" and to distinguish journalism from sensationalism. Media members--and consumers of media content/social media content--would do well to read The Image and learn from Boorstin's wise words:

Boorstin notes that the traditional expectation of news reporters was that they would report on significant events that happened; if nothing significant happened, "He could not be expected to report what did not exist" (p. 8). Boorstin observes that in the twentieth century, the expectation of what a news reporter should do shifted dramatically: "If he cannot find a story, then he must make one--by the questions he asks of public figures, by the surprising human interest he unfolds from some commonplace event, or by 'the news behind the news'" (p. 8). Boorstin adds, "Demanding more than the world can give us, we require that something be fabricated to make up for the world's deficiency" (p. 9). Boorstin calls these fabrications "pseudo-events," a neologism based on the Greek word "pseudo," which means false. 

The incessant attempt to create news and excitement where no news and no excitement exists can be observed in the ridiculous questions asked by many reporters at basketball games, at the World Chess Championship, and at almost any press conference pertaining to politics or public affairs.

If the NBA's investigation of the L.A. Clippers finds that the Clippers did not violate any NBA rules then Torre and the Pulitzer Prize Board will look foolish--but even if the Clippers violated NBA rules, Mariotti is correct that it is premature to honor Torre for "seemingly" breaking a story. 

The collapse of journalism as a serious profession is sad. During my writing career, I have encountered a lot of shady people doing shady things in this profession, and I have called them out by name when they steal my ideas without proper attribution (Ming Wong) or added insult to injury by plagiarizing my words while also making factually incorrect statements (Vincent Mallozzi); these are just some examples of the general decline in the quality of published writing that has been taking place for decades, and it is unfortunate that this decline appears to be accelerating.

Labels: Daniel Boorstin, Jay Mariotti, Kawhi Leonard, L.A. Clippers, Ming Wong, Pablo Torre, Steve Ballmer, Vincent Mallozzi

posted by David Friedman @ 10:46 PM

3 comments

76ers Make Magic Disappear, Chef Curry Cooks Clippers

The opener on the second night of NBA Play-In Tournament action featured two Eastern Conference teams that both did not meet expectations this season battling to secure the seventh seed. The shorthanded Philadelphia 76ers outlasted the offensively challenged Orlando Magic, 109-97. Tyrese Maxey led the 76ers with 31 points and six assists. Kelly Oubre Jr. added 19 points while shooting 5-10 from three point range, significant perimeter production considering that the Magic shot just 7-27 (.259) from beyond the arc. VJ Edgecombe contributed 19 points plus a game-high tying 11 rebounds as the 76ers held their own on the glass (only losing the rebound battle 41-40) despite being without the services of Joel Embiid, who is recovering from an appendectomy. Andre Drummond filled part of the void in the middle with 14 points, 10 rebounds, and a team-high tying three blocked shots off of the bench. Paul George had 16 points on 6-16 field goal shooting along with five rebounds and five assists.

Desmond Bane scored a game-high 34 points on 10-16 field goal shooting, but he did not have much help. Paolo Banchero, who is supposed to be Orlando's franchise player, scored 18 points on 7-22 field goal shooting while committing a game-high six turnovers. Anthony Black had a solid game off of the bench (13 points on 4-8 field goal shooting), but Franz Wagner did not do nearly enough (12 points on 5-11 field goal shooting), and Jalen Suggs (four points on 1-9 field goal shooting) misfired from all angles. It felt like anyone sitting courtside should wear a safety helmet to protect against Orlando's barrage of wildly missed shots, as the Magic shot 33-81 (.407) from the field. The first quarter set the tone for the entire game, with the 76ers leading 28-24 after the first 12 minutes despite shooting just 10-25 (.400) from the field; the Magic shot 9-24 (.375) from the field. If you watched the game, you know that the quality of play did not improve--and if you did not watch the game you are probably not yearning for a detailed account of all of the missed shots. In TV parlance, if this were part of a highlight package it would be "score only."

Who would be silly enough to pick this lethargic, flawed Magic team to win a road game versus the 76ers? Oh, that would be me. In my defense, it's not like the 76ers are particularly impressive; they did not build a double digit lead against the Orlando Magical Bricklayers until the third quarter, so it will be interesting to see how the 76ers fare in a first round matchup versus the surprisingly good Boston Celtics. Meanwhile, the Magic have one last chance to make the playoffs if they beat Charlotte on Friday, but the Magic are not likely to find much success when confronted by Charlotte's size, stingy defense, and three point shooting. I still feel good about picking Charlotte to capture the eighth seed.

In the nightcap, Stephen Curry turned into the superhero known as Chef Curry and he cooked the L.A. Clippers with a game-high 35 points as his Golden State Warriors rallied from a 13 point fourth quarter deficit to post a 126-121 win. The Clippers, who started the season 6-21 before rallying to qualify for the Play-In Tournament, are now eliminated from playoff contention, while the Warriors must beat the Phoenix Suns on Friday night to claim the Western Conference's eighth seed. Kristaps Porzingis and Gui Santos scored 20 points each for the Warriors. Bennedict Mathurin led the Clippers with 23 points.

The Clippers jumped out to a 12-2 lead versus the Warriors, the only Play-In Tournament team with a losing record this season. The Warriors had lost nine games in a row to the Clippers in L.A. and seemed to be well on their way to a 10th setback--but then they authored their own 12-2 run to tie the score at 14 and that set the tone for the rest of the game: the Clippers repeatedly built double digit leads to seemingly take command before collapsing and letting the Warriors back in the game. The collapses largely correlated with Kawhi Leonard not being in the game: Leonard, who finished with 21 points on 8-17 field goal shooting, was the only Clippers' starter with a positive plus/minus number (+6); every other Clippers' starter had a plus/minus number of -7 or worse. The first half ended with Leonard driving coast to coast through Golden State's entire team as if they were a bunch of elementary school kids, culminating in a two-handed dunk, after which Leonard shook his head as if to say, "You've to be kidding me if you think that is enough to even slow me down." The Clippers led 61-53 at halftime.

Curry put on a vintage show in the third quarter, erupting for 16 points on 6-8 field goal shooting to single-handedly keep the Warriors in the game, but after Mathurin's two free throws pushed the Clippers' lead to 98-85 at the 9:53 mark of the fourth quarter the Warriors seemed to be running out of time and energy until Curry saved the day, along with timely 4-4 three point shooting from Al Horford and suffocating defense on Leonard by Draymond Green. Curry scored 11 fourth quarter points on 4-6 field goal shooting while posting a +15 plus/minus number in the final stanza, and the 39 year old Horford scored 12 of his 14 points in the fourth quarter. Green authored his typical "triple single" (seven points, team-high nine assists, six rebounds), had a 0 plus/minus number, and did not score in the fourth quarter, but he stole the ball from Leonard twice in the closing moments, and played a major role in holding Leonard scoreless in the fourth quarter until Leonard had a meaningless dunk with 16.9 seconds remaining.

L.A. coach Ty Lue was disgusted after the game (though he used a different phrase when asked to describe his feelings), lamenting "We had the game in our hands" but gave it away by making numerous "silly plays." Not surprisingly, Golden State coach Steve Kerr was thrilled with the result, and he thanked NBA Commissioner Adam Silver for creating the Play-In Tournament, noting that otherwise the Warriors' season would already be over--and that raises an interesting point, albeit not the point that Kerr wanted to make: over the course of the 82 game regular season, the Clippers won five more games than the Warriors, but because Curry and Horford got hot in the fourth quarter of one game the Clippers are eliminated while the Warriors have a chance to make the playoffs. Phoenix finished eight games ahead of Golden State during the regular season, but the Warriors can wipe out months of work by beating the Suns just once. 

This format may work out great for Kerr, his team, and his team's fans this season, but the message that this sends is that the regular season does not matter--and this message, conveyed by the league office, team executives, and the players themselves in many ways during recent years, is how we have ended up with tanking, load management, and a league whose regular season is becoming increasingly unwatchable. Instead of the NBA having a great regular season, the NBA produces a mediocre regular season and hopes that some excitement in the Play-In Tournament and the playoffs will be enough to satisfy the fans who pay high ticket prices and streaming fees.

Labels: Desmond Bane, Draymond Green, Golden State Warriors, Kawhi Leonard, L.A. Clippers, Orlando Magic, Paolo Banchero, Philadelphia 76ers, Stephen Curry, Tyrese Maxey

posted by David Friedman @ 10:44 AM

1 comments

The 2026 NBA Play-In Tournament, Featuring the Worst of the Non-Tankers

The 2025-26 season will long be remembered for the NBA de facto becoming two leagues: a 20 team league in which teams competed to qualify for the playoffs or at least for the Play-In Tournament, and a 10 team league in which teams competed to lose as many games as possible. The standings reflect this sharp divide; instead of wins and losses being distributed relatively evenly, the 10th seeded team in the Eastern Conference finished 11 games ahead of the 11th seeded team, and the 10th seeded team in the Western Conference also finished 11 games ahead of the 11th seeded team. The 10th seeded team in each conference qualifies for the NBA Play-In Tournament, while the teams finishing below 10th head straight to the NBA Draft Lottery. Last season, the Eastern Conference's 10th seeded team finished seven games ahead of the 11th seeded team, and the Western Conference's 10th seeded team finished just three games ahead of the 11th seeded team. During the 2023-24 season, the margins were four games and five games respectively, and in 2022-23 the margins were five games and two games respectively. In 1995-96, when the Chicago Bulls won a then-record 72 regular season games and eight teams from each conference qualified for the playoffs without an NBA Play-In Tournament, the margins between eighth place and ninth place in each conference were one game and three games respectively. 

In short, to the extent that tanking existed historically it was much more limited in scope than it was this season: fewer teams tanked, and they did so for a smaller portion of the season. NBA fans can thank "stat gurus"--who act like they have figured out the mathematical solution to every problem--and NBA Commissioner Adam Silver for the "tank-tacular" NBA, a league that charges full ticket prices and hefty streaming fees for the "privilege" of watching a third of the teams race to the bottom. Have any of the "stat gurus" noticed that many of the same teams are tanking each year, which would suggest to a sensible person that tanking is not the optimal way to build a winning team?

Most of the 2026 Play-In Tournament teams are not as good or as intriguing as the NBA's media partners assert, but four of these teams--two from the Eastern Conference and two from the Western Conference--will survive to participate in the NBA playoffs, which begin on April 18. 

Last season, five of the eight Play-In Tournament teams had losing records. Not surprisingly, when movable forces face resistible objects the result is not scintillating basketball; the 2025 NBA Play-In Tournament began with the 41-41 Orlando Magic eviscerating the 40-42 Atlanta Hawks, 120-95. This season, rampant tanking in the bottom third of the standings enabled seven of the eight Play-In Tournament teams to avoid having losing records.

The 2026 NBA Play-In Tournament starts tomorrow night with the 44-38 Charlotte Hornets hosting the 43-39 Miami Heat. ESPN's Charles Barkley has been calling the Hornets "The Dream Team" for months, and he was only half-joking: after starting the season 6-16, the Hornets went 38-22 the rest of the way, including a nine game winning streak featuring wins over San Antonio and Houston. The Hornets ranked first in three point field goals made as Kon Knueppel set the single season rookie record and the Charlotte franchise record for three point field goals made, and his league-leading 273 were just one more than his teammate LaMelo Ball's 272. The Hornets ranked third in three point field goal percentage (.378) but they are not as adept at making other shots, ranking 25th in overall field goal percentage (.460) and 13th in scoring (116.0 ppg). They finished fifth in rebounding, seventh in points allowed, and 11th in defensive field goal percentage. Brandon Miller (20.2 ppg), Ball (20.1 ppg), and Knueppel (18.5 ppg) lead a balanced scoring attack. The Hornets have not made the playoffs since 2016, and their top nine players have combined to participate in zero career playoff games.

The Heat boast about their "culture" and their championship aspirations, but they have not advanced past the first round of the playoffs since 2023. They used to be known for being a slow tempo team that played tough defense, but this season they ranked second in scoring and 22nd in points allowed. The Heat scored at least 135 points in 15 games, and they won 14 of those contests. First-time All-Star Norm Powell led the team in scoring (21.7 ppg) but he played in just 58 games. Tyler Herro averaged 20.5 ppg in 33 games. Bam Adebayo averaged 20.1 ppg, the second highest mark in his career--boosted by his 83 point outburst versus the defenseless, tanking Washington "Wheeze-hards." The Heat have been the unofficial kings of the Play-In Tournament: in 2025, they became the first 10th seeded team to qualify for the playoffs, and in 2023 they emerged from the Play-Tournament to make an improbable run to the NBA Finals before losing to the Denver Nuggets. 

The Heat won the first two matchups with the Hornets before getting smoked 136-106 on March 17. Adebayo missed that game due to right calf tightness. I expect the Hornets' defense and three point shooting to cause problems for the Heat, so I am picking the Hornets to beat the Heat. The loser of that game will be eliminated from playoff contention, while the winner will face the loser of Wednesday night's Philadelphia-Orlando game to earn the Eastern Conference's eighth seed.

In Tuesday's nightcap, the 45-37 Phoenix Suns host the 42-20 Portland Trail Blazers. The Suns seemed to be rebuilding after trading Kevin Durant to Houston in a seven team deal last summer, but instead they won nine more games sans Durant this season than they won with him in 2024-25. The Suns' top players missed a lot of games in both seasons, so health does not explain the improvement. Not surprisingly, the Suns are worse offensively without Durant, ranking 26th in scoring and 28th in field goal percentage this season after ranking 18th and 11th respectively in those categories last season. The difference is on defense, where the Suns improved from 22nd in points allowed to sixth while also inching up from 21st to 15th in defensive field goal percentage. Devin Booker led the Suns in scoring (26.1 ppg) and assists (6.0 apg), while two of the players acquired in the Durant deal have been major contributors: Dillon Brooks averaged a career-high 20.2 ppg and Jalen Green chipped in 17.8 ppg.

The Portland Trail Blazers have not made the playoffs since 2021 and have not advanced past the first round since their fluky 2019 run to the Western Conference Finals, but Deni Avdija's emergence as a first-time All-Star helped this young team improve just enough to at least contend for postseason play. Avdija led the team in scoring (career-high 24.2 ppg) and assists (career-high 6.7 apg) while also averaging 6.9 rpg. Shaedon Sharpe contributed a career-high 20.8 ppg, while Jerami Grant bounced back from an awful 2024-25 season (14.4 ppg on .373 field goal shooting) to score 18.6 ppg on solid .453 field goal shooting. First year head coach Tiago Splitter did an admirable job replacing Chauncey Billups at the last minute after Billups was placed on leave by the NBA because of his alleged role in a two-pronged illegal gambling scandal. As is often the case with teams that finish around .500, the Trail Blazers have mediocre rankings in many statistical categories, but they finished sixth in rebounding and seventh in blocked shots, numbers that hint at their youth and athleticism.

The Suns won the first two head to head matchups in high scoring games at Portland, and then the Trail Blazers won 92-77 at Phoenix. Booker and Brooks did not play in that game, and Avdija played less than a minute, so that contest does not say much about these teams at full strength. I expect Avdija to have a great all-around game, but Booker and Brooks will each score 25-plus points in a Phoenix win. The winner of that game will earn the Western Conference's seventh seed, while the loser will face the winner of Wednesday night's L.A. Clippers-Golden State game to claim the Western Conference's eighth seed.

On Wednesday night, the 45-37 Philadelphia 76ers will host the 45-37 Orlando Magic. The tanking teams should stop hiring "stat gurus" and instead take a graduate course on "The Process": after the 76ers reached the second round of the playoffs in 2012, and then missed the playoffs by four games in 2013, the 76ers hired Sam Hinkie as their general manager and embarked on a four year tanking program. As a result, the 76ers chose Joel Embiid with the third overall pick in the 2014 NBA Draft. Embiid missed his first two seasons due to injury, but in the next nine seasons he failed to advance past the second round--and he is currently sidelined after appendicitis surgery. Since "stat gurus" claim to love numbers, let the record show that the 76ers lost on purpose for four years--and a decade later all of that intentional losing has yet to produce a better playoff team than their 2012 squad. I realize that some "stat gurus" are as slow as they are stubborn, but objectively the numbers prove that tanking does not work.

First-time All-Star Tyrese Maxey had a breakout season, leading the 76ers with a career-high 28.3 ppg. He does not shrink in the playoffs like Embiid does, but he also has not proven that he can carry a team very far. Rookie VJ Edgecombe averaged 16.0 ppg, and he is the only one of the 76ers' top five scorers who played in at least 75 games. Injuries and a 25 game suspension for using performance-enhancing drugs limited Paul George to just 37 games, during which he averaged 17.3 ppg. Insert joke about the drugs not actually enhancing George's play very much--and his playoff resume is nothing to write home about. 

The Magic were considered to be a team on the rise after going 47-35 in 2023-24, but something has just not clicked since then. Injuries have not helped, but even when this team is at or near full strength it does not strike fear into the hearts of legit contenders. All they had to do to host Philadelphia in the Play-In Tournament was beat a Boston team that rested its key players in the last regular season game, but instead the Magic fell flat on their faces. Paolo Banchero made the All-Star team in his second season (2024) and has not been back since. He led the Magic in scoring (22.2 ppg) and rebounding (8.4 ppg), but the initial thought/hope that he could develop into a franchise player now seems to be unrealistic. Offseason acquisition Desmond Bane did his part, averaging 20.1 ppg while being one of just 18 NBA players who participated in all 82 games. 

With the 76ers at home and the Magic floundering around, it is tempting to pick Philadelphia, but the 76ers are 24-14 with Embiid this season, and 21-23 without him; in other words, new year but same old story: with Embiid, the 76ers are a 50 win regular season team that is just good enough to lose early in the playoffs, and without Embiid the 76ers are not good at all. If the 76ers were completely healthy, I would not pick them to advance past the second round this season, and in their current state I expect even the enigmatic Orlando Magic to beat them. 

Wednesday's action will conclude with the 42-40 L.A. Clippers hosting the 37-45 Golden State Warriors. The Clippers started the season 6-16 before cutting ties with Chris Paul. They soon went on a six game winning streak, and their 11-4 January record lifted them above the tanking teams and into fringe playoff contention. The Clippers did some more addition by subtraction in early February by jettisoning 36 year old James Harden in exchange for 26 year old Darius Garland. This is just the second season since 2017 that Kawhi Leonard played in at least 65 games; he conveniently landed exactly on the number that keeps him eligible for postseason award consideration, and he will likely make one of the All-NBA Teams after averaging a career-high 27.9 ppg with shooting splits of .505/.387/.892. Garland has been a dependable second scoring option, averaging 19.9 ppg in 19 games with the Clippers.

After Jimmy Butler played just 38 games before suffering a season-ending knee injury, and injuries limited Stephen Curry to 43 games, future Hall of Famer Draymond Green picked up the slack--and led Golden State to the last Play-In Tournament slot after Dallas, New Orleans, Memphis, Utah, and Sacramento decided to abandon even the pretense of trying to win. We have seen this Draymond Green experience before: in 2019-20 with Curry and Klay Thompson sidelined by injuries, Green led the Warriors to a 15-50 record. Green's fans describe him as essential member of four Golden State championship teams, but a credible argument could be made that his flagrant fouls, suspensions, and negative impact on team chemistry cost the Warriors almost as many championships as he helped them win--and the word "helped" is used advisedly: as the third and sometimes fourth best player on championship teams, Green was not as dominant as Dennis Rodman--a lock down defender and seven-time rebounding champion--nor was he as clutch as Robert Horry. 

This season, the Warriors were 24-19 with Curry, and 13-26 without him, with Green along for the ride in either scenario. The Warriors ranked 14th in points allowed, 22nd in scoring, 23rd in defensive field goal percentage, 24th in field goal percentage, and 25th in rebounding; some of those numbers are skewed a bit by Curry's extended absences, but the reality is that the Warriors are what their record says they are: not very good. The Clippers are not the second coming of the 1996 Chicago Bulls, but with Leonard scoring an efficient 30 points and Garland adding 25 points the Clippers will put the Warriors out of their misery.

In Friday's Play-In Tournament games, I expect Charlotte to beat Philadelphia and L.A. to defeat Portland. As noted above, Charlotte is inexperienced but the Hornets are stout defensively, while the 76ers are the predictable product of years of tanking. The Clippers sans Harden and Paul will complete their rise from the basement to the penthouse (or at least the eighth seed in the Western Conference playoffs).

Thus, if my predictions are correct, the Orlando Magic and Phoenix Suns will claim the seventh seeds in their respective conferences, and the eighth seeded teams will be the Charlotte Hornets and the L.A. Clippers. 

Watching a third of the NBA tank into oblivion this season was not enjoyable, and even finding the games may be challenging for the casual fan, so it should be noted that all of the 2026 NBA Play-In Tournament games are being shown exclusively on Amazon Prime. 

Previous Play-In Tournament Articles:

2025

Heat Bludgeon Bulls and Mavericks Topple Kings to Stay Alive in the NBA Play-In Tournament (April 17, 2025)

Magic Rout Hawks and Warriors Edge Grizzlies to Clinch Playoff Berths (April 16, 2025) 

Thoughts and Predictions About the 2025 NBA Play-In Tournament (April 14, 2025) 

2024

76ers Cool off Heat to Clinch East's Seventh Seed, Heat Will Host Bulls to Determine East's Eighth Seed (April 18, 2024)

Lakers Clinch West's Seventh Seed, Pelicans Will Host Kings to Determine West's Eighth Seed (April 17, 2024)

The NBA Play-In Tournament Gives Mediocre Teams an Opportunity to Salvage Their Disappointing Seasons  (April 15, 2024)

2023

Zion Williamson's Refusal to Play Despite Being Healthy Embodies What is Wrong With Today's NBA (April 13, 2023)

L.A. Lakers Need Overtime to Dispatch Shorthanded Minnesota Timberwolves in Play-In Tournament (April 12, 2023)

The 2023 NBA Play-In Tournament: Grab Your Popcorn and Savor the Mediocrity! (April 10, 2023)

2022

Notes on the 2022 NBA Play-In Tournament (April 14, 2022)

Nets Clinch Seventh Seed After Outlasting Cavaliers, 115-108 (April 12, 2022)

The NBA is (Usually) Fantastic (Except When Teams Bench Their Starters for the Season's Last Game) (April 11, 2022)

2021

Nine Versus Ten Does Not Add Up to Fantastic Basketball (May 20, 2021)

Thoughts on the NBA's Play-In Tournament (May 17, 2021)

Labels: Charlotte Hornets, Golden State Warriors, L.A. Clippers, Miami Heat, Orlando Magic, Philadelphia 76ers, Phoenix Suns, Play-In Tournament, Portland Trail Blazers

posted by David Friedman @ 11:26 PM

2 comments

Cavaliers Take a Step Back By Swapping Garland for Harden

Two teams that have both fallen short of expectations decided that swapping former All-Star guards will solve their problems (or at least reduce their problems to a a more manageable size); the Cleveland Cavaliers seemed poised to be championship contenders this season after leading the Eastern Conference with 64 wins last season, while the L.A. Clippers had high hopes after pushing the Denver Nuggets to seven games in the first round of last season's playoffs--but the Cavaliers are clinging to the Eastern Conference's fifth seed while the Clippers started the season 5-16 before getting rid of Chris Paul and are now battling for the Western Conference's 10th seed (and final Play-In Tournament berth).

Cleveland sent Darius Garland and a 2026 second round draft pick to L.A. for James Harden. Harden's signature move is his step back--which was called a travel when the NBA at least loosely enforced the traveling rule and which bears little resemblance to the step back moves perfected by Adrian Dantley, Larry Bird, and Dell Curry--and that is a fitting description of this move for the Cavaliers: a step back.

On paper, Harden looks like the superior player. He has averaged 24.1 ppg and 7.3 apg in his 17 season NBA career. Harden is an 11-time All-Star who has received eight All-NBA Team selections (including six First Team nods). He has finished in the top five in regular season MVP voting six times, including winning the 2018 award. During his seven year NBA career, Garland has averaged 18.8 ppg and 6.7 apg while shooting .453 from the field. He is a two-time All-Star (2022, 2025) who has never made the All-NBA Team or received a regular season MVP vote.

The Cavaliers rank 11th in defensive field goal percentage but just 28th in defensive three point field goal percentage. The Cavaliers rank 13th in rebounding, fifth in scoring and eighth in field goal percentage. Last season, the Cavaliers led the NBA in scoring while ranking second in field goal percentage, sixth in rebounding, third in defensive field goal percentage, and 13th in defensive three point field goal percentage. Those numbers--and the eye test--demonstrate that this season the Cavaliers have fallen off in terms of rebounding, overall defense, and perimeter defense while maintaining their status as a top offensive team; thus, the Cavaliers need to add players who are tough, physical, and mobile to bolster their paint presence and their shaky perimeter defense. Harden does not help the Cavaliers in any of their areas of need. He will throw some flashy lob passes to big men Evan Mobley and Jarrett Allen, but his overdribbling will not help overall offensive continuity and will make it difficult to play him alongside All-Star Donovan Mitchell, the team's primary scorer and ballhandler. Harden is a stout, physical defender when switched on to big men in the paint, but he is an awful perimeter defender whose lackadaisical effort at that end of the court will put a lot of pressure on Mobley and Allen to clean up his mistakes and blown assignments.

Harden is 10 years older than Garland, the largest age gap in an All-Star for All-Star trade in NBA history. The Cavaliers made a win now move with a player who has not won before and is unlikely to be a key contributor to a team focused on winning now. There are two consistent themes throughout Harden's career: 

1) He chases money and individual accolades more than the opportunity for team success; as a result he often becomes unhappy with his current team because he is dissatisfied with his contract, which results in him forcing his way out. In 2012, Harden rejected being the third option for an Oklahoma City squad that had just reached the NBA Finals, so the Thunder dealt him to the Houston Rockets. Harden's Houston career ended in 2021 when he sulked and did not play hard until the Rockets shipped him to his desired destination, Brooklyn. In 2022, Harden complained and whined until Brooklyn traded him to Philadelphia. Harden played just 79 regular season games for the 76ers before he forced his way out of Philadelphia in 2023 to get paid by the L.A. Clippers. Cleveland is Harden's sixth team--and his fourth team in the past five years--and he has played more than three seasons for only one of his previous five teams.

2) He disappears in the playoffs. Harden specializes in the "Harden" (a game in which a player has more turnovers than field goals made) and the "concert tour" (a game in which a player's field goal numbers look like concert tour dates). In 2022, I summarized his horrific elimination game resume, and in the next three years he added more sad lines to that resume by scoring nine points on 3-11 field goal shooting in Philadelphia's 112-88 loss to Boston in 2023, by scoring 16 points on 5-16 field goal shooting in the L.A. Clippers' 114-101 loss to Dallas in 2024, and by scoring seven points on 2-8 field goal shooting in the Clippers' 120-101 loss to the Denver Nuggets in 2025.

It is not logical for the Cavaliers to assume, believe, or hope that acquiring Harden improves their chances of advancing past the second round of the playoffs for the first time since 2018. I can write the template for the Cavaliers' 2026 elimination game loss now, and after the game I can fill in the blanks around the words "James Harden disappeared" and "James Harden scored just xxx second half points."

Harden has been more available and durable than Garland, but that availability and durability do not matter much when Harden disappears in the games that matter the most. The Clippers understand that they are not winning the 2026 NBA championship, and that it will be an uphill battle for them to even win one playoff series, so it is logical for the Clippers to get younger while avoiding dealing with Harden's large contract, moody attitude, and annual playoff collapses. If Garland becomes a dependable second option and playmaker alongside Kawhi Leonard--who has played at an MVP level for the past few weeks--then the Clippers can retool for next year; if Garland cannot get healthy or does not mesh well with Leonard, he is young enough and talented enough that the Clippers can trade him either in exchange for players who fit alongside Leonard or to stockpile draft picks if the Clippers choose to pull the plug on the Leonard era.

Labels: Cleveland Cavaliers, Darius Garland, Donovan Mitchell, Evan Mobley, James Harden, Jarrett Allen, Kawhi Leonard, L.A. Clippers

posted by David Friedman @ 11:42 AM

2 comments

Addition by Subtraction: Clippers Add Wins After Subtracting Chris Paul From the Roster

Prior to this season, the L.A. Clippers signed Chris Paul, who previously played for the team from 2011-2017. Paul is often called the best leader in the NBA, but there is a difference between being a great leader and being a productive individual player. In his prime, Paul was a very productive individual player--averaging 19.1 ppg, 10.2 apg, 4.3 rpg, and 2.3 spg from 2008-2017--but this season he averaged just 2.9 ppg on .321 field goal shooting in 16 games before the Clippers sent him home. The Clippers went 4-12 in those games, and they were 5-16 overall this season with Paul on the roster. 

The Clippers have gone 18-9 since parting ways with Paul. Some commentators suggested that the Clippers scapegoated Paul for problems that were not his fault, but the team's record demonstrates that neither Paul's on court productivity nor his interactions with coaches and teammates helped the team win. I have never understood the rational basis for calling a player in a team sport a great leader if that player's teams have never won anything. Paul has not appeared in a playoff game since 2023, and he has advanced past the second round of the playoffs twice in 21 NBA seasons. 

The Clippers' slow start was not entirely his fault, and it is possible that the Clippers might have played better down the stretch even if they had not gotten rid of Paul--but the larger points are (1) it is clear that whatever Paul did during his cameo with the Clippers this season did not make the team better, and (2) the Clippers did not miss Paul after cutting ties with him. 

The Clippers' leader is Kawhi Leonard: he sets the tone with his work ethic, and he sets the pace with his high level play. The Clippers are 19-16 with him this season and 4-9 without him. In December 2025, Leonard averaged 29.8 ppg, 7.4 rpg, and 3.9 apg with shooting splits of .490/.360/.963, and then he averaged 27.5 ppg, 5.5 rpg, and 3.7 apg with shooting splits of .491/.408/.873 in January 2026. Leonard is playing at an MVP-caliber level, and he has lifted the Clippers from the bottom of the standings to contending for a spot in the Play-In Tournament. Leonard leads by example as opposed to scolding teammates and shouting at referees, but his resume includes winning two NBA Finals MVPs while leading two different teams to NBA titles (San Antonio in 2014, Toronto in 2019). Leadership should be assessed by results, not histrionics. 

However, the sad reality for the Clippers is that even if they claw and scrape their way into the playoffs they are unlikely to advance far because their roster is old, Leonard is injury-prone, and James Harden may be the worst playoff choker of all-time for a player of his caliber.

Labels: Chris Paul, James Harden, Kawhi Leonard, L.A. Clippers

posted by David Friedman @ 8:46 PM

0 comments

Assessing Chris Paul's Legacy and Leadership

The L.A. Clippers parted ways with 40 year old Chris Paul in an unusual but in retrospect not surprising middle of the night move, informing Paul that his services are no longer desired. The Clippers can waive Paul and eat his $3.6 million salary, agree to a buyout, or wait until December 15 to trade him (due to the NBA's arcane salary cap rules), but until those details are decided the team has sent him home in a move that strongly suggests that he was not merely unproductive (2.9 ppg on .321 field goal shooting in 16 games this season) but also a toxic locker room presence; there is no other reason to deal so harshly and abruptly with an established, veteran player, let alone one who will deservedly be a first ballot Hall of Famer. Paul recently announced that he planned to retire after this season, so this sudden end--or at least interruption--of his farewell tour brings to mind the scene in "Forget Paris" when Kareem Abdul-Jabbar told Billy Crystal (who played an NBA referee in the movie) that he can't eject him because he is on his farewell tour, and Crystal snarled, "Let me be the first to say, 'Farewell!'"

In his prime, Chris Paul was an elite playmaker, a deadly midrange shooter, and a feisty, crafty defensive player. He earned his selection to the NBA's 75th Anniversary Team with an impressive resume that includes four All-NBA First Team selections (2008, 2012-14), and five All-Defensive First Team selections (2012-16). He led the NBA in steals six times (2008-09, 2011-14), and he ranks second all-time in total regular season steals (2728). Paul led the NBA in assists five times (2008-09, 2014-15, 2022), and he ranks second all-time in total regular season assists (12,552).

However, no history of NBA stat padding is complete without an extensive chapter on Chris Paul's inflated assist totals, and it is shameful that the NBA selectively corrects some statistical errors (including taking away bogus triple doubles from LeBron James in 2006, 2009 and 2014) while letting other statistical errors remain in the record books (including Paul's inflated assist totals). These inflated numbers matter and they affect the legacies of multiple players because Paul is credited with breaking many assist records in the regular season and the playoffs.

Proving that Paul's assist totals are inflated does not mean that he was not a great passer; two things can be true at the same time: Paul was a great passer, and Paul's assist numbers are inflated.

Paul is often lavishly praised as a great leader. The way that the Clippers jettisoned Paul is just the latest piece of evidence that Paul's leadership has been vastly overrated by media members who are either gullible or who push preferred narratives regardless of what the facts show. 

In Notes About the 2020 Christmas Day Quintupleheader, I compared the leadership styles of Chris Paul, LeBron James, and Giannis Antetokounmpo: 

Perceptions and descriptions of leadership are interesting. Giannis Antetokounmpo is a great leader, regardless of whether or not media members have figured that out yet.

Charles Barkley so often says that Chris Paul is the best leader in the NBA that this has become a running joke during TNT's telecasts. LeBron James is also often lauded as a great leader. These characterizations are puzzling. Paul has hopped from team to team, and he is often at odds with his teammates and/or coaches. Paul's vaunted leadership has not resulted in a single NBA Finals appearance, let alone a championship. When someone is called a great leader but his teams have not accomplished much it is fair and logical to ask: "Where exactly is this great leader leading his followers?" Paul is a great but undersized point guard. He demands a lot from those around him, which can be a good thing at times, but his leadership has not had the same impact or generated the same results as many other better leaders have achieved during his tenure in the NBA. 

James is on the short list of candidates for the title of greatest basketball player of all-time--but neither his greatness as a player nor his charitable endeavors off of the court prove that he is a great basketball leader. LeBron James' failures as a leader are well-documented, although many media members prefer to downplay these facts.

Giannis Antetokounmpo is a better leader than LeBron James or Chris Paul. Antetokounmpo works hard, he encourages his teammates, and he is not looking for shortcuts. Consider his response to questions about why he re-signed with Milwaukee now as oppose to waiting and testing free agency. Antetokounmpo said that if he had delayed his decision then this would have put tremendous pressure and scrutiny on his teammates, who would have had to constantly worry about and talk about whether or not he would stay. Antetokounmpo said that if he had waited then he would have harmed his teammates and squandered a season during the prime of his career when he and his teammates have a chance to reach their ultimate goal: winning an NBA title.

It is impossible to imagine LeBron James or Chris Paul answering that question that way, or conducting themselves in that way. James has won four championships and four Finals MVPs; no one can question his greatness as a player, not can anyone question his ability to raise a team's level--but James has also presided over the implosion of multiple teams, and he wasted prime years during his first stint in Cleveland: just imagine what might have happened if he had fully committed to the Cavaliers franchise and helped to build the program as opposed to always having one foot out the door before eventually fleeing to Miami. 

In contrast, Antetokounmpo has a finely honed sense of urgency and sense of the moment; every game is precious, every season is precious, and you cannot afford to waste games or seasons because you think that you are heading toward greener pastures. Antetokounmpo gets it. James has been successful despite lacking those qualities at times, not because he consistently displays those qualities. In other words, James is so talented that he and his teams are sometimes able to overcome his flawed leadership style.

Isiah Thomas joined an awful team and helped to build a two-time champion. Michael Jordan joined an awful team and helped to build a dynasty. Antetokounmpo is a throwback to that kind of wonderful old school mentality.

A few months after I wrote those words, Antetokounmpo led the Bucks to their first NBA title since 1971, beating Paul's Phoenix Suns in the NBA Finals. Antetokounmpo won a championship without whining about his teammates or coach, and without forming (or jumping to) a super team. Antetokounmpo has been a great leader throughout his 13 seasons in Milwaukee, and even if he finishes his career with another team that will not diminish what he did in and for Milwaukee. After Paul scored a playoff career-high tying 41 points to lift the Suns into the 2021 NBA Finals, I explained why that one great performance does not change his overall resume:

Paul is a great player, but for some reason he gets more credit for his (limited) playoff success and less blame for his (extensive) playoff failure than other great players do. It is obvious and indisputable that Paul authored a tremendous performance in game six, but that is part of a larger legacy, and does not define his career--particularly if this playoff run does not result in a title. Many media members have a strange way of quantifying leadership. If our mission is to go to point Z, and our leader only takes us to point M, then it is difficult to rationally argue that our leader is a better leader than someone who led his team to point Z five times--or, to put it more bluntly, when I think about the best leaders in the NBA in the post-Jordan era, I think about Kobe Bryant, Tim Duncan, and LeBron James. Each of those guys has/had a different leadership style, but each played a major role in multiple championship runs; love them or hate them, they led their teams to point Z. Chris Paul is in his 16th season, and this will be his first NBA Finals appearance. You may retort that Paul has not always had the best supporting cast around him, but the reality is that he has had a lot of talent around him in multiple organizations while spending most of his career losing in the second round or earlier; either his leadership has been overrated, or leadership itself does not matter as much as raw talent. I am not saying that Paul is not a good leader, but the popular notion that he is the best leader in the NBA is not supported by the most important evidence: sustained team performance at an elite level.

It may seem like I contradicted myself about James' leadership abilities in those two passages, so I should clarify that I don't think that James is as great a leader as many people say that he is, but I think that he is a better leader than Paul and I think that--despite his documented leadership failures at times--his leadership played a role in championship runs, which contrasts with Paul's leadership style that often led to internal problems on his teams. 

Bob Cousy 16-8 (won six NBA championships)

Oscar Robertson 8-9 (won one NBA championship)

Jerry West 16-12 (won one NBA championship)

Walt Frazier 11-6 (won two NBA championships)

Magic Johnson 32-8 (won five NBA championships)

Isiah Thomas 16-7 (won two NBA championships)

John Stockton 17-19 

Jason Kidd 16-16 (won one NBA championship) 

Steve Nash 11-12

Allen Iverson 6-8 

Tony Parker 30-12 (won four NBA championships) 

Russell Westbrook 12-13

Derrick Rose 4-7 

Stephen Curry 24-6 (won four NBA championships)

Kyrie Irving 15-6 (won one NBA championship)    

Contextual factors beyond any one player's control affect team results, but there is little evidence that Paul is a great leader and a lot of evidence that teams he led imploded with him at the helm. For example, in the 2022 playoffs, Paul's Phoenix Suns lost game seven in the second round to the Dallas Mavericks, 123-90. Here is how I described the massacre: 

Stunning. Unprecedented. Humiliating.

I am disinclined to use hyberbole, but I am at a loss to describe what the Dallas Mavericks did to the 64-18 Phoenix Suns in Phoenix in a 123-90 game seven rout. By the time Chris Paul--supposedly the best leader in the NBA--made his first field goal his Suns trailed by 40; the Suns were so far behind they couldn't see the Mavericks with a telescope, a time machine, or a fortune teller. 

 I added the following: 

Am I belaboring the point? Am I making too much of one game? If you think so, then consider how much grief Kobe Bryant was given about his supposedly bad performance in the 2004 NBA Finals, when his injury-riddled Lakers lost 4-1 to the Detroit Pistons. Now, imagine that Bryant--whether as a 17 year old, a 27 year old, or a 37 year old--went into the playoffs leading a 64 win team and then lost by 33 points at home while the other team's star outscored his entire team for more than a half, and while Bryant put up a second quarter boxscore consisting of one point, no rebounds, no assists, no steals, and no blocked shots.

What do you suppose might have been said about Bryant after such a game? 

I say that players should be evaluated by the same standards. A player's legacy is not defined by one game, but by his overall resume. When I look at Bryant, I see a 5-2 Finals record, I see his team generally winning as the favorite and generally being competitive as the underdog. I see him putting up tremendous individual numbers on a consistent basis. For those reasons (and more), I put him in my pro basketball Pantheon.

When I look at Chris Paul, I see no championships despite playing for several excellent teams. I see his team losing more than once as the favorite. I see that no player in NBA history has blown more 2-0 playoff leads than Chris Paul, whose teams have squandered such an advantage five times: 2008 versus the Spurs, 2013 versus the Grizzlies, 2016 versus the Trail Blazers, 2021 versus the Bucks, and now 2022 versus the Mavericks. Paul's Clippers also blew a 3-1 lead versus the Houston Rockets in 2015; the Clippers split the first two games when Paul was out with an injury, but then after his return in game three they eventually lost three straight games. Paul is now 3-5 in game seven showdowns. 

In light of that evidence, I try to understand why "stat gurus" and media members pump up Paul to be more than he is. 

The harsh reality is that there is nowhere to hide in the playoffs. Players can inflate and manipulate their numbers to some extent in the regular season, and "stat gurus" team up with media members to craft agenda-based narratives advocating that those players receive various awards--but then the playoffs arrive, and every year we see Harden go on his "concert tour" and Paul cough up so many playoff leads his voice should sound like General Grievous in "Star Wars."

I've been saying this for well over a decade, but maybe people will pay attention now (I doubt it, but I'll keep trying anyway): Paul is an undersized player who consistently wears down and/or gets injured in the playoffs. He is a great player who has a lot of heart, but undersized players simply cannot be as valuable as players who are 6-6 and bigger who have comparable skills (let alone bigger players who also have superior skills). There is one player 6-3 or under in my pro basketball Pantheon: Jerry West, who would give the business to any other similarly-sized player in pro basketball history. Isiah Thomas did not quite reach Pantheon-level, but he led Detroit to back to back titles without having a teammate who made the NBA's 50th Anniversary Team, and he had a winning career record head to head against Bird, Magic, and Jordan. People who compare Paul favorably with Thomas have absolutely no idea how great Thomas was, and how durable he was until the very end of his career...

Luka Doncic right now has still not reached his peak, but as a versatile 6-6, 240 pound multi-position threat he is already better than Chris Paul ever was or ever could be. That is not a knock on Paul so much as it is a statement of basketball reality: the great 6-6 player is better than the great 6-0 player every time, and even more so in game seven.  

That game seven was not an isolated debacle. As mentioned above, Paul's teams have a history of playoff self-destruction:  

Paul's teams have blown five 2-0 series leads, his Clippers squandered a 3-1 lead versus the Rockets in 2015, his game seven record is 3-5, and--as noted above--his Suns disappeared in game seven at home versus Dallas last year. Every time Paul loses, excuses proliferate like weeds in an unmaintained yard.  

Paul's poor leadership is revealed in other ways. Without any evidence supporting his assertions, Paul has repeatedly trashed the public reputation of Scott Foster, who consistently grades as one of the NBA's top referees, a topic that I discussed in Blaming A Referee for Losing After Posting a "Triple Single" is Not Great Leadership:

Paul is often called the best leader in the NBA, and he is the current President of the NBA Players Association. Paul is attacking the credibility of an employer who pays him millions of dollars per year as part of a multi-billion dollar business that is based in no small part on the credibility of the competition between teams; without that credibility, the NBA is not in the sports business but rather in show business (maybe that business model would still work--it has worked for pro wrestling for decades--but that has never been the NBA's business model, and fans of pure basketball would be repulsed if the outcomes of games were proved to be predetermined)...

Great leaders do not attack the credibility of the business that feeds their families. Great leaders do not insist on playing if their level of play is harming the team.

The media narratives about players such as Chris Paul, Russell Westbrook, Stephen Curry, and others are fascinating to observe. Chris Paul is supposedly a great leader even after he posts a "triple single" with an awful plus/minus number while "leading" his favored team to a blowout loss. 

Russell Westbrook is supposedly a terrible leader even though he helped turn around the season of a not particularly talented team that was devastated by COVID-19 and various injuries. Yesterday, after Westbrook--who was a game-time decision due to an ankle injury--posted 26 points, 12 rebounds, and 10 assists (team-high numbers in all three categories) in Washington's 132-103 game three loss to Philadelphia at least one commentator called this an "empty" triple double. You can be sure that if Westbrook put up Chris Paul-like numbers of seven points, six assists, and five rebounds then that same commentator would have attacked Westbrook for quitting. Westbrook had as many rebounds in that game as Paul has in three games versus the Lakers! Westbrook's plus/minus number (-15) was better than the plus/minus number of every Washington starter except for Alex Len, whose plus/minus number was -14 in just 11 minutes. The Wizards are the eighth seeded team playing the number one seeded team, but Westbrook had a great game while playing hurt against a superior team. Paul is on course to lead his second seeded team to defeat while playing terribly. Who is the better player and better leader? This is not just about one season or three playoff games; the numbers and the true narrative (not the media's fictional narrative) are consistent throughout both players' careers. Westbrook was an All-NBA Team level performer for four teams that reached the Western Conference Finals, including one team that made it to the NBA Finals. He is currently tied for third on the all-time playoff list with 11 triple doubles (matching Jason Kidd, and trailing only Magic Johnson's 30 and LeBron James' 28). It would be fascinating to look up the media coverage of other playoff triple doubles to see how many have been described as "empty." Granted, the same commentator who called Westbrook's triple double "empty" also called Jimmy Butler's triple double "empty"--but Butler posted 12 points on 4-15 field goal shooting with 10 rebounds, 10 assists, and a -18 plus/minus number in a 17 point loss as his sixth seeded Heat were swept by the third seeded Bucks to become one of the few Conference champions ever swept in the next year's playoffs. There is no comparison between how Butler played and how Westbrook played; lumping those two performances together is intellectually lazy, at best.

Stephen Curry is lauded as a top three MVP candidate for leading his team to "play out" (instead of "play in") to the playoffs despite having two opportunities to win one game to qualify for the playoffs. Damian Lillard has recently pointed out that last season his own MVP candidacy was dismissed because of his team's low playoff seeding, and Lillard said that to be consistent the media should not tout Curry as this season's MVP. My consistent take is that Lillard was not a legit MVP candidate last season, nor is Curry a legit MVP candidate this season. I agree with Lillard that the media's MVP narratives are not consistent or fair.

Paul's obsession with bashing Foster betrays a sense of entitlement that the NBA never put in check:

Paul acts like he feels entitled to say whatever he wants to say and act however he wants to act without facing any consequences. He refuses to take responsibility for his actions, and instead casts aspersions on Foster.

Foster is the easy target here. As the saying goes, the fans don't buy tickets to see the referees but to see star players. However, based on what we saw and heard there was nothing unusual about the ejection. If Paul truly believes that Foster is biased against him, then why did Paul keep talking after getting a technical foul? It must be emphasized that Foster walked away after issuing the first technical foul; this is not Jake O'Donnell versus Clyde Drexler or Hue Hollins versus Scottie Pippen/the Chicago Bulls, instances when officiating bias was an obvious pattern. O'Donnell's grudges against multiple players led to him losing his job despite grading out highly, while Hollins' bias was so obvious that his name was the first one that came to many people's minds when the story first broke about an unnamed referee (who later turned out to be Tim Donaghy) intentionally making wrong calls.

Paul has publicly created a narrative that Foster has a grudge against him without providing any proof, knowing full well that he is immune from consequences because Foster will not be permitted by the NBA to publicly respond. Why should media members or fans believe Paul? Paul has proven to be both a cheap shot artist and a whiner throughout his career, and there are many players around the league who have feuded with him, including both teammates and opponents. I am not aware of a single other player accusing Foster of bias, and Foster consistently grades out as a top referee. I watch a lot of NBA games, and while my focus is much more on the players and the coaches than the referees I have never felt that Foster is incompetent or biased. 

It has become popular to suggest that the NBA should never assign Foster to officiate a game involving Paul's team. That is nonsense. If Foster grades out well enough to officiate the NBA Finals and Paul is fortunate enough to be carried to the NBA Finals by Stephen Curry then how can the league take that assignment away from Foster? No, the answer here is simple: if there is objective evidence that Foster is nursing a grudge that prevents him from officiating Paul in an unbiased manner then the NBA should fire Foster--and if there is no evidence of that, then the NBA should fine Paul for his comments, and make it clear that if he makes additional comments questioning the integrity of the officiating then he will be suspended. That is how former Commissioner David Stern would have quashed this nonsense that current Commissioner Adam Silver has allowed to fester for several years. If Paul is correct that the NBA organized a meeting with Paul, Foster, and others then the outcome of that meeting should have been an understanding that Paul's job is to play, Foster's job is to officiate objectively, and that if this ever becomes a public issue again then the person at fault is going to be disciplined by the league. Instead, Silver is letting one of these guys--and my strong suspicion is that the culprit is Paul--make a mockery of the league.

It is fascinating and revealing to observe so many media members covering the release of a 40 year old player averaging 2.9 ppg as if the move is an inexplicable decision and a disrespectful action. Chris Paul is an old, poor performing player on a losing team, and he reportedly is not on speaking terms with coach Ty Lue. Lue is a championship-winning coach, and he does not need advice or so-called "leadership" from a washed up 40 year old player who has never won a championship.

Leadership is about results, which means uplifting those around you individually and collectively. Leadership is about setting an example of personal accountability. Leadership is not about empty slogans or about narratives unsupported by facts. In his prime, Chris Paul was a talented and hard-working player, and he accomplished a lot for an undersized player--but the objective evidence demonstrates that he was not the leader that so many people hyped him to be. The value that he provided during his peak seasons was that he was a great passer, an excellent midrange shooter, and a gritty defensive player; he no longer provides great passing, shooting, or defense, and thus the Clippers parted ways with Paul precisely because Paul provides no value to a team beyond on court contributions. If Paul were a great leader, then the Clippers would keep him around to lead, much like the Miami Heat kept Udonis Haslem around long after he was no longer a productive player.

Labels: Chris Paul, Giannis Antetokounmpo, Kobe Bryant, L.A. Clippers, LeBron James, Phoenix Suns, Ty Lue

posted by David Friedman @ 12:12 PM

16 comments

Analyzing the Media Storm Surrounding the L.A. Clippers

I deliberately left the words "accusation" and "scandal" out of this article's title because I don't know if the L.A. Clippers violated the NBA's salary cap rules. You don't know, either, even though you may think that you do. The only things that we know are (1) there is a media storm surrounding the L.A. Clippers, and (2) the NBA is investigating the Clippers for a possible violation of the league's salary cap rules. 

Unless you avoid all media outlets and social media outlets--which may not be the worst way to live--you are aware that podcaster Pablo Torre accused the L.A. Clippers and their majority owner Steve Ballmer of circumventing the NBA's salary cap rules by arranging for Kawhi Leonard to be paid $28 million by a sustainability startup called Aspiration for an allegedly "no show" job that involved no work (feel free to insert a joke about Leonard also not working at his main job due to load management).

Torre was armed mainly with anonymous sources speaking about a stack of documents allegedly pertaining to the business dealings, bankruptcy proceedings, and federal prosecution for fraud of Aspiration. Joe Sanberg, Aspiration's founder, pleaded guilty to two counts of wire fraud for his role in a $248 million scam. "This so-called ‘anti-poverty’ activist has admitted to being nothing more than a self-serving fraudster, by seeking to enrich himself by defrauding lenders and investors out of hundreds of millions of dollars," Acting United States Attorney Bill Essayli said Aug. 21 in a statement. "I commend our law enforcement partners for their efforts in this case, and I urge the investing public to use caution and beware of wolves in sheep's clothing."

It is not clear at this point if the Clippers were victims of Sanberg's fraud--as they assert--or if they were using Aspiration to funnel money to Leonard while circumventing the NBA's salary cap rules. Legally, it does not matter how things "look" or how a podcaster and his podcasting buddies present things; the only thing that matters legally is evidence. 

It is fascinating to listen to non-lawyers talk about legal issues. An anonymous source speaking on a podcast is not presenting evidence from a legal standpoint; a person testifying under oath or a person submitting a sworn affidavit is presenting evidence.

So, not only do we not know for sure the facts concerning the relationships that may or may not exist among the L.A. Clippers, Kawhi Leonard, and Aspiration, we also do not know the legal significance of such relationships.

It is wise to reserve judgment about the credibility and motives of the anonymous sources interviewed on a podcast sponsored by "The Athletic," which is owned by The New York Times. The New York Times has been a shady organization in a variety of ways for a long time, including treating writers shabbily, and refusing to apologize after falsely accusing three Duke student athletes of rape. Torre assures everyone that he has total editorial independence, notwithstanding the funding he receives from The New York Times. It must be just a fortunate coincidence that Torre happened to break such a big story in the first edition of his podcast after his partnership with "The Athletic"/The New York Times was formalized; there is no doubt that Torre and "The Athletic"/The New York Times are not motivated at all by such crass concerns as money or clicks, and that they live by a credo consisting of truth, justice, and defending the sanctity of the NBA's salary cap rules.

The Clippers have issued two statements of denial. In the second statement, they termed allegations against the team "absurd" and declared, "There is nothing unusual or untoward about team sponsors doing endorsement deals with players on the same team. Neither Steve nor the Clippers organization had any oversight of Kawhi's independent endorsement agreement with Aspiration. To say otherwise is flat-out wrong."

All we have for sure right now is a media storm generating clicks, page views, ratings, and social media activity. That is not to say that there is no substance here; the NBA will investigate the assertions, and make a determination regarding whether the L.A. Clippers circumvented salary cap rules. The NBA's announcement of the results of that investigation is news; Torre's podcast and the ensuing media storm is what Daniel J. Boorstin called a "pseudo-event" in his seminal book The Image. Boorstin described what constitutes a pseudo-event (p. 11):

1) It is not spontaneous, but comes about because someone has planned, planted, or incited it. Typically, it is not a train wreck or an earthquake, but an interview.

2) It is planted primarily (but not always exclusively) for the immediate purpose of being reported or reproduced...The question "Is it real?" is less important than, "Is it newsworthy?"

3) Its relation to the underlying reality of the situation is ambiguous...

4) Usually it is intended to be a self-fulfilling prophecy...

Torre could have presented to the NBA privately the information that he found. If the NBA determined that the Clippers had violated rules, that announcement would have been a news event--but a debut podcast sponsored by a legacy media outlet and expected to deliver a big attention-grabbing splash is not a news event: it is Torre talking about something less from the standpoint of "Is it real?" and more from the standpoint of "Is it newsworthy?" or how much attention it will bring to Torre and his new partnership with "The Athletic"/The New York Times.

As part of the media firestorm, Mark Cuban--once the majority owner of the Dallas Mavericks, now one of the team's minority owners--blasted Torre, and stated that Steve Ballmer is way too smart to participate in the type of scheme that Torre described. My first thought about Cuban's statement is that it is absurd: our prisons are full of people who thought that they were too smart, too wealthy, or too powerful to be caught, let alone punished. If there is substance to the allegations then Ballmer will need a much more robust defense than "I'm too smart to do something that stupid." My second thought is that Cuban's seemingly off the cuff outburst--which may not be as off the cuff as it seems--is a dream come true for Torre and "The Athletic"/The New York Times, providing yet another pseudo-event for talking heads to discuss. 

The fact that none of the people who are pontificating publicly about this topic actually know for sure what happened will not stop Torre and other media members from profiting from all of the attention that they are receiving. 

My first instinct was to not write about this at all until the NBA announces its findings, but the situation reminds me so much of Boorstin's brilliant insight about pseudo-events that I could not resist making that connection. The Image was published in 1961, and it is as timely and relevant now as it was over 60 years ago.

If it can be proven that the Clippers violated salary cap rules, then the punishment should be swift and harsh--but we live in a society that is governed (or supposed to be governed) by the principles of (1) innocent until proven guilty, and (2) the accused has a right to confront his accusers under oath. This is not a matter of public safety that Torre had to publicize far and wide to save lives; this is a pseudo-event that may subsequently prove to be a legitimate news story--and that may prove to be as false as the accusations that The New York Times published about the Duke lacrosse players. 

Labels: Aspiration, Joe Sanberg, Kawhi Leonard, L.A. Clippers, New York Times, Pablo Torre, Steve Ballmer, The Athletic

posted by David Friedman @ 1:11 AM

2 comments

Nuggets Overwhelm Clippers in Second Half of 120-101 Game Seven Rout

The L.A. Clippers led 26-21 after the first quarter, but trailed 58-47 at halftime and then collapsed in the second half as the Denver Nuggets won game seven 120-101 to advance to a second round matchup versus the Oklahoma City Thunder; the final score obscures the fact that the Nuggets led 103-68 with 8:49 left in the fourth quarter before calling off the dogs. The Nuggets became the first team to have six players each score at least 15 points in a seventh game. Aaron Gordon led the way (22 points), followed by Christian Braun (21 points), Nikola Jokic (16 points), Jamal Murray (16 points), Russell Westbrook (16 points), and Michael Porter Jr. (15 points). Jokic led the Nuggets with 10 rebounds and eight assists, while Westbrook contributed five rebounds, five assists, and a game-high five steals.

Kawhi Leonard scored a team-high 22 points on 6-13 field goal shooting, but he did not impact the game across the board the way that he usually does, finishing with five rebounds, two assists, two blocked shots, and a game-worst -33 plus/minus number. James Harden, the All-Star guard who is supposed to be the team's reliable second option, had seven points on 2-8 field goal shooting and a -29 plus/minus number; his game-high 13 assists were not nearly enough to make up for not only his poor shooting but his refusal to shoot in an elimination game: the game was still within reach at halftime, but the game was out of reach after Harden scored 0 points on 0-2 field goal shooting while playing all 12 third quarter minutes. Leonard had eight points during the third quarter.

Before digging into the details of yet another pathetic performance to add to Harden's horrific elimination game resume (which now includes a 3-13 won/loss record since he fled Oklahoma City after the 2012 season), we will give credit to the Nuggets. Each Denver starter had between 11 and 16 field goal attempts, and Westbrook provided a critical energy boost during his 27 minutes off of the bench; the 2017 regular season MVP is not the first or second option on a regular basis at this stage of his career but--unlike many players who struggle to accept a lesser role when doing so becomes a necessary reality--he is a team-first player who embraces with enthusiasm his current role as a player who provides hustle, scoring, playmaking, rebounding, and defense off of the bench. The Nuggets took a double digit lead into halftime in large part because Westbrook had 10 points, three assists, two rebounds, two steals, and no turnovers while playing all 12 minutes in the second quarter. When Westbrook rebounded his own missed free throw and scored in traffic at the 3:10 mark of the second quarter, I thought about how stupid it sounded when Amin Elhassan and Zach Harper giggled their way through a segment on their radio show while asserting that Westbrook is a stat padder who obtains easy rebounds from complicit teammates. Westbrook is not a stat padder; he is an energetic game-changer: that play sparked a 9-4 run to close the first half, and set the stage for Denver's third quarter avalanche that ended the game and the series.

Westbrook is not a perfect player and he is the first to admit that, but he never cheats the game, his teammates, or the fans: he plays hard, and his basketball IQ is underrated; after the game, Christian Braun--who drew the primary assignment of guarding Harden--mentioned that Westbrook's knowledge of the Clippers' offensive sets in general and Westbrook's knowledge of Harden's tendencies in particular were invaluable to him.

If you love watching basketball being played the way that it is supposed to be played, then you have to love Westbrook; you may not root for him if he is on the opposing team, but you have to respect his approach to the game. 

The emotional exclamation point for Denver's win happened after Westbrook stole the ball and delivered an uncontested fastbreak dunk at the 6:53 mark of the fourth quarter to put Denver up, 107-76. Westbrook hung on the rim for an extended period, and did not care at all about the ensuing technical foul; during the stoppage of play, Westbrook exchanged high fives with Denver fans while very emphatically telling the Clippers' fans in the crowd to go home. One got the sense that Westbrook was not only sharing joy with Nuggets' fans while talking trash to Clippers' fans but that he was also letting out a lot of pent-up energy directed toward both of his former teams in L.A.--not just the Clippers, but also the Lakers and the sycophantic media members who unfairly made him a scapegoat even though knowledgeable analysts like Hubie Brown praised Westbrook during his time with the Lakers. 

James Harden is the exact opposite of Russell Westbrook: Westbrook keeps himself in shape all of the time, plays hard, accepts his role, and focuses on doing with high energy whatever his team needs him to do, while Harden is often out of shape, often does not give maximum effort, pouts if he does not like his role, and disappears like clockwork when his team needs him most, as if he looks at his Gucci and knows that in clutch moments it is "time to get ill." 

Harden has said that he does not play in a system because he is "The System." His biggest fan, Daryl Morey, insists that Harden is a better scorer than Michael Jordan. Look up delusional in the dictionary, and you should see those two statements as prime examples.

Morey loves "advanced basketball statistics," but the basic boxscore numbers are more than sufficient to tell Harden's story. When Harden's team plays in an elimination game, you can write the story template before the game and then just fill in the specific statistics after the final buzzer, because you know that he will choke and his team will lose. In 2023 as a 76er, Harden scored nine points on 3-11 field goal shooting with seven assists, and five turnovers in a 112-88 loss to the Boston Celtics; the 76ers trailed by just three at halftime, but Harden looked at his Gucci and got ill in the second half with three points on 1-3 field goal shooting. In 2024 as a Clipper, Harden scored 16 points on 5-16 field goal shooting with 13 assists in a 114-101 loss to the Dallas Mavericks, including four points on 2-5 field goal shooting during the decisive third quarter when Dallas outscored L.A., 35-20. This year versus Denver, Harden gave a game seven preview when he disappeared in Denver's 131-115 game five win (11 points on 3-9 field goal shooting with five assists, four turnovers, and a game-worst -16 plus/minus number). Coach Tyronn Lue may deserve the Coach of the Year award for coaxing 28 points on 10-20 field goal shooting out of Harden in a 111-105 game six L.A. win; that is the most points Harden has scored in an elimination game in five years.

Nuggets-Clippers was the most closely contested first round series this year--Golden State-Houston is the only other series to even reach a seventh game, to be played on Sunday night--but game seven turned into a blowout because it is difficult for a team featuring Harden in a first option or second option role to overcome his propensity to disappear when it matters most: if a player who is expected to score 12-15 points only scores 6-10 points, his team can overcome that, but if a player who is expected to be a dominant scorer who draws double teams instead just disappears then there is no way for his team to overcome the huge gap between expected production and delivered production. Very few players are capable of filling the first or second option role on a championship contending team, and Harden is not one of those players, as I noted 12 years ago after Harden fled Oklahoma City instead of accepting a third option role behind Kevin Durant and Russell Westbrook.

Harden is not the only reason that his teams have lost so many elimination games, but he is the biggest reason because of his overall approach to the game: if the purported leader is out of shape, does not play hard, and shrinks in big moments then his teammates are going to follow that example in one or more ways. Leonard, who is candid if dry during his press conferences, admitted that the Clippers' game seven effort was disappointing.

Westbrook lifts his teammates' energy, and Harden deflates his teammates' energy.

At least Leonard went to the post-game press conference. Harden left the arena without speaking to the media, which is not the first time that he has done this after a crushing loss, and is yet another example of how ill-suited he is to the role of being a franchise's best player or second best player; a leader does not shirk responsibility for a loss, and speaks to the media even if he knows that there will be uncomfortable questions. 

Labels: Aaron Gordon, Christian Braun, Denver Nuggets, Jamal Murray, James Harden, Kawhi Leonard, L.A. Clippers, Michael Porter Jr., Nikola Jokic, Russell Westbrook

posted by David Friedman @ 12:31 AM

11 comments

Nuggets Sink Clippers to Take 3-2 Series Lead

Jamal Murray poured in a game-high 43 points, Nikola Jokic had a modest (by his lofty standards) triple double (13 points, 12 assists, 10 rebounds), Aaron Gordon scored 23 points on 7-11 field goal shooting, and Russell Westbrook had 21 points off of the bench as the Denver Nuggets dismantled the L.A. Clippers 131-115 to take a 3-2 series lead. Westbrook showed no ill effects from the foot injury that forced him to miss Denver's game three win. The Nuggets jumped out to a 17-6 first quarter lead, never trailed, and were ahead by as many as 22 points before settling for a 16 point victory margin. 

Ivica Zubac scored a team-high 27 points on 11-15 field goal shooting, Kawhi Leonard had a near-triple double (20 points, 11 assists, nine rebounds), and Bogdan Bogdanovic added 18 points off of the bench for the Clippers, who melted down in front of their fans who thought that they showed up for a party, not a funeral.

All of the main players for both teams showed up--except for one: James Harden, a member of the NBA's 75th Anniversary Team, was his team's sixth leading scorer in this game. This is deja vu all over again for the Clippers, who are learning that there is at least one other certainty in life besides death and taxes: James Harden disappearing in game five of a 2-2 series. Last year, the Clippers entered game five versus the Dallas Mavericks tied 2-2, and they exited game five trailing 3-2 after a 123-93 loss during which Harden had a triple single (seven points, seven assists, four rebounds) while shooting 2-12 from the field (a frigid February "concert tour") and delivering his trademark "Harden" (a game during which a player has more turnovers than field goals made) with two field goals made and four turnovers. This year, Harden scored 11 points on 3-9 field goal shooting with five assists, four turnovers, and a game-worst -16 plus/minus number, achieving the rare (except for him) feat of logging a "concert tour" field goal percentage and a "Harden" in the same game.

Game five winners in a 2-2 series go on to win the series 81.3% of the time, so it is fair to say that game five of the Denver Nuggets-L.A. Clippers series was the biggest game of the season for both teams. Of course, game six is an even bigger game for the Clippers, because if they lose that game then their season is over with a first round exit, a sad finale for a squad that many "experts" lauded as a potential Western Conference Finals participant before the playoffs began.

Daryl Morey compared Harden favorably to Michael Jordan, but in fact Harden is the anti-Jordan: when Jordan played in a pivotal playoff game you knew that he would be very efficient and productive and his team would most likely win, but when Harden plays in a pivotal playoff game you know that he will be inefficient and unproductive and his team will most likely lose. Harden's elimination game resume provides a blueprint for what the Clippers should expect in game six; last year in game six, Harden scored 16 points on 5-16 field goal shooting as the Mavericks ended the Clippers season with a 114-101 defeat.

Labels: Aaron Gordon, Jamal Murray, James Harden, Kawhi Leonard, L.A. Clippers, Nikola Jokic, Russell Westbrook

posted by David Friedman @ 2:09 AM

10 comments

A Glance at Each First Round Series

The 2025 NBA playoffs started with quadrupleheaders on Saturday April 19 and Sunday April 20. A little more than one week later is a good time to examine what we have seen so far in each of the eight first round series.

Eastern Conference 

#1 Cleveland leads #8 Miami, 3-0

The Heat are the first team to finish 10th in a conference during the regular season but qualify for the playoffs via the NBA Play-In Tournament, and they are playing about as well as one might expect the 10th best team to play against the team with the best record in the Eastern Conference. Cleveland won the first two games at home, 121-100 and 121-112, before handing the Heat their worst playoff loss ever, a 124-87 shellacking in Miami. 

Although the best team will almost always win a best of seven series--barring unusual circumstances such as injuries or suspensions--it is often forgotten that each game in a series is a separate entity; the Heat will not be trailing by 37 points at the start of game four, and they may even eke out one win to send the series back to Cleveland. However, this series will end in five games at most.

The Cavaliers are playing well in all phases of the game, and they are featuring a balanced attack with seven players averaging double figures in scoring, led by Donovan Mitchell (24.3 ppg in three games) and Darius Garland (24.0 ppg in two games).

 #2 Boston leads #7 Orlando, 3-1

After Boston won game one 103-86, the next three games were each decided by nine points or less, but Boston took a commanding 3-1 series lead with a 107-98 victory yesterday. The Magic have made a concerted effort to limit Boston's vaunted three point shooting; in game four, the Celtics shot just 9-31 (.290) from beyond the arc but still prevailed behind a monster game (37 points, 14 rebounds) from Jayson Tatum. The Celtics are averaging 11.5 three point field goals made per game in this series with a .348 three point field goal percentage after making 17.8 three point field goals per game with a .368 three point field goal percentage during the regular season. This series is providing a great example of why it is important for a championship-caliber team to be able to score effectively from other areas of the court in addition to three point range: three point field goal shooting is high variance, so teams that rely too heavily on long range shooting will not be as effective in the playoffs as they were during the regular season. The Celtics have a multifaceted offensive attack, so they can counter Orlando's defensive schemes.

The Magic are a gritty and physical defensive-minded team, but they lack sufficient offensive firepower to beat the Celtics in a seven game series. The most interesting storyline from this series other than Boston's ability to win without high volume three point shooting is that several of Boston's players are banged up now, including Jayson  Tatum, Jaylen Brown, and Jrue Holiday. How much will the Celtics have in the tank for the next series? 

#3 New York leads #6 Detroit, 3-1

This is another physical series, but the unfortunate headline for this series so far is that the NBA admitted that a foul should have been called on Josh Hart as Tim Hardaway Jr. attempted a three point shot with .3 seconds remaining in the fourth quarter of yesterday's pivotal game four. If the foul had been correctly called then Hardaway Jr. would have attempted three free throws with his Pistons trailing, 94-93; if he had made at least two then the Pistons would have almost certainly won the game and tied the series at 2-2, instead of facing a 3-1 deficit and the tough task of winning game five in New York.

Much like the Boston-Orlando series, the favored team won the first game by a double digit margin (123-112) but the next three games were close as the Pistons won 100-94 to take homecourt advantage before losing 118-116 and 94-93 in Detroit. 

New York's Jalen Brunson has been the best player in the series, averaging a series-high 33.3 ppg, 8.8 apg, and 4.3 rpg with shooting splits of .460/.355/.833. Karl-Anthony Towns has been very good in his first playoff series as a Knick (22.8 ppg, 8.5 rpg, shooting splits of .530/.500/1.000). Cade Cunningham leads the Pistons in scoring (25.8 ppg) and assists (series-high 9.0 apg) while also averaging 8.8 rpg.

This has been a tremendous season for the Pistons, but the game four no-call has put them on the brink of elimination in an otherwise competitive series. 

#4 Indiana leads #5 Milwaukee, 3-1

Damian Lillard entered this series questionable due to a blood clot in his left calf, and he exited the series with what has preliminarily been reported to be an Achilles injury to his left leg, a devastating setback that has implications not just for this series but for next season and for the future of the Bucks' franchise. The Pacers would likely have eliminated the Bucks anyway, but after Lillard went down yesterday the disheartened Bucks did not put up much of a fight in a 129-103 loss.

The Pacers' high octane offense is led by Pascal Siakam (22.3 ppg), Myles Turner (15.8 ppg), Tyrese Haliburton (15.5 ppg, playoff-high 12.3 apg), and Andrew Nembhard (15.0 ppg). The Pacers are not great defensively, but they are good enough against a Milwaukee team that only has one serious offensive threat; as expected, Giannis Antetokounmpo is putting up monster numbers, leading both teams in scoring (33.8 ppg) and rebounding (14.3 rpg) while shooting .622 from the field and averaging 5.0 apg, but he does not have enough help on offense while the Bucks' defense has not been good enough, either.

Since winning the 2021 NBA title, the Bucks have fired Coach Mike Budenholzer and gotten rid of starters Khris Middleton and Jrue Holiday (who played a key role on Boston's 2024 championship team). In game four, Middleton's replacement Kyle Kuzma scored three points on 1-6 field goal shooting; he is averaging 6.0 ppg in this series while shooting .333 from the field. Lillard is Holiday's replacement, and he averaged 7.0 ppg on .222 field goal shooting in three games in this series; that is a small sample size, but the reality is that it is expected for a small guard's body to break down in his mid-thirties--and Lillard is such a defensive liability that even if he had stayed healthy it is unlikely that the Bucks would have won a title with him as the second option logging heavy minutes.

Western Conference

#1 Oklahoma City beat #8 Memphis, 4-0  

Remember all of the "experts" who told us that Memphis is not an ordinary eighth seed, and that Oklahoma City is vulnerable because of their inexperience? The Thunder tamed the Grizzlies 131-80 in game one and never looked back, although the victory margins decreased in each subsequent game.

The Thunder forced 77 turnovers while committing just 42 turnovers, which should not be surprising because during the regular season they led the league in both turnovers forced (17.0 tpg) and fewest turnovers committed (11.7 tpg). Shai Gilgeous-Alexander did not have an exceptional series by his lofty standards, but he still led both teams in scoring (27.8 ppg), albeit with an uncharacteristically bad .402 field goal percentage. His All-Star teammate Jalen Williams averaged 23.3 ppg, 5.3 rpg, and 5.3 apg. Chet Holmgren was the only other Oklahoma City player to average more than 10 ppg (18.5 ppg), but three others scored between 8.5 ppg and 9.5 ppg. 

Memphis' star guard Ja Morant missed game four due to injury, but that was actually the closest game of the series, with Oklahoma City winning 117-115. The Grizzlies have a lot of decisions to make, starting with whether to remove the interim tag from coach Tuomas Iisalo, and then extending to what to do with a roster that just does not seem good enough to win a playoff series.

#7 Golden State leads #2 Houston, 2-1

Houston started this series on a bumpy note with a 95-85 home loss to Golden State, bounced back with a 109-94 game two win as Golden State's Jimmy Butler left the game with a pelvis contusion after playing just eight minutes, and then lost game three 104-93 even though Butler did not play. The Warriors outscored the Rockets 35-22 in the fourth quarter of game three in what may turn out to be the pivotal 12 minutes of the series; prior to that point, the Rockets' physical defense had caused problems for the undersized Warriors.

Stephen Curry is having a sensational series, leading both teams in scoring (29.0 ppg) and assists (7.0 apg) while posting gaudy .526/.452/.929 shooting splits. Butler is the only other Warrior averaging more than 11 ppg and the Warriors are getting outrebouned 50.0 rpg to 38.0 rpg, but the Rockets cannot overcome their abysmal team shooting splits of .413/.330/.641. With all due respect to Golden State's defense, the Rockets are missing a lot of open shots and they are also exercising questionable shot selection at key moments. 

The Rockets need more production and consistency from Jalen Green, who is averaging 18.0 ppg on .392 field goal shooting in this series after scoring 21.0 ppg on .423 field goal shooting during the regular season. Green's game by game scoring totals in this series are seven, 38, and nine; he should be in the 18-25 point range every game, and if he does that the rest of the way then the Rockets still have a chance.

It is easy to write off the Rockets as a team that is too young and not good enough offensively to beat the veteran Warriors, but the saving grace for the Rockets may be that their size and physicality wear down the Warriors, particularly if the Rockets win game four to extend the series to at least six games. 

#6 Minnesota leads #3 L.A. Lakers, 3-1 

The story of this series is that Minnesota has dominated L.A. in the paint. Minnesota outscored L.A. in the paint 44-32 in a 117-95 game one win to seize homecourt advantage. L.A. tied Minnesota 46-46 in the paint to win game two 94-85, and then Minnesota won points in the paint 56-26 in a 116-104 game three win and Minnesota again dominated the paint (48-30) in Sunday's 116-113 win. The Lakers gave up size and defensive presence when they traded Anthony Davis for Luka Doncic; that deal will likely be great for the Lakers' long term future because Doncic projects to be an All-NBA First Team caliber player for the next decade, but in the short term the Lakers lack size in the paint and they are not consistently good defensively. 

I picked the Lakers to win this series because I thought that the scoring and playmaking of Luka Doncic, LeBron James, and Austin Reaves combined with having homecourt advantage in game seven would be just enough to get by a Minnesota team that does not always exploit its matchup advantages, but thus far the Lakers' perimeter play has not been sufficient to make up for Minnesota's size, and the series does not appear to be on track to even reach game seven in L.A. My series preview emphasized that Minnesota would enjoy a coaching advantage with Chris Finch versus J.J. Redick, and that has proven to be the case; as just one example, Redick used the same five players for all 24 second half minutes in game four, an almost unprecedented situation of not making a single substitution in a playoff game. At times, it seems like the Lakers are playing without coaching, or at least without competent NBA level coaching; they just give the ball to Doncic, James, or Reaves, and hope that whoever has the ball either scores or draws a double team that opens up a shot for another player. Redick has received largely favorable coverage from his media buddies all season, but up to this point he has one playoff win in four tries as the coach of the higher seeded team that, at least on paper, has the two best players in the series.

Doncic is putting up his typical numbers (30.8 ppg, 7.0 rpg, 5.0 apg), James is playing at a high level for any player, let alone a 40 year old (26.3 ppg, 9.5 rpg, 5.5 apg), and Reaves is doing as much as can reasonably be expected (17.3 ppg, 5.5 rpg, 4.0 apg), but the Lakers' lack of size and the defensive liabilities of Doncic and Reaves are damaging.

Anthony Edwards is leading Minnesota in scoring (29.8 ppg, including a game-high 43 points in the pivotal game four win) and assists (5.8 ppg). Julius Randle has been very good (22.5 ppg, 5.3 rpg, 4.5 apg) in his first playoff series with the Timberwolves, and Jaden McDaniels (19.8 ppg, 7.3 rpg, series-high .579 FG%) has had a big impact offensively and defensively.

#4 Denver tied with #5 L.A. Clippers, 2-2

This series looks like it will be remembered as an all-time classic, with the signature moment so far being Aaron Gordon's buzzer-beating tip-in dunk to win game four for Denver, 101-99. This is apparently the first game-winning, buzzer-beating tip-in dunk in NBA playoff history. Three of the four games have been very close, with Denver winning game one 112-110, L.A. winning game two 105-102, and Denver walking off with a dramatic two point win in game four. The only outlier is the 117-83 drubbing that L.A. delivered in game three, and that game skews the overall statistics for an otherwise closely contested series.

Nikola Jokic is leading both teams in scoring (28.5 ppg), rebounding (13.5 rpg), and assists (10.8 apg); media accounts portraying Ivica Zubac as some kind of "Jokic stopper" are bizarre, even though Zubac is having a good series (18.8 ppg, team-high 11.5 rpg). Jamal Murray (20.0 ppg, 6.0 apg) and Aaron Gordon (17.0 ppg, 6.8 rpg) have played at their usual levels, but Michael Porter Jr. (10.5 ppg, 7.3 rpg) is struggling.

Kawhi Leonard is the Clippers' leading scorer (26.5 ppg, .562 FG%) and he has had a big impact on both sides of the court. The only cautionary note with him, as always, is health/durability; he is a big, strong player who plays with force at both ends of the court, and his body tends to break down. James Harden has been solid so far (21.3 ppg, team-high 9.5 apg, .453 FG%) but--as is usually the case--he is trending downward as the series progresses: 32 points/11 assists in game one, 18 points/seven assists in game two, 20 points/nine assists in game three, and 15 points/11 assists in game four. Harden has been uncharacteristically efficient in the fourth quarters of these games, totaling 12 points on 4-7 field goal shooting with eight assists and just two turnovers, but vintage Harden often does not show up until game five; last year, the Clippers and the Dallas Mavericks were tied 2-2 before the Clippers lost 123-93 as Harden had a Draymond Green-like triple single (seven points, seven assists, four rebounds) including both "concert tour" field goal shooting (2-12) and a "Harden" with more turnovers (four) than field goals made (two). 

It is reasonable to expect greatness from Jokic and Leonard in game five, along with a typical Harden performance as well, which should add up to Denver taking a 3-2 series lead.

Labels: Boston Celtics, Cleveland Cavaliers, Denver Nuggets, Golden State Warriors, Indiana Pacers, L.A. Clippers, Minnesota Timberwolves, New York Knicks, Oklahoma City Thunder

posted by David Friedman @ 2:02 PM

2 comments