Sunday, June 12, 2011
Monday, May 16, 2011
Who's The Best Player On The Thunder?
I’m about to make an argument that sounds really stupid, but hear me out. Why are we so set in our ways that we believe Kevin Durant is, without a doubt, the best player on the Thunder? First, we have to ask ourselves what we think a “best player” should be. Should he simply be a transcendent scorer? Or should he be a well rounded player who gives you a lot of everything? I don’t mean to disparage Durant, but I think we know by now that, outside his scoring, he doesn’t do much else at an elite level. I want to show that Russell Westbrook at least has a solid case for the best player on the Thunder.
We can start by breaking down what aspects we want to look at. In my opinion, the 4 biggest aspects of basketball are defense, scoring, rebounding, and passing. We all know that Durant is possibly the best scorer in the league. He takes that category in a landslide. But what about the other 3? Let’s start by looking at rebounding.
Kevin Durant, this year, had a TRR of 10.3. TRR is an estimate of the percentage of available rebounds a player grabs while he’s on the floor. It’s a more accurate minute and pace adjusted way of looking at rebounding. The average TRR for all small forwards who played at least 20 games and 20 mpg this year was 9.2. So we can say that Durant was approximately 12 better at rebounding than the average small forward (((Durant’s TRR - Average TRR)/Average TRR) * 100). Russell Westbrook’s TRR this year was 7.8. The league average for all point guards who played 20 games and averaged at least 20 mpg was 5.8. Using the same formula, we see that Westbrook is about 34.5 better at rebounding than others at his position. So we see that Westbrook is a better rebounder for position than Durant. That category goes to Russell.
Now let’s look at passing. I’ll be using AR, which measures the rate of assists compiled against possessions used. Durant’s AR this year was a 10.42, and the league average for qualifying small forwards was 15.91. So we see that Durant was about 34.5% worse than average as a passer. Russell Westbrook’s AR this year was a 33.78, and the league average for point guards was 39.79. Therefore, Westbrook was about 15% worse than average as a passer. Both our subjects were below average playmakers, but Westbrook was slightly less worse for his position. Therefore, the category goes to him.
Defense is probably the hardest category to measure statistically. There’s really no good way to do it. For my purposes, I looked at a combination of steals and blocks. Keep in mind, this is extremely flawed. KD averaged 2.21 combined steals and blocks per game, and the league average for qualifying small forwards was 1.57. That puts him almost 41% above the average at his position. Westbrook’s combined steals and blocks per game amounted to 2.33 a game, and the league average at his position was 1.5 a game. That means Westbrook was 55% better than average at his position. These numbers are nearly meaningless though. Anecdotal and visual evidence, along with our flawed statistical analysis, tells us Westbrook is the better defender. He has this category.
So there you have it. Durant is a better scorer, but Westbrook is a better passer, rebounder, and defender (for his position, of course). Does that mean Westbrook is definitively better than Durant? No. It means that next time we crown Durant as the leader and top dog of the Thunder, maybe we should step back a bit.
All stats are courtesy of Hoopdata
Friday, April 22, 2011
NBA Players as Pokemon
Derrick Rose -- Pikachu The Pikachu from the original series was special for it’s electric attacks and it’s speed. Rose may be the fastest and most electrifying player in the league. It’s a natural fit.
Lebron James -- Charizard The best player in the league deserves to be the best Pokemon. Don’t even argue, you know Charizard was the shit. He was a flying, fire breathing dragon who could, according to the Pokedex, melt rocks! That’s legit.
Dwight Howard -- Blastoise His broad shoulders are kinda like a turtle’s protective shell. This one’s a stretch, but no one’s reading this, so fuck it.
Dwyane Wade -- Sandslash Slashing is the perfect way to describe what Dwyane does.
Blake Griffin -- Pidgeot This could have also been Fearow. I just liked my flyer to be Pidgeot. Blake Griffin is a high flyer, therefore, he is a Bird Pokemon.
Kobe Bryant -- Persian Kobe is graceful like a cat; plus, Persian was the Pokemon Giovanni was known for in the TV series, and Kobe is evil.
Joel Anthony -- Magikarp Just watch him flail around on offense. Unfortunately, I’m not sure he’ll ever evolve into Gyrados.
Eddy Curry -- Snorlax Evan Dunlap of the Orlando Pinstriped Post (@BQRMagic on Twitter) suggested this. You could also substitute Shaq for Eddy Curry. Especially because Snorlax is a pretty strong Pokemon, just like Shaq is still effective at times.
Michael Jordan -- Mew/Mewtwo This one is personal preference, whichever one you think is better, that’s MJ. The other Legendary Birds would probably be Larry Bird, Magic Johnson, and Bill Russell.
I know I didn’t get close to all the possible comparisons. Let’s hear yours in the comments.
Lebron James -- Charizard The best player in the league deserves to be the best Pokemon. Don’t even argue, you know Charizard was the shit. He was a flying, fire breathing dragon who could, according to the Pokedex, melt rocks! That’s legit.
Dwight Howard -- Blastoise His broad shoulders are kinda like a turtle’s protective shell. This one’s a stretch, but no one’s reading this, so fuck it.
Dwyane Wade -- Sandslash Slashing is the perfect way to describe what Dwyane does.
Blake Griffin -- Pidgeot This could have also been Fearow. I just liked my flyer to be Pidgeot. Blake Griffin is a high flyer, therefore, he is a Bird Pokemon.
Kobe Bryant -- Persian Kobe is graceful like a cat; plus, Persian was the Pokemon Giovanni was known for in the TV series, and Kobe is evil.
Joel Anthony -- Magikarp Just watch him flail around on offense. Unfortunately, I’m not sure he’ll ever evolve into Gyrados.
Eddy Curry -- Snorlax Evan Dunlap of the Orlando Pinstriped Post (@BQRMagic on Twitter) suggested this. You could also substitute Shaq for Eddy Curry. Especially because Snorlax is a pretty strong Pokemon, just like Shaq is still effective at times.
Michael Jordan -- Mew/Mewtwo This one is personal preference, whichever one you think is better, that’s MJ. The other Legendary Birds would probably be Larry Bird, Magic Johnson, and Bill Russell.
I know I didn’t get close to all the possible comparisons. Let’s hear yours in the comments.
Tuesday, April 19, 2011
On Andrea Bargnani
Andrea Bargnani hasn’t performed like a number one pick.
That isn’t news for anyone. The Italian big man, while showing flashes of All-Star scoring potential, has also shown flashes of D-League worthy defense. His rebounding has been just as bad. All in all, he hasn’t lived up to his top billing. But honestly, he didn’t have top billing. Yes, he was drafted #1 overall, but was there a talent available in that year who was a slam dunk? Brandon Roy was a walking injury risk, LaMarcus Aldridge was still unproven, JJ Redick was thought to be a shorter Adam Morrison, both great college players who would be unable to translate their success to the NBA. Rajon Rondo was a huge project. We can say with relative certainty that the Raptors front office wasn’t necessarily wrong when they picked a 7 foot big man with shot blocking ability and 3 point range.
But that’s all in the past. Right now, we know that Bargnani can’t be the centerpiece of a successful team. So what to do with him? He’s probably best suited for a team with a strong team defense around him, to protect and cover up his own defensive liabilities. He would also be most helpful on a team that struggles to score. One team fits the bill to a T: The Milwaukee Bucks. They’re one of the best defenses (and worst offenses) in the league. That’s good because Il Mago is one of the best offensive (and worst defensive) big men in the league. He would have the second best defensive center in the league protecting the rim for him in Andrew Bogut, and he’d have all the offensive touches he can handle. It’s a perfect fit.
So what can the Raptors expect in return? That’s tough. They would probably want some young guys, either Luc Richard Mbah a Moute or Chris Douglas Roberts (Larry Sanders is basically out of the question). However, in order to make salaries match, they’d need to take on someone like Corey Maggette, whose contract is two years shorter than Bargnani’s, but slightly more expensive per year.
That said, the Raptors would probably jump on this deal. It’d allow them to rid themselves of Bargnani’s bad contract and get a promising young player. If picks are thrown in, that’s just icing on the cake. For the Bucks, they’d get someone who can instantly step in and score 20+ a game, something they sorely need. They’d also move Maggette’s contract for someone with their prime in front of them. They’d probably want to keep Mbah a Moute, a talented young defender who started more than 50 games this last year for them. They’d also probably be hesitant to throw in picks. It depends on what they believe Bargnani is worth.
This wouldn’t be a trade where both teams get better. Toronto would, on paper at least, get worse, and Milwaukee would be making a huge gamble. However, Toronto would also get salary relief and the start of a proper rebuilding, and if the gamble pays off for Milwaukee, it could propel them back into the playoffs.
That isn’t news for anyone. The Italian big man, while showing flashes of All-Star scoring potential, has also shown flashes of D-League worthy defense. His rebounding has been just as bad. All in all, he hasn’t lived up to his top billing. But honestly, he didn’t have top billing. Yes, he was drafted #1 overall, but was there a talent available in that year who was a slam dunk? Brandon Roy was a walking injury risk, LaMarcus Aldridge was still unproven, JJ Redick was thought to be a shorter Adam Morrison, both great college players who would be unable to translate their success to the NBA. Rajon Rondo was a huge project. We can say with relative certainty that the Raptors front office wasn’t necessarily wrong when they picked a 7 foot big man with shot blocking ability and 3 point range.
But that’s all in the past. Right now, we know that Bargnani can’t be the centerpiece of a successful team. So what to do with him? He’s probably best suited for a team with a strong team defense around him, to protect and cover up his own defensive liabilities. He would also be most helpful on a team that struggles to score. One team fits the bill to a T: The Milwaukee Bucks. They’re one of the best defenses (and worst offenses) in the league. That’s good because Il Mago is one of the best offensive (and worst defensive) big men in the league. He would have the second best defensive center in the league protecting the rim for him in Andrew Bogut, and he’d have all the offensive touches he can handle. It’s a perfect fit.
So what can the Raptors expect in return? That’s tough. They would probably want some young guys, either Luc Richard Mbah a Moute or Chris Douglas Roberts (Larry Sanders is basically out of the question). However, in order to make salaries match, they’d need to take on someone like Corey Maggette, whose contract is two years shorter than Bargnani’s, but slightly more expensive per year.
That said, the Raptors would probably jump on this deal. It’d allow them to rid themselves of Bargnani’s bad contract and get a promising young player. If picks are thrown in, that’s just icing on the cake. For the Bucks, they’d get someone who can instantly step in and score 20+ a game, something they sorely need. They’d also move Maggette’s contract for someone with their prime in front of them. They’d probably want to keep Mbah a Moute, a talented young defender who started more than 50 games this last year for them. They’d also probably be hesitant to throw in picks. It depends on what they believe Bargnani is worth.
This wouldn’t be a trade where both teams get better. Toronto would, on paper at least, get worse, and Milwaukee would be making a huge gamble. However, Toronto would also get salary relief and the start of a proper rebuilding, and if the gamble pays off for Milwaukee, it could propel them back into the playoffs.
Friday, April 1, 2011
Dr. Balllove, or, How I Learned To Stop Worrying And Love March Madness
*I’m starting to have serious doubts about that title. But I really wanted to use the “Dr. Strangelove” subtitle, and I can’t think of anything else that fits for the actual title. Crucify me if you must.
For a long time, I mocked college basketball. To be honest, I mocked all of college sports. It was easy. You could see that it was obviously inferior to the pro game, be it basketball, football, or baseball (I didn’t actually watch college, or pro, baseball, I’m just assuming this). And in the case of college football, I still do mock them, although this has more to do with the BCS, which is another article altogether. But I learned something about college basketball last year. I still do believe it’s inferior to the pro game. But I’ve learned not to judge it so harshly.
The fact that college basketball is, at it’s core, a lesser offering then the NBA should be obvious. It has to be. Only the best of the best college basketball players actually manage to make it to the NBA, where they’re blessed with teams that have more money and resources at their disposal, solely to train these players, and the players themselves have more time to train and mature into their bodies. So it’s nothing to be ashamed of, NCAA. It’s just a fact of life. No big deal.
Notice I said that college basketball was inferior at it’s core. The reasoning for that wording is, college basketball isn’t meant to be taken as is. There’s a certain beauty to watching two .500 teams battle it out in mid-February with, in all honesty, nothing on the line. You’ve still got amazing athletes making amazing plays with regularity. The NCAA’s focus is elsewhere. It’s true, every once in a while, you’ll see athletic plays on par with the NBA, but on the whole, college basketball is theater framed as sport. A lot of it is by design. By making their postseason in a one-and-done format, college basketball officials are embracing the theatricality of their sport. If they truly cared about making sure the best team won the trophy at the end of the year, they would play series, be they best of 3 or best of 7. But they don’t. Why? Because the essence of college basketball is the upset. That is the magical word that defines March Madness for the casual fan. That is what the NCAA has embraced by making a one-and-done postseason tournament. That is why college basketball is theater, not sport. And that’s why I love it, despite myself.
For a long time, I mocked college basketball. To be honest, I mocked all of college sports. It was easy. You could see that it was obviously inferior to the pro game, be it basketball, football, or baseball (I didn’t actually watch college, or pro, baseball, I’m just assuming this). And in the case of college football, I still do mock them, although this has more to do with the BCS, which is another article altogether. But I learned something about college basketball last year. I still do believe it’s inferior to the pro game. But I’ve learned not to judge it so harshly.
The fact that college basketball is, at it’s core, a lesser offering then the NBA should be obvious. It has to be. Only the best of the best college basketball players actually manage to make it to the NBA, where they’re blessed with teams that have more money and resources at their disposal, solely to train these players, and the players themselves have more time to train and mature into their bodies. So it’s nothing to be ashamed of, NCAA. It’s just a fact of life. No big deal.
Notice I said that college basketball was inferior at it’s core. The reasoning for that wording is, college basketball isn’t meant to be taken as is. There’s a certain beauty to watching two .500 teams battle it out in mid-February with, in all honesty, nothing on the line. You’ve still got amazing athletes making amazing plays with regularity. The NCAA’s focus is elsewhere. It’s true, every once in a while, you’ll see athletic plays on par with the NBA, but on the whole, college basketball is theater framed as sport. A lot of it is by design. By making their postseason in a one-and-done format, college basketball officials are embracing the theatricality of their sport. If they truly cared about making sure the best team won the trophy at the end of the year, they would play series, be they best of 3 or best of 7. But they don’t. Why? Because the essence of college basketball is the upset. That is the magical word that defines March Madness for the casual fan. That is what the NCAA has embraced by making a one-and-done postseason tournament. That is why college basketball is theater, not sport. And that’s why I love it, despite myself.
Saturday, March 12, 2011
A Letter to Mr. Ebert
A long time ago, Roger Ebert wrote that he believed video games could never be art. He later changed his view, and eventually arrived at the conclusion that he should have never brought it up. Unfortunately, he did, and because I'm in touch with the zeitgeist, I've written a letter to Mr. Ebert, explaining just what I think of him and his taste in art.
Dear Mr. Roger Ebert: Kindly fuck the fuck off.
A long time ago, you said you didn’t believe video games could be considered art in the foreseeable future. That may be the most pompous, idiotic thing I’ve ever heard someone say, and I’ve listened to Bill O’Reilly speak for more than 30 seconds. Do you really not believe that The Legend of Zelda is art? Do you really not believe that Final Fantasy is art? Do you really think that Mario and his friends aren’t art? And those are just the mainstream video games. There are so many more that were probably suggested to you by your readers. Jesus Fucking Christ, if you truly believe that video games can‘t be art, kindly fellate a shotgun.
You must believe literature is art. You obviously believe movies are art. You’re a movie critic for god sakes (You may refer to yourself as a film critic, but that is pure, pretentious bullshit. You write pretty about moving pictures and get paid for it. Don’t get a swelled head.)! So why is it so hard for you to believe that a video game can be art? You say that the fact that player affects the game precludes it from being art. How is that so? As you mentioned Clive Barker saying, it allows the player to experience a wider range of emotions. In the end, I’m not sure you have a reason for disliking video games. At the risk of sounding standoffish, I feel you’re being a snob. You tell us that you would gladly destroy all the video games in the world to save the works of Shakespeare. You tell us that a person who values a great video game over Huckleberry Finn is a fool. This is nothing more than cultural classism. I assume this is how art critics, those pretentious buffoons, felt when Jackson Pollack was first dripping paint on canvas.
So I’m sorry Mr. Ebert. Until you can come up with some stronger reasoning then “they’re not Shakespeare or Twain,” I won’t be able to take you as anything more than a real life representation of Abe Simpson, afraid that a camera flash had stolen his soul. Fuck. You.
Sincerely, Atique Virani
Ebert has been rebutted much better than this, by much better writers. My personal favorite is Michael Swaim's piece in Cracked.com.
Dear Mr. Roger Ebert: Kindly fuck the fuck off.
A long time ago, you said you didn’t believe video games could be considered art in the foreseeable future. That may be the most pompous, idiotic thing I’ve ever heard someone say, and I’ve listened to Bill O’Reilly speak for more than 30 seconds. Do you really not believe that The Legend of Zelda is art? Do you really not believe that Final Fantasy is art? Do you really think that Mario and his friends aren’t art? And those are just the mainstream video games. There are so many more that were probably suggested to you by your readers. Jesus Fucking Christ, if you truly believe that video games can‘t be art, kindly fellate a shotgun.
You must believe literature is art. You obviously believe movies are art. You’re a movie critic for god sakes (You may refer to yourself as a film critic, but that is pure, pretentious bullshit. You write pretty about moving pictures and get paid for it. Don’t get a swelled head.)! So why is it so hard for you to believe that a video game can be art? You say that the fact that player affects the game precludes it from being art. How is that so? As you mentioned Clive Barker saying, it allows the player to experience a wider range of emotions. In the end, I’m not sure you have a reason for disliking video games. At the risk of sounding standoffish, I feel you’re being a snob. You tell us that you would gladly destroy all the video games in the world to save the works of Shakespeare. You tell us that a person who values a great video game over Huckleberry Finn is a fool. This is nothing more than cultural classism. I assume this is how art critics, those pretentious buffoons, felt when Jackson Pollack was first dripping paint on canvas.
So I’m sorry Mr. Ebert. Until you can come up with some stronger reasoning then “they’re not Shakespeare or Twain,” I won’t be able to take you as anything more than a real life representation of Abe Simpson, afraid that a camera flash had stolen his soul. Fuck. You.
Sincerely, Atique Virani
Ebert has been rebutted much better than this, by much better writers. My personal favorite is Michael Swaim's piece in Cracked.com.
Saturday, February 26, 2011
A Look Back At The NBA
As you can see by the above title, the NBA is making it's stretch run towards the title. Because of the NFL draft, pitchers and catchers reporting to spring training, and March Madness, this all-too-important part of the NBA season is overlooked by all but the most diehard fans. This also means that the NBA season has passed it's midway point, and it's now possible to look at it with a sense of objectivity. Here, I want to frame the NBA through the prism of the end of year award races.
MVP:
In my mind, the obvious pick for MVP is Lebron James. He's still the best player in the world, whether you simply look at the stats, or actually watch the games. He's the leader of one of the best teams in the league and a legitimate contender for at least a conference title, if not a championship. What more do you need? This is one of those rare cases where the best player in the league, and the best player on one of the best teams in the league are one and the same.
However, I know the chances of James winning MVP are slim. Why? For one, he's already won it two straight times, and voters can tire of awarding MVP to the same player too many times in a row, whether he's Lebron James or Michael Jordan. He also happens to not be Derrick Rose, this season's breakout player. Rose has exploded this year, not only showing individual excellence, but also pushing his team to the upper echelon of the Eastern Conference. So why is he not my pick? It's not that I believe he's not deserving. In a league without James, I would have no problem with Rose, Dwight Howard, Chris Paul, or, heck, even Steve Nash winning the trophy. Strong cases can be made for all them. However, as long as a healthy Lebron James is still in his prime, the MVP trophy is his to earn, and he's certainly done that this year.
DPOY:
The Defensive Player Of The Year award is perhaps the second most coveted award in the NBA, after the MVP. To win, a player must show that he can not only put up good stats on the defensive side of the ball, but also make his team defense better as a whole. In my mind, there's one player who does that more than anyone: Dwight Howard. This is an obvious pick, yes, but for good reason. Even though the Magic traded away their best perimeter defender, Mickael Pietrus, and a solid interior defender, Marcin Gortat away to acquire defensive liability Hedo Turkoglu and defensive neutrality Jason Richardson, he's kept them on pace to finish with the third-best Defensive Efficiency (a measure of points allowed per 100 possessions) in the league at 99.0. Kevin Garnett and Joakim Noah also deserve consideration for their respective team successes, but they have the luxury of excellent team defense. Howard has been forced to cover for the mistakes of his wings, as well as handle his man, and he's excelled.
ROY:
Blake Griffin. End of story. I look stupid for picking Demarcus Cousins, but there's nothing I can do about it.
6TH MAN:
My pick for 6th Man goes to Glen Davis, under the assumption the Celtics pick up a bought out center, and Davis continues to come off the bench to anchor a suddenly fearsome Celtics 2nd squad, after the addition of Jeff Green and return of Delonte West. Davis has been one of the better help defenders in the league for years now, and his ability to move his feet, cut off angles to the basket, and draw charges is almost unparalleled. Ryan Anderson's offensive contributions were also considered.
MIP:
This year's Most Improved Player has to be Derrick Rose. His improvement from last year is simply amazing. He managed to significantly increase his usage without sacrificing efficiency, and he was able to do this by becoming a deadly long-range shooter and getting to the FT line at an increased rate, where he also hit a higher percentage. It's not just the scoring though. He managed to increase his TRB, AST, STL, and BLK % while bettering his Offensive and Defensive Ratings and almost doubling his Win Shares per 48 minutes. I'm starting to feel unsure about not naming him MVP, in fact, so I'll stop there. Suffice it to say, Derrick Rose is your MIP.
COY:
Your Coach of the Year this year has been Gregg Popovich. Yes, he's been blessed with great talent, but he's also done an amazing job of integrating his veteran core with younger role players, and transitioning from the greatest power forward of all time leading the squad, to one of the best international players and 6th men of all time leading it. Through it all, he's masterfully managed his rotations, saved his important players for the playoffs, somehow extricated the best record in the league by far from his team, and, perhaps most surprisingly, is objectively liked by almost all NBA fans. That, my friends, is a difficult task.
So, that was a look at the important awards of this NBA season. With the exception of MVP, I think these will turn out correct. Regardless, I'm excited as hell to see these playoffs. We should be in for some great matchups. The NBA truly is faaaaaaantastic.
MVP:
In my mind, the obvious pick for MVP is Lebron James. He's still the best player in the world, whether you simply look at the stats, or actually watch the games. He's the leader of one of the best teams in the league and a legitimate contender for at least a conference title, if not a championship. What more do you need? This is one of those rare cases where the best player in the league, and the best player on one of the best teams in the league are one and the same.
However, I know the chances of James winning MVP are slim. Why? For one, he's already won it two straight times, and voters can tire of awarding MVP to the same player too many times in a row, whether he's Lebron James or Michael Jordan. He also happens to not be Derrick Rose, this season's breakout player. Rose has exploded this year, not only showing individual excellence, but also pushing his team to the upper echelon of the Eastern Conference. So why is he not my pick? It's not that I believe he's not deserving. In a league without James, I would have no problem with Rose, Dwight Howard, Chris Paul, or, heck, even Steve Nash winning the trophy. Strong cases can be made for all them. However, as long as a healthy Lebron James is still in his prime, the MVP trophy is his to earn, and he's certainly done that this year.
DPOY:
The Defensive Player Of The Year award is perhaps the second most coveted award in the NBA, after the MVP. To win, a player must show that he can not only put up good stats on the defensive side of the ball, but also make his team defense better as a whole. In my mind, there's one player who does that more than anyone: Dwight Howard. This is an obvious pick, yes, but for good reason. Even though the Magic traded away their best perimeter defender, Mickael Pietrus, and a solid interior defender, Marcin Gortat away to acquire defensive liability Hedo Turkoglu and defensive neutrality Jason Richardson, he's kept them on pace to finish with the third-best Defensive Efficiency (a measure of points allowed per 100 possessions) in the league at 99.0. Kevin Garnett and Joakim Noah also deserve consideration for their respective team successes, but they have the luxury of excellent team defense. Howard has been forced to cover for the mistakes of his wings, as well as handle his man, and he's excelled.
ROY:
Blake Griffin. End of story. I look stupid for picking Demarcus Cousins, but there's nothing I can do about it.
6TH MAN:
My pick for 6th Man goes to Glen Davis, under the assumption the Celtics pick up a bought out center, and Davis continues to come off the bench to anchor a suddenly fearsome Celtics 2nd squad, after the addition of Jeff Green and return of Delonte West. Davis has been one of the better help defenders in the league for years now, and his ability to move his feet, cut off angles to the basket, and draw charges is almost unparalleled. Ryan Anderson's offensive contributions were also considered.
MIP:
This year's Most Improved Player has to be Derrick Rose. His improvement from last year is simply amazing. He managed to significantly increase his usage without sacrificing efficiency, and he was able to do this by becoming a deadly long-range shooter and getting to the FT line at an increased rate, where he also hit a higher percentage. It's not just the scoring though. He managed to increase his TRB, AST, STL, and BLK % while bettering his Offensive and Defensive Ratings and almost doubling his Win Shares per 48 minutes. I'm starting to feel unsure about not naming him MVP, in fact, so I'll stop there. Suffice it to say, Derrick Rose is your MIP.
COY:
Your Coach of the Year this year has been Gregg Popovich. Yes, he's been blessed with great talent, but he's also done an amazing job of integrating his veteran core with younger role players, and transitioning from the greatest power forward of all time leading the squad, to one of the best international players and 6th men of all time leading it. Through it all, he's masterfully managed his rotations, saved his important players for the playoffs, somehow extricated the best record in the league by far from his team, and, perhaps most surprisingly, is objectively liked by almost all NBA fans. That, my friends, is a difficult task.
So, that was a look at the important awards of this NBA season. With the exception of MVP, I think these will turn out correct. Regardless, I'm excited as hell to see these playoffs. We should be in for some great matchups. The NBA truly is faaaaaaantastic.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)