Diamond may not be the appropriate words for these players, but I offer the following…
Last year, the Cavs had five rookies that were selected after the 52nd pick in the draft or were undrafted. Samardo Samuels, Luke Harangody, Semih Erden, Manny Harris, and Alonzo Gee (I’m counting Gee because he was undrafted and only played 180 minutes in 2009 – 2010) were draft day afterthoughts that played at least 600 NBA minutes last year. In this short series, these players will be compared to similar players from the 2002 – 2003 to 2009 – 2010 seasons to determine what precedent there is for each to become a productive NBA player.
The comparisons will be statistical and based on eight numbers: true shooting percentage (ts), assist rate (ast), turnover rate (to), usage rate (usg), offensive rebounding rate (orr), defensive rebounding rate (drr), player efficiency rating (PER) and age. Both the statistics and the timeframe were selected because they are easily sort able on ESPN.com’s “Hollinger’s Player Statistics” page.
Over the 8 seasons, the following table reflects the power forwards that were statistically most similar to Samardo Samuels last year. Samuels scored with below average efficiency, rarely passed, and rebounded offensively nearly as well as he did defensively. In some cases, the definition of “similar” gets slightly stretched.
What conclusions can be drawn from this data? First, no player “similar” to Samuels has become more than a borderline NBA starter. Kris Humphries is the most intriguing, but he’s not a great comparison; Humphries was younger, more athletic, and slightly better across the board. Glen Davis is a relatively inefficient player whose reputation has benefitted due to playing on a champion.
The most similar seasons to Samuels were 2007 – 2008 Jason Smith, 2007 – 2008 Glen Davis, 2002 – 2003 Slava Medvedenko, and 2002 – 2003 Lonny Baxter. The most similar player is Davis, due to his physique and also shot distribution; Samuels attempted 79% of his field goals from inside 10 ft compared to Davis’ 77% attempted from short range in 2007 – 2008. Each of the aforementioned four players was a rookie except for Medvedenko, who did not attend college and was in his third season. The most encouraging take away is that the two more recent players are still playing and played at least 1100 minutes for a playoff team last year. During the comparable seasons, one of the four players played 900 minutes on an NBA champion (Davis) and another played 700 minutes for an NBA champion the year prior (Medvedenko). In conclusion, although there is not a precedent for Samuels to become much more than he is now, there are precedents for sustainable contributing to a successful NBA team. Hopefully like Glen Davis, someday Cavs fans are able to discuss Samuels as an inefficient back-up that benefitted from being on a champion.
(Also if anyone cares, I will be making several posts at eightpointsnineseconds.com, the True Hoop Network blog for the Indiana Pacers. The first one should be up tomorrow.)
We don’t normally have a Shirt of the Day here at Cavs: The Blog. In fact, we have never had a Shirt of the Day. But if we did have a running Shirt of the Day feature, this shirt would surely be featured.
The Cavs are one game away from the official midway point of the season. Normally, this is the point where I would try and compare all the good things about the Cavaliers to all the bad things about the Cavaliers and see how they do or don’t even out. However, seeing as to how the 2010-11 Cavaliers are playing historically terrible basketball and are a miserable wasteland where all that is good and happy comes to perish, I’ve decided to try and measure all the bad things about the Cavaliers with all the good things about the rest of the world and see who wins. Without further ado:
Bad thing about the Cavaliers:
I’m looking at the Synergy data on the Cavs’ defense, and dear lord it is horrifying. The Cavs are giving up an average of .95 points per possession, which is dead last in the league. They are giving up .97 points per possession in isolation situations, which is dead last in the league. They are giving up .94 points per possession to the ballhandler in pick-and-roll situations, which is dead last in the league. Essentially, if you have the ball, a live dribble, and the intention to score, the Cavaliers have no idea how to stop you.
Good thing about the Earth:
Puppies!
Bad thing about the Cavaliers:
Seriously, though, the Cavalier defense is unbelievably terrible. They are giving up 1.09 points per possession in spot-up situations, which is dead last in the league. Spot-up shooters make 42% of their spot-up threes against the Cavaliers, which is actually better than the Cavs defend the three in all other situations. Given the choice to stop penetration or protect the three-point line, the Cavs have decided to do neither. The only thing keeping you from getting the shot you want against the Cavalier defense is your imagination.
Good thing about the Earth:
Alison Brie on Community.
That clip is everything good and bad about the internet: after watching that episode for the first time (I’m catching up on the show right now), I YouTubed “Alison Brie gravy train” and that video was the first thing to come up. That’s amazing. On the other hand, the video was uploaded by a one “Sexwithturtles,” and the comments are fairly a fairly saddening exploration of what human discourse becomes when anonymity is granted. Goddamnit, people on the internet. At least use capital letters or something.
Bad thing about the Cavaliers:
The only thing the Cavs do well defensively is guard the post — they give up .81 points per post-up possession, which is the sixth-best mark in the league. They’re also the 13th-best team in the league at defending the roll man on pick-and-rolls. Both of those things are almost entirely because of Anderson Varejao, who is out for the year.
Good thing about life:
I don’t know, sunsets or something. This is going to be harder than I thought.
Bad thing about the Cavaliers:
The Cavaliers are also terrible at offense. They score .88 points per possession, which ranks them 28th out of 30 teams. They are the worst team in basketball in isolation, but when they do manage to get out and run, they average less points per transition possession than any other team. Wait, both of things are terrible.
Good thing about life:
Every time I see Mike Brown on ESPN, I think about the end of Frost/Nixon and imagine Mike Brown telling Byron Scott “Perhaps I should have been the hard-hitting journalist and you should have been the coach of a LeBron James team. Also, I don’t regret not playing J.J. Hickson more against Boston. He sucks. He SUCKS. I want you to put that ON MY TOMBSTONE,” while Scott smiles and awkwardly shuffles away with the other girl from Vicky Christina Barcelona.
I know that Byron Scott can coach, but it is outstanding how Scott has been completely impervious to criticism while stoically watching the worst team in basketball than Mike Brown was for grimacing at the team with the best regular-season record in the league. Armchair coaching has gone from “On a team populated with LeBron James and guys who can’t create their own shots, why does the offense go through LeBron on nearly every play! There is nothing about that strategy that makes fundamental sense on a very basic level!” to “Well, if NBA players are going to make the wide-open threes this defense allows on a nightly basis, it’s pretty clear that a loss was an inevitable act of God.”
Bad thing about the Cavaliers:
Mo Williams scores .66 points per possession in isolation and as the ball-handler in pick-and-roll situations, and gives up .87 and .95 points per possession on those same situations on defense. Good lord, he is a victim of the Peter Principle.
Good thing about life:
The Strokes.
Bad thing about the Cavaliers:
Ramon Sessions gives up 1.15 points per possession in isolation situations. I didn’t even know that was possible. Also, Antawn Jamison gives up 1.06 points per possession in isolation, 1.14 points when defending the roll man, and 1.11 points when his man spots up for a jumper. I’m not sure if Antawn Jamison could successfully defend a woman’s right to vote.
Good thing about life:
I can’t put this clip in here since it involves a man who was eaten by a bear dropping repeated F-bombs on the park service for not doing enough to defend the bears, but everything about this Timothy Treadwell rant narrated by Werner Herzog is amazing. I demand Werner Herzog narration on professional coach rants immediately. “It is here that Van Gundy crosses a line with Rashard Lewis that I will not cross. He attacks the power forward who took him to the NBA finals. It is clear to me that Lewis’ lazy rotations and passive offense are not Van Gundy’s real enemy here. There is a larger adversary out there — the rest of the NBA’s belief in strict positional definitions and mid-range shots. It is here that his rage becomes incandescent. (I know Lewis doesn’t play for the Magic anymore, but I couldn’t imagine who else that rant could have been about.)
Also, sometimes I imagine Mike Brown wrapping up the season politely in his video diary before getting fired, then totally losing it and going on a Treadwell-like rant. “I did it. I won home-court advantage. I protected the paint. Defensive rotations rule. Mike Brown conquered. F**k Inside the NBA.” I think about cathartic Mike Brown rants more than most people do.
Bad thing about the Cavaliers:
Of course the Cavaliers are all but guaranteed to have the worst record in the league in a year with a weak projected draft that top prospects might not even come out for because of the lockout.
Good thing about life:
There’s always Jimmer Fredette. That’s all I have for now. This is a picture of a kitten. Soon the Cavs will play again.
I had an English paper to write tonight, so I thought I was going to be too busy to do a post of any substance. However, I was able to get some stuff done while I was procrastinating, mainly because I didn’t think I was actually working on anything.
So without further ado, here are a bunch of random NBA pictures with even randomer captions.
(Two disclaimers: I am sorry this isn’t Cavs-related in any actual way, and Doc Funk is the absolute king of this medium. Everything below is nothing more than a poor imitation of him.)
Welcome to “how it all went wrong,” a breezy romp through the ways the Cavaliers managed not to build a solid “core” around LeBron James during his time in Cleveland. This is an idea I came up with during the free agency process, but never really got around to it. Since I did, LeBron signed with Miami, who built their team this off-season in an audacious, unprecedented, and possibly pre-planned turn of events. Because of that, I realize that some people might say the Cavs’ failure to build a core around LeBron ultimately turned out to be a moot point, but I still think there’s value in taking a look how the Cavs were more or less forced to build with LeBron and duct tape during Cleveland’s competitive years.
One other thing: this is not a “this was all the front office’s fault” thing. Because LeBron made the Cavaliers so good so fast, they only had a few chances to make the move or draft pick that would have given him a true running mate or set of running mates. Due to a series of circumstances both within and beyond management’s control, the moves they made didn’t work out. Without further ado, the tale of Luke Jackson, the Cavs’ only lottery pick in the LeBron era.
The Theory:
Things were looking good for the Cavs after the 03-04 season. LeBron won rookie of the year and was well on his way to becoming a superstar, the Cavs finished the year strong after dropping Ricky Davis and Darius Miles, Carlos Boozer had shown promise as a potential running mate before his contract situation got more and more dire, and basketball was cool in Cleveland. All good things, and the Cavs had their sights set on building on the momentum they’d gained and making a playoff run.
With the #10 overall pick, Luke Jackson was the fairly obvious choice. Thanks to LeBron, high school/young player mania was in full effect, and the draft was full of risky picks: 8 of the first 20 picks were either in high school or too young to have attended a year of American college.
Furthermore, the Cavs knew who their star was, and didn’t see the need to take a risky player: they knew they were going to compete for a playoff spot next season and run the offense through James, so they wanted a player who would be able to contribute right away and would be a good fit next to LeBron. Again, Luke Jackson was the only thing approaching a “safe” pick at the #10 spot. Here were the players taken after Jackson:
#11: Andris Biedrins, a horrifyingly raw center (the Cavs still had Z) who was actually younger than any of the high schoolers in the draft
12: Robert Swift, a high school center and that year’s recipient of the Sonics’ scholarship fund for raw centers who didn’t know how to play basketball
13: Sebastian Telfair, who was considered a huge reach at 13 and most people were sure would be a bust (and who the Cavs would later GIVE AWAY. RIGHT AS THEY WERE BUILDING A RUNNING TEAM. A RUNNING TEAM FOR BASSY. I can’t talk about Bassy without ranting about my love for a short point guard who can’t shoot or finish inside. I apologize.)
14: Kris Humphries, who is Kris Humphries
15: Al Jefferson, high school big man
16: Kirk Snyder, who went to college and is now serving a three-year prison sentence. Currently working with Maurice Clarett on a book about how age limits keep players from making bad life decisions.
17. Josh Smith, high school player then considered a shooting guard, albeit one who couldn’t shoot or dribble with his right hand. Bilas predicted that he would be the bust of the draft.
18. J.R. Smith, high schooler, three-point gunner, neck-tattoo enthusiast
19. Dorell Wright, high-schooler
20. Jameer Nelson. I’m telling you, this was an ass-backwards draft. How ass-backwards?
21. Pavel Podkolzine “Pavel Podkolzine went one pick behind Jameer Nelson” ass-backwards.
Then Russian Teammates Viktor Khryapa and Sergei Monia were taken before Delonte West, Tony Allen, Kevin Martin, Sasha Vujacic, Beno Udrih, David Harrison, and Anderson Varejao were taken with consecutive selections. Making a bad pick in the 2005 draft was like making poor health choices in Mad Men times. I mean, look at the players taken before Jackson:
#1: Dwight Howard: Okay, he would’ve been nice.
#2: Emeka Okafor: I mean, kinda meh. Good player, but not a franchise savior. How much better would he have been at his contract number than Varejao at his, considering Varejao and LeBron’s chemistry?
#3: Ben Gordon: Would’ve been a nice pickup/player. No Scottie Pippen, to say the least.
#4: Shaun Livingston: (Shakes fist at absent God)
#5: Devin Harris: Would’ve been nice, but he was raw and seemed like a reach. Jury’s still out on whether he’s a star — very little talk about the power of a LeBron/Harris pair this summer.
#6: Josh Childress: Played LeBron’s position. Went to Greece.
#7: Luol Deng: Played LeBron’s position. LeBron was unexcited by the possibility of Deng being the fourth-best player on LeBron’s new team.
#8: Rafael Araujo: Probably a very nice man.
#9: Andre Iguodala: More on that later.
Furthermore, Luke Jackson really should have worked on paper. The dude averaged 21.2/7.2/4.5 in his last year at Oregon, on 48.8%/44%/86.2% shooting, had good size for his position, and wasn’t supposed to need athleticism because the Cavs had LeBron to create most of the plays anyways.
My basic “the team really screwed this pick up” rules are as follows: the correct choice has to be within five picks of the team’s actual choice, and not have been considered a huge risk or bad fit at the time — it has to be plausible that the team actually would have made the pick. No “Oh, the Grizzlies and Cavs passed on Amar’e for Drew Gooden and Dajuan Wagner.” Other than Jameer, there’s no player who wasn’t a huge unknown behind the Jackson pick, and Jameer went at 20. Here’s the scary part: if the Cavs had the #9 pick and a choice between a raw-as-hell, similar to LeBron, averaged 13 points in college Andre Iguodala, which player would have seemed like the more logical choice? That one would have looked terrible in hindsight, but even then the Jackson pick would be justifiable.
The Reality:
Unfortunately, Luke Jackson struggled with not being injured and not sucking throughout his NBA career. He played a total of 46 games for Cleveland, never averaging more than 8.9 minutes per game. After Cleveland got rid of him, he bounced from the Clippers to the Raptors to D-League and international ball. I saw him in Summer League this season, and he didn’t look like he belonged there. I don’t know if it was the injuries, but Luke Jackson never resembled an NBA role player.
The Cost:
Thanks to the Jiri Welsch debacle and the Cavs’ subsequent success, Jackson was the Cavs’ only lottery pick. No Durant/Westbrook/Harden for the Cavs, thank you. Just LeBron and Luke Jackson for Cleveland. Good hindsight is always fun, but for to fix this one you might have needed a DeLorian and a case of St. Joe’s DVDs. Sigh. Just because something was nobody’s fault doesn’t make it suck less in the end.
—
We provide fast success in 1Y0-A05 certification along with 1z0-053 exam. You can also use our high quality 642-691 dumps. We also offer up-to-dated 000-102 dumps and with definite guarantee of success in 70-656 exam.
Some events require a measured response. Other need a free-flowing essay. Others need a poem of some kind or something. Clearly, the events of the past couple of days require that I interview myself.
Good Evening, Mr. Krolik.
Good evening, you.
So, LeBron will be appearing on “Larry King Live” on Friday night.
That’s what they tell me.
In person, around the blogosphere, or on Twitter, have you seen anyone whose opinion on said appearance is along the lines of “Oh boy, I’m so glad LeBron is going to be on Larry King?”
No.
Is everyone of the opinion that this is an annoying diversion from the NBA Finals and further evidence of LeBron’s egomania?
Yes.
Why do you think people have those opinions?
Well, because it is an annoying diversion from the finals and further evidence of LeBron’s egomania.
Egomania? Explain.
Well, it’s no great secret that LeBron has enjoyed milking this free agency situation for all it’s worth. This is nothing new for people that have been following the Cavs for a few years. He loves this stuff.
And why do you think that is?
Well, remember that many, many people who are not LeBron James have believed that LeBron James is the best player in the world for a number of years now. Yes, John, I realize that we are about a week away from Kobe claiming the unofficial title of the undisputed best player in the league. Still, the fact is that LeBron was playing on a completely different level than the rest of the league was for the past 162 regular season games, had three amazing individual series performances in 2009…
Wait, three great individual series performances? They lost in the third round against the Magic.
Look at what LeBron did in that series, Krolik. His numbers were off the charts, he made a game-winning buzzer-beating three, and he scored or assisted on something like 25 of the Cavs’ final points in their other victory in the series.
Go on.
I appreciate you giving me permission, buddy. So anyways, LeBron’s looked like the best player in the league for the last two years, with the exception of that Celtics series. (I acknowledge that the majority of the populace believes that Celtics series proves that he is not the best player in the planet. Let me continue.) I think that LeBron firmly believes he is the best player in the world, and one of the best ever. I’d be disturbed if he didn’t think that.
Everyone else is going to count championships, but LeBron is very aware of what he’s done on a night-in, night-out basis. If there’s a key takeaway here, it’s this: LeBron does not evaluate himself the same way everyone else evaluates him. That is probably a good thing, in some ways.
So anyways, LeBron believes that this is a fairly unprecedented event: the best player in the NBA, maybe one of the best players ever, searching for a coach and supporting cast capable of making the most of his talents and getting him a championship.
A capable supporting cast? Cleveland won 61 games this year, you short jackass.
Yes, and LeBron accounted for 11 more (estimated) wins than any other player on a contending team. Circular logic is fun, though. You travel-sized jerk.
The best player, and inarguably the most talented player, searching for a good supporting cast for a decade. Is there any precedent for that?
Well, there’s Wilt. LeBron’s more flexible and less self-centered than Wilt was, but I’m getting way more Wilt vibes from LeBron’s career than I’m comfortable with. That combination of impossible situations and tough breaks (Frank Selvy) just seems ominous.
In a leaked excerpt from the interview, LeBron said that Cleveland has an “edge” in signing him this off-season. Does LeBron genuinely acknowledge his Cleveland roots and appreciate what the Cavalier organization has done for him over the past seven years, or is he just covering his bases in case he does decide to leave?
Yes.
So, in your opinion, why does pretty much everybody hate LeBron right now?
It comes back to that Bull Durham thing, Krolik. Remember that part where Crash is telling Nuke to clean the mold off his shower sandals? Win 20 in the show, you’re quirky. As long as you’re in the minor leagues, clean your sandals.
That’s how it is with LeBron and the championship. Win a championship, and going on Larry King is fun. Doing a scripted movie is fun. Acknowledging that the basketball world is drooling over the possibility of signing you is fun. Dancing on the court is fun. Hosting the ESPYs is fun. You have the perceived right to play GM. A championship ring makes everything that you do a thing that Champions do.
Without a championship ring, everything you do is something that losers do. Every hour you spend having a life or pursuing other interests is an hour that might have cost your team the championship, the thinking goes. Which is why LeBron should have waited until he got a ring to do this stupid movie.
So you’re saying that if you win a championship (and maybe two) as the best player on your team, people will forget that you demanded a trade, criticized moves the front office made, and may have refused to re-up with your team until they traded away a hall-of-fame center?
I hope you’re not talking about Kobe and Shaq. They traded him away because he wanted an extension. THERE IS NOTHING MORE TO THAT STORY. Never mind what Phil Jackson said in his book. I’m sure he was just in a bad mood.
Would this be a good time to mention that Kobe made a rap album?
Is there ever a bad one?
Now you’re just being mean to Kobe.
No, I’m using him to defend LeBron. Kobe managed to play GM for a few years, get Shaq out of town, be a superstar, and produce a rap album over the course of a career that got him five championships. That’s great for him. In hindsight, there’s nothing he should have done differently. Where I have a problem is when people say Kobe’s won these championships because he’s a borderline sociopath basketball robot who doesn’t do anything else. Kobe’s such a great player. I don’t understand why fans have to make him into something he’s not in order to appreciate him.
Kobe’s a workaholic, but he’s also a human being who does things other than basketball. For that matter, so was MJ. (WHO BECAME A BRAND AND STARRED IN A MAJOR MOTION PICTURE. AND RETIRED FOR TWO FREAKING YEARS TO PLAY BASEBALL. AND STARTED GOLFING IN COLLEGE AND WAS A SCRATCH GOLFER BY THE TIME HE RETIRED. AND IS A FULL-ON GAMBLING ADDICT. ALSO, SECRET FAMILY.) While we’re on the subject, Tiger Woods was the hardest-working golfer on the planet, bar none, while juggling like 12 mistresses. Players can work very hard at their craft and work very hard in their personal lives. In fact, the two qualities often go hand in hand.
How can LeBron change public opinion about him?
LeBron will become a changed, humbled man .0000001 seconds after his team wins an NBA Championship. If doing well at the Masters can “humble” Tiger for some reason, clearly the magic healing powers of winning playoff games will help LeBron.
Are you finding it hard to root against Ron Artest, in spite of everything?
Extremely hard. I can’t remember a post-Gasol Laker with legitimate cult/underdog appeal. Well, except for Odom. (Do NOT try to sell me Shannon Brown.) Say Queensbridge.
Do you wish you were recapping an NBA Finals game right now instead of discussing LeBron appearing on a talk show?
Colin McGowan is the editor in chief of Cavs: The Blog. He has written for Deadspin, Sports on Earth, and The Classical. You can contact him at colinsilasmcgowan@gmail.com or on Twitter @cs_mcgowan.
Kevin Hetrick is a contributing editor at Cavs: the Blog. He is a civil engineer who grew up in Northeast Ohio as a fan of the Cavs, Indians, and Browns. He now lives in Indianapolis. His email is hetrick46@gmail.com, and he's on Twitter at @hetrick46.
Tom Pestak is a staff writer at Cavs: the Blog. He's from the west side of Cleveland and lives and (mostly) dies by the success and (mostly) failures of his beloved teams. You can watch his fanaticism during Cavs games @tompestak.
Nate Smith is a staff writer at C:TB who grew up in Anchorage, Alaska, and moved to NE Ohio in 2000. He adopted the Cavs in 2003 and graduated from Kent State in 2009 with a BA in English. He can be contacted at oldseaminer@gmail.com or @oldseaminer on twitter.
Robert Attenweiler is a staff writer at Cavs: The Blog. Originally from OH, he's long made his home in NYC where he writes plays and screenplays (www.disgracedproductions.com) some of which end up being about Ohio, basketball or both. He has also written for The Classical and the blog Raising the Cadavalier. You can contact him at rattenweiler@gmail.com or @cadavalier.
Mallory Factor is the voice behind Cavs: The Podcast. By day Mallory works in fundraising and by night he runs a music business company. To see his music endeavors check out www.fivetracks.com. Hit him up at Malloryfactorii@gmail.com or @Malfii.
John Krolik is the editor emeritus of Cavs: The Blog. At present, he is pursuing a law degree at Tulane University. You can contact him at johnkrolik@gmail.com or @johnkrolik.
A monster lives in the comments section of Cavs: The Blog, and he likes to feed on comments. We have very little idea about when he will strike. What we do know is that comments with 2 or more links will get filed into the spam folder, as will comments with foul or discriminatory language. The comment monster also seems to enjoy extra-long comments, so if you have a long comment, you may want to press copy before submitting a long comment and break it into multiple pieces if the monster eats it. If you are having particular trouble with the monster, email one of us and we will talk to him for you.
