Last week’s foray into the positional revolution was a good start, but there’s still a lot of work to be done. As I noted previously, Drew Cannon’s positional system isn’t coming out of the internet womb fully-formed; a lot of adjustments and tweaks are necessary for the model to become viable. Still, Cannon’s design offers a welcome starting point for both discourse regarding positional fluidity and, hopefully, some eventual long-term change in the way we think about and define positions.
There is no end to this process. Even if we successfully shed the five traditional positions in favor of some other system, players and their roles will continue to evolve. It’s critical that we’re constantly challenging the limits of positionality to match with the on-court product. Note that those limits aren’t being tested without reason. It’s important that positional rhetoric remains descriptivist in nature. We’re not saying “this is the way that position X should play,” but rather “this is the way that position X does play.”
With those things in mind, any model proposed here needs to be poked and prodded. Finding the leaks is an important step in the process. I’ll be the first to concede that no positional model will ever be perfect, but tinkering with the system’s imperfections is the the path that will bring us all closer to that flawless standard.
~~~~~
Thus far, Cannon’s defensive positions seem to be the source of the most controversy. While there is some confusion over what Cannon’s designations do and should mean, the most glaring problem was captured perfectly by Tom Ziller:
The problem with the way this new development is framed is that it still relies on demonstrably imprecise labels. If Rodrigue Beaubois is a “D1″ — meaning he guards point guards despite often playing shooting guard next to Jason Kidd or J.J. Barea — then you’re assuming there are “1s” for him to guard, which is just the type of assumption the Positional Revolution aims to destroy.
The point of a new nomenclature is to do a better job describing what players actually do, and do well. If “1s” no longer exist, in favor of the Cannon/Mahoney use of “scorer” or “creator” for offensive roles, what does a “D1″ do? And is that by necessity (due to size or athleticism) or ability? Is calling Beaubois a “D1 Scorer” any different from calling him a “guard”? A more useful classification might be something like “DPick-and-RollA+” or “DPostC-”.
In their original context, defensive designations like D1, etc. are actually very counterproductive. If the hope is to move away from traditional positions, it makes little sense to lean so heavily on them.
Yet Ziller’s suggested variant, while useful, is both highly subjective and goes well beyond what position is thought to bring to the NBA discussion. There are some skill valuations inherent to positional delineation, but in my eyes (and this point is certainly up for debate), it’s important that positions describe and group without necessarily assessing how well a certain player executes their role. Those types of appraisals require far more nuance, and using them to define players via position sacrifices the accessibility of those classifications.
In addition, the wide variety of defensive abilities each NBA player is asked to display makes it difficult to pin down a primary role via skill set. For purposes of convenience, the defensive positions should be as short as possible, so saying that Dwight Howard is a “DPick-and-RollB+/DPostA/DHelpA+/DHelpPostB/DRebounderA+,” while descriptive, is probably a bit silly. Yet, if we’re going to classify players by their skill (and skill level, in this scenario), Howard’s post defense is no more important than any of those other facets. How would one accurately and succinctly convey all of that information in a usable (and more importantly, re-usable) manner?
I think the key is to step away from skill descriptors, particularly at such depth. While it makes sense to describe a player’s offensive role as a “scorer” or “rebounder,” defense functions much differently. A player’s defensive position (not utility, position) hinges on, again, not how well a player defends, but what purpose they serve. Or, for simplicity’s sake, what types of players they’re able to defend.
Who a given player is able to defend certainly ties into the respective skills of both the defender and their offensive counterpart. At a more basic level though, a player’s defensive range is determined by the various heights and speeds he’s able to counter. I’m not talking about the height and speed of the defender, but rather, the ranges of those two variables that a defender is physically able to contest.
Thus, I offer the following modification of Cannon’s defensive positions:
We’ll use the original D1, D2, D3, etc. designations, but with each describing a certain range of relative size and speed. D1 no longer represents a player’s ability to defend point guards per se, but their ability to defend shorter, quicker opponents. Likewise, a D5 would indicate one’s ability to defend bigger, slower players, regardless of one’s own size and speed (Chuck Hayes, for example, is 6′6”, but would be a D5 because of his ability to guard taller, stronger players).
A few notes:
With this system, we eliminate the idea that there are 1s or 2s to guard, and instead simply assume that there will be players of different sizes on the court. Someone will need to guard them. Teams don’t have to match small with small, but they do need to match a small opponent with a D1 (even if that D1 would be a shooting guard or small forward by most conventional standards).
It’s important that the boundaries between the size/speed of D1 vs. D2, D2 vs. D3, etc. are nonspecific. This is not meant to be measurable, as creating the necessary framework would involve drawing far too many arbitrary brightlines.
Positions are meant to be convenient. As such, we really do need to sacrifice some depth for the sake of easier use and better understanding. The point isn’t to create some undecipherable code that no other NBA fans can solve, but to create a relatively uniform system that’s a bit more descriptive and accurate than the current one.
These positions are different from traditional ones, particularly because they account for defensive versatility and cross-matching. For a basic example, let’s take Rodrigue Beaubois. He may start at shooting guard this year, but in the Allen Iverson mold, will mostly be cross-matched on opposing point guards. So from a positional standpoint, it makes far more sense to call him a “Scorer, Creator/Handler, D1″ than it does a shooting guard. It gives us a bit of insight into what kind of players Beaubois will be guarding, as well as his offensive responsibilities.
For a more complicated example, look at LeBron James. He’ll be listed as a small forward, but we know his offensive role is more far-reaching than the limits of a traditional wing. Additionally, LeBron has become such a useful defender that he can guard all kinds of positions. Thanks to his incredible combination or size, speed, and strength, one could make a legitimate argument that James is actually one of the few players capable of defending all five traditional positions. His ‘SF’ label has never done him justice on offense, and now it’s just as constricting defensively.
There’s still something to be said about how a player defends that’s completely unaccounted for. It’s distinct enough from the question of ‘How well?’ that it could technically be incorporated, but I see no simple way to incorporate it. Something to put on the wish list, for sure, but at this stage those distinctions seem a bit too complex.
Another concern is addressing players who can’t really defend anybody. Regardless of where we put the bounds of a positional system, there are going to be exceptions. There will always be someone who doesn’t fit neatly into the given categories. Tentatively, these players will be addressed as ‘D0,’ but it’s certainly an idea worth revisiting.
Please, leave questions and concerns over this system or propositions for other defensive positional models in the comments. Feedback is a crucial part of this process, and every reader is an invaluable part of the refinement of this system.
In the basketball gods’ latest attempt to toy with Mark Cuban’s psyche, they’ve stricken Rodrigue Beaubois down by the foot. Beaubois has broken the fifth metatarsal in his left foot while practicing with the French national team according to Tim MacMahon of ESPN Dallas, and could possibly require surgery and a recovery period of up to three months. There will be no more point guard trials for Rodrigue this off-season, and now he’ll face his first significant injury since joining the NBA last fall.
Just about the only thing that could have stopped Beaubois’ ridiculous momentum was a busted tire, and he was unfortunate enough to suffer one at a rather critical time. It’s better for Rodrigue to miss time now than during the regular season, but off-seasons like this one are still very important for his development and role establishment.
While Beaubois was refining his playmaking abilities this summer for his eventual takeover as the post-Kidd Creator, this year’s training camp was also a very significant opportunity for Beaubois to cement his immediate status as a starter. Rick Carlisle and his staff have clearly been considering the idea, but without the benefit of a full-speed training camp (not to mention the regular season time Beaubois could potentially miss), Rodrigue’s debut as a full-time starter is delayed at the very least.
If Rodrigue does end up missing the initial games of the regular season, two players stand to benefit: J.J. Barea and Dominique Jones. Barea is the more experienced heir to Beaubois’ role and responsibilities, but the Mavs could plug Jones into the lineup in order to keep the rest of the rotation in place. Coincidentally, a similar situation allowed Beaubois to make a name for himself during Josh Howard’s early-season injury last year, so some good may yet come of this. Even if that pesky fifth metatarsal means a little less Beaubois, wouldn’t it all be worth it if Dominique Jones steals the show and forces his way into some extended playing time?
Positional certainty has never been a luxury the Dallas Mavericks could afford during the Dirk Nowitzki era. Yet year after year, the team’s flaws are diagnosed according to the standards of a conventional lineup. Dallas needs a better center. A better shooting guard. A better point guard. Hell, anything that isn’t power forward. Dirk has been the one constant, and despite his unconventional and unique talents, the success of his team is ultimately measured by way of an antiquated tradition.
No longer. Or at least as minimally as possible in this space.
It may be naive to think that the mainstream basketball audience will soon abandon the five conventional positions, but that doesn’t mean those of us in this corner of the universe can’t strive to be better, smarter basketball fans. I’m ready to take a hop (more than a step, but well short of a leap) in the way we classify players. With that, I’ll cue Drew Cannon of Basketball Prospectus:
But what do you really need from a lineup?
On defense, you need to be able to guard your opponents. This means you have to be ready for speeds and heights of all kinds. You need to have a player capable of guarding each of the five traditional C-PF-SF-SG-PG positions. We’ll call the players capable of defending each position “D1” through “D5,” respectively, with speed/athleticism on the x-axis and height/strength on the y-axis:
And on offense what do you need to be successful? You need to be able to make shots (from the field or free throw line), avoid turnovers, and clean up the offensive glass–at the very least to the point where you aren’t handing over points by doing the opposite. This means that you need someone who can take care of the ball, someone who can put it in the basket, someone who can get the ball to that guy, and someone who can get the ball back when someone misses. We’ll call these four characters the Handler, the Scorer, the Creator, and the Rebounder.
Quick point. The Creator and the Handler have to be the same guy. Because you can’t have your Creator losing the ball all the time before he can feed your Scorers, and you can’t have your Handler with the ball all the time but unable to get it to the Scorers.
…It boils down to this: On defense, you have to be ready for whatever the offense throws at you. But on offense, you really just need to rebound and protect the ball enough to let your scorers go to work (or protect the ball just enough that your dominant rebounding can keep putting points on the board despite below-average scoring, etc.). Really, how you put points on the board is your business. The defense is just reacting.
This is more than just a quaint idea.
I’m sure Cannon’s model isn’t a perfect one, but it doesn’t have to be. It’s a start, and nothing more. Just as the traditional formula yielded point-forwards (or even point-centers…word up the the Antoine Walker experiment), combo guards, and other atypical cogs, I’m sure that this framework will allow for a few more offensive player designations yet. What matters is that we move away from a nondescript and misleading method of classifying players in favor of something — anything — that actually manages to advance basketball discourse.
To those still clinging to what they know, I’d ask this: what’s a power forward? What characteristics link Dirk Nowitzki, Tim Duncan, Rashard Lewis, Lamar Odom, Reggie Evans, Tyrus Thomas, and J.J. Hickson? Not rebounding. Not scoring. Not skill set. Not height relative to their teammates. Not even the spaces they occupy on the floor. I’m at a total loss as to the criterion that would group that bunch together, which makes the assessment “Player X isn’t a real power forward” pretty much worthless. I think I know what it means, but without the ability to define the contemporary power forward, how could I really know for sure?
Conceptually, this is nothing new. Players like Dirk have been bending positional bounds for years, and the basic tenets of fluid positionality have been preached by a number of NBA scribes. Yet this system makes enough intuitive sense to work, and gives the thought a more practical and literal application.
If you’d like to join me on this little adventure, I’d love the company. If not, that’s fine, too. This post isn’t meant to convert, but primarily to do two things:
Inform as to what the hell I’m talking about when I write that “Jason Kidd is a D2,” in the future.
Bring the idea to the forefront. Even if you’re not ready to buy into an overhaul of positional classifications, I hope this at least gets you to think about what those classifications mean (or don’t mean).
This could be fun, but I’m going to need a lot of help. Here are the initial offensive and defensive positions for all of the current Mavs according to my own assessment, but they’re not infallible. Are there offensive profiles that aren’t represented? Is it fair to list Shawn Marion strictly as a rebounder? Or Jason Terry as a D2? Let me have it. Rip this idea to pieces. Tear it down so we can build it back up with stronger and smarter ideas, making our collective analysis that much better in the process.
Alexis Ajinca - D?, Large body J.J. Barea - D1, Scorer-Creator/Handler Rodrigue Beaubois - D1, Scorer Caron Butler - D3/D2, Scorer Tyson Chandler - D5, Rebounder Brendan Haywood - D5, Rebounder Dominique Jones - D2/D1, Scorer Jason Kidd - D2/D1, Creator/Handler Ian Mahinmi - D5/D4, Rebounder Shawn Marion - D3/D2/D4, Rebounder Dirk Nowitzki - D4, Scorer-Rebounder DeShawn Stevenson - D2, Abe Lincoln tattoo Jason Terry - D2 (I guess?), Scorer
The Mavs haven’t had a ton of success in free agency this summer, but they had previously done a terrific job of taking care of their own. Dirk Nowitzki was signed to a great value deal, keeping Dallas’ window forced open for a bit longer. They re-signed Brendan Haywood, who was the Mavs’ best option for a legitimate center next season. Yet when it came time to secure a free agent on the other end of the pecking order — undrafted point guard Jeremy Lin — Dallas was beaten out; Lin and the Golden State Warriors are close to an agreement on a multi-year, partially guaranteed deal that will allow Jeremy to reprise his role as a local hero in the Bay Area.
It’s unfortunate, particularly because Donnie Nelson was so pivotal in Lin’s emergence. Though Jeremy wasn’t committed to any one team, the point guard seemed like the Mavs’ to lose. Well, they lost him. It’s not earth-shaking, but it does set the Texas Legends back a bit. The Warriors were ultimately able to offer Lin the contract, role, and potential for playing time he was looking for, and regardless of the franchise’s intentions in signing him, it’s a good fit. The organization may be a mess, but running the point for the Dubs will give Lin a chance to really show off for other NBA suitors, and I’d be surprised if he didn’t parlay this one opportunity into a few more.
The Mavs still have J.J. Barea, who is the better player today, and for the future until Lin proves otherwise. Let’s not forget that J.J. was once where Jeremy is right now, but he carved out a rotation spot on one of the top teams in the Western Conference by force of will alone. He was once the plucky underdog, but has elevated himself into an NBA player worthy of being judged by his limitations, which is something that at this moment, Lin can only aspire to. It would be terrific if the Mavs could have signed Lin to be the face of the Legends next season. Although, let’s not forget that while Lin is an interesting prospect, he’s still just a prospect. Barea, faulted though he may be, is already a legitimate player.
The Mavs missed out on an opportunity to pick up a good, young player for very little, but considering what the Mavs have already done to bolster their depth at almost every position this off-season (let’s not forget that while the Mavs let Lin slip through their fingers, Mark Cuban shelled out the cash to draft Dominique Jones, who was even more impressive in Vegas), it’s nothing more than a pity.
Until the Texas Legends begin to formulate their roster, they will be more of an amorphous blob than an actual asset. We’re getting closer and closer to something real; Summer League is over, and though final training camp cuts are still a lifetime away, the first whiff of the Legends as we’ll know them has surfaced.
As a guest on ESPN Radio, 103.3 FM in Dallas, Jeremy Lin had the following to say about his choice to play for the Mavs’ Summer League team in Vegas this year:
The biggest reason why I was drawn to the Mavs is because of Donnie Nelson. He sat me down at Portsmouth and we had dinner. He talked about how he liked my game. He thought that I was a year or so away from the NBA and he wanted to recruit me for his D-League team.
Donnie’s really taken care of me. He invited me to play for the Summer League team. Even before the draft had ended, he called me right before it ended and said, “I really want you to play for us.” That was an opportunity I couldn’t pass up with how well he’s been treating me and how he pursued me to play for the team. When I got to Dallas, he took care of me there. I’m just glad I was able to get this opportunity.
This is great news. Dallas isn’t the only team interested in signing Jeremy Lin for next season (According to Jeff Caplan of ESPN Dallas, the Lakers and at least one Eastern Conference team are also negotiating with Lin), but they do appear to have a decent advantage thanks to Nelson’s legwork. Jeremy wouldn’t be a candidate for playing time on this year’s team with Jason Kidd, Rodrigue Beaubois, and J.J. Barea all superior options at point guard, but the Mavs could definitely benefit from giving Lin a roster spot while allowing him to thrive in Frisco.
The decision will be Jeremy’s. If he gets a better offer from another NBA team, no one should blame him for taking it. But if the Mavs can make it worth Lin’s while to stay in the Dallas area, we could get an extended look at the third point guard for next season. J.J. Barea will be an unrestricted free agent next summer, and while he’s been very useful during his four-year career with the Mavs, Lin could easily make him expendable after a year of D-League seasoning. This isn’t to say that Lin would necessarily be the better player in a year’s time, but he’d undoubtedly be the more cost-efficient of the two.
The D is the best place for Lin right now. Although Jeremy had a strong showing in Vegas, teams won’t be lining up to hand him significant minutes next season. But having the opportunity to run an NBA offense full-time while further adjusting to the speed of the pro game will do wonders for Lin’s long-term chances. With that in mind, Dallas is a perfect fit. Not only could the Mavs offer Lin a chance to fight for a rotation spot in 2011, but he’d also be able to develop in the team’s front pocket. The Legends will run Maverick sets and operate within the same general offensive and defensive systems next season, all while allowing Mav-affiliated coaches to work with Jeremy on aspects of his game as emphasized by the team. Should Lin choose to sign with Dallas, he would be playing for the Mavericks next season, even without technically playing in NBA games.
UPDATE 11:56 PM CST: Per Jeff Caplan of ESPN Dallas, Lin’s agent, Roger Montgomery, has said that there are now new teams in the running.
Al Jefferson wouldn’t have been a suitable replacement for Brendan Haywood, nor is he a particularly wise usage of Erick Dampier’s instantly expiring contract. But what if he could be had for something far less? That’s apparently what the Mavs are asking of the Timberwolves, according to Marc Stein of ESPN Dallas:
Dallas, meanwhile, is determined not to ship out Dampier’s fully unguaranteed $13 million contract just to take back someone else’s long-term deal. The Mavs are telling teams that they have to furnish a clear roster upgrade if they want the ability to acquire Dampier, cut him instantly and wipe $13 million off the books.
Sources say Minnesota has been urging Dallas to part with Dampier’s contract and draft considerations in exchange for Al Jefferson, who has three years left on his contract at $42 million. The Mavericks keep telling the Wolves that they won’t surrender Dampier’s contract in a Jefferson deal because they have it earmarked for a Gasol-type trade, such as a theoretical sign-and-trade arrangement for James or as the centerpiece of Dallas’ longstanding pursuit of Paul. The problem? It’s a steep drop in terms of difference-makers that might be available after LeBron and his good buddy CP3.
The Mavs’ hard-line stance could always change if they miss out on their other summer targets. For now, though, look for them to take a measured look at their options on the trade market for the next month or so, disappointing as it would be if they can’t turn their best asset into tangible help for Dirk Nowitzki after so much hoopla. Just to be clear, though: Sources say Dallas does remain interested in Jefferson if the Wolves prove amenable to a deal that does not involve Dampier’s contract.
The Mavs would understandably want to pick up Al Jefferson for expiring contracts and Matt Carroll while holding on to their most valuable trade chip, it just seems awfully unlikely that Minnesota would ever agree to such terms. Al’s contract is rather large for a player with such glaring holes in his game, but he’s not enough of a burden that he warrants unloading for cap savings alone. If Dallas really wants to add Jefferson, it’s most likely going to take Dampier. Expecting anything less is just a part of the negotiation, but hardly worthy of anything more than a rumor.
There are only a few core deals that the Mavs could use to trade for Al Jefferson without using Erick Dampier’s contract, assuming that the only player coming to Dallas is Jefferson:
DeShawn Stevenson’s expiring contract, Matt Carroll, and Eduardo Najera (with his partially unguaranteed 2011-2012 salary) for Al Jefferson
DeShawn Stevenson’s expiring contract, Matt Carroll, and J.J. Barea for Al Jefferson
Jason Terry (and his partially unguaranteed 2011-2012 salary) and Matt Carroll for Al Jefferson
Jason Terry (and his partially unguaranteed 2011-2012 salary) and DeShawn Stevenson’s expiring contract for Al Jefferson
Terry and Stevenson make the most sense for the Wolves, but only if their intent is to clear as much salary as possible. They would trade Jefferson’s $13 million salary for $5 million guaranteed if they opt to waive Terry, and Dallas could include cash and draft picks to sweeten the pot if they so choose. Would all of that be worth it to earn the right to pay Jefferson over the next three seasons? Perhaps, but only if the Mavs don’t intend to force him into an uncomfortable role: playing center alongside Dirk Nowitzki.
Dirk is a unique cat, and his game isn’t easy to build around. It takes a particular set of players that can complement his strengths while making up for his weaknesses, and in that regard Jefferson disappoints. They’re not comparable, just familiar; even if Nowitzki and Jefferson aren’t the same in form, they are in function. It’s a neat diversion, but wouldn’t work as a starting pairing.
Now, a big rotation of Dirk, Brendan Haywood, and Al Jefferson? $13 million is a lot to pay for a big off the bench, but yeesh. Diversion turns to full-time fancy, and concerns about fit are obliterated. It would likely be painful for Mark Cuban to absorb both Jefferson’s deal and the tax implications, but considering it’s salary the Mavs would have been paying out to benchwarmers (and possibly Terry) this season anyway, the financial difference this season would be rather negligible. It’s all about how optimistic the Mavs are in their ability to move under the tax line (and conceivably the cap) in the coming seasons. With Nowitzki, Haywood, Marion, and perhaps another player yet to be determined all eating up space until 2014 at least, it may not be as financially liberal as it seems to throw in Al.
Ryan Blake, the NBA’s director of scouting, on draft prospect Sherron Collins (via Jeff Caplan): “If Collins is down there, which he could be, he’s one of the better point guards in this draft, but it depends on how good you think he is. This is not a point-guard draft whatsoever, but the guy is tough, he’s quick and he’s proved it. He doesn’t have size, but you have [J.J.] Barea, who is very tough, comparatively, the same kind of guy.”
Caron Butler, through his Twitter account (@realtuffjuice): “Wherever I’m at next year I’m going to be a problem. (I love dallas)…I wanna win a chip in dallas and that a realistic goal luv holla in the am…I wanna win in dallas let’s get it(chip).” He also noted that he’s trying to drop about 14 pounds for next season.
Reebok is holding a celebrity baseball game in Frisco next weekend to benefit the Mike Modano Foundation and The Heroes Foundation, and Jason Kidd, Nancy Lieberman, and Mark Cuban will all be playing.
J.J. Barea, with a declaration that if he weren’t a Maverick, he would want to be a Net. It’s implied that it’s out of respect for newly-hired coach Avery Johnson, who coached J.J. during his first two seasons in Dallas.
Mike Fisher of DallasBasketball.com, channeling Rick Bonnell of the Charlotte Observer: “Speaking of Shawne: As we noted a few days ago, he’s trying out in Charlotte and we wish him well. Even Larry Brown says Williams’ ‘past is no problem.’ But in the next breath, Larry notes that Shawne showed up for his tryout 20 pounds too fat.”
Jason Kidd, coaching consultant. It’s actually a pretty interesting idea, even if Kidd technically has no prerogative to help out another team or Byron Scott.
Eddy Rivera reviews Brandon Bass’ 2009-2010 season for Magic Basketball: “In retrospect, it’s fair to wonder why general manager Otis Smithsigned Brandon Bass. There’s no question that Bass is a good player but he’s the equivalent of being a round peg trying to be inserted into a square hole. Bass’ strengths as a player are completely the opposite to what makes the Magic successful. For instance, even taking into account his efficiency on offense, Bass is the lone player on Orlando that bases his game around the mid-range jumper. Add to the fact that Bass was never able to learn the Magic’s defensive schemes and there shouldn’t be a surprise that he barely saw minutes this year.”
UPDATE: John Hollinger ranked the top 50 single-game Finals performances of all-time, and Dwyane Wade’s Game 3 and Game 6 in 2006 ranked 9th and 19th respectively.
Annnd we’re back. A little delay following the Mavs’ playoff exit due to my non-blog commitments, but look for things to get slightly closer to normal starting today. Obviously there isn’t a ton going on aside from free agent speculation at this point, but there’s still plenty to go over in analyzing the roster, breaking down off-season strategies, etc. The summer may be slow on news, but that doesn’t mean it has to be slow on analysis.
According to Tom Haberstroh, the smallest lineup fielded by any team in the NBA this season was a Beaubois-Barea-Terry-Butler-Marion unit trotted out by the Mavs against the Warriors. The average height of that lineup? 6′3.2”.
A big, delayed welcome to the newest blog in the TrueHoop Network, A Wolf Among Wolves. I’m expecting great things from Myles and Ben, so hit them up via RSS, bookmarks, or whatever.
Just a friendly reminder that even when the Mavs are eliminated from the playoffs, you can continue to read my work (and watch my videos) at Hardwood Paroxysm and ProBasketballTalk, and you can follow my assorted NBA (and non-NBA) ramblings on Twitter @robmahoney.
View Comments 
