They look at Duncan, KG, Kobe, Kidd, Nash, Shaq and Dirk with their MVPs and/or rings and think of what an accomplished group it is. Meanwhile, Howard, Paul, Durant, Westbrook, Harden, Irving, Davis, Griffin, Love, Williams, Melo, Wall, and others (especially Rubio) could still get to that level of accomplishment.

What do people think Rubio's ceiling is these days? I have barely watched him this season, other than the occasional staggering pass highlight, but his shooting numbers look terrible, which IIRC was the big concern about him coming over. What are the chances he ends up a stud, and how do they compare to the chances he never really puts it together?

If Chris Paul had been drafted into the weak Eastern Conference to play alongside Josh Smith, Joe Johnson, Josh Childress, and Al Harrington

< cries >

What do people think Rubio's ceiling is these days? I have barely watched him this season, other than the occasional staggering pass highlight, but his shooting numbers look terrible, which IIRC was the big concern about him coming over. What are the chances he ends up a stud, and how do they compare to the chances he never really puts it together?

I posted about him on the last page. His shooting numbers this year are dragged down by the first games he played when he was far from his normal self. Since the minutes restriction was lifted, he's about 42-43% from the field, which I think is an acceptable level for him. He's also averaging almost 9 assists and under 3 turnovers. I do not think he is all the way back yet because his defense remains below his standard, but his midrange shot is improved and he appears to be finishing much better at the rim over the last couple of weeks (he has developed that quick release layup to get under shotblockers that Parker uses and has gone to the reverse more often). I doubt he will ever be a huge superstar, but if he keeps playing how he has over the last 10 games and increases his minutes next year, we're looking at 15-10 with good defense. That's a borderline All-Star in most eras, even if he's stuck behind Westbrook, Paul, Parker (and maybe Lillard, Curry, Lawson) in a stacked conference.

Heh. Simmons wrote a Ewing Theory column on Rondo.

IIRC a lot of people here vouch for The Basketball Jones podcast, but the few times I've listened to it they always say a few too many monumentally...puzzling...things. One of the guys is making a J.R. Smith All-Star/6th Man case in today's podcast...

It seems like he's taken up the Harden strategy of only shooting 3s and at the rim, at least in this recent run. He would do well to keep going.

Also known as the "NBA Jam" strategy.

Lengthy (but pretty compelling) Jordan piece:

JORDAN PLAYS his new favorite trivia game, asking which current players could be nearly as successful in his era. "Our era," he says over and over again, calling modern players soft, coddled and ill-prepared for the highest level of the game. This is personal to him, since he'll be compared to this generation, and since he has to build a franchise with this generation's players.

"I'll give you a hint," he says. "I can only come up with four."

He lists them: LeBron, Kobe, Tim Duncan, Dirk Nowitzki...
When someone on TV compares LeBron to Oscar Robertson, Jordan fumes. He rolls his eyes, stretches his neck, frustrated. "It's absolutely … " he says, catching himself. "The point is, no one is critiquing the personnel that he's playing against. Their knowledge of how to play the game … that's not a fair comparison. That's not right … Could LeBron be successful in our era? Yes. Would he be as successful? No."

"I study him," he says.

When LeBron goes right, he usually drives; when he goes left, he usually shoots a jumper. It has to do with his mechanics and how he loads the ball for release. "So if I have to guard him," Jordan says, "I'm gonna push him left so nine times out of 10, he's gonna shoot a jump shot. If he goes right, he's going to the hole and I can't stop him. So I ain't letting him go right."

For the rest of the game, when LeBron gets the ball and starts his move, Jordan will call out some variation of "drive" or "shoot." It's not just LeBron. He sees fouls the officials miss, and the replays prove him right. When someone shoots, he knows immediately whether it's going in. He calls out what guys are going to do before they do it, more plugged into the flow of the game than some of the players on the court. He's answering texts, buried in his phone, when the play-by-play guy announces a LeBron jump shot. Without looking up, Jordan says, "Left?"

I briefly watched the celebrity game, but turned the channel after seeing Arne Duncan standing open in the right corner, unsuccessfully calling for the ball.

It seems like he's taken up the Harden strategy of only shooting 3s and at the rim, at least in this recent run. He would do well to keep going.

Also known as the "NBA Jam" strategy.

Also known as "College Basketball", except with made shots.

Am I alone in thinking that LeBron -- transported as is -- would have even bigger mismatches than he does now, due to his combination of size, speed and quickness?

I would love to see LeBron play against Pippen and Jordan. And I'd love to see what he'd do in the fast-paced earlier eras.

Jordan's awesome, but he's wishcasting there. Players are significantly tougher now due to the emphasis on defense and the expansion of the talent pool. Look at the highlights from Jordan's early career and all the white stiffs with moustaches he's dunking over. Those guys are all gone now, or playing 6 minutes a game in garbage time. LeBron in a faster-paced, all offense/little defense fastbreak 80s setting? He would have killed people. Or in the 90s, when there were only a handful of true offensive stars and the game started to favor big guys who were bulked up? Likewise. LeBron would be a superstar in any era, as would Jordan, as would Kobe, as would all the major major talents.

So, Jordan is a terrible talent evaluator. As we knew.

@611 -- that's true, but the flip side is that the paint was often packed with a a couple of those "white stiffs" whose job it was to stand near the basket and be tall. With the advent of the "stretch 4" and the "euro style" there is more spacing in the modern game then when Jordan played. Furthermore, those "white stiffs" were often told to take hard fouls and enforce the "no fly zone" with Jordan and others.

I think that it's basically a wash. Whatever advantages Lebron has with the modern spacing and lack of physicality are offset by the talent of the perimeter defenders he goes against on a nightly basis. Any advantage Jordan had by playing against a weaker talent pool is offset by the fact that that pool was more singularly dedicated (and had less rules to abide by wrt to physicality) to stopping him and his ilk.

Right now I think it's basically Jordan and Lebron for GOAT 1a and 1b. But to pass Jordan, Lebron is going to need another 5 years at around this level and a couple more championships. People forget that Jordan once averaged 33/8/8 on a .614 TS%. That's insane. It's also insane that Lebron this season has a chance to match that 88/89 season of Jordan with one of his own.

Never thought I'd see a player as good as Mike in our lifetime, Lebron is that good however.

Heh. Simmons wrote a Ewing Theory column on Rondo.

Including a line-by-line breakdown of the original column, with the original in bold and his comments in roman. Self-indulgent? Sure, but I got a kick out of this:

Dave introduced me to the Ewing Theory three years ago, and we've been tinkering with it like Voltaire and Thoreau ever since.

I gotta be honest — I don't know who those two guys are.

"Voltaire and Thoreau"? I think Simmons isn't kidding when he says he doesn't know who they are.

["I'll give you a hint," he says. "I can only come up with four."

He lists them: LeBron, Kobe, Tim Duncan, Dirk Nowitzki...

No Adam Morrison or Kwame Brown?

This may be reductive, but I took mj's remarks as your standard back in my day schtick with an extra helping of legacy protection.

@611 -- that's true, but the flip side is that the paint was often packed with a a couple of those "white stiffs" whose job it was to stand near the basket and be tall. With the advent of the "stretch 4" and the "euro style" there is more spacing in the modern game then when Jordan played. Furthermore, those "white stiffs" were often told to take hard fouls and enforce the "no fly zone" with Jordan and others.

As an aside, I'd much rather try to dunk on a 7'1" white stiff standing flat footed under the basket than some hyper athletic 6'9" guy coming at me from the side, but that's neither here nor there. I imagine we can all agree that Jordan and LeBron both would dunk on a lot of people whatever era they played in. I agree that to be counted as Jordan's equal LeBron needs another 5-6 years at this level and 2-3 more championships. I just think the notion that LeBron would be anything less than an absolute stud in the 80s is silly.

"Voltaire and Thoreau"? I think Simmons isn't kidding when he says he doesn't know who they are.

Wasn't he an English major at Holy Cross? He knows, he's pandering to his base.

===

Howard for Rondo?

===

Am I alone in thinking that LeBron -- transported as is -- would have even bigger mismatches than he does now, due to his combination of size, speed and quickness?

No. Me on the last page, for one.

This may be reductive, but I took mj's remarks as your standard back in my day schtick with an extra helping of legacy protection.

Sure--that was actually more or less the subtext angle of the piece. Jordan turning 50, and James playing at a level such that people are starting to have the conversation. Jordan knows that, and based on what we know of Jordan, he is probably pissed off that he can't get out there and play against James. So he watches James and "studies" him.

As to the conversation, I am never all that comfortable with cross-era comps, for a variety of reasons, one being that I think players, even great ones, are products of their time in more ways than we think about. If Jordan had been born in 1983, rather than 1963, IMO the Jordan we would be watching today would be more ripped than the Jordan of 1993 and would adjust his game to the game of 2013. Same for an imaginary James born in 1964 rather than 1984. James is obviously playing at a peak that is right there with Jordan, but I also want to see what James does from ages 28-33.

If Jordan had been born in 1983, rather than 1963, IMO the Jordan we would be watching today would be more ripped than the Jordan of 1993 and would adjust his game to the game of 2013. Same for an imaginary James born in 1964 rather than 1984.

I agree, and I think that's an adjustment we all pretty much make in our heads (or at least I would hope). Jordan didn't spend his entire career as a skinny toothpick though, he bulked up pretty well in the 90s along with everybody else.

Looks like the guy that lost to Jordan was Kidd-Gilchrist. Honestly, that doesn't really shock me. Of course, I'm sure Jordan prepped for this game by studying him. And I think MKG was an awful #2 pick.

Jordan didn't spend his entire career as a skinny toothpick though, he bulked up pretty well in the 90s along with everybody else

.

Sure, but there have been advances in training etc, since then. Jordan had a personal trainer traveling with him late in his career, and he would be doing all kinds of extra stuff now, and an imaginary James playing in 1988 wouldn't have access to some of those advances. So, I think it is better, if people want to make these kinds of comps, to look at how the guy stacked up relative to the league he played in, the numbers he put up thereof, and other things, like versatility.

And, as I have said, I always like breaking the question down into scenarios, with each guy in his actual era:

If you could have either of them at age 20 to start a franchise, who would you take?
If you had a generic hypothetical 41-41 team, with an average player at each position, and you could replace one of those players with Jordan, 1989, or James, 2013, that is the only player move you can make barring injury, and if you don't get to at least the conference finals, you have to listen to me and Hombre debate Henry Abbott and Bill Simmons for two hours, who do you take?

But Voltaire and Thoreau? How does it make any sense to pair those two? They spoke different languages in different centuries and are not really known for tinkering as far as I can recall. I mean, Thoreau fiddled with his sentences, I guess, but...

Understatement of Trade Deadline Season, Respectable News Sites Division: "There are at least two significant impediments to a Howard-Rondo deal."

rr -

Whew. Wow. Those are tough to decide.

If you had a generic hypothetical 41-41 team, with an average player at each position, and you could replace one of those players with Jordan, 1989, or James, 2013, that is the only player move you can make barring injury, and if you don't get to at least the conference finals, you have to listen to me and Hombre debate Henry Abbott and Bill Simmons for two hours, who do you take?

Dammit, now you've thrown an emotional monkey wrench into the whole thing. I'm frozen and can't decide.

One thing that's interesting in the LeBron/Jordan thing is that, in the theoretical matchup between the two, the two wouldn't actually match up. LeBron guards Pippen on that team most likely, and vice versa. DWade would be the guy following Jordan around. Pippen would probably match up pretty favorably on LeBron, those kind of guys seem to give him the most trouble.

If you had a generic hypothetical 41-41 team, with an average player at each position, and you could replace one of those players with Jordan, 1989, or James, 2013, that is the only player move you can make barring injury, and if you don't get to at least the conference finals, you have to listen to me and Hombre debate Henry Abbott and Bill Simmons for two hours, who do you take?

If it's Jordan, 1989, give me Lebron. He's more flexible on the defensive end, I can play different combinations of guys with him. Then again - Michael. Oh, man, real tough call. And god forbid my Lebron + average guys run into Jordan's team in the second round after I snubbed him :-)

By the way, as long as it was in person and not on the internet, I'd be highly entertained by the four of you debating. Two hours might be a bit much though.

Pippen would probably match up pretty favorably on LeBron, those kind of guys seem to give him the most trouble.

I know what you're getting at here, and you're right, I think, but my first reaction here was just to snark, "oh, really, that's who gives him trouble? All-time great defenders at his position?"

I know what you're getting at here, and you're right, I think, but my first reaction here was just to snark, "oh, really, that's who gives him trouble? All-time great defenders at his position?"


Me too. It'd be interesting to see of LeBron could take Pippen to the block. It'd be a fun matchup for sure. I could also see LeBron cross guarding Jordan, because Wade would be a little undersized there. It'd be awesome, for sure.

Woj says the Celtics and Clippers are in regular contact about a trade of Garnett for Bledsoe and Jordan. Here's the key paragraph, I think:

The Clippers had expressed reluctance to several teams about parting with Bledsoe until they were certain that Chris Paul would re-sign this summer to a long-term deal, sources said. The organization has become increasingly confident that Paul will stay, but every franchise decision is made within the context of how it will impact Paul, and how he feels about it.

Woj also says there are "differing factions within the Celtics and Clippers on the prudence of the deal," which makes sense. It's been very fun to watch Garnett and Pierce turn back the clock over the last eight games, so at the moment I wouldn't feel terrible about Ainge not doing this. But if it really is Bledsoe *and* Jordan, he probably should. And then he should really deal Pierce, too, who has said he doesn't want to stick around for a rebuilding period.

I was feeling a lot less sentimental two weeks ago.

Woj says the Celtics and Clippers are in regular contact about a trade of Garnett for Bledsoe and Jordan.

Seriously?? Oshkosh b'gosh, do the Celts need to do that.

Although I wonder, which probably-not-gonna-happen deal would Celts fans rather do, Bledsoe/Jordan for KG, or Rondo for Howard... or, I suppose, both.

Although I wonder, which probably-not-gonna-happen deal would Celts fans rather do, Bledsoe/Jordan for KG, or Rondo for Howard... or, I suppose, both.

Maybe this is obvious, but I think the KG/Bledsoe/Jordan one is actually a real thing being discussed, while Rondo/Howard strikes me as something maybe assistant GM's batted around or something.

If the Clippers actually went for that, I would expect Rondo to get dealt in the offseason, in addition to Pierce getting dealt sooner than that. The Celtics would look different in a hurry.

Edit: Oh, and as for the purely hypothetical which I'd rather, Rondo/Howard would be a fun way to go for it one more time with Pierce/Garnett, which I almost kind of prefer at this point -- except, and this may sound stupid, I really, really don't like Howard, and wouldn't particularly look forward to rooting for him. Also I doubt he'd stay in Boston, so. Long-term, the KG deal almost certainly makes more sense.

I assume the majority of Celtics fans would get more exciting about trading an injured star for a less injured and even bigger star than trading an all-time great for two young guys who are pretty good, at least given the little burst of possibly false hope the last 8 games have provided.

Looks like the guy that lost to Jordan was Kidd-Gilchrist. Honestly, that doesn't really shock me. Of course, I'm sure Jordan prepped for this game by studying him. And I think MKG was an awful #2 pick.

Has there been a GOOD Bobcat pick in the Jordan era? it may be just me but it seem that if i just draw a name out of box fill with generally agreed upon top 10-20 guys I would have ended up with better results than Jordan's pick in the Bobcats no?

Looks like the guy that lost to Jordan was Kidd-Gilchrist. Honestly, that doesn't really shock me. Of course, I'm sure Jordan prepped for this game by studying him. And I think MKG was an awful #2 pick.

Really? Drummond clearly should have gone #2 and Lillard's been better than MKG so far, but he's also three years older and far from a sure thing to have a better career than MKG. If MKG was an awful #2 pick, then so would've been Beal and Barnes. Waiters and Thomas Robinson would've both been worse than awful.

Joe Posnanski in support of Red Klotz for the Hall of Fame.

Given the recent rumors, how about Bargnani to Charlotte, Gordon to Brooklyn, and Humphries and/or Brooks to Toronto?

This is a really good Grantland profile on Marc Gasol.

Grantland on Marc Gasol

Has Deandre Jordan become overrated? He makes a lot of money, for one thing, and though he's young, at 24 he's probably already into his prime. His FG% is high but he barely shoots. His minutes have actually gone down this year in part because I gather he doesn't close out games much (which, I gather, is partly because his free throw shooting is an abomination).

Am I missing something? Or is it that people think he could significantly improve over the next few years?

Has Deandre Jordan become overrated? He makes a lot of money, for one thing, and though he's young, at 24 he's probably already into his prime. His FG% is high but he barely shoots. His minutes have actually gone down this year in part because I gather he doesn't close out games much (which, I gather, is partly because his free throw shooting is an abomination).

Am I missing something? Or is it that people think he could significantly improve over the next few years?

Jordan is fine as he is, he rebounds, blocks shots and scores at a very high percentage. He's a good supporting player, about a league average starting center getting paid about the going rate for that when you consider his age and durability. His poor FT% shooting is probably part of why he doesn't play at the end of games, but I also think he gets singled too often by VDN for mistakes everyone on the team makes and it's not like Odom or Turiaf can make FTs or don't mistakes either.

I've heard the VDN is willing to trade Bledsoe/Jordan for Garnett, but front office isn't. I don't think VDN fully appreciates what Jordan and Bledsoe do, which is part of why he doesn't play either as much as he probably should. There is no reason not to give Bledsoe some minutes at SG over Willie Green and for Jordan's minutes to be down this year despite the dreck on the bench behind him. I don't think VDN really appreciates rebounders, team defenders or good all around players all that much. The Clippers are doing well despite VDN largely because Paul and Griffin are so good, not because anything VDN is doing.

woj says hunter is out as head of the players' assoc

@WojYahooNBA Says one official in NBPA meeting: "LeBron really stepped up, led the charge. His voice was heard. It was great, and it was important."

He is *really* doing it all this year.

Basketball Hall of Fame finalists of 2013

Five people from various committees (ABA, Early African American, Veteran, International, Contributor) already elected

I should make a longer comment, but the non-Payton NBA finalists just feel very borderline, and the men college coaches all have warts and there's the general mixing of all types of basketball.

Oh, and good call on putting Oscar Schmidt in from the International Committee.

i'm amazed that schmidt wasn't already in; flabbergasted

that hof just seems so .... ridiculous.

I should make a longer comment, but the non-Payton NBA finalists just feel very borderline, and the men college coaches all have warts and there's the general mixing of all types of basketball.

I can't find my footing enough to say where the border is for the Basketball HOF. Bernard King was certainly a famous and feared player--the Jim Rice I'd guess of the bunch. Someone who might not deserve to get in but might anyway.

I would have guessed Maurice Cheeks was in already. But advanced stats don't love him. I don't know what that makes him. Steals and assists are important categories, not like batting average. Add that to being central to a genuinely great team? I'd vote him 2nd after Payton.

I wouldn't be in a rush to honor Hardaway or Richmond.

I assume Dawn Staley will be picked, no?

Coaches are hard; at some level Guy Lewis and Tarkanian and Pitino all obviously belong in the Hall of Fame.

It would be nice of the announcers to even bother to name the WNBA players in the Shooting Stars.

Radio call talked about all of them!

I thought Bonner was going to blow out the scoreboard early on.

I hate that I'm so much more educated about the abilities of the competitors in the 3 point contest than people who are actually paid to do this.

I did not know that Fallout Boy was still a thing.

Let's never have musical performances again, please.

I feel bad for those who bought tickets for this. I mean really paying to watch a 3pt contest and all that contrived bs

James White was robbed.