For the record have no axe to grind with Irving. Just find his situation interesting

1298--Does he score enough that his defensive deficiencies aren't a big issue? Because at 30 it's not like his his defense will get better. So if a team signs him for multiple years (which I think is a given) then you have to think a 33 year old Kyrie is worse on defense than he is now.

My point isn't arguing he's worth it or not. If you believe he's not a good player to sign because of defense/injury history/intangibles, what has happened in Dallas hasn't changed your mind. If you think he's an incredible offensive talent, what has happened in Dallas hasn't changed your mind.

Dallas was not the right to acquire him especially because they gave up some of their key defenders on a team that was already challenged in that regard. I also think it is hard for two talents like Luka and Kyrie to co-exist when there is overlap between their skill set.

I wouldn't sign him because he has tendency to be hurt for big chunks of the season.

I wonder what the Daily News and Post would make of the Mavs missing the playoffs with Jason Kidd and Kyrie Irving.

Guys, it's 4D chess. The Mavs first rounder is 1-10 protected. Put this one in the stealth tanking Hall of Fame.

Of course the Warriors lose when I am rooting for them to win. So annoying.

f course the Warriors lose when I am rooting for them to win.

I watched the third quarter of this game. The Wolves' twin towers approach - having two 7-footers against a "frontcourt" of Green and Looney - is a bad matchup for Golden State. Steph or Klay basically have to go lights out for 40+ for the Warriors to beat them.

Naz Reid is having a bit of a moment. I thought once KAT was back he would be consigned to oblivion, but they are leaning into going big.

The inescapable gravity of .500 means the Wolves will lose in Sacramento though (but I can dream).

How concerned are Celtic fans about recent Jaylen Brown event re: his long-term future with the team?

This was last page, but no one responded so I'll take a crack. I'm not particularly concerned, certainly not more than I was before. He gave a nuanced answer about his future (including saying that he hated answering that type of question because it makes fans go nuts, alas) that hedged whether he would be in Boston long-term, but that seems completely fair for a guy who has been the obvious trade chip for the Celtics since Tatum's ascendence and therefore in trade rumors for most of his career. He's always seemed uncomfortable with those rumors, and seems to want to be secure in his place. At the same time, he and Tatum have always seemed to have a great relationship, Stevens has been publicly vocal about Brown's importance, and Brown has seemed to have friction with the media (Boston and nationally) but not with his teammates, coaches, or the Celtics front office.

So I'm not particularly concerned with the media kerfuffle about his recent comments. The thing that has always worried me a bit is that Brown is currently in the CBA trap where the Celtics can't extend him for what he can make in free agency unless he makes All-NBA and is supermax eligible. If he makes third team all-NBA, which seems quite possible, I'd expect the team extends him and this is all water under the bridge. If he doesn't he will be going to free agency, and anything could happen. I'd still expect him to resign with Boston and keep contending for championships next to Tatum, but there's always a chance he'll go for the greener grass of being the lead guy on another team.

I was aware of what a good shooter Trae Young is but I wasn’t aware of the level of foul manipulation he engages in.

oh yeah, he's pretty notorious.

For the record have no axe to grind with Irving.

fwiw - i do - have disliked him since his one year at duke (and unlike most people who live in the triangle, i have no issue with liking/disliking people who play for duke or unc or whatever ...). that said, i don't blame him for dallas' rough play either. they've been a top tier offense and bottom tier defense (both as expected), have been pretty "unlucky", but - most pertinently - the team is bad outside of the top two guys. who is the third best player on the team? christian wood (who they don't trust to play with the big two because of defense), dwight powell? josh green? tim hardaway jr?
this team is rough.

Naz Reid is having a bit of a moment. I thought once KAT was back he would be consigned to oblivion, but they are leaning into going big.

It's all they can really do with the roster they have, but Reid is a reasonable stand-in for Towns (not as good a shooter, probably better driving, just as useless on defence) and I think it might make the reintegration of KAT back into the lineup easier. I still think he's going to get a good deal from someone this offseason.

Update on the Western Conference race.

Phoenix (#4) and Utah (#12) are separated by 4 games. What is interesting is that the teams are *almost* perfectly distributed in 1/2 game intervals.

The Suns are 1/2 game up on the Clippers
Who are 1/2 game up on the Warriors
Who are 1/2 game up on the Timberwoves
Who are 1/2 game up on the Pelicans
Who are 1/2 game up on the Lakers and Thunder
Who are 1 game up on the Mavericks
Who are 1/2 game up on the Jazz

One more loss (or one fewer win) by either OKC or LAL would have all 9 teams exactly 1/2 game apart.

Game 21 (video link: Here)

Celtics (Winter) 2-1 @ Warriors (JTSports) 1-1

Starting Lineups:

Celtics

Nate McMillan
Tracy McGrady
Elgin Baylor
Chris Webber
Marc Gasol

Warriors

Walt Frazier
Sidney Moncrief
Larry Bird
Anthony Davis
Nikola Jokic

Synopsis:

Both teams got off to a pretty hot start. Nikola Jokic was having his way, running up a line of 14/7 in the first quarter, but it was the Celtics' shooting that led the way. The team combined for seven made triples (paced by Tracy McGrady's three) to jump out to a 33-30 lead after one quarter. Unfortunately for them, the good shooting did not continue into the second. It took nearly five minutes into the second quarter for the Celtics to score, while the Warriors continued to look to their big men for at-the-rim action. It worked: Jokic/Thurmond/AD combined for 11 points in the 2nd, and they were able to rack up the foul count on Chris Webber, who took his third early in the 2nd. Coach Udoka gambled on Webber and left him in for most of the quarter. It kind of paid off, in that Webber didn't collect another foul in the half and he was the Celtics' best hope for keeping the Warriors off the boards (Webber had 9 rebounds in 2Q). All told, it was a tight one point lead for the Warriors at half time, 53-52. The Celtics jumped out early in the third, building up a small lead before again going ice cold. The Warriors methodically took the lead, featuring a razzling, dazzling Walt Frazier for a few consecutive possessions, who had a streak where he could not be contained. Although the Warriors led 77-72 after three, that lead quickly snowballed into a blowout win as the Warriors were unstoppable inside and out for the final period. Final score: Warriors 118 (2-1), Celtics 94 (2-2)

Key stat:

The points in the paint category was lopsidedly in favor of the Warriors: 52-28

Nail in the coffin:

With a little under five minutes to go, Larry Bird tossed a lob to Anthony Davis, who slammed it home to give the Warriors a 15 point lead.

Player of the game:

AD was 17/16/5 on 5-10 shooting, with one steal and two blocks added.

Strong in defeat:

Marc Gasol was the only efficient scorer for the Celtics, as he put up a 20/9/2 line on 7-13 shooting.

Really a question of taste:

The computer chose AD as the player of the game, but the honor could just have easily gone to Frazier (26/2/7 on 10-16 shooting, with 19 of those points coming in the 2nd half) or Jokic (18/18/3).

The splendid six:

In a dubious first, Chris Webber became the first player in this tournament to foul out of a game, aided by a lack of frontline depth for the Celtics and an aggressive gameplan from Jokic and AD. Webber finished the game with an odd line of 2/16/5.

Toying with them:

Larry Bird had a quiet game. Or so he would have you believe! Bird had just four points through three quarters as the Warriors focused on getting the ball to their big men. In the fourth quarter, however, Bird showed a scoring burst that has rarely been rivaled in the tournament. He had 15 points in the final stanza, finishing the night at 19/8/4, including a shot that was so quintessentially Bird that I can only hope that Hombre does a highlight recap.

We head next to an elimination game, pitting the 0-2 Lakers (Hombre) against the 0-2 Rockets (Scott). Probably coming Wednesday...

Ringer article on Mavs

Gasol cleans up the offensive board.

Clyde with the glide, with the funky mid-ranger. Absolutely takes McGrady to school.

Baylor swoops in for the putback.

Nate the Great posters Horford.

Chris Mullin leans into one.

Tatum from long range.

Fun sequence: Bird started with a three. Manu answers. Bird with another.. Manu answers. Mullin responds. Baylor answers with two. After two fouls, Clyde blows by Tatum. Baylor answers with three.

Nail in the coffin.

Quintessential Larry bucket.

The Knicks' pregame tribute to Willis Reed tonight was beautiful.

Wolves with a bit of a mini-run. Good timing.

Wolves had a 33/6 Ast/To ratio last night. It was a pleasure to see the ball moving around. Conley and SloMo are very smart passers. It's rubbing off on And and McDaniels, who are at least willing if still a little sloppy. Finch has embraced being bigger with two of Rudy, Kat, and Naz on the floor a lot more often, plus McDaniels and SloMo at times. the ball movement is the salve for their sloppy offensive execution for a lot of the year and makes them so much fun to watch.

The Kings are just a fun team to watch.

My "not a DLo fan" has been very justified (small sample size) by this Wolves run. Conley (and as you said SloMo) have been awesome for this team and I think for the long term development of Ant and Jaden.

Cosign to both 1318 and 1319. I like watching the Kings because they have a style they want to play, but have so many guys who have different things they can do within that structure.

I’m listening to DUNC’D ON and the guy who is the temporary cohost with Nate (Dan something?) is illustrating just how blinkered Duncan’s analysis is. I still enjoy the podcast but man the groupthink is very strong in this one.

I'm hoping Kings and Wolves don't match up in the first round, because I'd like to see both advance. My perfect world has Dallas missing the play-in, and Memphis and Suns both getting knocked out in first round. I also don't want a GS vs Memphis 1st round, because I don't want Memphis to even have a rivalry. I'm so over their bravado.

Nets just announced Simmons is done for the season. Who plays in more games Simmons or Ball?

I think you have to guess Simmons, simply because Ball looks to be on the fast track to a medical retirement and Simmons might have another dispiriting year or two in him even if his back/psyche is messed up forever.

(I'd gladly trade the rest of Simmons' career to get a healthy Lonzo back, but I can't find where I put the dang monkey's paw so that's out.)

(I'd gladly trade the rest of Simmons' career....

So would the Nets, I bet.

I'm seeing articles more and more alluding to the #2 pick being between Brandon Miller and Scoot. Is it just me or is that crazy? Scoot has a legit chance to be generational. Brandon Miller is just a notional 3&D guy who isn't obviously a sure thing on either side of that ampersand.

Maybe draft writers just need something to talk about but man, that strikes me as in the vein of Bagley over Doncic, unlikely to turn out as badly but just obviously wrong.

The Celtics have taken tonight off, apparently, giving me time to look up Bradley Beal on Basketball Reference. He's played 50 of 75 games this year. 40 last year, 60 the year before. Coming off those two years, in which he also wasn't particularly good when he played, the Wiz gave him one of the biggest contracts in the game. He has a $57 million player option in 26-27, can probably go ahead and pencil that one in.

It's incredible that they just went through all this with Wall and were like yes, sign us up, let's do that again.

1327--Agreed. The talk is now all about how he hasn't let the media spotlight rattle him--but check out his line from the San Diego State loss last week: he lost that game single-handedly. Social media narrrative-making can just completely transcend the evidence....

The Hornets beat the Thunder today, and they have really helped the Lakers in their quest for a playoff spot. They have now won their last 3 games, 2 against Dallas and one against the Thunder. They did get blown out by the Pelicans but their recent play has been helpful to the Lakers (also the Pelicans).

I only now found out that Luka's tech suspension didn't happen because his 16th tech was rescinded without explanation. Has the league said anything at all about that?

Has the league said anything at all about that?

Nope

"Hey Mark, give up your protest about the Warriors game and we'll rescind Luka's technical?"

The Thunder win the game against the Pistons 107-106 with a last second bucket.

Dallas continue its collapse and it looks like they might be the odd team out.

Lakers' starting lineup looked really good. LBJ looked really healthy.

Clippers beat Memphis without Kawhi or PG-13. Westbrook was brilliant today, 36 points on 13-18 shooting and 5-5 from 3-point range.

The Lakers really did make it look easy tonight in the 2nd half. All I want is a healthy Lebron and AD going into the playoffs.

Game 22 (video link: Here). Note: the video still hasn’t processed to HD after about 20 hours. Hopefully it will get there soon but I want to get it out there so I can move onto the next game.

Lakers (Hombre) 0-2 @ Rockets (Scott) 0-2

Starting Lineups:

Lakers

Chris Paul
Brandon Roy
Clyde Drexler
Pau Gasol
Wilt Chamberlain

Rockets

Jerry West
Klay Thompson
Dominique Wilkins
Dolph Schayes
Hakeem Olajuwon

Synopsis:

With the two star centers mostly bottling each other up early, both teams looked to other sources for scoring. For the Rockets, the outside shot was flowing as the team hit four triples in the first quarter, three of them by Klay Thompson. For the Lakers, however, they needed little more than a highly confident Clyde Drexler, who cut and slashed his way to 15 points in the opening frame on 6-10 shooting, leading his squad to a 1st quarter 29-27 lead. Wilt the Stilt finally got going in the second, scoring 11 points, while Drexler kept shooting but with much less effectiveness. No one on the Rockets scored more than 4 points in the quarter, and the team's shooting cooled off significantly, but they were able to stay in the game by forcing turnovers and grabbing offensive boards. At the half, it was Lakers 55-52. The Lake Show really got running to start the third, building a ten point lead but, you may have previously heard, basketball is a game of runs and the Rockets went on their own run, pretty much dominating the back half of the third quarter as Olajuwon had his way with the Lakers' second unit. A late flurry kept the Lakers close, but they went into the final quarter trailing 85-82. The fourth was wild. Here was the closing sequence:

-Dolph Schayes hits one of two free throws to tie the game with 2:12 to go
-A Rockets steal and a subsequent Penny Hardaway putback gives the Rockets a 2 point lead
-CP3 threaded a nasty pass to a cutting Chamberlain for the tie
-Hakeem hit a great pass to Penny for the go-ahead dunk
-Drexler throws an alley-oop to Wilt for the tie
-With 1:14 remaining, Hakeem drew a foul and hit both free throws to take the lead
-CP3 got himself to the line on the next possession but could only make one of two
-Wilt broke up an alley-oop attempt
-Drexler missed a floater
-Hakeem nails a fadeaway jumper with 25 seconds left to go up three
-Brandon Roy hits a three to tie with 17 seconds to go
-Chamberlain steals a pass to send the game to overtime.

From there, the Rockets kept feeding the ball to Olajuwon, which was effective early. The key sequence of the game came when Olajuwon drew a foul (Wilt's 5th) but missed both free throws. Hitting either would have given the Rockets the lead. Off the miss, Chris Paul raced down the court and drained an off balance three. On the subsequent try, Olajuwon again went after Chamberlain, who swatted the ball off the backboard. Drexler slashed in for a dunk on the return trip, giving the Lakers a 5 point lead, which they easily protected from there. Final score: Lakers 129 (1-2), Rockets 118 (0-3)

Key stat:

The Lakers excelled at the game's easiest shot, accumulating 16 dunks while allowing just seven.

Nail in the coffin:

Charles Barkley established great post position and flipped in a layup to put the Lakers up 7 with 1:23 left in overtime.

Player of the game:

Wilt had 26 points (11-15 shooting), 21 rebounds, 4 steals, and 4 blocks

Strong in defeat:

Klay Thompson drained nine of 17 three pointers en route to a 33 point performance

The glide:

We had yet to see a decent game from Clyde Drexler, but he feasted today, dropping a 38/6/4 line on 29 shots. Most impressively, he scored ten points in overtime and four of them were on dunks, all of which came from beating his man off the dribble if I remember correctly.

Daydream dressed like a nightmare:

Hakeem had a nice night (25 points, 21 boards, 4 steals, 2 blocks), but he had three consecutive empty possessions in overtime, including the two missed free throws.

Point god:

Chris Paul had the kind of game that had been missing from prior performances as he scored 20 points and added 13 assists, easily finding his wings and bigs in favorable positions. Plus his clutch three in overtime left the Rockets chasing the lead for the first time in over five minutes of game time.

Rockets post mortem:

The Rockets were, seemingly, set up to do well. Anchored by one of the best big men of all time and surrounded by shooters and a Dolph Schayes that 2K loves, this should have been a team that did better than 0-3. In the overall 2K sim thus far, the Rockets are next to last in total FG% (49.9%), 2nd in 3PA/GM (32.2), and 10th in 3P% (39.3%). They just didn't make enough shots. Really, the problem boils down to the bench which, outside of Penny Hardaway, didn't keep pace with the league (the team was 11th out of 14 in bench scoring). And finally, Klay Thompson and Jerry West were heavily utilized but not particularly effective (PER of 14.6 and 11.4, respectively).

Were they screwed by 2K?

Big time. Or, more accurately, screwed by the particular games that showed up in this tournament, since there’s no way this should be a three and out team. The Rockets have the 2nd best Net Rating, driven mainly by the league's 2nd best DRTG. In all games simmed thus far, the Rockets are 25-22, which suggests that the team is prone to the high variability of a team that relies on the three point shot. Hakeem didn't translate particularly well to the sim, with a pretty low EFG% of 51.4%. And Dolph Schayes...get that man the ball! (65% TS, 18.9 USG).

The Lakers are up again next as they take on the 1-2 Hawks (Dolf Lucky). Coming later today…

The Top 4 order in the East looks pretty set now. I think this sets up to have some great 2nd round matchups, and a fun 4-5. Also looks like Brooklyn has likely locked up a top 6 spot - they have the tie breaker over Miami, so they're 3 games up on Miami in the loss column. Should also be a pretty easy matchup for Philadelphia.

For the Laker fans on the board, what’s your reaction to the foul call disparity in LA games since the LeBron meltdown?

Question, Dolf, does "all games simmed" include games against vanilla teams (since there aren't 30 BBTF teams) or have you put together a league with just these teams?

Also, 39.3% from three is tenth?!? Tough league.

Question, Dolf, does "all games simmed" include games against vanilla teams (since there aren't 30 BBTF teams) or have you put together a league with just these teams?

The latter.

For the Laker fans on the board, what’s your reaction to the foul call disparity in LA games since the LeBron meltdown?

I'm not a Laker fan, obviously, and I haven't followed this debate, but this tweet from Ben Taylor caught my eye. Seems like, on the season, at least, the Lakers' free-throw differential is not outside the norm of a typical NBA year.

Recent leaders in differential:
2023 LAL +5.6
2022 UTA +4.1
2021 NOP +5.0
2020 OKC +5.3
2019 DAL +3.3
2018 CHA +8.8
2017 CHA +5.6
2016 HOU +4.7
2015 SAC +6.1
2014 HOU +8.6

So my assumption, before looking at the tape, is that it's probably just a fluke, covering a period of what is really not very many games. But maybe someone who's paying more attention will take a different view.

The key sequence of the game came when Olajuwon drew a foul (Wilt's 5th)

number of times real Wilt ever fouled out of an NBA game: ZERO

so, good simulation !

I think that, with the foul call disparities (which are certainly real, for some given period of time, combination of games, reffing crews, &c.), we're seeing incidence of human pattern matching wetware seeing patterns where no such patterns exist.

The Top 4 order in the East looks pretty set now.

The Celtics still have the Bucks and Sixers, they could easily finish 3rd.

Also, 39.3% from three is tenth?!? Tough league.

How much of that is gameplay bias (made shots are more fun than missed shots) and how much is that we picked the best seasons from basically all of the elite shooters in NBA history with enough skill to be more than a limited-minutes role player?

I'm guessing there's a good bit of both but more the former. I optimized my team for defense, passing, rebounding, and getting to the rim, so perhaps not the best example. I only had 2/10 players with >40% from three IRL (Stockton and Schrempf, both in the short line years) and 02-03 Doug Christie at 39.5% also just barely beating the league average.

The Celtics still have the Bucks and Sixers, they could easily finish 3rd.


Maybe, but Philly also has a hard schedule, including @Milwaukee. Every team they're playing is in the playoff race. You also have the tiebreaker, so you're really 3 games up with 6 to go. And Boston is just better. What you're saying is true. But I'd put you finishing above them at like 90%.

Not trying to yuck anyone's yum, but earnest question: is there reason to think NBA 2K is good/realistic at simulating these games?

I haven't played a basketball game in a long time, but using FIFA games as an example, pace is pretty much the most important attribute for almost every player, and by a lot. So it's not really a realistic representation of what soccer looks like.

Not trying to yuck anyone's yum, but earnest question: is there reason to think NBA 2K is good/realistic at simulating these games?

IMO not really, but honestly, it is also really fun. I don't think anyone built their team with NBA 2K in mind or anything, so it is fair in that way, despite not being realistic.

But, again, most importantly it is fun. But it is very much not to be taken as a serious evaluation of the merit of the various teams in my opinion.

Klay with work from outside, inside, off the curl.

West blows by CP3. then hits the transition 3.

CP3 from range, with a gorgeous leave for Embiid, threads the needle.

Hakeem ran wild with 10 of his 25 when Wilt sat: crosses over Embiid. with the second effort, taking Embiid's lunch, owning the low post.

End of regulation:
Penny for the tie, then Hakeem to Penny for the lead.
Clyde to an emphatic Wilt to tie.
Hakeem pushes the lead to 3.
Brandon Roy's big shot.

OT was all Drexler, to tie the game.

After Hakeem's third missed FT of OT, CP3 with the running leaning triple to take the lead.

Wilt blocks Hakeem, and Drexler kisses the sky.

Chuckster gives Dolf an elbow on his way to nailing the coffin.

Drexler says goodbye.

is there reason to think NBA 2K is good/realistic at simulating these games?

Not at all. It’s more arcade than simulation, showing a sensationalized version of what these games might look like. It probably aligns closer with one’s imagination than a likely reality.

I think that, with the foul call disparities (which are certainly real, for some given period of time, combination of games, reffing crews, &c.), we're seeing incidence of human pattern matching wetware seeing patterns where no such patterns exist.

And yet the players and coaches clearly think there is a pattern, to the point that every game comes down to complaining about the officials. It creates a chain reaction: Lakers complain about officials, then they start getting calls which leads to them winning more, they beat the Suns while getting lots of calls, the Suns complain about officials, the Suns get all the calls against the Wolves--the Wolves complain about the officials. If you watched that game you would know that the Wolves absolutely have a complaint, the officiating was ridiculous, Booker gets every call against him (as he did in the Lakers game by the way) but everyone else is never fouled or even get called for offensive fouls.

The easy and smart answer is that there are no patterns. And yet, I watched all of these games above, and many others besides, and the standard of officiating is so abysmal that the complaints cannot help be legitimate--in the sense that the calls manage to be bad, inconsistent, and do not even out.

You guys seem to think it is normal, but officiating is the #1 story of every game. Not according to me, but according to the people who are playing the game, the players and the coaches. Yes, they whine incessantly, but they do so not simply out of self-interest, but because they do not respect the authority of the referees. And they don't respect their authority because so many calls are made on an arbitrary basis.

That's a major problem, one that may not have a solution. It is going to require a league wide effort to clarify the criterion of the rules and then apply it consistently. Right now every call is a discretion call, and that is no way to get buy-in from either players or fans.

You guys don't think Harden taking 33 shots a game is realistic?

Game 23 (video link: Here)

Lakers (Hombre) 1-2 @ Hawks (Dolf Lucky) 1-2

Starting Lineups:

Lakers

Chris Paul
Brandon Roy
Clyde Drexler
Pau Gasol
Wilt Chamberlain

Hawks

Jason Kidd
James Harden
Peja Stojakovic
Kevin Garnett
Dikembe Mutombo

Synopsis:

Clyde Drexler woke up hungry. He scored the Lakers’ first six points and only barely slowed down from there, finishing the quarter at 20/4/2 on 10-12 shooting, as Peja Stojakovic did his best sieve impression. Overall, the discrepancy in field goal percentage told the tale: Lakers 62%, Hawks 22%, leading to a 31-14 advantage for the Lakers after one. The second quarter got worse for the Hawks as they went a paltry 6-31 from three in the quarter. The Lakers shifted focus to Wilt Chamberlain (8 points, 8 rebounds, 3 blocks for the quarter) and Brandon Roy (10 points on 4-5 shooting) in pushing the halftime lead to 64-38. From there, there were a bunch of inconsequential moments and runs as America’s team bowed out. Final score: Lakers 121 (2-2), Hawks 95 (1-3).

Key stat:

The Lakers led on 2nd chance points, 17-15. Not a big deal, right? Consider that the Hawks kept shooting from distance and didn’t make squat. Chamberlain, in particular, kept the Hawks off the offensive glass, erasing what might have been the Hawks only chance at keeping things close.

Nail in the coffin:

The key moment happened sometime during the draft.

Player of the game:

Wilt had 29 points (14-18), 15 rebounds, and 5 blocks.

Strong in defeat:

N/A. Harden had 33 points but it took him 32 shots to get there.

The glide, again:

Based on back to back monster performances from Clyde Drexler, we’re left to conclude that he enjoys playing against weak defenders. Clyde had 28/6/5 on 14-23 shooting.

Future coach:

Jason Kidd spent the first half of the season watching James Harden jack up an inordinate number of three pointers and concluded that it was a good plan. Kidd went 9/1/3, with an impressive 0-8 from deep.

Point god, again:

Chris Paul yawned his way to a 16/3/9 night.

Hawks post mortem:

The Hawks were a mess. There were too many one-dimensional players on the team, leading (perhaps) to a style that was overly reliant on the three (4th in the league at 28.8 per game) but the team shot very poorly: dead last in overall FG% and 3P% (48.5% and 37.6%, respectively). James Harden had an incredible USG of 29.9, but without exceptional shooting numbers. And Peja might be the most useless starter in the league (per game averages of 14/3/2 with no defense and a FG% of 40.2%).

Were they screwed by 2K?

No way. In all simmed games, the Hawks had a winning percentage of .350 or so and had the league’s worst ORTG and worst DRTG. Quite the combo. In my mind, Harden and Kidd drove the lane more to take advantage of rim runners and kick outs, but there were too many holes for a stylistic difference to matter that much.

Next up is a pair of 1-2 teams as the Suns (Obscura) take on the Bulls (Willard) in an effort to stay alive. Not sure yet when that’s likely to post.

That's a major problem, one that may not have a solution. It is going to require a league wide effort to clarify the criterion of the rules and then apply it consistently. Right now every call is a discretion call, and that is no way to get buy-in from either players or fans.

There have been some loud and very high-profile complaints (the LeBron meltdown, Fred VanVleet's full-throated spiel), but I'm not convinced (so far) that things are worse now, vis-a-vis the officiating, than they've been in the past. (The low point in my life as a fan — certainly in terms of perception, at least — is probably Kings-Lakers 2002. And Donaghy, obviously.) In fact, I think things are significantly better than they were just a couple of years ago, when Harden and others elevated foul-drawing to really an overly important part of the game. I think the league has rightly cracked down on some of that — not with perfect consistency, sure, but it's the right direction.

And it might help explain some of the players' frustration. Things *were* called differently not very long ago. But that's not to say that things were called *better* than they are now.

I want to credit Bud and Bucks for not punting games like last year. Way too many games against sucky teams where Bucks seemed to not give a #### and would lose.

I don't disagree with anything in 1352. I think that consistency is the problem, but the refs are, even the good ones, mindful of who's been chewing their ears, who gives them a hard time, who doesn't, &c. There would be no gamesmanship -- and I put the complaints about referring solidly in the "gamesmanship" camp -- if it didn't work. I just don't think that the poor quality of the refereeing is directed in any one overarching direction, which is what I was trying to say earlier. Things can be unfair, and your team can get the shaft, without there being meaning to it.

ETA: speling.

I think refereeing buy and large is pretty damn good. Players are always going to take things to the edge, wherever the line is. The Dunc'd On podcast had a pretty good ~8 minute interview with Monty McCutchen at the start of their Mar 6 podcast. I'd recommend that to everyone who likes the NBA regardless of if they like the Dunc'd On podcast generally.

ATL opens the 2nd half with three, three, three, bucket, bucket (and one), a 14-2 run to cut the lead to -- yikes -- 16.

Clyde cooks Peja.

Point God finds Roy cutting. Wilt with the ORB, and Paul gets him back.

Doc Rivers to Rudy.

CP3 from the corner, from straight away, from Barry on the break, on consecutive possessions for a 24-pt lead.

Some guy literally named Scrubb gets an assist when Lowry's triple makes it a 28-point lead.

Wilt, Wilt, Wilt, Wilt, Wilt.

The Wilt links got all screwed up. It was just a bunch of this.

I think refereeing buy and large is pretty damn good.

I largely agree with this, and think that the age of slow mo replay and (limited) challenge has put refereeing in an impossible position. (The same is true with how VAR has led to complaints about terrible refereeing in soccer, etc.) If bad calls disappeared into the ether there wouldn't be this focus, but instead we have endless rehashing of borderline calls and ever-increasing player and coach gamesmanship around working the refs, both reactively and proactively. I think the refs are in a pretty impossible position. I'm not really sure how to fix it, beyond hiring more refs and cracking down on player complaints during games, as I think the issue is much more cultural across the NBA than just the refs. (The refs are by no means perfect, and definitely have uneven tolerance for player misbehavior, but I think the only real solution there is to limit all player ######## during games, not to somehow push the refs to be perfect in a way that won't ever happen.)

Every time I think NBA refs are awful, I just think about refereeing in the NFL or -- even worse -- college football. Relatively speaking, the NBA refs do fine. The problem is that, with slo-mo replays, everyone else has become more aware of all the judgement calls that are or aren't called. Refereeing FEELS worse than ever, but I suspect overall refereeing is actually better than it's ever been.

I agree that it isn't bad in one systematic direction or another. I don't think there is a bias in favour of the stars, indeed the one player who doesn't get any calls is Curry.

I also agree that video replay is part of the problem, insofar as even when they review the plays there is disagreement on what is or is not a foul. Not just the formal reviews, but just between the commentators. If someone calls something at live speed differently than I saw it, it is easier to say we had a different view point. But when we watch the same replay, and so by definition see the same thing, and we still disagree, well now there is something wrong with you. I think this erodes the legitimacy of the officials.

But I am unconvinced that it is better than some time in the past. I mean, is it even better than college basketball? It brings up an interesting comparison. First, it is pretty obvious that the same standard is not applied in college--far more offensive fouls, far fewer touch fouls. Now this is neither better nor worse, in principle, but it demonstrates that officiating standards can be different. Second, if officiating standards can be different, can these differences not also be better or worse, resulting in better or worse officiating?

My hypothesis is the current standard in the NBA, which I think is tilted toward the offensive player, is harder to apply consistently. If any little touch is a foul, but you can't call a foul on every single play without ruining the game, then there is no criterion for distinguishing what is or is not a foul. Likewise with calling offensive fouls, which almost never happens, so that when it does happen it seems unfair.

I think the game would be better, at least in terms of consistency of officiating, if fewer touch fouls were called, the verticality rule paid more attention to, and more charges called. In college they seem to pay attention to who initiates contact, in the NBA that doesn't seem to matter since the offensive player initiates contact on every play.

*There is no perfect answer to this, in College I think they call too many charges, but that seems more enforceable than whatever the NBA is doing.

If any little touch is a foul, but you can't call a foul on every single play without ruining the game, then there is no criterion for distinguishing what is or is not a foul.

This is basically holding in the NFL, right?

I'm surprised there hasn't been a major NFL ref corruption scandal recently to be honest. Everything's so subjective, penalties can really impact the game, lots more betting action on individual games than the NBA.

If you think NBA reffing is bad, watch a game or two of the NCAA tournament. Holy ####.

Brandon Ingram looks very much like a middle class version of Durant, on offense at least.

Also, the Celtics destroying the Bucks on the road was pretty impressive.

Also, the Celtics destroying the Bucks on the road was pretty impressive.

I did enjoy it a great deal but also have to tip my cap to our good friend variance: Boston was 12/23 from three in the 1st half, Milwaukee was 3/22, including an 0/11 in the 2nd quarter. If the Celtics hadn't rolled over against a couple of the worst teams in the league recently they might be on the verge of the 1 seed, but it's probably too late.

It’s important to come to an understanding of what “good officiating” actually means, I think. There are a number of axes you could compare on — do you want every single violation called? Do you want consistency? Do you want fairness? Do you want game flow? It’s not obvious to me what we should want.

Milwaukee was also on the 2nd of a b2b. But, still, very impressive. I was watching baseball, but caught the highlights, and the shot making from Boston was absurd.

It’s important to come to an understanding of what “good officiating” actually means, I think. There are a number of axes you could compare on — do you want every single violation called? Do you want consistency? Do you want fairness? Do you want game flow? It’s not obvious to me what we should want.


I think Euro league/NBA playoff basketball is about the level of physicality I'd like them to allow on the perimeter during the regular season, which is reasonably more contact than they allow on average now. That's the main significant thing I'd want changed, but is also one of the hardest things to officiate. Consistency and eliminating non-basketball plays are the others, though I think they generally really try for consistency and they have been trying to clean up non-basketball plays over recent years.

It’s important to come to an understanding of what “good officiating” actually means, I think. There are a number of axes you could compare on — do you want every single violation called? Do you want consistency? Do you want fairness? Do you want game flow? It’s not obvious to me what we should want.

I agree with this. IT is not obvious to me either. The issue is that it would be better if these questions were addressed head-on. Right now we get none of these things.

The NBA right now is the best basketball that has ever been played. I don't have a lot of doubt about that. But it causes problems for the officials, and it would help if there was some kind of clarity on what is or is not a foul. As a lay person I have no idea, and cannot infer a criteria from any of a) the calls that are made, b) the commentators response to those calls, and c) the players actions.

It is like the load management debate. The people who talk about it keep ignoring the elephant in the room. The game today is played harder than it has ever been played before, and consequently players need more rest and there are more injuries. Instead we get nonsense like there are more injuries because players are not conditioned to play so many games.

Yeah, it's the lack of clarity from the league that's frustrating. Everybody "knows" that the game is called differently on the last few possessions. Is it? Why? Everybody "knows" the whistle gets tighter in the playoffs. Does it? Again, is this at the direction of the league?

Excited to see Caitlin Clark vs. South Carolina tonight.

Clark might need a 50-point triple double to have a chance. I think Iowa's lack of playmakers other than Clark is going to get exposed. I expect South Carolina's bigs to dominate inside as well. Still, excited for the game.

I agree with all that. I think South Carolina's massive talent advantage everywhere else will bear out. Iowa was pretty meh in their 2nd and 3rd round games, getting destroyed on the glass, before a good game against Louisville. But Clark could go like 40/10/10. I presume if she goes absolutely crazy early they may just start doubling her? Anyways, hope she has her best game.

I will fearlessly predict that South Carolina will win this game by a lot. I think they're just so much better than every other team. 538 gave them something like a 65 percent chance to win the title pre tournament which is absurd and, in my opinion, about right. They've got, at worst, the second best player in the country and she doesn't even need to do all that much.

If we had a time machine I'd love to see them against the Breanna Stewart UConn teams. My instinct is that they are on a similar level but stylistically quite different. Would be a fascinating matchup.

I think officiating in the NBA, outside of the very new refs, is better than it has ever been.

There are a few common patterns about officiating that cause frequent complaints.

1. Officials favor driving to the basket with the ball.
2. Officials favor the home team.
3. Officials allow themselves to be baited by serial floppers.
4. Officials cause a rubber band effect, where calls favor the team down in the game or down in a playoff series.

Are the Hawks trying to get Snyder fired?

Caitlin Clark got that dawg in her.

(But Iowa is just getting killed on the glass.)

Feel like South Carolina has gotten away with lifting/switching their pivot foot a number of times in the post.

Nice win for the Lakers and AD was pretty dominant in the fourth quarter at least (I just watched the last 7 minutes or so).

Give me a healthy LeBron and AD in the playoffs, and this team has a shot.

We're officially at the point of the game where I think Iowa might do this.

The Lakers are over .500 for the first time this entire season.

I was wrong. Happy to be.

Great, great game. Refs got a bit too involved. But great nonetheless.

I can't believe it. What a game.

In an attempt to curb load management and lost games among star players, the NBA is tying eligibility for postseason awards -- such as All-NBA teams and MVP -- to a mandatory 65 games played. The 65-game minimum does come with some conditions.

I'm curious what the conditions are.

I’m very happy about the deal and it seems like a reasonable one to keep the gravy train flowing. I think the 65 game limit will have unintended consequences. It’s going to lead to some all-NBA and supermax eligible players who shouldn’t be. People talk about load management, but most of this has just been real injuries IMO.

I think having an in-season tournament but not reducing the number of games played is madness.

These restrictions owners try never work out the way they plan.

I think it's Frank Isola who has campaigned for the scoring title (and rebounds, assists, etc) to be awarded to the player who scores the most points - not the one with the highest scoring average.

If that applied to contract bonuses......

Load management is real, but guys aren't missing 17 games due to load management.

I don't like the 65 game thing at all. It could lead to some lameness like guys starting and then immediately sitting for the rest of the game to hit the number. Could also see 65 games ending up being a ceiling instead of a floor, I really just don't see the point.

I still don't like the in-season tournament and am honestly surprised it's happening, I kind of figured it was an idea that would just get talked about for years but not implemented.

The cap changes at the team level don't sound great, either, it looks like they're effectively putting in a hard cap (eliminating the mid-level after a new second tax apron is reached).

1392:

right - but if you blow off a half-dozen games and then actually get hurt and have to miss a dozen, then those "blow offs" could cost you some serious cash.

Tax MLE goes away, but max raises go up to 140%. That seems like a wash.

I have come around and think the in-season tournament is great. It will reduce games for 26 teams and create excitement and something other than ring or bust.

Do we know the details on where the second tax line is? I’m more ok with it if it’s designed to curtail Clips/Warriors level spending vs, say, the Bucks.

You know how good Philly would be if they had Mikal Bridges and Jimmy Butler? They’d be historically great.

65 games is an absurdly high minimum requirement. It is going to result in absurd all-NBA teams. Imagine choosing Jalen Brunson instead of Steph Curry on the basis of this season? That makes a mockery of the idea of awards.

The widespread complaints about load management undermined my faith in human intelligence.

This year, no Curry, no Lillard, no Davis, no Leonard, no Lebron, no Haliburton. Those are five, I think pretty clear choices for All-NBA players that wouldn't be eligible. No Morant, who I , no Irving, no Booker, no Harden, no Jackson. These will become endurance awards not quality awards. Either this will work, in which case teams have to do dumb things like play their players all the time, or it won't work, in which case what is the point.

Load management is smart. Every sport in the world does it except for hockey, and hockey is run by the dumbest people on the planet. We have 150 years of evidence in every single types of athletics that load management improves performance. If you want your team to win then your best players should play less. This is not complicated.

The NFL doesn't do it, the NHL doesn't do it, the NBA never used to do it, MLS doesn't do it (I don't think).

That seems like an awful lot of "exceptions to the rule" - almost as if "the rule" is different than you say it is.

Probably your strongest assertion would be if you say yes, you have shelled out $200 apiece for 3 or 4 tickets for pretty good seats for the one time a year that a future Hall of Famer was coming to town - and you're just fine watching that player hang out on the bench (if he shows up at all).

The widespread complaints about load management undermined my faith in human intelligence.

People who believe there is only one correct point of view on an issue - and it's always, always their own view that is correct, by the way - undermine my faith in human intelligence.