On January 25, 2010, the Utah Flash hosted the Maine Red Claws. The Red Claws ended up thumping the Flash handily, but I thought the way this game played out provides some excellent insights on winning and on losing.

Here is the scoring by quarter:

Check out the points scored by each team in the 2nd and 3rd quarters. Wow, huh?

A game like basketball has so many variables that it can be hard to be 100 percent sure of any particular cause and effect. Different officiating, home court verses on the road, injuries, etc. all tend to dilute analysis to some degree, so sometimes it’s nice when you can use the same game to study certain aspects of the game.

Then again, in most blowout games, the game stats as a whole aren’t very useful because the play of both teams in “garbage time” is rarely representative of the play prior.

So, what were these teams doing when they were successful? When they were struggling? Is it quantifiable and can we learn from it?

SHOT SELECTION

Defining “inside shots” as shots within about 8 feet of the rim, and “outside shots” as shot from about 9 feet out to the 3 point arc…

In the 2nd quarter, 44% of the Maine Red Claws’ shots were from the inside, while 63% of their shots from the inside in the 3rd quarter. When you consider that Maine shot 27% from outside and 50% from inside those two quarters, you can see how this adjustment to their shot selection significantly helped turn the game around for the Red Claws.

CARE FOR THE BALL

In the 2nd quarter when the Flash prevailed, they had 3 turnovers compared to 8 for the Red Claws. Conversely, the Flash had 8 turnovers in the 3rd quarter and the Red Claws just 4. Consider that for the whole game the Red Claws actually had more turnovers than the Flash (1), and you start to appreciate the importance caring for the ball plays in winning basketball.

REBOUNDS

In the 2nd quarter, when the Flash outplayed the Red Claws, the Flash was +5 in rebounds. Considering the Flash were -7 in rebounds for the game overall, it’s safe to say the the Flash’s commitment to rebounding that quarter contributed to their successful quarter.

DEFENSE

Obviously, allowing your opponent to score inside rather than forcing them to prove they have an outside shot is a defensive problem. Many of these inside shots were made possible by gambles made in perimeter defense, gambles which resulted in easier inside shots. But how does a team go from holding an opponent to 15 one quarter, then letting them run for 36 another?

CONCLUSION

Basically, the Flash came out of the locker room with a lax commitment to playing winning basketball. They didn’t play hard, nor smart, and got a good thumping by the visitors as their reward.

ALSO NOTED

I’m waiting for it to dawn on Luke Nevill that at his size, in the d-league, he should have at least 10 rebounds a game if he expects to get noticed by the NBA. He should be a solid double double guy, night in and night out.

In the 2nd quarter, Kosta Koufos was only 1 of 4 shooting, but had 4 rebounds and 2 steals. In the 3rd quarter, Koufos had a missed shot, a foul and a turnover in 3:50 of play in the Flash’s disasterous 3rd quarter. While Kufous finished with a respectable 16 points for the game, 6 of them came in “garbage time” near games end when the game wasn’t winnable and the Red Claws cleared their bench.

The Flash also seemed a bit distracted by the presence of former Utah Flash teammate JR Giddens, now playing for the Red Claws on assignment from the Celtics.

Similarly, Giddens seemed especially keen on getting the Flash, and was a bit rude to the Flash fans who gave him a very warm welcome back to Utah.

My 12 year old daughter demoted Giddens from her favorite player in the d-league to “glad he’s gone.”

First, I would like to thank the young man with the Utah Flash who handed out stats during halftime of tonight’s game. They really make a difference in understanding what is going on, and focus attention on the game. Thanks again.

Today the Albuquerque Thunderbirds avenged their New Years Eve loss with a 109 – 103 win over the Utah Flash in Orem. Credit Thunderbird Head Coach John Coffino and his team for learning from their mistakes of 3 days ago and making adjustments.

The previous match up of these two teams, on New Year’s Eve, was remarkable because the Flash battled back from a 19 point deficit on the merits of their second half defensive effort. I would have LOVED to have heard what Utah Flash head coach, Brad Jones, told the team at halftime. In the first half, the Thunderbirds exploited a casual, disinterested defensive effort from the Flash, particularly from the perimeter, as the T-birds lit up the Flash for 61 first half points. The second half, however, was a totally different story. The the Flash played 24 minutes of inspired defense, and held the Thunderbirds to just 33 second half points. In fact, the Thunderbirds scored more in second quarter than they did the third and fourth quarters combined. There was a stark difference in Utah’s defense the second half.

Tonight, Albuquerque showed early that they had no interested in a repeat of their last performance. They started off quickly with a 9 – 0 lead, all from their perimeter oriented center, Kevin Pittsnogle, however, defensively the Thunderbirds immediately shut down what hurt them the previous game. Whereas Utah’s center, Luke Nevill gave Albuquerque fits early and often in the game on New Years Eve, the Thunderbirds gave Nevill nothing easy tonight, causing Nevill to miss his first 6 shot attempts. It wasn’t until there was just 1:30 left in the first half when a sweet alley oop pass from Carlos Wheeler finally gave Nevill his first bucket. The Flash’s second quarter point production was aided by 4 of 4 shooting from the arc.

Just as the Flash started slowly to begin the game, they had a slow start to begin the second half as well. The Flash scored just 18 points in the 3rd quarter, and were out rebounded 11 to 6 in the quarter. What is interesting about the rebounding disparity as that rebounding was actually even for the first half of the third quarter, but then the Flash just totally lost interest in grabbing boards, and seemed content with “one and done” trips down the floor.

The Flash gave a big effort in the closing minutes of the game and nearly pulled it off. In fact, this was a thrilling, 1-point game with just 18.7 seconds to play, but Albuquerque’s precision at the free throw line just wouldn’t let the Flash’s desperate efforts prevail.

The Utah Flash played hard, but Albuquerque played smart. Well, except for Albuquerque’s 19 turnovers, they played smart.

The free throws statistics provide a big hint as to what the key to victory was for the Albuquerque Thunderbirds.

For starters, Albuquerque scored 24 points from the free throw line. The game was actually well officiated. In fact, I wouldn’t mind seeing officials Haywoode Workman (#56), Deldre Carr (#24) and Greg Danridge (#38) a bit more often, and some of the other guys a bit less. Interestingly, Albuquerque scored more points from the free throw line than the Flash, despite being called for more fouls than the Flash (22-18)… and the Flash’s 18 fouls are a bit deceptive since 6 of them came with less than 2 minutes left to go in the game as the Flash tried to stop the clock and eek out a win.

Albuquerque won tonight primarily because of their shot selection.

As I watched tonight’s game, I made a shot chart.

49 percent of the Utah Flash’s shot attempts came from the outside (between about 8 feet out and the 3-point arc).

19 percent of the Albuquerque Thunderbirds shots came from the outside.

What an astonishing difference in shot selection.

The Thunderbirds refused to settle for jump shots, consequently, they shot more high percentage shots and got to the free throw line for the highest percentage shots in basketball.

That’s just smart basketball.

By contrast, Utah launched 49 percent of their shots from outside, even though they were only shooting them at a 40 percent clip.

For more detail, here are the shooting percentages broken down:

Inside shooting:
Utah 26/35 for 74.3 percent, Albuquerque 27 of 40 for 67.5 percent

Outside shooting:
Utah 10/25 for 40 percent, Albuquerque 5/11 for 45.5 percent

3-point shooting:
Utah 5/16 for 31.3 percent, Albuquerque 7/17 for 41.2 percent

In my last blog, Smart Team Defense: The Bird’s Eye View, I mentioned that it has been statistically proven that the two most effective shots in the NBA are inside shots within 5 feet of the rim, and 3-pointers.

With that in mind, there are at least 2 lessons to be learned from tonight’s game:
(1) The Utah Flash needs to shoot less from the outside where shooting is less effective, and
(2) They need to defend the paint and the arc better and encourage opponents to shoot more midrange and outside shots.

The Flash have the personnel to make these adjustments. First, the Flash has the third best 3-point shooter in the NBA Development League: Andre Ingram, and other effective 3-point shooters such as Lee Cummard, Jordan Brady, and Dontell Jefferson. Second, the Flash have 7 foot 2 inch Luke Nevill, who can be both a defensive force, and an offensive weapon when focused to be so, and the Flash has several other great athletes with size enough to help inside.

Again, the Utah Flash played hard tonight and it was a blast to cheer them on. Hopefully they will learn from this loss as Albuquerque learned from theirs, and take that advantage with them into upcoming games.

Cheers!

True or false: Carlos Boozer doesn’t play defense.

Read on for the RIGHT answer. And don’t cheat. If you skip past this primer on team defense, you probably won’t get WHY the right answer is the right answer.

When you think about it, defense is half of the game of basketball … so naturally all serious basketball players devote as much time to honing their defensive prowess as they do their offensive skills, right? Uh, why are you laughing?

Well, if you think defense is under-appreciated by players, just think how under-appreciated it is by most basketball fans.

And box score statistics are certainly no help. In fact, box scores contribute to the problem, causing people to smugly believe they have a handle on a team’s or a player’s defensive efforts, when in reality, what is going on defensively is as far over their heads as the scoreboard.

Smart team defense has two goals:

To work together as a team to …

(1) Limit your opponent’s shot attempts, and to
(2) Force the opposing team to take lower percentage shots.

You limit your opponent’s shot attempts by:

(a) Rebounding (giving opponents less possessions)
(b) Forcing your opponent into turnovers (giving opponents less shot attempts)
(c) Taking care of the ball on offense (giving opponents less possessions)
(d) Controlling the pace of the game (not always desirable, but it does give opponents less possessions if you want).

You force opposing teams into lower shooting percentages by:

(a) Contesting shots, especially high percentage shots
(b) Encouraging opponents to shoot from where they are less effective
(c) Denying skilled scorers shot attempts where possible
(d) Encouraging less skilled players to be shooters
(e) Forcing your opponent to rush shots to beat the shot (or game) clock
(f) Making your opponent uncomfortable on their offensive end of the court
(g) Denying your opponent the ball and people movement their offense is calculated to give them

So where are the lower percentage shots?

Obviously, the closer to the rim you shoot, the higher the shooting percentage, but does that axiom hold true when you take into account defenses? Yes, and NBA statistics bear that out:

NBA Average Shooting Percentages (2009-2010 season as of 30 December 2009):

60.4% = At the rim
44.6% = 5 to 9 feet from the rim
40.4% = 10 to 15 feet from the rim
39.5% = 16 to 23 feet from the rim
34.7% = At the 3 point arc
52.0% = eFG percentage from the arc

That last statistic is the “effective field goal percentage” from the arc… in other words, it takes into account the fact that you get 3 points from the arc instead of two.

These percentages show that generally speaking, the two most effective places on the floor to shoot from are near the rim, and the 3 point arc.

While every coach would love it if their teams could seriously contest every shot attempted by any player from anywhere on the floor, in a competitive league that’s not too realistic. In the real world, smart team defense is about priorities.  It’s about knowing which of the opposing players are effective scorers, and how they are most effective, then forcing opponents away from their strengths and into where they are less effective.  It’s about taking care of business in the critical areas, then doing the best you can in the less critical.

For example, at this point in the 2009-2010 season, the top two teams at defending the 3-point arc are the Los Angeles Lakers (30.7% opponent 3-point shooting) and the Boston Celtics (31.3% opponent 3-point shooting). These two teams also happen to be the best teams in the NBA right now.

What about their defense near the rim? In terms of shooting percentage, Boston is 2nd in the NBA in defending near the rim, (Cleveland is 1st), and the Lakers are 4th. However, the Lakers are also 1st in the NBA in defending within 10 feet of the rim… so defensively, they cover well the areas opponents where can hurt them the most.

By contrast, further out on the floor, again in terms of shooting percentage, the Celtics are only 14th in the NBA in defending the floor from 15 to 23 feet, and the Lakers are only 24th (out of 30 teams) in defending the floor from 10 to 15 feet.

In other words, the NBA’s elite teams are serious about defending near the rim and at the arc, and do an adequate job defending midrange and long jumpers. Smart defense is about priorities.

So, is Carlos Boozer a bad defender? Well, when you look at the box score statistics, Carlos is 77th in the NBA in blocked shots and 61st in the NBA in steals… so maybe.

Then again, when you look at limiting opponents shot attempts, Carlos is 7th in the NBA in rebounding, which is kind of amazing when you consider that he is the 2nd shortest player in the top 20.

And when you look at shot attempts near the rim, Utah is 9th in the NBA in keeping opponents from shooting near the rim, and 8th in the NBA in shooting percentage defense from distances under 10 feet from the rim. The Jazz have a perimeter oriented center, so it is reasonable to assume that Carlos Boozer has played a big role in nudging opponents away from the rim and forcing them into lower percentage shots… while still keeping an inside position for rebounding.

So, while Boozer may not be an NBA leader defensively speaking, Boozer definitely appears to be a solid NBA defender, especially for his height — contrary to the complaints of some Jazz fans who should know better. After all, you can’t play for Duke and win NCAA championships without solid defense, can you.

But Boozer was just a teaser to see if I could entice basketball fans to learn a bit more about smart team defense.

If defense was about steals…

… then the Golden State Warriors would be defensive monsters; they lead the NBA in steals.

And if defense was about blocked shots…

… then the Los Angeles Clippers would be defensive monsters; they are 2nd in the NBA in blocked shots.

However, the Clippers (13-17), and Warriors (9-22) are the second and third worst teams in the Western Conference right now, and no one in the NBA allows their opponents to score more than the Warriors.

Obviously defense is not about steals and blocks, it is about aggressively contesting shots near the rim, chasing shooters off the arc, and forcing players to shoot from further out. Look for that on the defensive end of the floor next time you watch a basketball game, and you’ll enjoy the defensive side of the game quite a bit more.

Of course, there is still quite a bit more to smart team defense than what I just outlined here, but this article is too long as it is. Besides, understanding the two fundamental goals of smart team defense, and how they are accomplished will give you a basis for understanding more than I could tell you anyway.

Unlike the rest of the world, I was actually a bit surprised by NBA Development League President Dan Reed’s apology “for a Utah Flash promotion that never should have happened.” Why was I surprised? Well, because as a Utah Flash season ticket holder, I was there.

On Monday, December 7, 2009, D-League commisioner Dan Reed was in Orem, Utah. We don’t usually see Reed in Orem at Flash games, but on that night in particular, with a record attendance in excess of 7,500 people, Dan Reed was in Orem: all smiles, hovering around court side, meeting people, shaking hands, and giving interviews.

What are the odds Mr. Reed knew about Brandt Anderson’s challenge to Michael Jordan for that night? And what are the odds that Dan Reed knew Michael had not actually consented to be there that night for the challenge?

Yet if Reed disapproved in any way of the promotion, you couldn’t tell by looking at him. In fact, he seemed quite excited by it all… well, until halftime that is — but then again, a booing, vanishing crowd can have that affect.

Still, even after the game Dan Reed didn’t seem  too bothered by the night, telling the Salt Lake Tribune that the stunt was done “all in good fun.”

Then came the Internet and media firestorm, followed by a new tune.

By all appearances, Dan Reed went from silent partner to scolding parent in less than 24 hours. One day Mr. Reed flew to Utah to be near the action, then the next day he tried to distance himself from this “ill-conceived” promotion.

However, despite their recent missteps, I actually have a lot of admiration for Brandt Anderson and Dan Reed.

Both Anderson and Reed have ample talent to succeed at most business endeavors I’m sure, yet they’ve both chosen to take on what has to be one of the toughest jobs I can think of. How on earth do you build a loyal customer base for a league whose main attractions vanish to the NBA as soon as they prove to crowds how good they are?

I’m sure I do NOT know the answer to that question, but I do have a perspective they might benefit from: the perspective of their existing fan base.

We come for great basketball at a great price, not for the gimmicks.

I feel like D-League principals obsess over the question, “How do we fill seats?” rather than asking themselves, “How can we cost-effectively make our customers happy?”

Consequently, they’ve found a way to fill every seat in the house, and not make many of those attending happy enough to pay to come again.

Happy fans come back. Happy fans tell friends. Happy fans bring friends. It’s not about filling seats, it is about making the customer happy, and what makes fans happy is good basketball. It’s what we paid to see.

I didn’t buy Utah Flash tickets on the chance that Michael Jordan might show up. And I didn’t buy tickets in case I might get called down to win a flat screen television, or to catch freebies being dropped from a blimp.

Believe it or not, I bought D-League tickets so my family and I could enjoy great basketball.

I don’t know if I’m in the minority or the majority on that, but do know that at Utah Flash home games, an awful lot of effort is expended in distracting fans from the game itself, and very little in helping them get into the game and understand it better.

Need an example? How about three?

(1) Generally speaking, a noisy crowd is a good thing at a basketball game, but it is infinitely better that the noise come because the crowd is totally into the game, rather than from fans clamoring to be thrown free stuff while the game is underway. T’s for 3’s and other freebies being thrown into the crowd during game play actually prevents the crowd from paying attention to the game they paid to attend. By all means, do it when play has stopped, but stop when play has resumed.

(2) If you slow the game down too much, the crowd loses interest. That’s why the league is very cautious about how video replay is used assist the referees. That being the case, what kind of damage to the pace of the game and to fan interest is happening when timeouts are made longer because the players cannot take the floor because the “entertainment” has still not left the floor, or have left the floor but still need be cleaned up after?

(3) Should blimps really be floating overhead dropping freebies on fans during game play, causing fans to look overhead and be oblivious of what is going on on-court? Or can the blimp wait for time outs and quarter breaks so as to not distract fans from getting totally into the game?

Again, a lot of effort is expended to distract fans from the game, rather than helping them get into the game more and understand it better.

Besides, you want fans coming for the game, not for any halftime spectacle. The game is there each night, the gimmick? Maybe it goes over with the crowd, maybe not. (Just ask Bryon Russell.)

So rather than spend money so that a family can walk off with a large, flat TV, put print outs of the quarterly stats at the aisles so that people can see what is going on and get into the game more. In Utah’s case that means getting a much faster printer, and perhaps a small, light duty copier, but many fans enjoy knowing what is going on, and printed stats are another opportunity to sell ad space as well, right?

Rather than blaring music maybe 50 percent of those present even like, could the p.a. announcer use some of that “dead time” to share statistical insights on the game? Player highlights? An audio version of the “hustle board” you see around many arenas?

Rather than project play onto screens no one looks at (because the live game is so much easier to see), why not project game related data? Or at least video replays of the game we are watching.

And while it may look good on camera to have all those seats near the court filled, it is pretty frustrating for those of us who actually paid for them to see them being filled with floaters, especially knowing that nothing is ever done about them.

Finally, and this is probably out of reach for any team owner, but nothing ruins a game like inexplicable officiating.

Mind you, I’M NOT TALKING ABOUT BAD OR MISSED CALLS, those are always going to happen, and happen to BOTH teams.

I’m talking about what truly appears to be GAME CONTROL.

Tonight as the 3rd quarter was underway, I told a friend who I brought for his first ever Utah Flash game, “Uh oh. This isn’t good.”

“Why?” he asked.

“The refs are making really weird calls that favor the Flash.”

“Why is that not good?” he asked.

“Because every time I see them do this in the 3rd quarter, they reverse it in the 4th quarter.”

Tonight the home team had 3 players foul out (and 1 player with 5 fouls), while more than a third of the visiting team’s 107 points came from the free throw line. Reno went to the free throw line 48 times, and were never once called for 3 in the key.

It would be one thing if the Utah Flash were hackers and the Reno Bighorns angels, but according to the d-league’s own statistics, if you look down the list of players sorted by fouls per game, Reno has SIX players listed before you find the first Utah Flash player… who happens to be Luke Nevill who is no longer with the Flash. [EDIT: These statistics have now been updated to include Friday's games, so the list no longer looks as it did when I wrote this.]

In other words, this season’s statistics [to date] say Reno is by far mostly likely to foul, and my eyes certainly saw that as well tonight. It was inexplicable how tonight’s officiating crew of  Josh Tiven (#58), Kevin Scott (#43), and Ben Taylor (#63) just could not seem to see the moving screens, grabbing, pushing, and arm hacking being committed by anyone wearing a green uniform. The crowd could certainly see it, and as the night wore on, the inconsistency wore on them.

All night Reno was very late coming out of their huddles, and I mean holding up the game will you please get your tails onto the court late, yet not even one delay of game warning was blown, much less technical foul. Add those constant delays to stopping the game 61 times for personal foul calls to shoot 80 free throws, with the vast majority of those being shot by the visiting team, and you get some idea of fan frustration with the game.

It wasn’t bad officiating, it was biased officiating. When Utah Flash Brad Jones protested a call, he was given a technical foul. When Reno Bighorns coach Jay Humphries protested a call, the referees actually reversed the call on the floor to accommodate him. It was an out of bounds possession call, and the refs reversed the original call based not on a video replay, but solely because the Reno coach said it should be their ball. It was inexplicable. All game long Reno players and coaching staff were mouthy and on the refs, and often very deserving of a technical foul, yet the refs patiently let them do it. Carlos Wheeler was walking back to the bench and was literally two steps away from his seat, and made a quiet comment to his teammates, not even to the ref, and the ref standing at midcourt T’d him up for it. The treatment players and coaches were given that game was far from even, and there certainly was no “home court advantage” happening for the Flash.

Some might wonder if the Utah Flash, who had only one loss in the season prior to tonight (when it was beaten by a team with a losing record), was being punished by the D-League for a promotion that embarrassed the d-league nationwide.

Let me be clear: *I* do NOT believe that to be the case.

Conspiracies like that are just too over the top for me, but I do struggle to understand how a professional officiating crew can be so inconsistent. If anyone has a theory about this, by all means please share.

Meanwhile…

Mr. Reed, Mr. Anderson… want to make the d-league more attractive?

Put the game first, because first and foremost, that is what we’ve paid to see.

Anything that detracts from the game, including halftime spectacles, in game promotions and (especially) referees with agendas, ultimately diminishes our enjoyment of what we paid to see, and quenches our desire to support the NBA Development League with our time and dollars.

Hat’s off to the players and coaching staff. Despite what goes on around them, they are what makes holding season tickets worth it.

In case you missed it, the basketball world buzzed for about 15 minutes in September of 2009 about a possible one on one match between Michael Jordan and Bryon Russell.

After Michael Jordan’s controversial Hall of Fame acceptance speech, Utah Flash owner Brandt Anderson announced he would donate $100,000 to the charity of his choice if Michael Jordan would play Bryon Russell one on one during halftime of the Utah Flash’s home opener on December 7, 2009.

As a holder of 8 Utah Flash season tickets since their inaugural season, I smiled when I heard about Anderson’s challenge. I didn’t think Jordan would take it, but if he did, at least we were assured seats to the spectacle.

What I didn’t realize though, is that the spectacle would start well outside the gym. Traffic to and around Utah Valley University’s McKay Event Center was a nightmare. Adding to the mayhem was a larger than predicted snow storm.

As we crept along in traffic, my kids looked at all the cars in wonder and asked me again if MJ would be there. “I really don’t think so, kids,” I frankly replied.

When we finally reached the parking lot, one of the kids spotted two stretch Hummer limousines. “Dad! Jordan HAS to be here! Look at the limos.” I chuckled and to tease the kids, I parked right next to them.

The crowd inside the McKay Events Center was nuts. There had to be thousands more people than normally attend. Staff  kept laying down new sections of bleachers that normally aren’t down, and people would fill them up as soon as they were ready to be occupied. It looked as if by halftime, the McKay Events Center was at 80 to 85 percent capacity, and it was very warm in the building. Too warm.

With a home crowd like that, you would have thought the Utah Flash players would be energized, but oddly though, the crowd was barely aware that there was a basketball game going on. People were visiting like they were at a, well, baseball game. The Flash players were diving for loose balls, dunking, etc. and while some of us regulars were applauding the hustle, the crowd overall was oblivious.

With about 8 minutes left in the second quarter, Bryon Russell got up out of his courtside seat, waved at the crowd and headed down the passage to the locker rooms. My kids asked me, “Could  he be going to change for the 1 on 1 matchup?”

Then with about 3 minutes left to go in the 2nd quarter, and the Flash up by 2 points (37-35), the p.a. announcer electrified the crowd when he announced that we should all stay put because at halftime “His Airness” would be playing Bryon Russell one on one.

Suddenly total strangers were best of friends as they all buzzed about seeing Jordan, about what a decent and great guy Jordan must be to do this, etc.

A section of the crowd started chanting, “Jordan! Jordan! Jordan!”

I smiled and yelled back at them, “Russell! Russell! Russell!” They laughed and stopped their chant and joined me in mine.

The home crowd weren’t the only ones distracted by the announcement however. The news seemed to distract the Flash players as well. They went from being up 2 points when the announcement was made, to being down three minutes later when the halftime buzzer sounded: 43 to 51.

Soon the lights were lowered and on the big screens they were showing a television interview with a famous sports analyst saying Jordan would never show up. The crowd jeered at the statement. “Look who gets the last laugh!” we thought, “He’s HERE!”

Music and spotlights and wild cheering greeted Bryon Russell as he took center court with a wireless microphone and got the crowd charged up.

Everyone’s cell phone cameras lit the dark room as they video recorded the p.a. announcer yell, “And now, a man who needs no introduction…”

I turned to my kids and said, “Wow! He really is here! There certainly aren’t a lot of kids your age that can say they saw Michael Jordan play live!”

Then loud became deafening as “Michael Jordan” was escorted out on to the court by 4 body guards.

The instant I saw him, and I saw him soon and well from row 2, I turned to my wife and shouted, “That’s not him! That’s not Michael!” I then turned to my kids and the crowd around us and yelled, “That’s not Michael Jordan! Look at him, that’s not Michael.”

Those that could hear me went quiet, then someone yelled, “That’s Gary Payton!”

I whirled around to take a closer look at the man wearing shades amidst the body guards then yelled back, “That’s not Payton either!”

With the music and mayhem from the crowd, I couldn’t make out what the p.a. announcer was going on about, but I didn’t care anyway.

The Utah Flash organization had just made suckers out of their paying customers, and inconvenienced their faithful ticket holders, and for some reason they thought we all would laugh and be okay with that.

As the crowd started to realize Jordan wasn’t in the building, the p.a. announcer confessed it to be so. Then, in another astonishing act of bad judgment, the p.a. announcer had the gall to lay this fiasco at Michael Jordan’s feet… like Michael was the villain here for not showing up because, after all, their offer for him to play Russell was legit.

I turned to my kids and apologized to them for their senseless disappointed. They’d all texted their friends that Jordan was there, now they were texting them that it was a hoax.

What happened next though, was a sight to behold. The crowd turned ugly. In addition to people booing and turning their thumbs down, the crowd was throwing back on to the floor the free t-shirts they’d been thrown during the first half of the game!

Then what was a near capacity crowd vanished. It looked as if 75 percent of the crowd left right then and there in disgust.

And what is worse, those of us who stayed were in no mood to cheer the home team. Not for awhile anyway.

The Utah Flash staff clearly knew they blew it and started shouting through the p.a. to stick around and get more free stuff, but the crowd’s trust was already violated, and wasn’t about to be bought or bribed back.

The Utah Flash players actually played an excellent and gutsy game, and waged an admirable come back and won the game… but I guarantee you, almost no one will remember that.

What everyone will remember is that on night when the Flash had its biggest ever crowd, instead of impressing them with their product, they tricked them with a hoax … all in the name of shaming Jordan, and gaining publicity.

It is utterly astonishing to me that they didn’t know better before they did it. Even the NBA D-League’s commissioner, Dan Reed, was there in attendance.

That said, I’m pretty sure the organization knows it screwed up. In fact, this embarrassment is large enough that there is no need for anyone else to pile on to it. I’m just reporting the night from a loyal fan and customer’s point of view.

I also add that late in the 4th quarter the announcer apologetically told those of the crowd that was still around, that if they will bring this night’s ticket to another home game later this season, they’ll be admitted for free.

Well, that’s no consolation to those of us who have already paid in advance for every home game this season, but we do appreciate their efforts to make amends with their customers.

I’ll blog on the game itself tomorrow, but for now and perhaps for always, it will be the victory no one will remember.

At halftime of last night’s game (Lakers at Nuggets), I got up to turn off the television and my wife asked, “What are you doing?”

“The Lakers are going to get creamed,” I explained.

“How can you say that? They are just down by two points!” she answered.

“I can say that because they gave up 58 points in the first half, and Carmelo Anthony hardly played.”

She said nothing so I continued.

“The Lakers have fallen back into bad habits. They are casual about defense, and they are on the road playing against a team that feels they have something to prove against them. They’re not getting the ball into Bynum, their advantage, or into the paint for that matter, and Kobe is obsessed with posting up his smaller defender which is what the Nuggets want instead of him driving and putting their bigs in foul trouble. Kobe’s impossible to double on the permimeter, but easy to double in the post, and who on the perimeter is going to punish the Nuggets for doubling Kobe in the post? Artest? Trust me, the second half is going to be ugly.”

Unfortunately, my wife didn’t let me turn off the TV; she wanted to see if I was going to be right so I had to suffer through it all.

At least Ty Lawson’s dunk on DJ Mbenga made it worth it though. Wow. I don’t care what team you are cheering for, if you are a fan of basketball you’ve got to love that stuff.

As I watched the lambs march to their slaughter, I had the following thoughts about the Lakers…

— Small Forward —

The Lakers are a mess at the 3 position.

Ron Artest is ineffective on both ends of the floor. He’s a brand name, but he’s not a knock down shooter, he’s not a lock down defender anymore. He abandons the offense to over dribble, or holds the ball too long letting the clock tick away.

Luke Walton is a good passer, but just doesn’t make great choices. For instance, he dislocated his finger in the fourth quarter but insisted he could still play. Walton went back into the game, threw a turnover his first pass, and got pulled for the rest of the game. Clearly, seldom used Walton wanted playing time, even if he really couldn’t contribute for his team.

Adam Morrison has totally lost his confidence and doesn’t look like he’ll ever be a consistent force for the Lakers.

Lamar Odom is the team’s real small forward, but he is so versatile he’ll likely play more at the power forward position while Gasol covers center so Bynum can sit, or while Gasol sits.

I realize the risk, but the if the Lakers could dump some or all of these small forwards, including Ron Artest, to get Stephen Jackson, they would be no worse off than they are now, and perhaps much better off.

— Point Guard —

Point guard is the other position the Lakers are in trouble.

Derek Fisher has played surprisingly good defense this season, but last night he was totally unworthy of his minutes and was a liability on both ends of the court. Maybe at his age he couldn’t recover from a back to back with little sleep, but Phil Jackson needs to realize that when Derek isn’t playing well, he almost never steps it up later in the game, so you may as well sit him and give Shannon Brown a chance.

To me, Shannon Brown is the first call off the bench at the guard position. He is raw and makes mistakes, but no more than Farmar, and Farmar has had YEARS to learn and improve within the Lakers’ system, and this is the best he’s been able to do.

I realize Sasha Vujacic is hardly in the rotation anymore, but for all his struggles offensively, the guy is very motivated to play defense and does a good job of it. That alone would put him ahead of Farmar in my book.

The Lakers declined to renew Farmar’s contract, and that was right thing to do. Again, Farmar is usually good for a highlight each game, but his decision making is still shaky after all this experience. Shannon Brown has earned the right to be first off the bench of the guards, and it’s time to give Brown minutes and let him grow into his position the way Farmar and Vujacic had in the past.

And while we are waiting for Shannon Brown to figure out who he is in the Lakers’ system…

Make a trade for Orlando’s J.J. Redick.

No, Redick isn’t really turning heads in Orlando, but for the money, can you think of a better fit for Phil Jackson’s system than Redick? Think John Paxson, Craig Hodges, BJ Armstrong and Steve Kerr… only Redick is more athletic than any of those players and has at least the footspeed of Derek Fisher. Redick isn’t just collecting paychecks either; he keeps improving his game.

A rotation of Fisher, Brown and Redick would be solid for the Lakers at the point.

— Power Forward —

This Pao Gasol’s job, and with apologies to Tim Duncan, Pao is the best power forward in the NBA right now. The problem is, Pao is also Andrew Bynum’s back up…

Meaning the biggest problem the Lakers have at power forward is DJ MBenga. Because there is not an adequate backup for Bynum, the Lakers need Gasol to cover for him, and Odom to cover for Gasol, and Artest to cover for Odom…

I like DJ’s heart and his active body, but the poor guy just has no common sense on the court. If they can’t smarten him up with a lot of film and one on one instruction, then they ought to look to the DLeague for another big, active body that WILL learn quickly.

Mbenga is a good guy, but he makes me miss Kwame Brown.

Maybe the Warriors would throw in Ronie Turiaff with Stephen Jackson for Luke Walton, Adam Morrison and Ron Artest. Walton’s running and passing, and Morrison’s shoot first mentality and Artest’s toughness and name recognition should be appealing to the Warriors.

Josh Powell is an interesting player. He rebounds, he defends if you tell him to, and he spreads the floor with his outside shot. But he isn’t going to get any better if he doesn’t get experience. If Phil can trust Jordan Farmar and Sasha Vujacic on the floor when they are messing up, why can’t he play Shannon Brown instead and give Powell enough minutes to make his mistakes and find his place?

— Conclusion —

Of course, when Pau Gasol returns, the Lakers will do better, but it won’t be because their problems have been solved, it will be because they can cover them up most of the time with a new rotation.

But imagine this rotation:

PG – Fisher, Reddick, Brown
SG – Bryant, Vujacic
SF – Jackson, Odom
PF – Gasol, Odom, Turiaff
Ce – Bynum, Gasol, Turiaff

That’s a step up from where they are now, isn’t it?

Regardless, the Lakers have real vulnerabilities, and should be addressing them.

— Who is to blame for Yao’s injuries?

I can’t speak for the other planets, but Ballerblogger.com is the best 1-stop place for NBA basketball on our world’s world wide web, and today they posted an interesting quote from China’s state-run media:

“A commentary in the Communist Party-run People’s Daily dismissed the widely-held view in the United States that Yao’s repeated injuries stemmed from training with China’s national team during the NBA off-season.

“It can only be said that the NBA game has worn Yao Ming out,” the paper fired back.

“The physical beating taken by every player due to the long season, the high level of match play and the endless travel cannot be overlooked.

“The NBA should consider changing its match scheduling from the standpoint of safeguarding players.”

— Does China have a point?

Now I am one of the last people on earth who would side with a communist-run newspaper. In fact, I stopped buying my favorite computers in the world, IBM Thinkpads, when IBM sold the line to Chinese run Lenovo, because I didn’t want my dollars going to support an ideology I do not believe is good for us.

Neverthless, the communist-run Chinese media is 100% right, and are saying something that has already been a topic of hot debate in the United States for years.

The reality is the NBA treats its players like tires on a sports car: it rides them hard and fast, then tosses them aside, and it does it because the fans pay them to.”

The NBA kills the golden geese to get the eggs, but they are okay with that because there is always another draft of geese eager to take their place — and now international players are flocking to the draft as well.

— Does defense win championships? Or luck?

The NBA isn’t baseball: players don’t stand around for half the game waiting for something to happen in their area of the field, then sit around the other half of the game waiting to bat.

Basketball is a very physically and emotionally demanding sport. Heck, at the end of some games, even the FANS are exhausted!

Every season attrition plays as big a role as anything else in determining who becomes an NBA champion, as every season championship contending teams are knocked out of contention thanks to an injury to a key player.

For example…

Los Angeles Lakers fans contend that in the 2008 NBA Finals, the Boston Celtics benefited greatly thanks to injuries to Andrew Bynum and Trevor Ariza. Many dismissed that as sour grapes, but then the next season the Lakers seemed to bear that out by sweeping the Celtics in the regular season. With all Celtic players healthy and accounted for, the Lakers beat them in Boston 92 to 83 on Christmas day 2008. And then on February 5, 2009, the Lakers beat the Celtics again, and this time they did it without Andrew Bynum who was out injured again.

Then it was Boston’s turn to deal with injury. In fact, in the 2008-2009 season, all the Celtics’ starting 5 missed games, 40 man games in all, with 25 of those missed games belonging to Kevin Garnett. With the emergence of Rajan Rondo, it seems likely that a healthy Boston would have easily defeated the Orlando Magic in the Eastern Conference Semi-Finals. Instead, with key players on the bench in street clothes, the Celtics fell to the Magic in 7 games.

Likewise in the West, the always contending San Antonio Spurs had similar struggles. Tony Parker lost 10 games, Tim Duncan was out 7 games (and played hurt for more), and Manu Ginobli missed a whopping 38 games due to injury. That obviously affected the Spurs regular season record, playoff seeding and championship hopes.

— A 72 game regular season?

If you are tempted to argue that injuries happen and maybe these key players would have been out in a shorter season anyway, you are missing the point.

The Chinese said, “The NBA should consider changing its match scheduling from the standpoint of safeguarding players.”

Changing the schedule, including putting more space between games, would certainly reduce the role injuries play in determining NBA champions.

And championships should be determined by teams, not by luck. That’s not basketball, that’s Yahtzee.

That altering the regular season playing schedule is EXACTLY what the Phoenix Suns did with aging superstar Shaquille O’Neal.

The Suns played Shaq in only 72 games and made him sit out 10 games at strategic times of the season so that he could rest and recover from the rigors of NBA play and travel.

The result? Shaq had his best season since the 2005-2006 season.

Think about it.

Even though Shaq was a year older, he went from scoring 16.2 points per 36 minutes, to scoring 21.3 points per 36 minutes.

Even his free throw percentage got better.

And before you try to dismiss those stats by claiming the Suns have a different system than the Heat, those stats I just quoted have been adjusted to account for only for Shaq’s games with the Phoenix Suns.

Without a doubt, altering the NBA season would NOT eliminate injuries, but it would positively affect how large a role injuries play in determining NBA championships.

What is more, getting a 72 game season is easier than you might imagine.

There are 30 teams in the NBA. If every team played every team in their conference 3 times, and every team in the opposite conference 2 times, that would give each team a 72 game season. That is a totally reasonable schedule.

— The downside?

That is a 12% reduction in games, which will result in a reduction of revenue for the NBA. However, expenses are also reduced, so that has to be accounted for. Also, it would be a mistake to assume 12% less games means 12% less revenue, because while ticket sales and television revenue would be reduced, other income sources would not such as merchandising. People will still buy Kobe Bryant jerseys even if he is playing 72 games a year instead of 82.

So, here’s the big question: Would the NBA curb its lust for money by 10% or so to keep the likes of Yao Ming, Shaquille O’Neal and Manu Ginobli in the game, and to allow better teams to excel rather than just younger teams?

Probably not, so here’s another idea.

— A pre-playoff qualifier round?

The money lost by reducing regular season games can be made up and more by having a qualifier round just prior to the playoffs.

Right now the system the NBA uses to determine who qualifies for the playoffs is Byzantine and (frankly) idiotic.

For example, the NBA is divided into 2 Conferences: Eastern and Western. Each conference is then divided into 3 divisions — which are totally meaningless. Winning each division doesn’t mean much in terms of seeding, because in 2006 that rule was tweaked to favor teams with better records anyway.

If having divisions doesn’t mean anything, why have them?

Another problem with the playoffs is that many of the teams that earned a spot in the playoffs aren’t given one because they happen to be in a tougher conference.

For example, in the 2008 playoffs, all 8 teams in the Western Conference playoffs had 50 or more wins, while only 3 Eastern Conference teams had 50+ wins… and 3 others didn’t even have winning records. That’s messed up.

And of the Western Conference teams that didn’t qualify for the playoffs, 3 of them had better records than Eastern Conference teams that did.

So, give the first 6 seeds of each conference to the teams with the best records in each conference, and then let the next 8 teams in terms of regular season wins, regardless of conference, play for the 4 wild card spots in a playoffs qualifier round in a best of 3 or best of five qualifier series.

The buzz of the qualifier round will sell more tickets and television spots than regular season games, thus making up the revenue lost by cutting the regular season by 10 games, PLUS…

Plus the qualifier round will give the playoff teams a week or so to rest from the regular season and heal up for the playoffs.

— The moral of the story?

By:

(1) Reducing the regular season to 72 games,

(2) Eliminating back to back games and spacing the schedule better, and

(3) Having a qualifying round prior to the playoffs for the bottom 4 seeds…

Athletes would have a better chance at staying healthy, the better teams would have a better chance at the championship, and better teams would be in the playoffs which should greatly enhance the fan appeal of the first round.

Unfortunately, these great reforms, while they may have support in China, will likely never see the light of day in David Stern’s NBA will they?

That’s too bad, because the really NBA treat its players like tires on a sports car: riding them hard and fast, then tossing them aside, and there is a better way.

— EDIT: Or how about this?

In baseball, there are rules for how many innings (or pitches?) a pitcher can pitch in a given time period. These rules exist to protect the health of the players.

Why not do something similar in the NBA?

Why not set up a set of rules that limit how many minutes a player can play in a week, and set how much rest teams should have between games?

Again, the president already exists in professional sports, so this isn’t a radical idea at all.

While I’m sure the minutes take their toll, I’m also confident that it is the inadequate rest for recovery that plays a big part in wearing down players and making them susceptible to injury. That is really where the NBA needs the most reform on this matter.

Back in the day when college players could compete for the USA in international play, the NBA’s off season may have been adequate in terms of rest.

Times have changed though, international competition has grown up, and TeamUSA demands commitments from NBA elite.

Today it is Yao that is injuried, but soon it could be LeBron, Kobe, or Dwight whose year ’round commitment for high level basketball threatens to derail a team’s championship aspirations for a season… or even a player’s career.

And when they come back, who is to say they will be the same player? There have been plenty of NBA players who never were the same after an injury.

That’s where I really admire the Phoenix Suns: they would rather risk a mid season loss than a player’s health.

If the league could have the same priorities and the same discipline, then perhaps there wouldn’t be so much worry that (for example) Pau Gasol will be playing for Spain in a European tournament just prior to the NBA preseason.

The bottom line is that most fans, if not all fans, wouldn’t even notice a season shortened by 10 games.

On the other hand, all fans notice when the star players from their teams are out injured.

If this work hazard for missed time, and potentially career ending injury existed in other industries other than professional sports, people would get behind the reforms in a blink.

On June 16, 2009, in a blog entitled “Dynasty for Sale or Rent,” I wrote, “Maybe beating Orlando was the easy part. The hard part might be bringing the band back together next year.”

I may have jinxed the Lakers because since then Trevor Ariza left the Lakers for the most incomprehensible of reasons, and now, things seem to have fallen apart with Lamar Odom.

It’s amazing how many parrots accuse Kobe Bryant of being selfish while completely overlooking Lamar Odom’s LONG history of self-serving and very bad judgment — a history of bad decisions that goes very far beyond candy bing eating.

— HIGH SCHOOL

Lamar Odom played for 3 different high schools, not because his family was moving, but he dumped teams in perceived furtherance of his basketball career.

— COLLEGE

Lamar Odom started off at UNLV taking classes in the summer. Unfortunately, he was also taking money. Odom received payments amounting to $5,600 from UNLV booster David Chapman. That, and the academic scandal that also ensued got UNLV coach Bill Bayno fired, and got UNLV placed on probation by the NCAA for 4 years. UNLV’s storied basketball program never really recovered from the mess Lamar left it, and left it he did… for the University of Rhode Island.

In the wake of his scorched earth, after sitting out a year, Lamar played just 1 season for Rhode Island and then ditched them after his freshman year for a career in the NBA.

— CLIPPERS

Drafted 4th overall in the 1999 NBA draft, Lamar’s career started with L.A.’s other NBA team, the Clippers, where he showed much promise and made 2000 NBA All-Rookie First Team. A year later, in Novemeber of 2001, Odom was suspended for having been caught in his SECOND violation of the NBA’s drug policy.

— HEAT

Odom played 1 year for the Miami Heat, along side rookie Dwayne Wade, before finding himself in Los Angeles once again, being one of 3 players traded by the Heat for Shaquille O’Neal.

Interestingly, Odom never sold his house in Miami; he still owns it.

— LAKERS

With the Lakers, Lamar Odom has been a mixed blessing. On the one hand, his skills, particulary for his size, made him one of the most versitile players in the NBA. On the other hand, Odom’s decision making can be quite horrible.

And Odom has shown a tendency to vanish in big games, particularly in the playoffs.

In the 2006 playoffs, the Lakers gave up a 3-1 series lead to the Suns in large part to Odom going M.I.A. In fact, in critical game 7, in 42 minutes of play, Odom’s line was 12 points, 37% shooting, 5 rebounds, 2 assists.

In the 2007 playoffs, Odom, then the Lakers #2 option, vanished again (10 points in game 2 on 33% shooting), and the Lakers lost to the Suns in 5 games.

And in the 2008 NBA Finals, when the favored Lakers fell to Danny Ainge’s all star team, Pau Gasol took much of the heat for the Lakers “being soft,” but power forward Lamar Odom’s numbers for the series were well below his regular season performance.

That’s not to say Lamar Odom hasn’t shown tremendous promise though. Odom’s 28 points, 17 rebounds and 2 assists in a rare defeat of the Cleveland Caveliers in Cleveland this last season shows why the Lakers are high on Odom.

Or at least they were.

— DEAL OR NO DEAL

Dr. Jerry Buss, owner of the Lakers, recently asked Mitch Kupcheck to withdraw the Lakers’ offer to retain Odom.

The Lakers had been offering Odom a deal for $9 million a season for 4 years at $36 million, or $10 million a season for 3 years for a total of $30 million.

Odom is reportedly holding out for a 5-year, $50 million deal.

I guess I’ve always felt that Odom has been overpaid pretty much his entire career.

Specifically, Odom has been paid (I won’t write “earned”) over $69 million 9 seasons playing in the NBA, or in other words, Lamar Odom has averaged $7.7 million per year.

Odom’s 1999 draft classmate Manu Ginobli has averaged $5.6 million per year over the course of his career.

As one of San Antonio’s “big three,” Manu has been a CRITICAL component of 3 NBA championships for the Spurs. What is more, Ginobli shows his team first mentality by coming off the bench or starting — whatever Pop wants — without a peep.

By contrast, Odom has been an inconsistent flake his entire career. In fact, much of the infuriating inconsistency the Lakers have shown is directly attributable to Lamar Odom.

— JEOPARDY

As NBA announcers Mark Jackson and Jeff Van Gundy were saying as they called the 2009 playoffs, “As goes Lamar Odom, so go the Lakers.”

Lamar’s problem is he has been paid primarily on potential, not production. If you look at potential, I can see why Lamar is demanding what he is.

But if you look at consistent production, Manu Ginobli gives his employer far greater bang for the buck than Lamar Odom ever has.

If Odom really feels like $10 million a year for 3 years is beneath him, then perhaps he ought to refund the Clippers, Heat and Lakers the money he didn’t actually EARN in previous years, THEN from a position of equal footing, start making his demands of the Lakers.

It’s time for Odom to grow up and start giving back.

Odom isn’t in demand because he’s earned everyone’s respect over the years, but because there is no one else available with that skill set at his height at the current time.

I’m with Buss on this one.

Odom can eat some humble pie and redeem himself by “settling” for $36 million, or he can walk and prove himself the donkey we’ve so often seen from him in his checkered basketball career.

— DOG EAT DOG

I don’t think Lamar Odom will be a Laker next season. Just as Ariza walked for no comprehensible reason, it looks as if Odom will be gone for no reason a reasonable person could believe.

Miami looks like a possibility, even for less money. Odom still has a house there, and the Heat have a place for Odom that isn’t on the bench when its tipoff time.

Everyone talks about the Blazers, especially now that Millsap is staying with the Jazz, but the Blazers haven’t seemed interested. Yet.

And now noise is coming from San Antonio.

Even if Odom doesn’t go to the Spurs though, the Spurs’ championship aspirations for the 2010 may well rest in Lamar’s hands.

For as goes Lamar Odom, so go the Lakers.

Phil Jackson often uses the metaphor of a journey when he talks about winning a championship. Using his metaphor, the road back to an NBA Championship next season looks like it may be a bit harder than it was this last.

A few days ago I wrote a blog I called, “The Rich Get Richer.” In it, I looked at this last season’s title contenders and one by one talked about what they had done to get better (or worse) from where they were this last season. It contained draft information, trades, and people who, due to healing from injuries, would be more of a factor this coming season than they were last season.

Then I clicked “Submit” (or whatever it is) and the browser waited forever then crashed and the story was lost.

Annoyed, I stayed away for a time.

I’m still unwilling to redo it, but to (very) roughly summarize, the Mavericks, the Celtics, the Cavaliers, the Magic and especially the Spurs appear to have SIGNIFICANTLY improved themselves over the teams they had last season.

And let’s not forget the Blazers, who seem to have the Lakers’ number, matured and got better as well.

That’s not to say the Lakers didn’t shake things up a bit as well in the off season, and Odom is not yet in the bag so more may come, but it isn’t at all clear that the Lakers have improved themselves with the loss of Ariza and acquisition of Artest.

Also weighing in for the Lakers is Andrew Bynum. Without a doubt the kid has shown promise, but this season will need to start making good on that promise — and in a consistent way (assuming Artest’s scoring reflex doesn’t stunt Bynum’s growth).

Of particular concern is Pau Gasol.

Gasol will be playing for Team Spain in September in the European Basketball Championship.

Pau Gasol logged 931 minutes in the playoffs, 4th most of any player in the playoffs, but the only 7 footer. And they were active minutes as Pau was the 2nd best rebounder in the post season, and #2 in blocked shots as well.

And in the regular season, Pau Gasol ranked #14 in minutes played for the entire NBA, and was the only 7 footer in the top 20.

That is a lot of wear and tear — especially for a big.

Factor in the fact that Spain played as many Olympic games as Team USA last summer and was in the gold medal game, and that Pau was Spain’s main go to guy, then Lakers fans HAVE to be concerned about Pau in the coming season.

What if Pau goes down this coming season and the Lakers’ hopes for a repeat fall onto the inconsistent shoulders of Andrew Bynum doing the big man duties? In the post season Bynum could hardly keep himself on the floor due to foul trouble, much less be counted on to defend, rebound and score in the post.

And what of the miles on Kobe’s legs as well?

Last year’s team with the second best regular season record may well find this coming year’s road fraught with even more peril. They may find their wills, and their chemistry, tested and proven.

During the 2009 NBA Playoffs…

Trevor Ariza shot 50% from the floor. Ron Artest shot 39%.

Trevor Ariza shot 48% from the arc. Ron Artest shot 28%.

Trevor Ariza was 2nd in the playoffs in steals (behind Kobe Bryant), 3rd in 3 point field goals, and 5th in effective field goal shooting. Ron Artest doesn’t appear on the playoff leader board at all.

Trevor Ariza made clutch defensive stops again and again for the Lakers. Ron Artest, a supposed lock down defender, made boneheaded decisions that resulted in technical fouls and ejections.

Trevor Ariza knows the intricacies of the triangle offense and is productive in it. Ron Artest doesn’t, and frankly doesn’t have a reputation for being the brightest bulb in the ceiling.

Trevor Ariza is young and getting better. Ron Artest is declining.

Ron Artest is a stronger BRAND name than Trevor Ariza, but Trevor is the better player — especially for the Lakers.

What is Artest going to give the Lakers that Ariza couldn’t? Defense? No, Ariza is perhaps the Lakers best defender. Shooting? Uh, no. Toughness? Sorry, Ariza has that too.

Some people are accusing Ariza of “getting greedy.” Interestingly, Trevor Ariza turned down more money to play with the Toronto Raptors. Was Ariza greedy, or were the Lakers cheap?

Perhaps Trevor opted for Houston instead of Toronto in order to get more games against the Lakers so he can make them pay for not paying to keep him.

The Lakers may still win a championship with Artest instead of Ariza, but they didn’t make themselves better with this move.

Think about it: when the Lakers lost to the Celtics, the chorus sang, “Wait until Andrew Bynum gets better!”

But this year, Bynum was a complete non-factor for the Lakers. The Lakers biggest improvement came at the 3 spot (small forward) when Trevor Ariza healed and began playing well on both ends of the court.

The Rockets should improve with Trevor Ariza. Remember, the Rockets, without Tracy McGrady and then without Yao Ming gave the Lakers the hardest time in the 2009 playoffs. With Ariza, they get a better shooter than Artest, and a very good defender still.

The Lakers lost a selfless team player who won’t pout if he doesn’t get shots, who is a great defender (especially in the clutch), for the person who ruined Houston’s offense in the playoffs more than any other Rocket. Artest over dribbled the ball constantly, especially late in the game, then hucked up poor shots against the shot clock and Lakers defense (often Trevor Ariza).

It is possible that acquiring Artest will take shots from Gasol.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying Artest is necessarily a BAD acquisition, I’m saying it wasn’t as good as if they could have found a way to keep Ariza.

And the evidence points to the possibilty that the Lakers could have easily kept Ariza. Ariza turned down more money from the Toronto Raptors and signed with Houston for about the same money he was offered by the Lakers.

Why was the Lakers’ offer unattractive and the Rockets’ acceptable?

“It was never about the money,” said Ariza, “It was about respect.”

By all appearances, the Lakers weren’t lowballing Ariza, but playing hardball: “Take our offer, or we’ll just go get Artest.”

— EDIT: The following was added on July 4, 2009:

What does Phil Jackson think of the Ariza / Artest situation?

“I wasn’t given the either or [the choice between Ariza and Artest]. I know Ron has been on our wish list for what, 3 years now? We needed a defender besides — I mean somebody that was a lock down defender besides Kobe Bryant that could take on the chores, and, you know, Trevor turned out to be that guy this year.

“And so I was quite surprised, as was most of our fans I think, that, you know, negotiations did not go well with Trevor and his people. ”

“And uh, you know, we think we have a player [in Ron Artest] that has probably a little more dimensions than Trevor, but still Trevor has that youth and that speed that we’ll miss.”

– Phil Jackson to FSR’s Myers and Hartman

Far more interesting, however…

Prior to the Lakers acquiring Artest, Phil Jackson told KLAC/570 that after the Lakers eliminated the Rockets from the playoffs in game six of the Westen Conference Semi-Finals, Ron Artest “eagerly” sought out Phil Jackson for an awkward meeting…in the Lakers’ locker room shower!

“Ron said, ‘Coach, I can help your team. I can help you get that championship,’” Jackson said.

“He’s an unknown,” Jackson said. “He’s a player that even I think his own teams don’t know exactly what he’s going to do that particular night.”

But what does seem to be a known, is that Ron Artest wants to win an NBA championship … enough to approach an opposing coach in a locker room shower to make a pitch for it.

Very interesting indeed.