Playoff Report

Vladi looks for a rebound, while Reggie looks for some nuts to grab.

Maybe I'm the only one who cares about this sort of thing, but I was curious to see how the players Seattle traded during the season are doing in the playoffs. Here's a quick look:

1. Vladimir Radmanovic - 8.8 ppg, 4.5 rpg, 7-15 from 3-point range
Radman hasn't had a breakout series, only going for double figures once, and that was in the weekend's blowout win over the Nuggets. He's averaging 20 minutes a night, which is a respectable number, but I'm sure he'd love to be playing more.

2. Reggie Evans - 4.3 ppg, 5.5 rpg
Evans hasn't seen many minutes, either, even with Kenyon Martin on the DNP list. As the backup PF, Evans' rebounds have gone from 16 in the first two games to 6 in the last two.

3. Flip Murray - 8.3 ppg
Flip continues to struggle from long range (2 of 10), but his 19 points Sunday against the Wizards was the best game of any of the former Sonics. Flip's minutes have been strange, 30+ twice and fewer than 15 twice.

(Editor's note: It looks like Reggie is getting very busy in the playoffs! - Paul)

Nash

Well, it appears Steve Nash has worked his Canadian magic on the voters once again. Reports are circulating that Nash has won the MVP for the second consecutive season, boosting hopes for runty white guards all across North America.

I thought it might be interesting to compare Nash with LeBron James, who I consider to be the league's true MVP (with Kobe and Billups right behind). Specifically, let's look at that mystery called "most valuable." Every story you read in the next few weeks will center on how Nash boosted a team without Amare to a strong record, almost as if his surrounding cast was a bunch of stiffs straight out of the NBDL. But what if LBJ's teammates are worse; doesn't he deserve some credit as well? Here's a quick look at the two rosters:

2nd-best player:
Cleveland: Ilgauskas (15.6, 7.6 reb)
Phoenix: Marion (21.8, 11.8 reb)
Clearly, Marion is the better player, as he averages nearly as many blocks as the taller Ilgauskas, while grabbing an extra 1.5 steals, fewer TOs, and more points per shot.

3rd-best player:
Cleveland: Hughes (15.5, 4.5 reb)
Phoenix: Diaw (13.3, 6.9 reb)
A tougher call here. Diaw has never played this well in his career, so Nash has to get some credit for that. But the question is: Who’s a better player? Hughes.

4th-best player:
Cleveland: Gooden (10.7, 8.4 reb)
Phoenix: Bell (14.7, 2.5 3’s per game)
Again, a tough call. Bell’s Roland Rating is +.1, Gooden’s is -.4, which is essentially a toss-up. Interestingly, Bell’s stats are virtually identical to his previous campaigns, with the exception of him chucking up way more 3’s than ever before. I’ll call this one even.

5th-best player:
Cleveland: Snow (4.8, 4.2 assists)
Phoenix: Leandro Barbosa (9.3, 3.4 reb)
I had to mix this up a bit, as Barbosa isn’t really the 5th-best player, but it would be silly to match up Snow with Tim Thomas. Still, he is statistically superior to Snow.

6th-best player:
Cleveland: Flip Murray (13.5, 2.8 assists)
Phoneix: Kurt Thomas (8.6, 7.8 reb)
Again, no way you’d ever deal Murray for Thomas, unless Murray’s nickname reminds you of Flip Wilson and you’re looking for that whole nostalgia thing.

7th-best player:
Cleveland: Donyell Marshall (9.3, 6.1 reb)
Phoenix: Tim Thomas (11, 4.9 reb)
An interesting comparison. Both were top 10 picks, both have been considered something of a disappointment in their careers, although Marshall has been a consistent contributor throughout his tenure, while Thomas has been a salary cap menace to many teams. I think the majority of NBA GMs, in a world where the cap did not exist, would take Thomas.

That’s enough of the comparisons, as no one cares whether I think Anderson Varejao is better than Eddie House. The important point is that in four of the six comparisons, the Suns’ player was better, and in only one match-up was the Cavs’ player definitely superior (Hughes).

So, the result is that LBJ’s cast is easily worse than Nash’s, Amare or no Amare. And yet, James, who led his team to 50 wins is somehow less valuable than Nash, who led his team to 54? James, who scored 1,000 more points than Nash is less valuable? James, who averaged more steals and fewer turnovers than the “ultimate point guard” is less valuable? I don’t buy it.

I’m convinced that 20 or 30 years from now, basketball geeks will look back at these two trophies, look at Nash’s stats, and utter a collective, “Huh?”

Expectations

Quite a bit has been made of the Sonics’ 14-11 finish to the season. Adding Chris Wilcox and Earl Watson seemed to spark Seattle down the stretch, causing no end to the speculation that it means next year will be a return Sonic playoff basketball.

But does it really mean anything? Does playing .500+ basketball in garbage time add up to anything substantial? Are there any examples of teams that played poorly one season, then rebounded the next to great heights? And how did they fare in the final 2 months of the season?

Well, let’s take a look at some recent teams that jumped from mediocrity to playoff standards in one season, the mitigating factors, and how they played down the stretch of the previous season (I limited it to the past two seasons because of laziness).

First, some parameters. We’re looking at teams that went from outside the playoff picture to inside, but weren’t propelled by the acquisition of a single player (e.g., LeBron, Shaq, Steve Nash,etc.) or injury (e.g., David Robinson), since the Sonics aren’t likely to add someone of that stature and they’re not looking at bringing back anyone from the injury list (with the exception of Shawn Kemp. Ahem.).

On to the teams:

2004-05 Chicago Bulls
Improvement: 24 wins
Factors: Added Ben Gordon
Final 25 games, previous year: 7-18
A fair comparison to the Sonics, in that they hired Scott Skiles the year before their improvement, who brought a new attitude to a team which was headed nowhere (a la the Sonics and Bob Hill/Bob Weiss).

2004-05 Washington Wizards
Improvement: 20 wins
Factors: Added Antawn Jamison
Final 25: 7-18
The Wizards were led by an improving Gilbert Arenas and Larry Hughes, and the addition of Jamison helped offset the loss of an injured Jerry Stackhouse from the previous year.

2004-05 Seattle Sonics
Improvement: 15 wins
Factors: Kismet and Danny Fortson
Final 25: 11-14
Perhaps you’ve heard of these guys. Having Ray Allen for a full season helped, but last year was a case where everything just sort of fell into place for the Sonics.

2003-04 Memphis Grizzlies
Improvement: 22 wins
Factors: Added Bonzi Wells and James Posey (!), Hubie Brown
Final 25: 10-15
The Grizzlies bought into Hubie’s brand of bench basketball, as a number of guys contributed to the team’s improvement, including a maturing Pau Gasol and one Earl Watson.

That’s obviously too small of a sample size to make any worthwhile deductions, but it does illustrate that finishing poorly does not GUARANTEE a poor finish the next season. One surface note from looking at those examples is three of the teams improved in no small part because of maturing young players.

How about the rest of the league, though? Were there any teams that played well down the stretch last year and finished out of the playoffs? How did they do this season?

Here are some answers. I looked at all teams’ records last year in the final 25 games, then compared it to this season (I left out such teams as San Antonio, Dallas, Miami, and Detroit because their performance is almost set in stone, and they may have been “coasting” into the playoffs).

What I found is that, in a nutshell, a team’s “Stretch Drive” (SD) performance had very little, if any, relevance to its performance during this season. For example, two teams with the better SD records (Houston and Golden St.) both finished out of the playoff picture, despite going a combined 39-11 in their final 25 games. Conversely, the Lakers and Milwaukee finished last season on a woeful 11-39 note, then rebounded to each make the playoffs.

Obviously, this scenario is fraught with complications. Injuries, trades, and other roster and coaching changes muddle the picture. Nonetheless, I think the implication that the Sonics’ stellar performance down the stretch indicates sunnier days ahead for Seattle is sorely misguided. IF Chris Wilcox is re-signed and matches his offensive performance, IF Ray Allen maintains his output despite advancing age, IF Bob Hill doesn’t begin to wear on the players, IF the Ridnour/Watson combination doesn’t become combustible because of the dangerous liquid known as playing time, and – most important – IF Swift/Petro continue to develop then YES, the Sonics can play well next year.

That’s a lot of ifs, though, and I would hazard a guess that with that in mind the Las Vegas oddsmakers won’t put the Sonic ’05-’06 win total too far north of 45 games. Neither would I.