 |
| |
|
 |
 |
|||||||||||
|
Wash out Wizards simply don't have the talent to be a playoff teamPosted: Friday April 04, 2003 12:31 PMUpdated: Friday April 04, 2003 5:15 PM
Click here to send a question to Jack McCallum's Mailbag. Jack, who do you think will take that last playoff spot in the East? I feel the Bucks could give the Pistons a competitive first-round matchup, but I think Washington would lose in four straight. What do you think?
Steve, if you can read my mind, why ask? I think exactly as you do. Milwaukee will get the eighth slot and (probably) play the Pistons tough. I was in D.C. on Wednesday and watched the Wizards battle the Kings. Washington played hard, almost making up a 22-point deficit but couldn't get over the top. The Wizards are not good enough. They don't belong in the playoffs. The impossibly hard-luck way they got beat in Atlanta on Thursday was enough to tell you: These guys aren't meant to make it. Jack, based on playoff seeding and the teams they'd have to go through, would you say it would be a shock if the Lakers made it to the Finals? Even for Kobe and Shaq, the road is just too tough, no?
A shock, Paul? You'd call it a shock? That would definitely not be my word. There is only one team that, in my opinion, is clearly better than the Lakers. That is Sacramento. I could see the L.A. beating San Antonio and I could see them beating Dallas, which they did on Thursday night. Again. I'm not saying the Lakers will, just that they could. After the matchups are set, I'll give my (probably ill-fated) predictions. Regarding your Sterling Awards, Elgin Baylor was one of my favorite players. I have never known or understood why he has worked with the Clippers for so many years and not gotten a job with another NBA team. Do you know why he continues to stay with the Clippers?
I don't have any particular insight into Elgin's thinking, Keith. (And he was one of my favorite players, too.) Every time I've been around the Clippers he always seems -- what's the word? -- hopeful. He never appears down and gloomy. My best guess is that he's loyal to the organization and likes living in L.A., where there are only two GM jobs -- one of which isn't an option for him. I really enjoyed your Sterling Awards. I agree with most of your comments and recipients. However, I think you should have pointed out that although the Clippers are a horrible team, and have been for years, Donald Sterling is still making a lot of bank -- upwards of $40 million last year, if I'm not mistaken. This makes it quite obvious that Sterling doesn't care a lick about the fans, but is still an excellent businessman. Isn't the NBA just a business when it comes down to it?
That point about Sterling, Ben, has been made so often that it's self-evident. You're right. Over the years, television contracts and shared revenue have generated profits for owners who haven't deserved them. And when it comes down to it, all sports is a business. League commissioners, though, are reluctant -- and, to a certain extent, legally restricted -- from making rules that tie profits to performance. They still believe that the men and women who risk their fortunes (and there are owners who lose money) deserve the benefit of the doubt. Do you think Ben Wallace should win the MVP? He may not score many points, but he is a good shooter, the best defensive player in the NBA and has been the No. 1 reason the Pistons returned to the top spot in the East.
Josh, the tone of your letter suggests you're not going to like this answer, but: No, I don't think Wallace deserves the MVP. Earlier this season Sports Illustrated did a story suggesting Wallace could be the MVP (I didn't write it) and the idea is worth exploring in an academic sense. That said, I won't have him in my top five, as terrific a defensive player as he is. I know the award is not Most Versatile Player, but in my thinking an MVP has to have a scoring dimension. Wallace is already penciled in, though, as my Defensive Player of the Year. Watching the Mavs-Wolves game last Sunday, I began pondering the similarities between Dirk Nowitzki and Larry Bird: the ability to float along the 3-point arc, ready for the ball at all times, the quick release when the ball arrives, and the incredible ability (for a big man) to put the ball on the floor and drive to the rim. Except for his defense, I think Dirk has a good shot at being a very special player. How do you rate Nowitzki as compared to Larry Legend?
First of all, Damian, Larry was not known as a great defensive player, at least not man-on-man. As you might expect, Bird's forte was sneaking away from his guy and playing the passing lanes because of his incredible anticipation and hoop intelligence. I think this: Dirk can become an even better shooter than Bird. Dirk can become better in transition. Dirk will be able to go to the hoop just as effectively. Dirk will be able to rebound just as well, especially given the fact that he's probably three inches taller than Bird. I don't think Nowitzki is Bird's equal in any of those categories yet (except transition) but he could eventually get there. However, Bird was a much better passer and remember this: Bird's greatness -- and almost any of the immortals' greatness -- is based largely on what they did in the postseason. Did they take their games to a higher level under pressure, as Bird did? Did they lead their teams to championships? That will be the test for Dirk. I'm not questioning the Rockets coaching staff, but wouldn't it pay some dividends to teach Yao Ming the right way to roll off a pick-and-roll? I keep seeing him set a big screen, then get lost in oblivion with his back to the ball. Also, what kind of system should the Rockets install to ensure that Yao will get the ball more often? Any 7-foot-5 player that can make a step-back fake, step under, off-glass shot against Shaq deserves the rock 75 percent of the time. Houston should trade Steve Francis back to the Grizzlies, along with a box of tissues to wipe his crybaby tears!
Uh, oh, it turns out Justin hasn't forgotten that Stevie once dissed the good folks of Canada, right? But I do think the "system" that would get the ball to Yao more would consist of replacing either Francis or Cuttino Mobley. Trust me: The R's ain't about to unload Stevie. Cuttino, however, could go. Also, keep this in mind, Justin: How many centers work that pick-and-roll or pick-and-pop successfully? It isn't easy. Over the years have you seen, say, Dikembe Mutombo run it effectively? The Nets center is one of the smartest guys in the league, but he can't do it. For that matter, do you see Shaq running a high pick-and-roll? It's about footwork, it's about making the shot, it's about committing your big man to coming out from under the basket. Having said that, I think Yao will be one of those big centers who learns how to do it. But it's going to take time. It seems to me that the Nets' slide has coincided with Jason Kidd's comments about being a free agent after the season. Is this just a coincidence? Are the Nets doomed if J.K. leaves? What do you think the chances are of the Nets luring Gary Payton from the Bucks? I think the Nets don't skip a beat if they can land the Glove. New Jersey has such an upside, I can't imagine at least a few players wouldn't be drawn to a situation like theirs.
I'll tell you Anneliese, I haven't heard the Nets described as being a positive situation in a while. But I'm a Jersey guy by birth and I think it is a good situation. New Jersey has a young nucleus with Kenyon Martin and Richard Jefferson and, if I'm reading him correctly, I think Kidd realizes that, too. I think he'll stay, and not just because of basketball. He and his wife enjoy being close to New York and the opportunities that provides. Will the Nets franchise be set back several years if he leaves? Absolutely. Is it possible that Vlade Divac will retire after this season? His contract is up and he is 34 years old. If he did hang it up, would the Kings be better off with Keon Clark (if they can keep him, and it appears they will) or Scot Pollard starting at center? Pollard is a more traditional center, but Clark seems to be the more talented player. Or would they be wise to take the money they would save to the free-agent market?
Sean, you have a team that's won 54 games (through Thursday) and you're already remaking them? The one thing about Vlade is that, unlike a lot of players, he will adjust to a lesser role. To an extent, he already has and during the playoffs you're going to see a lot of the Pollard-Clark combination. I'm almost sure Vlade will not retire, but instead will play at least one or two more seasons in his elder statesman role ... and be quite effective in it. If there were an award for "Most Improved Player" from the first half of the season to the second, would you give that honor to Eddy Curry? Is he finally on track?
Adam, you're in Hungary and you've followed the Bulls closely enough to suggest this? I'm going to be frank with you: I don't know the answer to your question. But readers of the 'bag can send me "Most Improved Player" suggestions and I'll think about it. Off the top of my head, though, I might go with Chauncey Billups of Detroit or Allan Houston of New York. Sports Illustrated senior writer Jack McCallum covers the NBA for the magazine and is a regular contributor to SI.com. Click here to send a question to his Mailbag.
|
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||||
