Like a Camby in the wind

Fuck the NBA.

Seriously, fuck it. Fuck it hard. Right in the face.

The Denver Nuggets traded former DPOY Marcus Camby to the L.A. Clippers yesterday, for absolutely nothing. The Nuggets got no more than the right to swap second round picks with L.A. in 2010, a year in which the Clippers will have the lower pick anyway, meaning that Denver won't be exercising the option. That's it. That was their return. That was what they got.

That was what they got for Marcus, freaking, Camby.

I am really annoyed by this.

Marcus Camby is a former DPOY award winner. He may have another one left in him yet, too. Camby is a high calibre player - last year, he averaged 13.1 rebounds and 3.6 blocks a game. 3.6 rebounds per game is a lot of rebounds. And 3.6 is a hell of a lot of blocks. He can pass, and also shoot 20 footers, if you give him a week and 40 feet of elbow room.

Camby is a rare commodity in this league; he is a centre that isn't crap. He is at the peak of his career, and strangely also at his peak physical conditionm having set his new personal best for games played in a season, with a commendable 79 games last season. Without wanting to go overboard and do something silly, such as calling him a dynamic two way player, it's safe to say that Tampon is one of the best at his position, the position that is so hard to fill that General Managers will consistently try any old shit to try and strike gold. In a league where most executives would willingly sacrifice their closest family memebers to get an elite centre, the Clippers now have two. And they're not even overpaid.

They got one of them for freakin' nothing.

How does Marcus Camby fit alongside Wolfgang Kaman? I don't know, but it doesn't matter. He's going to better their team simply by not being Aaron Williams. The Clippers just bagged a huge infusion of quality to their team, and all they had to do was not overpay Luol Deng. If they can now trade for Vince Carter using little more than Cuttino Mobley and Tim Thomas to die, then suddenly they're dancing. A front seven of Carter, Camby, Kaman, Baron Davis, Al Thornton, Quinton Ross and Eric Gordon could break 50 wins, even without Elton Brand or a bench.

And yet, somehow, Denver couldn't even get a first round pick for him? Is that even possible? Is instant salary relief really THAT important? Why has this come up now? Why could they not use the Warriors' and Sixers' cap room, before they spent it, as leverage for a better deal? Not even Memphis's? They couldn't take back even a BIT of salary if it meant getting soem assets, like young players or draft picks? Not a bit? Really? You mean to tell me that a team heading in no particular direction and capped out like buggery can afford to give away its best players for absolutely no return whatsoever? How can any team out there justify spending $23 million on a fourth choice power forward while already nursing one of the league's highest payrolls, paying $60 unnecessary million to a guy who played 3 minutes the season before, as well as giving Chucky Atkins $13 million to do big fat Fanny Adams, can now somehow justify giving away its first round draft picks and frittering away quality players like confetti? This from a team that made the ultimate let's-give-this-shit-a-shot trade only 18 months ago?

Sod that.

Somewhere, somehow, someone is systematically wrong. Either Nuggets owner Stan Kroenke woke up with the arseache and ordered General Manager Mark Warkentein to do a dramatic about-face and cut payroll immediately at all costs, or Warkentein is a pillock. Or both.

Whichever it is, they have a problem. They're still cap strapped, they're still a lottery team, they still have no exciting internal future, they're still a badly assembled veteran team that isn't getting anywhere, and they're still being mismanaged. I'd feel bad for them, but they've annoyed me, so I owe them nothing.

The fans, however, have my sympathy. When teams make bad personal moves to save money, purely as collateral damage from their own previous stupid move, then the fans become the victims to the folly that is the NBA and its old boys network. Believe me, as a Bulls fan, I know that pain. I miss Tyson Chandler every day.

However, in a rare but special first here at eddiebasdenslegacy.com, I'm going to try and think positively. The sole solace for the Nuggets in this deal is the $10 million traded player exception that this deal created. Then again, it will probably go unused. However, if the Nuggets let Allen Iverson expire this summer, they will finally be out, barring widespread changes, from the tax territory in which they currently reside. If that happens, they will still have the TPE to use until July 15th, 2009. And at that point, they'll be able to add salary again. Whether they do this or not is another matter, but the ability to do so remains. And that's a small solace that Nuggets can take away and keep.

Who knows, they might even use it to bring Camby back.



By the way, while we're sort of on the subject of the Clippers and Elton Brand, let us tangent for a minute as you explain something to me. As I understand it, the time line of events in their negotiations go like this;

1 - Brand opts out.

2 - The Clippers and Brand verbally agree to a new deal rather quickly.

3 - The Warriors top this offer, just to see if they get lucky. The Sixers follow suit.

4 - Brand and his agent David Falk take news of this new offer to the Clippers, looking to use it as leverage with the Clippers to make them increase their offer slightly.

5 - The Clippers say no.


Now, why would the Clippers do this? By all accounts, they had a verbal agreement for a very reason 5 year, $65 million offer. Why would they be so inflexibile in renegotiating that slightly? $13 million is a good price for Elton Brand - if you're overpaying him at the end of the deal, you're underpaying him at the start, so it works out fine. Why wouldn't you add a few million if it kept him here? Why wouldn't you discuss a sixth year? Why would you extend qualifying offers to Marcus Williams and Nick Fazekas, keep the unguaranteed Josh Powell around unnecessarily, and even more unnecessarily sign first round draft pick Eric Gordon before compelting your cap space adventure, needlessly costing yourself almost $1.5 million in cap room, a figure which could add over $10 million to the value of a 5 year contract? A $10 million that would have meant the re-signing of your best player, and a hell of a good starting five to build upon?

The answer: I simply don't know. Maybe they didn't know the rules or something. Maybe they didn't know signing Gordon would cost them cap space. Maybe they think Fazekas actually matters in some why. I couldn't say. But I think the Clippers, in doing this, nearly managed to one-up The Juan Carlos Navarro Experience of this past season. And for that, I salute, pity, humilate and disown them. At least they got Camby as a backup plan.

I will never get over how such multi-million dollar business franchises can be mismanaged by the whims and misinformation of those in charge. All the damn time, too. Fucking dumbfounding.



(Readers note: Never listen to Elton John and blog. It leads to the creation of stupid post titles and slightly aggressive opening gambits.)

Hy-pathetical Situation

You're 49-32, fighting for the 8th seed in the playoffs. The team you're battling is 48-32. Even though you have the tiebreaker, you really need to win your last game to ensure the final spot. And it's not going to be easy. It's All Hands On Dick time, with the playoff intensity needing to be in full swing.

What's the first thing that you need?

A drink, obviously.

What a really stupid time for that. A really, really stupid time. There's never a good time, but this is a particularly stupid one.

If I was earning $13 million this year, I'd get some hired help on the driving. I really would. At the very least, you'd get one of your millions of hangers-on to help you out. That's what they're there for, isn't it? Make them earn their free tickets.

It really is amazingly stupid that DUI's (or DWI's, depending on what state you're in. So to speak.) continue to be so rife in the world of professional sports. And I have no idea why it continues. At least no one died, or crashed while watching porn. So that's something.



In other NBA news, I don't know why this is funny, but it is, and it needs posting, but doesn't merit its own post. So we'll make it an addendum to this one.



I don't do captions. Apply within.

Reason No. 451 Why The Bulls Suck This Year

They were supposed to lose this game.

But, clearly, they didn't. Not even close, in fact. Rather than lose, the Bulls instead nearly set a franchise record for most points in a regulation game.

Teriffic.

Yet, I can't be annoyed at this. It may not have been the optimum result in terms of the Bulls long term future (it pains me to admit that the one draft spot they could potentially gain from losing out is the most useful thing that could possibly come out of the Bulls disastrous season now), but it was great effing fun, if nothing else. It would have been even more fun had I actually watched the game. I'm sure of that.

More inspiring still was the complete randomness of it. The fact that the Bucks have been a special kind of shit on defense all year is a well documented truth. But the fact that the team with the worst FG% in the league - and by a reasonably comfortable margin - just shot 68% in a game, is friggin' staggering. Especially coming from a team with the cohesiveness of a early morning shit after a night on the Stella, like the Bulls currently have.

However, all the time the score was being run up, I couldn't help but think that it wasn't enough. 151 points is fan-freakin'-tastic, but it pales compared to the 168 points that Denver put up earlier this season. And this made me disappointed - since when was 151 points 'remarkable', but not league leading?

It's a damn good period of the NBA's history that we currently live in where things like this can happen.



Also, some individual performances need some praise and some scorn. The statline of Ramon Sessions no doubt jumps at you. His 24 assists is not quite an NBA rookie record, for the record is 25, jointly held by Nate McMillan and some guy called Ernie DiGregorio. But it's definitely the rookie record of recent times, surpassing Jamaal Tinsley's rookie effort of 23 in a game, back in the days when he used to pass first. (Note: I am going off of memory here, and didn't look to check if any rookie had topped that mark since.) So this effort pushes Tinsley further out of sight and out of mind, which can only be a good thing.

Unfortunately, to look at Sessions's effort, properly, you need some context. The first 20+ point and 20+ assist game in Bucks history was undermined somewhat by Chris Duhon's statline of 15 assists with 0 turnovers, along with scoring 22 points on 9 shots. All of this took place in 14 less mintes than what Sessions played. Had he played the same amount of minutes as Sessions (44), he almost certainly would have had better overall numbers than Sessions did.

And this is a bad thing, because this is Chris Duhon we're talking about. Chris Duhon, in his penultimate game as a Chicago Bull, no less. Duhon's tenure with the Bulls has always been highlighted by the occasional staggeringly brilliant performance, be it his triple double versus Charlotte, his eight made three pointers versus Atlanta, or his 38 point game versus the Warriors this season. Every four months or so, he turns in a performance so dominating that you can't help but wonder what it is that makes him so shit for the other 80 games of the season. And tonight, he has done this again. But this is no excuse for Sessions to let him put up numbers of such magnitude - it is, after all, Chris Duhon. At some point, you have to make him look like the shitty point guard that he is.

Also, who would have thought that one of the most high scoring games of the past decade could have possibly involved Michael Ruffin logging significant minutes? (I had an interesting follow-up point to this, but Muffin ruined it by scoring the final basket of the game, to finish with a mesmeric 2 points. Bastard. By the way, for those who still haven't got the memo, Michael Ruffin is the worst offensive player of all time. His profile proves this.)

For points per shot fans such as myself, this game was a stunner. For Bulls fans such as myself, this game was polarising. For Bucks fans, this game was more of the same - you know what you're getting by now, and you don't like it, but at least Sessions gives you false hope. (I'd trade him by the next deadline if I were you. Sell high. See also: Tinsley, Jamaal.) And for Chris Duhon fans, you get one final chance to see your hero in action for the team that will probably constitute 80% of his entire NBA career.

So, something for everybody there.

And speaking of deliberate losing.....

......there's just so so much wrong with this that I can barely even begin.



48 minutes for Chris Quinn? Ricky Davis as the best player? 25.6% shooting? 10 free throws? Mark Blount rebounding line Mark Blount? 12 assists to 13 turnovers? Needless question marks?

Bollocks to it all. That's awful. Deliberately awful, and thus not amusingly awful. Bad times.

Still, it's not the worst lineup of all time. That honour goes to the 1999/00 Chicago Bulls, who offered up this joy of joys.

Chicago vs New Jersey, 04/21/1999


And closely following is this inspiring effort from the 2002/03 Denver Nuggets.

Denver vs Dallas, 01/06/2003



Spot the common variable.

Dreaming about Mark Madsen

Do you ever stop and think about that time that Mark Madsen shot seven three pointers in an overtime game, when Minnesota and Memphis had the most blatant tank-off that history has ever seen? No, nor did I. That is, not until this morning, when I woke up thinking about it.

(For those unaware of what the hell I'm talking about, here's a box score.)

It's not an entirely normal thing to wake up thinking about, even for the most hardcore Madsen fans amongst us. (For we are all Mark Madsen fans. Obviously.) But some part of this must have ruffled my feathers, stoned my crows and enraged my loins, because this was all that i could think about for about 3 minutes after waking up.

It is now a permanent blot on the NBA landscape. The situation Minnesotas found themselves in - not good enough to make the playoffs, not bad enough to suck mightily without trying to - left them deliberately trying to lose games. It needn't have done, but General Manager extraordinaire Kevin McHale had already pissed away Minnesota's first rounder that season, as it was owed to the L.A. Clippers along with Sam Cassell in exchange for the mesmeric insignificance of Lionel Chalmers, along with Marko Jaric and his bevvy of minge. The pick, however, had top ten protection, and so in order to be able to keep it, Minnesota had to lose with a bit more regularly and finesse than they were doing up until that point.

They did this with aplomb, telling Kevin Garnett to stop playing (or so we thought), playing their better players for merely token minutes, and letting their worse players do whatever the hell they want, in what then-head coach Dwane Casey called "letting them have some fun" (read: "playing really badly so that we lose".)

The fact that they met an equally tanking Memphis team, who were tanking for a different reason, was an unfortunate coincidence. Memphis had comfortably made the playoffs, but was trying to lose for a different reason - they were residing in the fifth spot, with the Clippers in sixth. Whoever finished 5th would face the 60-22 Dallas Mavericks in the first round of the playoffs, without homecourt advantage, but whoever finished 6th would face Denver with homecourt advantage. After *accidentally* losing four of their last five games, the Clippers secured the worst (and, thus, the best) seed, in spite of Memphis's valiant efforts on the final day.

(The Clippers then beat Denver comfortably. The Grizzlies were swept by Dallas even more comfortably. Memphis were right not to want it.)

The whole exchange highlighted two key flaws in the NBA's system - the new playoff system and the protection of draft picks. The playoff system has been somewhat resolved, as the possibility of a team finishing lower down the seedings than a team with an inferior record has been decreased with the new decision to grant division winners no less than a top four seed, as opposed to a guaranteed top three seed. But the other situation remains intact, with lottery teams able to lose at will to either retain traded picks, or better their lottery chances. And it remains a travesty based around a communist idea of parity.

(The draft lottery isn't a million miles away from what Stalin was trying to do. Remember that.)



At this point, this post would benefit greatly from a well thought out and heavily critiqued suggestion for a better way of going about these things, so that such a deplorable situation won't ever happen again. (The concept of teams deliberately trying to lose is still prevalent - Miami, for example, has told Dwyane Wade to stop playing, and Memphis recently gifted away Pau Gasol just to take them out of purgatory.) However, as mentioned at the top, this post had a mere three minutes of thought, and so I haven't got one.

Any scenario in which teams are deliberately losing, though, is a gaping flaw in the otherwise well-constructed NBA machine. Therefore, it gives me something to bitch about. And so, I did. Quietly. To myself. For about three minutes.



Coincidentally (and it really was), a report came out on this very day (note: this note was not published on the day that it was written, which was the 18th) on the subject of Minnesota's recent tanking.

Responding to claims that his team tanked it down the stretch in recent years to improve draft position, Timberwolves owner Glen Taylor fired a barb at Kevin Garnett on Tuesday, as reported by Yahoo.com.

Taylor pointed out that Garnett, who was traded to the Celtics this offseason, took himself out of the lineup late last season and missed the last five games with a sore right quadriceps.

“It was more like, I’d say, K.G. tanked it,” Taylor told the Pioneer Press. “I think the other guys still wanted to play, but (the loss of Garnett) sure changed the team and didn’t make us as (good).”

While the quote may have been taken out of context, or Taylor had not necessarily said what he meant, it does sure as shit look like he is trying to pass the blame onto this entire situation onto Garnett's shoulders. This hardly seems entirely fair, given the Madsen situation that inspired this post. But it DID lead to me googling Glen Taylor's name, and thus seeing for the first time a picture of his grin.


I thought I should share that with you.

Playoff eligiblity

A lot of people (four) have either e-mailed me about this or asked me about it on t'internet in recent days, about when players have to sign with a new team by in order to be eligible for the playoffs. Apparently there's some confusion on the issue, particularly surrounding the March the 1st date.

So let's clarify.

There is NO SIGN-BY DATE for playoff eligiblity. You can sign whenever you want - even on the last of the regular season if you like - and still be eligible for the playoff roster.

The only stipulation is that you CAN'T have been on another team's roster - or on waivers from another team - on March the 1st. This makes the March 1st date a waive-by date, not a sign-by date. And that's why players frequently get waived in the run-up to it, (such as Maggy Magloire, Brent Barry and Flip Murray have so far) and then sign with a new team after it, and still appear in the playoffs.


An example of this is Anthony "The Dazzler" Carter last season with the Denver Nuggets. He and Von Wafer both signed with Denver just before the end of the last regular season, because the Nuggets needed some insurance guards for the playoff push and didn't want to sign them earlier because they were so deep into luxury tax territory. Vaekeaton didn't then play in a playoff game for them, but Carter did, and so my case is proveth thus. The Dallas Mavericks and Kevin Willis did the same thing.

So there we go. Fun stuff.

30 teams in 36 or so days: Denver

Players acquired via free agency or trade:

Chucky Atkins (3 years, $9.72 million)
Steven Hunter (acquired from Philadelphia)
Bobby Jones (acquired from Philadelphia)



Players acquired via draft:

None



Players retained:

Anthony Carter (waived, then re-signed, saving about $800,000)
Eduardo Najera (opted in)



Players departed:

Reggie Evans (traded to Philadelphia)
Steve Blake (signed with Portland)
DerMarr Johnson (signed in Italy)
Jamal Samspon (signed with Dallas)



Bobbins:

When you spend $162 million on only three players in one offseason, you're generally making a commitment to those as core players. Denver did this last offseason with Nene, Carmelo Anthony and Reggie Evans, investing in two power forwards despite also having the massive contract of Kenyon Martin firmly entrenched at the position, as well as Joe Smith and Eduardo Najera on hand to stand around looking sheepish.

When you then trade your only significant expiring contract and both first rounders this season (and Andre Miller) for soon-to-be-fading star Allen Iverson, you're making a subsequent commitment to for it all with what you have. You're foregoing the few assets you have, placing yourself deep into luxury tax territory to try and put your team over the top.

It's noble. And they could not realistically turn down the Iverson deal because of the small price tag. But, in the short term at least, it hasn't really worked.

Denver hasn't had their shooting guard position solved for a number of years. The days of the Kiki Vanderweghe era saw such greats as Predrag Savovic and Vincent Yarborough blemish the position, and while Vanderwghe did pursue a number of options to fill the position (ranging from Manu Ginobili to Clyde Drexler, of all people), the best he could manage was a brief flirtation with Voshon Lenard. New GM Mark Warkentein picked up The Prodigy Formerly Known As J.R. Smith from Chicago as a potential solution to the problem, but all that brought Denver was a tidal wave of emotions: from amusing highs (career high 37 points vs Chicago) to humiliating lows (being benched for stupidity during the playoffs, being called out by his coach, killing his friend in a car accident). And the two headed monster of Yakhouba Diawara and Von Wafer isn't getting it done.

You would think that trading for Allen Iverson, one of the finest scoring guards of all time and still at the peak at his game, woud solve the problem. Yet Denver is currently experiencing what Philadelphia had to figure out for all those years: it's all right having Allen Iverson, but who do you put alongside him?

Iverson and Steve Blake made for an effective offensive pairing for their brief time together last season, with Blake's pass-first nature complimenting the pass-last style of Iverson, and with Blake's jumpshot making a brief return after a half season away. But defensively, the duo combined to give Marcus Camby his inaugral Defensive Player Of The Year award, unable to keep anybody in front of them and without the height to in any way trouble shooters.

So what did the Nuggets do to rectify this?

They lost Blake to Portland, and replaced him with the aptly named 5'11 Chucky Atkins, a man with Iverson-like delusions but with Chucky Atkins-like ability.

Brilliant. There's the needed compliment right there.

In their only other offseason move of note, Denver made another trade with Philadelphia (note to all GM's out there - they're onto something here. It's good to trade with Billy King), swapping 85th string power forward Evans (by the way, why DID they pay their fourth stringer that much? Did we ever get an answer on that?) for Steven Hunter and Bobby Jones. Jones, should he make the roster, adds abslutely nothing of value, but does have an unguaranteed contract, which could turn out to be a nice saving for a team mired deep into luxury tax territory. And Hunter, if nothing else, is a man capable of playing the center position, even if he does play it very badly while rebounding without due care and attention. More importantly, they save on a year of salary, even if that saving is three years down the road. Every little helps, and all that.



Next season:

It would be nice if I was able to open this stanza with a comment along the lines of "A lot depends on whether star Kenyon Martin can bounce back from injury and finally fully realise his potential". But I can't. Because it's not happening. Not only is Kenyon Martin not a star, but he's also not getting back to where he was - microfracture surgery in each knee can do that to a man. A player who relied almost exclusively on explosiveness isn't much good when you take that explosiveness away. If Martin can return as a rebounding role player, he can help the team. But if he doesn't, he's just dead weight. Very expensive dead weight, at that.

Still, only 4 years and $60 million to go.

Being without Martin didn't hinder the Nuggets on-court progress, though, as Nene had something of a breakout season last year. Given a 6 year, $60 million contract despite only having played three whole minutes the previous season - bad business that they've gotten away with so far - Nene performed well, putting up 12 points and 7 rebounds in only 26 minutes a game, while providing good interior post defense. The pairing of he and DPOY winner Camby went some ways to counteracting the Nuggets pourous perimeter defense, while also making for a decent offensive pairing.

If nothing else, the Nuggets can boast a starting lineup of Camby/Nene/Anthony/Iverson/whoever, one of the league's most talented lineups out there. Who the "whoever" is going to be, though, remains a concern. If it's Atkins, they have problems - the man is a bench scorer, pure and simple. If it's J.R. Smith, they have problems - the man is an idiot, pure and simple. If it's Yakhouba Diawara, they have problems - the man is not very good, pure and simple. And if it's someone else, I'll be amazed.

More important than who the fifth starter is, though, is the age old question of whether Iverson and Anthony can co-exist (and by "age old", I mean "9 month old"). This question was never definitely answered last year, and it's the key to Denver's entire future.

If they can co-exist effectively, and if the team stays reasonably healthy (they'll never be truly healthy. I mean, they have Iverson, Camby and Martin, for God's sake) they could drag a Denver team into a position to surprise a few people, winning homecourt advantage and maybe making some inroads in the playoffs.

But if they don't bring the best out of each other, and if the Nuggets have their usual woe with injuries or worse, then this Nuggets franchise is again looking at a low playoff seed and a first round exit. And at that point, they're possibly a season away from losing Iverson and starting again.

With a youth movement currently consisting of J.R. Smith and Linas Kleiza, they could do with avoiding that kind of mediocrity.

(Well, and Carmelo. He's useful, I guess.)