Lake Show
This is the national media's week to bury the Lakers, and the Lakers have been all-too willing to help justify the talk. Standing at 10-15 before starting a tough four game road trip in Minnesota last night, the Lakers need to play something like .700 ball the rest of the way to get to 50 wins. So, this is when the Lakers turn it on, right? The Wolves hammered them. Game was never even close. The Lakers, minus Kobe and Shaq, have to be the least talented, least athletic team in the league. Only Devean George has any upside at all. And KobeShaq just doesn't look right at all. They have become passive, and so has the Zen Master, who is content to sit back and coolly diss Kobe (and subtly distance himself from Kobe) in the post-game interviews. Shaq doesn't even do post-game interviews these days.
So, are they done? Devoted BP reader Cliff P. was at the game last night, sitting high in the stands. But even from his lofty perch, he saw trouble in the purple uniforms. He saw a team that has no depth, that isn't playing together, that isn't listening to the coach, that isn't fighting. Hard to disagree with all of that right now, but let's all take a step back for a moment. The Lakers are less than five games out of the last spot in the West. Does anybody really think Portland or Minnesota or Phoenix or Utah is going to run away and hide? This is still KobeShaq, and still very much the same team they had last year. I'm not ready to bury them yet, but they need to get it together quick. At some point, wouldn't a championship team get pissed off? Yeah, but there's something deeper than the talent. Something isn't right in the lockerroom. I'll just submit these two quotes for your consideration, and let you read between the lines:
Kobe Bryant, when asked if the Wolves were playing tough D: "Not really. I can score any time."
Phil Jackson, on Kobe's game: "He didn't have that fire in the first half. He was better in the second half, but he energized us for a couple of minutes and got us in trouble the rest of the quarter."
Sounds like everybody's on the same page there, huh?
Of Course, Somebody Had To Beat Them...
And what of the Wolves? They are now 14-11, and only a half game out of third in the West. This, despite playing without an All-Star in W-Szcz (and I don't even count Brandon anymore...). The Wolves have been a struggle to watch so far this year, because nothing comes easy. But this makes two nice wins against the Lakers, and I don't care what anybody says, those are big wins. Ask Dallas. This team is slowly coming together, and overcoming obstacles while doing it. Which leads us to...
Early Season MVP Talk...
Yes, it's early, only about 30% of the way through. This is mostly a look at what has transpired thus far, but we'll do some projection for the full year, too. Let's list the serious candidates, and have a few words about their chances...
Paul Pierce-Boston is playing well; Pierce is an animal. There is not universal feeling in Boston that he walks on water; there are increasing rumblings that he is selfish. He also has another star on his team to share the load. Still, a strong candidate.
Jason Kidd-The Nets are not the dominant team they were last year, and Kidd's level of play has slipped a notch. Still the Nets are in a large market, and there will be some sentiment for Kidd because he didn't win last year. But if he couldn't win it last year in a breakout year for him and his team, how can he win it this year?
Allen Iverson-Philly has been up and down this year, and Iverson hasn't played particularly well. Iverson is a former MVP, but I think everything has to go right for him to win, including staying healthy, which is a challenge for him. I think if he's healthy, he should be a strong candidate in the end, but a lot has to go right for that to happen again. Plus, Iverson will shoot you out of a lot of games, too. He isn't all upside on the court.
Tracy McGrady-McGrady has been a statistical monster this year, but Orlando sits at just .500. McGrady is playing in a tough situation, with Grant Hill's inconsistent presence in the lineup. But does McGrady do enough to help his team win on both ends? In some ways, he compares with Garnett, in that so much depends on him. But he also has health issues. He'll be a strong candidate if he can play 70 games.
Steve Nash-Dallas' gaudy record and offensive tendencies will produce candidates; Nash is the engine that makes that team go. But is he an MVP? He should get votes, but he won't win, nor should he. The talent around him and playing style of Don Nelson allow him to flourish, which isn't to say he isn't a great player. It just means he won't win the award.
Dirk Nowitzki-See Nash, above. But Nowitzki's candidacy is weaker than Nash's. Dirk is strictly a player at one end of the court; even if he was on a team that did want to play D, he would be a liability.
Bobby Jackson-Jackson won't get any serious consideration, but he's a favorite of the Basketball Pipeline, and he has helped save Sactown's bacon while Bibby is out. I think it's absolutely open to question whether Bibby is any better than Jackson. What a great job Geoff Petrie has done putting that roster together. I don't think any other Kings merit serious consideration; they're just a very good team, and fun to watch. Damn them.
Tim Duncan-Duncan won last year, so I think that's going to be a strike against him. He's also significantly off last year's production, and his team is struggling to be dominant. He'll get a lot of consideration, as he should, but I don't think this is his year. Both his play and his team need to be better.
Steve Francis-The Basketball Pipeline loves Steve Franchise's game. But he's got a fair amount of help, and his team is a middle-of-the-pack group right now (though getting better). I don't think he'll get as much consideration as he should, but I'd take this guy on my team any day of the week. No matter how you slice it, he's not the MVP.
Gary Payton-As good as anybody, and so important to his team. He never gets enough support from the voters. He's not having a statistically dominant year, and his season doesn't stand out in the context of his career. He's not the MVP.
Elton Brand-Having a great year, especially on the offensive glass and blocking shots. He's sort of like a Ben Wallace that you actually need to guard, and that's a powerful combination. But he's playing for the Clips, which is strike one. He's not having a statistically better year than at least 10 other guys, strike two. And he's from Duke. Grab some bench, Elton. He should get votes, though.
Ben Wallace-Look, we know he's a monster on D and on the boards, and that's valuable. But his team is going four on five on offense because of his severe limitations. If I can't consider Dirk or McGrady because they disappear on the defensive end, I sure can't consider Big Ben if he disappears on the offensive end. Not when you've got some players who are every bit his equal on the boards and defensively who can also carry a team on the offensive end.
Kobe Bryant-He'll get votes, and rightfully so. But his team tanked when he had to carry them, and his team is tanking now that he doesn't have to carry them. The "bad teammate" whispers are getting louder and coming from more people who would have reason to know. Exactly what argument do you use to justify his candidacy? He's good...so is everybody else on this list.
Shaquille O'Neal-Shaq is sort of like the old days with Jordan, when you used to hear people say that no matter who won the MVP, Jordan was the MVP every year. At least, the old Shaq was that way. Are we now seeing Old Shaq? He's back, but he's not the same force he was before, at least not yet. Marc Jackson and Rasho Nesterovic were pushing him out of the lane last night. Huh? I think the biggest factor is that Shaq doesn't want or need to win MVP; he only wants the ring. I still say he's pacing himself for that challenge, and people who pace don't win the MVP. Plus, he's only going to play in 55 to 60 games this year. Just because your team tanks in your absence doesn't make you the MVP; Jordan would have been MVP in all of his retirement years. You have to actually be on the court, helping your team win games.
Kevin Garnett-I guess we all saw where this one was going, didn't we? Look, everybody knows I'm a homer for the Wolves and KG. But I DEFY you to put forth a better candidate at this point of the season. KG's numbers speak for themselves, so we don't even have to address that. KG is quite possibly the best and most versatile defender in the NBA, routinely asked to shut down the other team's best player, whether it's Pau Gasol or Tracy McGrady or Rasheed Wallace. KG doesn't get any nights off. And of course, he's carrying his team to a 14-11 record despite missing W-Szcz. That's not a world-beater record, but anybody who has seen this team play knows that without an MVP effort from KG, this is a lottery team with a decent number of balls in the hopper. I don't know any player who is carrying his team more, or in more ways. Doubters will surely cite KG's rumored lack of aggression and production when the game is on the line, but KG has improved considerably late in the game. He's 12th in the Nestle Crunch Time stat, previously discussed here, which breaks down overall production late in the game. It's not a perfect stat, but it shows he isn't just a shrinking violet when the clock runs down. KG is taking the big shots these days, and getting to the line, and guarding the other team's go-to guy in the clutch. Sounds like an MVP to me.
10:40:06 AM 
|
|
