Cut and Run

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/7026680/welcome-amnesty-20-nba


Bill Simmons and Jonathan Abrams over at Grantland discussed the best possible use of an expected "Allan Houston" amnesty provision in the next CBA. This time, not only would teams gain relief from the luxury tax but the salary cap itself, in exchange for buying out the contract.


This is how they sliced up the Raptors' impending decision:

TORONTO RAPTORS

Abrams: Linas Kleiza. It would be tempting for the Raptors to use the clause on Jose Calderon, whose contract guarantees him $20.3 million over the next two years. Kleiza's contract (signed last summer) is equally awful and pays him $13.8 million through 2013-14.

Simmons: Disagree. I'd rather chop Calderon's $20.3 million. I'm pretty sure paying eight figures a year for a backup point guard isn't getting you anywhere with a harder cap. Although really, they should see if they can use the clause on Bryan Colangelo — that's the worst single Raptors contract, right?

First, as the BitterRaptorFan, I appreciate Simmons' longstanding recognition of the scourge that is Bryan Colangelo. I really, truly, genuinely think it's important that the most influential sports writer today reminds the world that us Raptor fans are chained in a dungeon of awfulness and it's BC who's wearing the leather mask. 

But, after that I must take a stand against the long-held but futilely incorrect notion that Jose Calederon (and his contract) are impeding the Raptors towards long-term success. While Jose is not in the tier-one, elite level of a Chris Paul, Steve Nash, Rajon Rondo, Derron Williams, Russell Westbrook, Jason Kidd or Derrick Rose,  he's been in the second tier consistently, and the Raptors' best or second-best player since the dawn of the Bosh age. While casual observers knock his defence (it can't be denied that he's basically a pylon with cool sideburns on D) let's not forget that no point guard has played more than a few minutes of defence-a-game since Chauncey Billups in the '04 Finals.

I don't think I have to make the offensive case except to say Calderon is Tony Parker with a few less layups, a few more 3s and assists, and to my knowledge, Jose's never slept with Brent Barry's wife.

The $20 million owed to Calderon over the next two years is fair. No better point guards for less money are showing up in the next two years (sorry Jerryd Bayless but you know you're Juan Dixon 2.0, right?) and there's so many other more pressing issues for the Raptors (shooting guard, small forward, centre) that it only makes sense to cut Calderon if you're the kind of basketball mind that believes only one player should shoot in the fourth quarter.

Look, the real leech on the Raptors' payroll is, obviously, Andrea Bargnani. No Mago is due $41.5 million over the next four years, over which he may solidify himself as the most detrimental player to ever play in the NBA. That said... Sigh... *Deep breath*... It is still impossible to determine whether there is trade value for him. We know that Jose Caleron is almost worth Tyson Chandler. But I've still never seen a reasonable offer for Bargnani that lets me know whether the other 29 teams are in on the joke or not.

Kleiza, on the other hand, is just dead weight. The Raptors bid against themselves to sign him and wouldn't have been able to trade him the day after. He's unplayable and everyone knows it. I bet if he was given the amnesty out, he'd be back in Europe within a week.

So, the answer to the Raptors' amnesty issue is really, how stupid do we think the rest of the NBA is? 

Cut Kleiza and express courier Bargnani to Cleveland, I say. LOCKOUT!

That New Pitcher Smell

Our fearless co-editor here at FBC, zgall1, assured me that Jonah Lehrer's backhand to sabermetrics on Grantland this week was not bad sports writing, per se. He was merely misguided, as if the errors in his ways were pointed out to him, Lehrer would nod along knowingly. zgall1 is rarely wrong and this time is no exception.


So, I'm wont to understand what bothered me so much about Lehrer's tug job to the "Moneyball was stupid" crowd and I've come up with this: Jonah Lehrer should know better! He writes for Wired and Scientific American Mind for chrissakes. His anti-skepticism skepticism carries a weight, because of his well-regarded reasonableness. When he tells us professional sports is somehow maturing away from quantifying its results and actions, we're supposed to listen.


Out of respect (and because Fangraphs has already taken him to task) I'm not going to go through it line-by-line but here's a few things you'll need to remember if you're going to attempt to build your sports teams solely around who's a good bro, dude.


Lehrer begins with an elaborate metaphor comparing car-buying satisfaction with, I suppose, team or player performance. The crux being that the quantifiable and most marketed aspects of auto engineering--horsepower and fuel economy--don't have much of a correlation with the owner's overall satisfaction. Therefore, whatever it is that makes up a successful team/player may not be contained in a package of statistics that are calculating an ever-increasing amount of data about what goes on during a baseball game.


But the analogy is figurative because the components do not match: a car buyer's satisfaction is inherently subjective, based on a feeling toward the experience of the car. Sports have an objective goal: to accumulate wins. This isn't to say that someday car manufacturers won't discover how to quantify ride quality, stability, dashboard layouts, and comfort to build a predictive model of owner satisfaction. But the fact that manufacturers don't, on outset, market these aspects of driving do not show that the objective goals of GM and of GMs are the same.


Okay, I lied. I'm going to have to pull a few pieces out:


Like a confused car shopper, [teams] are seeking out the safety of math, trying to make extremely complicated personnel decisions by fixating on statistics. Instead of accepting the inherent mystery of athletic talent — or at least taking those intangibles into account — they are pretending that the numbers explain everything. And so we end up with teams that are like the worst kind of car. They look good on paper — so much horsepower! — but they fail to satisfy.


Lehrer denies the antecedent here, claiming teams narrowly rely on stats, ignore the "inherent mystery of athletic talent" and then, ultimately, fail. All teams do this? What? How can anyone wrap their head around this? Unfortunately, Lehrer fails to offer even one example. Something like "The Red Sox signed high career OBP guys who lacked heart and hustle and bottomed out for years" would certainly not prove his point but might at least sandpaper up the straws being grasped at. He does give one positive example of Aaron Rowland and how his numbers were ignored at the Giant's peril. Right. I don't understand, Jonah.


But sabermetrics comes with an important drawback. Because it translates sports into a list of statistics, the tool can also lead coaches and executives to neglect those variables that can't be quantified. They become so obsessed with the power of base runs that they undervalue the importance of not being an asshole, or having playoff experience, or listening to the coach. Such variables are the sporting equivalent of a nice dashboard. They can't be quantified, but they still count.


I... I don't know what to say. This is the classic anti-stats argument and it always crumbles so quickly with almost no prodding. What are the non-asshole, coach-listening, playoff vets (presumably who don't get on base)  supposed to do or be? Is the argument that every team needs to employ a nice guy to motivate the rest of the players to play better? I think that's bacon-fried hogwash but, hey, at least it's an argument. A nice dashboard counts in one's feeling about one's own car so maybe a nice teammate counts in one's feeling about one's favourite team? I'm trying, Jonah, I really am.

Lehrer then turns to J.J. Barea and the Dallas Mavericks, trying to tell us that, despite being a piss poor performer for the regular season and most of the playoffs (a shooter who can't make a shot) his few successful layups in the Finals constitute credit for their NBA Championship. It's the Robert Horry argument and, frankly, it sucks:  "Because it doesn't matter what the numbers say. Barea won games." Advanced stat guys, especially the ones looking at efficiency differentials look to Tyson Chandler, Jason Kidd and Shawn Marion as the keys to the Mavs success (and Dirk Nowitzki but that's news to no one). 


Coaches and fans use the numbers as an excuse to ignore everything else, which is why our obsession with sabermetrics can lead to such shortsighted personnel decisions. After all, there is no way to quantify the fierce attitude of a team that feels slighted, or the way even the best players can be undone by the burden of expectations, or how Kendrick Perkins meant more to the Celtics than his rebounding stats might suggest. But Nenad Krstic looks so good on paper!


But none of this happens, really, because of advanced stats. You know this, Jonah. Most professional coaches are about six blocks behind the curve on this stuff, most fans deride it as witchcraft. I don't know a lot about ferocity and burdens, but if those feelings make Joe Mauer slap a few dingers, guess what -- they'll get counted! Kendrick Perkins was an average centre who was replaced by a couple of terrible ones. And no one, no one, NO ONE has ever accused Nenad Krstic of looking good anywhere.


Lehrer finishes matter-of-factly:


These [ferocity, burdens, other feelings as needed] are the qualities that often determine wins and losses, and yet they can't be found on the back of a trading card or translated into a short list of clever equations. This is the paradox of sports statistics: What the math ends up teaching us that is that sports are not a math problem.


That's not a paradox -- it's just a guess.

A quick defence of BC

Nothing about that title seems in place. But here goes:

I like the pick.

And here goes the disclaimer:

I don't know shit about this large, young man. Or any other draftee. He could be Nikoloz Vokshul while Kemba Walker becomes Magic Paul. But I'm also pretty sure Bryan Colangelo nor 25 other general managers have much more of an idea than I do. (Teams I sort of trust: OKC, Houston, San Antonio, Portland and Denver. You're my boy, Masai!)

There's an old adage about drafting the best player available (and not for immediate team need). And that old adage is fine and even dandy if it keeps you from passing on LeBron James. But in a draft like this (and frankly more drafts than not) the talent evaluation is suspect at best and a crack-house grilled cheese sandwich at worst (you know, unreliable) so fuck you and your old adages.

Does that mean you leave a good player on the board because you're coveting a back-up centre? No, sirs and madams and kitty-cats, it does not. The indemnity that Rob Babcock violated with the Araujo pick in '04 was that if he really wanted to stroke Hoffa's gel-cemented hair, why not trade down 20 spots, get another pick and owe the Brazilian Blurp less money? That and he bombed the pick, obviously.

Also, Bryan Colangelo's biggest sin wasn't drafting Andrea Bargnani, it was extending that dick-hole (it's so hard thinking up insults for Il Magoat that aren't abjectly racist)

So, here's the thing.

If I put on my "gimme gimme gimme a point guard" hat and start lusting over Kemba Walker or Brandon Knight (who college stat guys rate as a so-so player) I'm hoping the Raps dump Calderon without mercifully taking on any more salary; I'm hoping for 2,600 more minutes of Andrea Bargnani, a 15-67 record, some more ping pong balls and a shined up shotgun waiting for me to snap.

But, if I decide to select Foreign Centre #5 (as I'll never even attempt to learn his name) and stash him in Europe, I'm getting player development on someone else's dime, I'm getting $3 million in cap room I can add to the "please sell us Andre Iguodala or other players of proven quality" fund, I replace our 7 foot nothings with funny names with a 7 foot nothing with an even funnier name, and best of all, I add one more stick-figure leg to the game of hangman I'm playing with Andrea Bargnani. Raps' record is still 18-64 but the shotgun gets left in the attic next to my Troll doll collection.

And what does this peace of mind cost me? $3 million (not even half of Barbosa's salary. Hot damn) and a whiff on some of these point guards, of whom no one I trust is convinced will be better NBA players than Ramon Sessions (who's very available and had a better year with a better contract than, say, Jarrett Jack).

Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe people who know, know that Brandon Knight is an Adonis of basketball purity. Maybe FC#5 is a poor man's tall, Lithuanian, poor man. I don't fucking know. But in the absence of information and reason and time and space, I say bravo Bryan Colangelo. To all the porous ass-gapes who deride the Raptors for taking a European because we've had bad luck in the past with other Europeans, you need to have your racist ass washed out with anti-racist soap. You really want to swear off an entire continent of players? That's like saying "I'll never date a blond girl again, those chicks are crazy."

I hate you, Bryan Colangelo. I hate you so much. Don't make me regret this.

Toeing Doug's mail bag

You remember how this works. Cribbing from DJF, I take a peek at Doug's mail bag, scan for the 20% or so questions that relate to the NBA, and offer our own answers. I also avoid reading Smithereen's responses as my doctor is imploring me to keep my blood pressure down.

Q: Hey Doug  BRF. Thanks for the work all year.




Look forward to your take on what should be an interesting off season ahead.


Two comments (with hopes you share your thoughts)


Interesting what Bosh said in his post game interview - about how he should have seen the ball more - been more of an option - because he was feeling good and shooting a good average. Didn't he give that up when he left Toronto? Didn't he know what he was getting into? I wonder if he misses "being the man?"


What do you think?




I would think it is quite obvious that Dwane Casey is the next coach: He is defensive minded, tough on his players, and was able to hide the seven-foot jump shooter in the defense (just what the Raps need, isn't it?) Would you go so far as to think that Casey is the candidate to get if they want to keep Bargnani?


Ren R, Swastika


First off, thanks for the question, Adolf. I understand you're originally from Assrape, Ontario so please get in touch and let me know how you're enjoying your new town.

Chris Bosh most assuredly touched the ball less this year. His decreased production was proportional to taking less shots than he did in Toronto. And his passing has dropped off a cliff, handcuffing one of his best skills -- an indication of either a touch deficit or a quicker trigger. That said, his playoffs mirrored his season with the Heat pretty well in terms of FGA/36, Usage%, Assist%, etc.

If the question is should Bosh touch the ball more in comparison to Eddie House and Juwan Howard, the answer is resoundingly "mmm hmm." But in relation to LeBron and Wade? "Nuh uhh."

About Dwayne Casey (who's been announced at this time as the next Raptors coach) I remember reports out of Minnesota calling him unprepared, unable to control players and employer of bizarre substitution patterns. Let's hope everyone in Minnesota is perma-drunk. Heil, Ren.



Q: Hi Doug BRF A little while back when it appeared that Enes Kanter had turned down a session with the HOTHC, you had suggested that "maybe a promise was made". I'm assuming you meant that a team above the Raptors might have promised to draft him. Having said that, are there any rules that teams must follow with draft eligible players? Can they promise to draft someone, or even if drafted to pay a certain bonus structure to the salary etc before they actually draft them? Thanks as always for your insight.


Sohail G, Collingwood


My understanding is yes to promises, though I don't think a team would admit it and I don't know what would stand up to any verbal contract law. But no, they would not be able to negotiate. This answer was boring. Diarrhea!!!



Q: Hi Doug BRF  Since the Finals ended, many people have said or written that experience counts in the NBA. That "you have to lose before you can win it all". Nowitzki had to "learn" how to win and that maybe LeBron still has to learn that trait or skill-set (not sure what to call it).

My question: without being able to look back on a player's career, can we predict, or have a hunch, as to whether a player will "learn" or "get it" in order to win in the future? That is, are there present traits that may increase future chances of "learning how to win"?



Thanks,


Diego S, Toronto



No, Diego, we can't because that's backwards rationalizing, results-oriented bull crappy. Five years ago, a team with Dirk Nowitzki and Jason Terry lost a finals series to a team with Dwyane Wade and Udonis Haslem. This year, the reverse happened. No mythical maturity journeys were involved in the outcome of a best-of-seven.

Generally, I'd want my players to train, practice, sleep, not contract diseases, and lay off the pipe. But if Chris Anderssen can be effective using the same brain that thought it a good idea to get tattooed up to his cheekbones and snort so much powder he had to buy a lift ticket, then maybe nothing really matters. (any way the wind blooooowwwwsss)

I was so tempted to read Doug's response here. I bet it's a 31 on the folksiness scale (17-34 with 26 being somewhere in the middle).


Q: Hi Doug BRF, I read an article by Eddie Johnson which said that LeBron is more like Magic Johnson rather then Michael Jordan. Explaining that he much prefers assisting than scoring and they Miami need players who will lessen the scoring load on LeBron. I felt inclined to agree. What are your thoughts on this?


Chaz E, London



From a physical point of view,  LeBron sizes up closer to Magic than Mike (but James still has 40 pounds on either of them). But I don't think this is what the reference implies. In the hallowed pantheon of basketball giants, Jordan is generally considered the best while Magic is referred to as #2 of all time (with apologies to Kareem and Primoz "The Gangster" Brevec). The implication being, if you emulate Magic Johnson, you can only ever be as good as Magic Johsnon, therefore you like Silver Medals therefore you're a soft baby loser.

Let's look closer at the numbers. If being like Mike involves taking making field goals instead of passing, then let's note MJ per/36 (starter's minutes) FG made: 10.7 career. LeBron: 8.9. That pansy Magic? 6.7. So there you go. I guess. You win the "LeBron couldn't carry Mike's testicles" alpha dog pissing contest, if you're into that sort of thing. The comparison is obviously a dig. People with gonad brains comprehend emulation to equal dominance. So if Kobe flails shots and grimaces like Jordan flailed shots and grimaced, then Kobe must be as good as Jordan.

That was a long, drawn out way to say "passing's for pussies."


Q: Hey  Doug BRF, Admittedly I only watched the finals on and off (a lot of off actually) but what did you make of Spoelstra's use of Joel Anthony in the finals? His minutes were down, and he rarely saw the court in the 4th quarter, even though the Heat seemed to have a lot of defensive lapses late in each game (game 2 for example). And Joel only played about 11 minutes in game 6. Sure, he doesn't score, but he's not there to score. There's supposed to be 3 other guys doing that. They needed stops late in games, and they didn't get them. Any thoughts?

Love the blog.

Cheers,

Duke L, Toronto

Thanks for the love, Duke L. I hope the "L" stands for "Love." Duke Love loves. 

I sincerely hope Joel Anthony plays for Team Canada and recruits his teammate, the 46 year old Jamaaaaaaal Magloire plus Tristan Thompson, Cory Joseph, Samuel Dalembert, Matt Bonner and Steve Nash. I could take or leave Andy Rautins. 

But he's a extremely limited player who lacks offensive skills so glaringly, the Mavs wouldn't even put a defender on him. He fouls too much and never seems to be in good positions to get defensive rebounds. But he's a terrific shot blocker and athletic enough to crash the offensive boards and I guess that's why he still has an NBA job. What was the question, Duke of Love? Oh, game six. Yeah, it looked like Spoelstra was trying desperation line-ups trying to stave off defeat hence the Eddie House presence. The other three centres seemed to have fossilized by the end which was good news for Joel fans but the return of Haslem meant the Heat could play two skill players in the (small) front court. I'd do the same thing, wouldn't you?

There's another question about a Hofstra point guard who I've never heard about. I'd be my third testicle neither has Doug.

This was fun and only took me three days to write.

Finally, a Unified Theory of Basketball

The NBA season, you might have heard, is over. Congratulations to the 2011-2012 Dallas Mavericks who have, by all accounts, proven that the only way to win an NBA Championship is to be the 2011-2012 Dallas Mavericks. 29 other teams, you are now on notice: conform now or remain ringless, hatless and balless, says Marc Berman of the venerable (and by 'venerable' I mean exactly the opposite) New York Post.

Mavericks show Knicks should change 3-star plan


It does not look like the way to go for the Knicks, who boast two stars in Carmelo Anthony and Amar'e Stoudemire and have contemplated adding a third, with the rest of their 2012 cap space, in Chris Paul. But at what expense?


At what expense should the .500 Knicks pursue the best point guard in the NBA? How about all of them. All the gold doubloons in Tartuga. Trade both Amar'e and Carmelo for him. Throw in the Empire State Building. I'm confused. Why wouldn't the Knicks do this? Because the Miami Heat did not win an NBA Championship this year? Unconfuse me, Marc.


America's Team -- the 2010-11 champion Dallas Mavericks -- proved during the riveting Finals that a deep, full-bodied team with lots of varied parts can overwhelm a club made of three players -- no matter how good.

America, eh? I suppose in a world where LeBron James is evil and Dirk has a goofy grin, we must hand over the mantle to the red, white and Cuban, but Marky Marc, let's be honest: the Mavs didn't *prove* anything. They were the better team in this series, no diggity. Does that proves that the make-up of this Mavs team is inextricably most superior to all others? Of course not, that would be dumb and stupid. Let's agree that the Heat had the best two players in that series (they didn't play the best in that series but are the superior players this year) and Mavs have the third, Dirk. The Mavs also employ the fourth, fifth and sixth (some order of Kidd, Chandler and Marion) and we'll slot Bosh as the seventh. After that we have some decent players on both sides (Miller, Haslem on the Heat) and if you like chucking, Terry and Barea for the Mavs.

Yet, one of these teams is some three starred Justice League and the other is "full-bodied" like a Belgian ale? What is it about a series between the two best teams (and I'm being generous with respect to sample sizes in the playoffs) that causes poop-for-brains to believe that two different essences of basketballdom are on trial for the prize of world domination of hearts and minds? And are serious people making serious basketball decisions on such nonsense? Is it a Cold War mentality? Am I getting too analogical one sentence after using the phrase 'poop-for-brains?' I digress.

The LeBron James-Dwyane Wade-Chris Bosh experiment failed not only because "King" James choked, but also because the Heat had no supporting cast to perform the Heimlich. Whether Miami president Pat Riley can add solid complements without cap space is questionable.


Oh... I see what you did there, Marc. You put "King" in "quotations" to call into "question" the "virility" of that "nickname," you "sly" "devil."

You're right, though. Heat? Big failure. They failed their way to 58 wins. They flopped and choked past American full bodies like the Celtics and the Bulls. Those losers!

Haven't we already determined that, in the playoffs, teams shorten their benches and the top players play almost complete games. Isn't that how we were explaining the Heat's relatively easy path through the first three rounds? I can't keep up. And let's remember the Heat were missing Haslem and Miller most of the season (and decided that Mike Bibby was suddenly going to become... not Mike Bibby). The Mavs did it (Nowitski +5 MPG in the playoffs, Chandler +5, etc.)

And to this cap room nincompoop, I plead ignorance. Why is the Miami Heat's cap space situation a story? The Miami Heat are in a great cap situation, whatever the next CBA brings. Let's remember they were a cap team this year and spent just as much as the Toronto Raptors on salaries. The Mavs, goliaths that they are, had a $20 million higher payroll. Going forward, the Heat have two of the four best players in basketball signed for max deals (which is a steal) Mike Miller and Haslem for reasonable mid-level contracts and yeah, they overpaid for Chris Bosh, but whatevsies, you know? No they will not have cap room any time soon and neither will the Mavs, Lakers, Bulls, Griz, Blazers, Magic, even the Celtics have to divest of the "Big 3" in a couple years to even get a whiff of cap space. This is argument that the Heat are all tied up is exactly true except for the fact that it's exactly false.  The Heat will have about as much access to the free agent market as most contending teams. They can offer starting centre and point guard jobs. I am begging Samuel Dalembert to sign with the Raptors and not the Heat. I think my begs will fall on deaf ears.

None of the Big Three will be traded this summer, but if the star trio does not win the 2012 championship, the concept may be scrapped.

I agree. Sell the franchise. Bring in a starting five of all midgets. Or are we calling them "little people" now? I'm pretty sure "smurfs" is too offensive. 

Late Sunday night, Riley's wife, Christine, approached a James confidant and whispered: "You learn more from losing than winning."

What a bizarre and creepy non sequitur. What else is Christine Riley whispering to confidants? #cougar

Knicks outgoing president Donnie Walsh has given strong recent hints adding Paul may not be in the plan, especially with the new labor agreement shrinking their 2012 cap space. Better to spend the cap room on three solid contributors.

"You really need all the pieces or roles filled to win a championship," Walsh told The Post yesterday. "Miami gave it a great run, though, with what they had."

In his conference call 10 days ago announcing his impending resignation, Walsh was prescient about the series while giving strong indications the Knicks need role players -- not Paul.

Donnie Walsh knows that Chris Paul is three solid contributors. But he's also saying this on a phone call to announce his quitting so, grain of salt, I suppose. 

"We have the stars. They will do what they do. And we're lucky to have them," Walsh added. "But you need more than that. So that's the job. And that's how I've felt about this since the day we did the [Anthony] trade."

This is only significant in that Donnie Walsh is clearly admitting he did not want to trade for Carmelo Anthony.

Miami's entire cap space went to the Big Three -- nothing left for established role guys. They had no point guard or center and a terrible bench. It was damning that starting point guard Mike Bibby received a DNP in desperation Game 6 on Sunday. Of the nine players who played in Game 6, three went scoreless -- starting center Joel Anthony, Mike Miller and Juwan Howard. Ex-Knicks castoff Eddie House played 21 minutes, taking big shots in the fourth quarter.

Right. We get it. The 8-15th player on the Heat were a big bag of suck balls. I could point out other teams with suck ball benches that cost a lot more money but I'll let you close your eyes and imagine I'm doing so instead.

Yes, Dirk Nowitzki played better than any of Miami's Big Three, but the Mavs came at the Heat in waves. Sixth Man Jason Terry and guard J.J. Barea lit them up. Jason Kidd was poised and clutch. Center Tyson Chandler seemed to keep alive every ball in the fourth quarter.

We've hit the clutchiness argument which means it's time to end this. Congratulations once again to the Dallas Mavericks, America and God's team.

The only constants are death, taxes, Doug Smith & Bryan Colangelo

Ohhh, it was all the coach's fault. Yup. Mmm hmm.

Dip-sticking back into Doug's mailbag

That title didn't make any sense. I'm sorry.

We got a couple positive comments on the whole thieving Doug's mail questions and answering them thing. Thanks for that. Thanks to DrunkJaysFan for the style that we're cramping. Thanks to God.

So here's the deal. I copied questions DS's last mailbag post without reading Doug's responses, and will provide real, non-nincompoop answers. But I'm filtering basketball questions only, so I'll be skipping the ones where loyal fans ask Doug about his bowel movements. Cool?

Q: Hi Doug. I am going to try to have two questions answered for the price of one.

First: if I am correct, you seem to imply that it is not clear whether the Raps should keep Reggie given that they already have a glut of bigs. But when I see his performances since he has returned and consider how well the Raps were playing before he got hurt, I don't really see why they should even think twice before offering him a contract. After all, he's become one of the top rebounders in the league (at least if stats are to be believed) and he brings the defensive presence the Raps miss so badly. What's your take on this?

Second: I really think that basketball is a beautiful sport to watch (movements, creativity, etc.). What's your take on that? What do you think makes basketball so special? What would be your top 5 of the sports you find "aesthetically pleasing" to watch?

Ooops, there are more than 2 questions in my message, sorry about that.

Keep up the good work.

Regards

Matthieu B, Bern, Switzerland

On this issue, Matthieu, we're both neutral. (Get it? Switzerland? Neutral?) But seriously, folks.

I'm of two minds on the Reggie issue. On the one hand, re-signing Reggie projects to be an expensive proposition. I doubt he'll take a pay-cut from his mid-level area deal and his Rodman-like performance when healthy this year should be enough to keep demand high. He's also 30 and due to regress. But the biggest issue holding me back from fully endorsing four more years of Reggie is that the power forward spot is the one position on this team that doesn't worry me. Some combination of Ed Davis and Amir Johnson will be occupying that floor space for years to come, and though he might be let go in the off-season, Joey Dorsey has shown the ability to rebound and defend in limited minutes. In short, there's a glut. Ideally, the money that could be spent on Reggie should be allocated to positions where the Raptors can replace worse players with better ones. A barrel scraping team should be shoring up on cap space and selling it for players with value, cross fingers on the draft or just plain go at it cheaply for a while.

That said... I think I re-sign him. I'll enumerate why.

1. The Raps need the most immediate help at the 2, 3 and 5. They are in blind love with DeMar and Andrea and therefore don't understand that they need help at the 2 and 5. That leaves the 3. Maybe King Colangelo (and at this point I just assume he sticks around forever and ever) targets Kirilenko or Matt Barnes. But probably not. So the smart money is on this team not knowing what to do with smart money.
2. PF glut aside, since no savior centre is on the horizon, the Raps will still need a four-man big rotation and I'll just have to hope that Bargnani somehow gets buried under a pile of pasta.(Seriously, can we find a dump truck, fill it with pasta and drop the payload on him? This isn't racist, by the way -- the dude does pasta commercials.) I think beggars can't be choosers in these troubled times and if all our good players play the same position, so be it. I believe Reggie's trade value in two years is higher than Linas Kleiza's right now. 
3. I honestly, with my whole heart believe Bryan Colangelo understands basketball talent about as well as dogs understand calculus. I think that the resources he saves by letting go of Reggie Evans most likely go to pay an awful player. I'd love for the Raptors to focus on selling Barbosa or Kleiza for a can of magic beans but I don't see it happening... so go with the rebounder you know.
4. Holy shit, this was long.
5. "(at least if stats are to be believe)" I see what you're doing there Mattheiu (which I assume rhymes with a sneeze) you're trying to make me angry. It won't work.

Oh, and blah, blah, basketball is a beautiful, graceful game. It's Swan Lake in Nikes.

Q: Hey Doug. I was at the Friday night game at the O2 and was quite pleasantly surprised with the atmosphere. For me, I was quite anxious to see how James Johnson fitted into the Raptors... earlier, you had mentioned that JJ would grab a rebound and push the ball up the court as a point forward and that this was a luxury that the Raptors have never had. However, in watching JJ during the match, he did this a few times and each time he was way out of control, often leaving his feet on passes or holding the ball too long on the wing. So is this point forward thing something Jay wants or is this JJ trying to impress quickly on a new team?

And after a few games, what do you think of JJ overall and his future with the team?

Felix T, Loughbrough, UK

Thanks, Felix from most Britishy-sounding village ever. And kudos to you for attending the game. You'll be able to tell your grandkids about the historic Nets vs. Raptors Battle of Brittain 2011. Good show.

What do I think about James Johnson? With an obvious sample-size caveat, I'm pretty okay with his play. Defends and rebounds decently and is an above-average shot blocker. Needs to shoot better (or, barring that, shoot less). I don't see appreciable differences between Julian Wright and him but I assume only one of them will be returning to back up Kleiza (a part of my soul dies every time I write his name). I wouldn't mind if  both stuck around but I think it will depend on what happens in the draft.

Q: Derrick Rose's SAT Scores Wipe Out Memphis' Record 38-Win Season. He cheated on his SAT by letting somebody sit to take the exam for him.

Under the NBA one year eligibility rule, he is ineligible to play in the NBA. All the Chicago Bulls win must be invalidated also to be fare with the other NBA teams. A rule is a rule, and there must be no exception just because you are Derrick Rose.

Angel B, Mississauga

It seems like a lot of strippers write into this mailbag, but anyways, thanks for your question, Angel. I love your work out by the airport. I should peek at Doug's response to gauge whether this is a joke or not. Let's assume it is. So I don't feel even worse for a stripper.

There's another question about whether a player has to finish his year on college so I guess some clarification is required: AIN'T NO ONE NEED TO GO TO NO COLLEGE. Thanks.

Q: Doug: Is Doug short for Douglas?

Justin S, Sudbury

And there we have it. The grandest question of them all.

Q: Doug, with the minor struggles of the Heat, there has been a lot of talk about having players that complement each other on a team. Even with the solid play of James Johnson, it appears that the biggest need on the Raptors is Small Forward. Can you describe the type of 3 that would fit this team moving forward and complement the pieces that are already here? There are some 3s with very different styles in the draft but we all know you don't touch the draft in early March. However, it would be interesting to hear what you think this team presently lacks from the Small Forward position.

Evan G, Thornhill

Gee, Evan. Players complement each other by playing better. Sorry, that was snide for no reason at all. I love Thornhill. First, what the Raptors "need" in a small forward is for another team to take Kleiza off their hands, or barring that, a giant cannon so he can be launched into the atmosphere. After that? Above average shooting and rebounding. I've always liked Josh Childress. or LeBron.

[I'm skipping a juicy question about "clutchness." I hope Doug has recognized that David Eckstein is the clutchiest player in any and all leagues including the NBA.]

Q: Hey Doug, how bout them Raptors?

Considering this seems to be the most cohesive group of heroes in years, who is least likely to be back and why?

In Sonny's case, does being bosom buddies with DD give him a demonstrable edge to keep the seemingly melancholy (of late) Compton kid happy in Canada?

Does Reggie's toughness & effort get him a new deal, or do they look at Chandler or another free-agent with more size to go with the three fours they have?

Is Jose back as the leader at PG, is Bayless still seen with upside, or do they look at a draft pick or veteran to replace either?

What's the hunger level for a three with Klieza out and no proven player or prospect at the position?

Wright, Alibi, Ajinca, Dorsey, any love in the organization for these guys?

In short, is this a drastically different team next year, or are the kids alright?

James K, Toronto

Do you write promos for Sportsnet Connected, James? Okay, I'll give it a go. This time I'll employ the ancient art of bullet points:

• I'm assuming none of the free agents will be back and will be replaced by other inconsequential players. I'd like to see Reggie and Joey Dorsey return. I wouldn't mind Julian Wright on the bench for the minimum. I don't give a shit about Sonny Weems, or any of the 7 foot nothings. Of the players under contract, I'd love to see Barbosa, Kleiza, Bargnani and DeRozan traded. The only one of those guys who would potentially be moved is Barbosa but I'd fear it would be for an even worse player with an even worse contract.
• Nobody cares who DeMar DeRozan's friends are and if they do, they shouldn't be allowed to run a basketball team.
• See first question on Reggie. Wilson Chandler is restricted and I want no part in him.
• Jose Calderon should not be moved. I'm not saying there isn't value deals to be made for him, but I am saying is that the Raptors are incapable of finding one. I'm torn about Bayless. When he arrived, I wasn't convinced he was an NBA player. Now, I'll consider that he has potential but ideally as a third, not second point guard. But, considering how Jarrett Jack fell off a cliff this year, I'm not unhappy with the PG situation. 
• The "hunger level" for a 3 with Kleiza in is at orange. Or mango. Maybe Grant Hill would like finish his career in Toronto? Maybe?
• As for Alibi and Ajinca, I accept that most every team needs a 7 foot nothing on the end of the bench because talented centres are just in too short a supply. So one of them can return. At random, I'll pick Ajinca because it's slightly more fun to say. I wouldn't mind Wright returning and I definitely want Dorsey's shoulders. I mean... nothing.
• This team is not drastically different next year because it owns too little of perceived value. Unless they dangle Bargnani. Please, lordy, let them dangle Bargnani.

[Okay, even I'm getting bored and I'm a gigantic basketball nerd (my nerdom is gigantic, I'm rather unassuming]

There's a question about Danilo Gallinari. I don't hate him. Gets to the line at a very good rate, rebounds well. Better than Kleiza. 

In summary, I hate Kleiza. Also Bargnani. But I love me some mailbag.

I'm an F-minue-minus?

I'm a Bill Simmons fan. I've read both his books (even lugging the 700 page Book of Basketball around Central America in a backpack) I've read the columns for five or six years and I catch the podcast when I can. I really like his stuff. But (surprised there's a 'but?') the guy is completely and irrationally hostile to basketball statistics. And Carmelo Anthony has become the de rigeur "pure scorerererer" poster boy for why nerds live in their parent's basement. So for the next few hundred words, Bill, we're not friends.

PEOPLE WHO DON'T REALIZE THAT CARMELO IS A LEGITIMATE SUPERSTAR: F-minus-minus

One of the strangest subplots this week: Everyone rushing to pick Carmelo's game apart, especially people who rely on advanced metrics and ended up getting caught up in small-picture stuff. Carmelo has one elite skill (he rebounds extremely well for a small forward) and one transcendent skill (he's as good as anyone in the league at scoring and/or getting to the line, especially in crunch time). You can absolutely, positively, unquestionably win a championship if Carmelo Anthony is your creator at the end of a basketball game. The Knicks didn't have anyone like that. Few teams do.




I guess, it's true. Anthony is a decent rebounder. Slightly better than Wilson Chandler  but not as good as, say, Matt Barnes. I'd be better convinced if he grabbed a few more offensive boards, but I will give it up. Good rebounder. We're agreeing. This is good. I'm a fan, remember?




But he's a transcendent scorer? We're really still talking "scorer?" It's 2011. The dude takes 20 shots a game, makes 45% of them. Taking 20 shots is a transcendent skill? Enough of this shit. He's a good player, above average. But transcendent scorer? LeBron James is a transcendent scorer. Dwight Howard is a transcendent scorer (he just does it from within 3 feet), Anthony's just okie dokie.




And please give me a motherfuckin' break on this crunch time thing. We've all seen the stat by now that says Carmelo is the numero uno "crunch time" shooter, he shoots 2% better than the #2 guy, Chris Paul. At 47%, he shoots closer to a respectable rate trailing by two or less with 24 seconds left in the game. And what's the sample size on this study? 21 shots on 44 attempts. So, we're talking 2 games worth of shots for Carmelo and three misses away from his average clip. Did Bill miss the point of that article? I'll summarize thusly: run your normal offence in crunch time, if you play the triangle -- run it. The bullshit about crunch time is based on some (wait, I already used "bullshit") cowcrap that the one-on-three isolation plays Kobe adores are stupid, stupid strategy. Carmelo Anthony's transcendent skill is being King of the Stupids? What else, Bill?


Now throw this in: He's only 26.

True. We're probably in the midst of his peak. I would venture to guess he will not decline in the next three years he's extended. We agree again! Score! We can be friends again soon!


Now throw this in: Ten guys started the 2011 All-Star Game. In a 30-team league, the Knicks suddenly have two of them.


Billllllll!!!! I mean, Billlllllll!!!!!! Bill, the fans voted Amar'e and Carmelo into that game. You want to give me an F-minus-minus because I may take issue in the integrity of fan voting for the All Star game? Yao fucking Ming.



Now throw this in: The other players know. They know who's good. They know who's worth a damn. They know who they'd go to war with. So you can't discount (A) how well Carmelo played on the 2008 Olympic team; (B) how much the other guys respected him; and (C) how the key guys on that team were Kobe, LeBron, Wade and Carmelo. It can't be forgotten. It just can't. Neither can the fact that he nearly carried a limited Nuggets team to the Finals two years ago.




There's so much flowery yet vague praise here I need to sit down for a minute... But I think we can thank the Billups for Iverson trade for the strength of that team. Anthony, whether you look at important stats or go-to-war stats like PPG, had an off-year in 08-09. Blarg?


Now throw this in: If there was ever a player who could be ignited by a great basketball city and a consistently fantastic crowd, it's Carmelo Anthony. He's been stuck in a relatively icy cruise control for two solid years, playing in a city he didn't totally love, being professional about it, trying hard every game ... and yet, there was something detached about him. No longer. I hate how he weaseled his way to the Knicks and pissed on Denver fans, but that's over. Let's look at this thing objectively: He's going to kill it with the Knicks. I'd bet anything. 



To anyone who honestly and sincerely thinks players play better because the crowd in New York will, in some measurable way, enjoy basketball more than Denver fans, I have a fantastic investment opportunity you don't want to miss.


They haven't had someone like this since Bernard King, which is funny because I always thought Melo was Bernard 2.0. Playing in New York isn't for everyone, but in this case, it will be the best thing that ever happened to Carmelo Anthony.


Bernard King? Please make an Alex English, Bob McAdoo or Iverson comparison to complete the universe.



I keep hearing that you can't win a title with Melo and Amare. Agreed. But you can win the title with Carmelo, Amare and Chris Paul (or Dwight Howard, or Deron Williams).


This argument reminds me of watching breakfast cereal commercials as a kid. You know, the "Cap'n Crunch is part of complete breakfast!" ones where they show the cereal box next to a piece of toast, a grapefruit, and a glass of orange juice? Carmelo, you are Cap'n Crunch!


In the short term, you can make some noise, rock the building and make Knicks fans forget about the 10 excruciating years they just endured. And you can scare the living hell out of the fans from the other Eastern contenders. Believe me, as a Celtics fan, I want no part of the Knicks this spring for one reason: You never want to play a playoff series in which the other team has the best guy. There's a decent chance Carmelo could just go off 1984 Bernard-style in Round 1 or Round 2. I'm crapping my pants just thinking about it. Over everything else, THAT is why they had to make this trade. A week ago, the Knicks were a .500 team. Now, they matter. And if you're throwing stats at me, I'll counter with this one: 15 for 15. Thank you and please drive through.


They're still a .500 team. Maybe .520? Again, thanks in large part to your friend Chauncey. Bill, you know stat-hate leads to wrinkles AND unintentional comedy.  I'm worried about your skin and your catchphrases. I'm a fan!!!!!!!!!!

Stealing blog gimmicks, the epitome of class

So this blog is on hiatus -- that's what my last post said, right? Right. But I've been reading a lot (A LOT) of drunkjaysfans recently as the prospect of the impending baseball season is the only light at the end of the proverbial tunnel of ice, sleet and Raptor embarrassment. Stoeten does this great thing where he answers Richard Griffin's mailbag questions, answers unseen.

And since this blog has a monthly readership of -3 people (okay, maybe a few spam bots looking for email addresses to peddle misspelled erectile dysfunction pills) and there's nothing on TV but Justin Bieber tributes, I'm diving into the Doug Smith mailbag. If this doesn't work out, I promise to send you a pithy Valentine as compensation.

Q: Hi Doug. I hope you don't mind a non-Raptors question about a certain star coach in the news: Jerry Sloan.



Most of the talk surrounding him is that he's lost the confidence and ears of his players, but it seems obvious to me that he's quitting now, so that he'll have a better chance to win by replacing Phil Jackson when he retires.
So with all your insight on the league, I ask you: Is this truly Jerry Sloan's swan song, or is he just setting himself up for the best chance at a championship?


Thanks a-plenty

Charlie D, Montreal

I'm not sure why Charlie D (love your strip club, by the way) thinks DS has any insight here. Maybe Jerry Sloan was tired of babysitting petulant millionaires who'd never been coached until they landed on the Jazz, maybe he wanted more time to bird watch. Insofar as coaches can be "good" I think Sloan passed the test. His teams consistently won, despite the fact that they play in Utah and many of their fans wear magic underwear.


The flex offense encourages inside play, passing and a lack of stupid shit that leads to turnovers. The Jazz would have probably been awesome this season if it weren't for the fact that Deron Williams is the only NBA-calibre guard on that team.  Sorry, what was the question? Is Jerry Sloan going to stalk the Lakers job? Let's say no, okay Charlie?  Now pump some Def Lepperd, I have a pocket full of loonies I can't wait to deposit in Josiee's g-string.








[Skipping trivia questions. Have Smitty's readers yet to discover Google?]

Q: Hey Doug! Read the blog every day and always enjoy when you let us know of different anniversaries of the day. I was just wondering though, when is the Raptor Blog's Birthday? More importantly, is it what you thought it would be when you first envisioned it?

We appreciate all the hard work Doug!

Steve T, Ajax

Glad to see Super Son finally got one of his questions in the mailbag. Why the pseudonym, "Steve" from "Ajax? If this blog were to have a birthday, I nominate Remembrance Day (Veteran's Day in the US) because if you read it for too long, you may consider enlisting for combat. 

 Oh wait, I'm supposed to cross out Doug's name and pretend these questions were addressed to me. Fuck. I knew I'd mess this up.

No, "Steve," when daddy started writing this pile of goat shit, I never believed the Toronto Star and you, dear readers, would ever let him carry on this long. For shame.

[Some long-winded soliloquy disguised as a question that I couldn't bear to read to the end. Shit, the next one's even long-windier. I can't skip two in a row. Goddamn]

Q: Hey Doug. I posted this in the comments this week and you didn't have time to answer then so I thought I'd try again here, as this is likely a better place to ask this kind of question. And since they will have just left town, it rates as somewhat timely:

Brandon Roy is poised to return to action for Portland, and the fact the Trail Blazers have posted a winning record in his absence, prompted me to look up their current active roster to see if it was readily apparent why their record is significantly better than the Raptors. They have experienced a similar injury profile this season (worse over the last couple of years) to the heart of what was supposed to be a promising young team. When I look at the Blazers rotation made up of LaMarcus Aldridge, Wes Matthews, Nic Batum, Joel Przybilla, Andre Miller, Rudy Fernandez and Patrick Mills it really makes me wonder how they've managed. I think if you concede that LaMarcus Aldridge is better than Bargnani (which is debatable, but for the sake of this comparison I'm willing to do) I'm still hard-pressed to see that rotation as appreciably better than the Raps.

So first, between the Blazer group or the Raptors current 8 man rotation which do you think is better?

And second, to what would you attribute the relative success of these Trail Blazers, given their injury woes and having to play in the Western Conference.


Richard E, Toronto 

Is Richard in Toronto on E? I know I'm not supposed to peek at Doug's answers but I did so fuck you. Doug chalks the Blazers success up to experience followed by big-gameness followed by coaching. Good show, old boy!

Here's the deal, Dick E: LaMarcus Aldridge is the Blazers third-best centre this season (and fourth-best if you take a longer view). Andre Miller has never, ever, ever had an unproductive season, Nicholas Batum is better than any swing the Raptors have employed since the first season of Anthony Parker and they have MOTHERFUCKING MARCUS CAMBY!!! (tm)

Hey, Rich. If you're going to make a snide, "Andrea Bargnani is better than..." quip and the end of said quip isn't "Earl Barron" you should probably shut your MDMA-popping, phallicly-named mouth.

[More trivia. I am not joking]

Q: Hi Doug, this isn't a Raptors question but a Kevin Garnett question. I just read he cursed out Spike Lee at a Knicks game. He allegedly made comments about Charlie V being a cancer patient early in the year and a couple of weeks ago he punched a guy in the groin during a game.

Is there any kind of cumulative action discipline in the NBA for this type of behaviour

It seems like no one wants to say anything bad or do anything about KG.

Jeff F, Toronto


Yup. Garnett's totally a douche.


[You won't believe this but more trivia]






Q: Hey Doug. Karl Malone was on NBATV discussing Coach Sloan's abrupt departure, when he mentioned that he wants to carry on Jerry Sloan's coaching legacy. Chauncey Billups has also expressed interest in a front office job with the Nuggets. What level star do you have to be before you can just start asking management for those coveted jobs. Do you think it affects coaches and scouts and GM's who put in years before they reach any position of real importance?


Tilak J, Buffalo


The real question is do you feel comfortable putting your favourite team's precious cap space in the hands of Chauncey Billups as he does battle with top NBA agents? I thought the whole point of NBA TV was to give these guys "jobs" and keep them out of important, possibly team-killing positions.




Q: I have followed the team for many years but the expectations have hit an all time low. Since this season seems to have gone South what would be the best way to go in the draft? Assuming no work stoppage/top 4 pick, trade down and go for volume or keep the top pick and hope for a difference maker? I know you think it's way to early but it's been that type of year.


John P, Vernon Hills




Vernon Hills sounds mostly made up, John P. Did your town once have an outstanding season and sign an ass-gapingly disgusting contract? Doug has a history of excellent draft insight so I feel almost bad I'm not reading his answer to this one. Okay, we're assuming a decently high draft pick? And, I suppose, assuming King Colangelo is still pillaging and plundering this team?


Obvious disclaimer is I follow very little college basketball and know shit-all about any of the prospects this year. So I'm speaking only from an understanding of the history of shoot-from-the-hip drafting and assurances this year's crop is going to be poor due to the lockout.


Here's what Bry Bry wants to do. Draft a European. He'll be a jump-shooting, 6'10 four, despite the fact that the only position with depth on the Raptors is PF. This draftee's career will mimic Yi Jianlian's, yet BC will sign him to a max extension and the Raps will not win a playoff game until 2023. DraftExpress is indicating a Swiss-born, currently ineligible Kentucky player, Enes Kanter, may fit the description.


Here's what the Raptors should do:


Option 1) Clear, no-brainer pick at our draft position who actually projects to be an NBA player, not some chuckster who happened to get to the Sweet Sixteen. If the player plays anything but PF, keep him.


2) Trade down. Learn how to draft for value and draft the next Landry Fields... Okay, when you've stopped laughing at the prospect of BC learning, we can continue. We have immediate needs at the two, three and five. Offer Andrea Bargnani to anyone for anything. I'd trade him for a sesame seed bagel. Even a poppyseed bagel.


3) Package that sexy, high draft pick for some players, even if it's to sweeten a deal to send DeRozan, Kleiza, Barbosa or Bargnani out. Hey Andre Iguodala, I'd bet you'd love Tim Hortons!


Three strategies. No chance of any of them being employed.


[Well, fuck the heck. There's, like, 16 more bullshit trivia questions and I have to go to sleep. This was a bad idea. Valentines are in the mail.]

On hiatus

I know the vitriolic, snarky sports journalism criticism-osphere has been mourning the vacuum left by the lack of FDS posts in the last, say, year.

The truth is we just kind of got busy and tired. Busy with lives, tired of mocking the good mock against our friend Douglas and his ilk.

So, this is so long for for now... Until the next time Stephen A. Smith makes us want to jam a fork in our eye socket.

I'm on Twitter at www.twitter.com/BitterRaptorFan