Four teams to watch in 2015-2016 season

1. Los Angeles Lakers

The 2015-2016 Lakers won’t win the NBA championship.  They probably won’t even make the playoffs. So why should we watch them?

The answer is simple… Kobe Bryant.

This season could be the last time we get to see one of the greatest players of all time on an NBA court.  He is also one of the last links that we have to the great era of the 1990s. 

But there are so many questions surrounding Bryant:

Firstly, will he be able to stay healthy? Can his 38 year old body hold up for the season? He wasn’t able to make it through the pre-season injury free, so how is he going to get through 82 games?

Is he going to be able to perform like Kobe Bryant?  He looked good in the pre-season, averaging 13.0 points in only 18 minutes and he scored 21 points in just 18 minutes against Maccabi. He shot .447 which is slightly below his career average of .451. 

Can he adapt to playing small forward?  Kobe claims he can and that he loves playing off the ball.  It will be intriguing to watch.

Can the Lakers make the Playoffs? Probably not.  The Western Conference has so many great teams, but Kobe loves a challenge.

No matter what happens with the Lakers this year, every game in which Kobe plays will be worth watching just to see one of the greatest ever for what could be the last time.

2. Oklahoma City Thunder

A few years ago, the Thunder liked like they were going to be the team of the future.  They were young, athletic and had three of the best players on the planet in Kevin Durant, Russell Westbrook and James Harden. 

But after they lost to the Miami Heat in the 2012 Finals and subsequently lost Harden to the Houston Rockets, the Thunder have been disappointing and failed to make the Playoffs last season for the first time since 2009.

Admittedly, a lot of their struggles were because Durant and Westbrook have suffered injuries.  Westbrook has missed 51 games in the past two seasons and Durant was only able to play in 27 games last season.

However, Durant being did give Westbrook a chance to show just how great he is and finished fourth in MVP voting last season. 

Some have questioned whether Westbrook’s elevated status will be a problem for team chemistry.  It is not clear whether the Thunder will be Durant’s team or Westbrook’s team?

With both players healthy, The Thunder were impressive in the pre-season with a 5-1 record.  If Westbrook and Durant can stay healthy throughout the season, the Thunder could again challenge for the NBA championship in 2016. 

3. Golden State Warriors

Ok, this is an easy choice. The defending champions are one of the most entertaining teams in the NBA.  They looked like they were on cruise control in the pre-season with the Splash brothers putting on shows.  

But they will be without Head Coach Steve Kerr for the start of the season.  Will this affect the defending champs?  Luke Walton will be interim head coach for the start of the season but he has never been a head coach before.  I don’t think that this will be a big issue, but could be a speed bump for the defending champions.

4. Cleveland Cavaliers

Another easy choice.  Even without Kyrie Irving and Kevin Love, the Cavs almost won the NBA Championship last season before losing to the Warriors in 6 games.

The Cavs were terrible in the pre-season, losing all but one of their seven pre-season games.

Nevertheless, if Lebron, Kevin Love and Kyrie Irving stay healthy, the Cavs will be the hands-down favorite to win the East and should make another trip to the Finals.

Kyrie and Lebron also happen to be two of the most entertaining players on the planet and the Cavs will definitely be worth watching this season.

Steve Nash Deserves More Respect

On a recent episode of NBA Open Court, Shaquille O’Neal took an opportunity to have a free therapy session in relation to some resentment he had towards Steve Nash winning the MVP award over him in 2005 and 2006. 

“He would always beat me out on the MVP voting.  I’m averaging 28 and 15, without the free throws, and I’m going to the Finals every year.”

When Ernie Johnson asked Shaq whether he thought Steve Nash deserved the award, Shaq responded:

“Maybe once but not twice over the Diesel… He got 2, I got 1, Kobe got 1. There’s something wrong with that picture.”

Is there any truth to this?  Did Shaq deserve the MVP over Steve Nash.  Let’s have a look at the facts of the two years that Nash won the MVP.

2004-2005

The 2004-05 season was Shaq’s first season in Miami.  He led the Miami heat to a 59-23 record and to the Eastern Conference Finals where they lost 4 games to 3 to the Detroit Pistons.

The Heat improved their record by an impressive 17 games with Shaq from the 42-40 record in 2003-04.  Shaq’s per game averages were 22.9 points, 10.4 rebounds, 2.7 assists, 0.5 steals and 2.3 blocks.  He shot .601 from the field but only .461 from the line.  Certainly some pretty impressive stats, although nowhere near the 28 points and 15 rebounds that he claimed that he averaged.  He also did not make it to the Finals despite his claim that he made it to the Finals “every year.”

His teammate, Dwyane Wade actually led the team in points averaging 22.4 points per game with 4.8 rebounds, 6.3 assists, 1.5 steals and 1.0 block per game.

Like Shaq, 2004-2005 was Steve Nash’s first season with a new team after spending the previous five seasons with Dallas.  Phoenix improved their record by an amazing 33 games, winning an impressive 62 games after finishing 29-53 in the previous season.   Playing in the tough Western Conference, the Suns 62-20 record was best in the League after finishing 13^th in the West the previous year.

The Suns’ main move from 2003-2004 to 2004-2005 was getting rid of Stephon Marbury and acquiring Steve Nash.  The majority of the Suns team from 2003-2004 remained intact in 2004-2005.

Nash averaged 15.5 points, 11.5 assists, 3.3 rebounds and 1 steal per game, while shooting .502 from the field, .461 from 3 and .887 from the line.  His 11.5 assists per game led the NBA.

In the voting, Nash earned 65 first placed votes, with a total of 1066. Shaq got 58 first placed votes with a total of 1032.

It was definitely a close race, but given the incredible turnaround that Nash led in Phoenix in 2004-2005, in my opinion, Nash deserved to win the MVP in 2005.

2005-2006

While Shaq may have an argument in relation to the 2004-2005 season, there can be no doubt that Steve Nash deserved the MVP in 2005-2006.  Nash received 57 first placed votes and a total of 924 points.  Lebron James finished second in the voting with 688 points but he received only 16 first placed votes.  Shaq did not receive a single MVP vote in 2006.

The Suns had to play the 2005-2006 season without Amare Stoudemire, who was injured in the third game of the season.  Despite this, the Suns still won 54 games, finishing second in the Western Conference.

Nash actually improved his averages from the previous year, with 18.8 points, 10.5 assists, and 4.2 rebounds while shooting an incredible .512 from the field, .439 from 3 and .921 from the line.

Only playing in 59 games, Shaq averaged 20.0 points, 9.2 rebounds, 1.9 assists and 1.8 blocks.  He again shot .600 from the field but only .469 from the line.  Having received zero votes in the MVP voting in 2006, Shaq has absolutely no basis for complaining that Nash won the MVP in 2006.

Conclusion

The most valuable player award is given for the player that is most valuable to their team.  The turnaround that Nash led in Phoenix in 2004-2005 showed that he was the most valuable player.  In 2005-2006, Nash posted even better stats, leading the Suns to second place in the West despite Amar’e Stoudemire’s season ending injury.

Steve Nash is often overlooked in discussions of the greatest players of the 2000s.  In a decade where MVP awards were won by Shaquille O’Neal, Allen Iverson, Kobe Bryant, Kevin Garnett, Lebron James and Dirk Nowitski, Steve Nash and Tim Duncan are the only players to win two MVPs in that decade. 

Steve Nash is the best point guard of the 2000's.  Let’s start giving him the credit he deserves.

What if? Bulls v Spurs 1999 NBA Finals

I was watching a Bulls v Spurs game from late in the 1998 NBA Season recently and I couldn't help but wonder what if the Bulls had stayed together following the 1998 NBA season?  What if Jerry Krause hadn't made one of the worst mistakes in sport history by getting almost the whole team and coaching staff off side and deciding to rebuild?  Would the Bulls have met the Spurs in the 1999 NBA Finals?

Michael Jordan has stated that the biggest regret of his career was the way that it ended in Chicago. He wanted to keep going and winning as many championships as he could until someone beat them. The Bulls team were coming off three straight championships and seasons in which they won 72, 69 and 62 games.  If they were to have been able to keep Phil Jackson, they could have essentially brought back their core group of players for the 1999 season.  

But Phil knew before the 1998 season started that it would be the last dance. Years of tensions with Jerry Krause had come to a head and Krause already had his sights set on Tim Floyd to be the next Bulls head coach. Over the years, Krause had also managed to get his two most valuable players off side, firstly by devoting his efforts to signing Toni Kukoc rather than re-signing Scottie Pippen in the early 90s. Then, as Michael Jordan vividly recalled in his Hall of fame speech, Krause famously stated that “organisations win championships”, not players. Unfortunately for Krause, he will probably be most remembered for these mistakes rather than the man who drafted Pippen, Horace Grant and Toni Kukoc and signed Dennis Rodman.

But enough about the politics of it all and on to the basketball. If the Bulls had stayed together, could they have won the Eastern Conference again and advanced to play the Spurs in the Finals?

So how would the Bulls have looked in the 1999 season? Firstly, had they re-signed Phil Jackson, I believe Jordan, Pippen and Rodman would all have returned for the 1999 season.  I also believe that Steve Kerr and Luc Longley would have returned as well as Toni Kukoc, Ron Harper and Bill Wennington, who were still in contract for the 1999 season.  This means that the core group that won 72 games just two seasons ago would be intact for the 1999 season.

The 1999 season was shortened by the lockout and the lockout meant a shorter training camp. Having a group of veterans that had played together for the last three seasons and knew the system would have greatly benefited the Bulls in the shortened season. The older players on the Bulls may also have benefited from the shorter season, two months shorter than the standard NBA season.

Although the Bulls won an impressive 62 games during the 1997-98 season, that number is actually quite deceptive. The Bulls were without Pippen for the first 35 games of the season and were 24-11 during those games.  Their record was much worse than that in the first month of the season, staring 8-7 in their first 15 games.

Following Pippen's return, the bulls went an impressive 38-9, which equates to a 67 win season over the course of 82 games.  They easily won the first two rounds of the playoffs, sweeping New Jersey in three games and then beating Charlotte in 5. However, in the Conference Finals against the Indiana Pacers the Bulls looked vulnerable for the first time in years. Of course, they did manage to defeat Indiana in 7 games then beat Utah in 6 games after losing a 3-1 lead in game 5 in Chicago. 

Based on the Bulls record from the 1998 season, the Bulls would have won 37-38 games in the 50 game 1999 regular season which would have secured top spot in the Eastern Conference.  However, if you look at the Bulls record for after Pippen returned from injury, the Bulls would have won 40 games.  But working on the assumption that the Bulls wouldn’t have improved their record from the previous season, they still would have finished first in the Eastern Conference winning 37-38 games. The top three teams in the East in 1999 were the Heat, Magic and Pacers, each winning 35 games. 

Interestingly, had the Bulls made the playoffs in 1999, the Eastern Conference Champion from that year would not have even made the playoffs.  The Knicks finished eighth in the Eastern Conference in 1999.  In order to reach the Finals, the Knicks beat the 1^st seed Heat, 4^th seed Hawks and 2^nd Seeded Pacers.

Had the Bulls finished first in the East, they likely would have played the Milwaukee Bucks in the First round.  The bucks had not beaten the bulls in 3 years, the Bulls winning all 12 games.  It is hard to see the Bulls losing a game against the Bucks in the first round of the playoffs.

 The Bulls would then have faced the Orlando Magic or the Atlanta Hawks and would have dispatched them without much difficulty.  In the 1999 Playoffs, the Magic lost in the first round to the 6^th seeded 76ers.  The Hawks were swept in the second round by the 8^th seeded Knicks.  The Bulls had completely dominated both teams in previous years with an 11-2 record against the Hawks and a 9-3 record against the Magic.  The Bulls had defeated both the Magic (4-0 in 1996 with Shaquille O’Neal) and the Hawks (4-1 in 1997) in the playoffs.

The Bulls then would have played one of their opponents from the previous two eastern conference finals - the Miami Heat or the Indiana Pacers.  The Bulls won 14 of 19 games against the Heat in the past three seasons, including a 4-1 victory in the 1997 Eastern Conference Finals.  They won 2 of 3 games against them in 1997-98 season.

The Indiana Pacers would have been a tougher challenge for the Bulls.  Although the Bulls had won 9 of the last 12 regular season games against the Pacers, the Bulls were forced to 7 games by the Pacers in the 1998 Eastern Conference Finals.  However, the 1999 Pacers lost to the eighth placed Knicks in the Conference Finals and were not as strong as they were in 1998. It would have been a tough series, but I believe the Bulls would have won.

The 1999 NBA Finals against the San Antonio Spurs would have been a great series.  It is often argued that the Bulls never faced a team with a dominant center in the Finals, missing out on Olajuwon in 1994 and 1995, David Robinson in 1999 and Shaq in 2000.  Of course, the Bulls did have to face Ewing, Shaq, Mutombo and Mourning in the Eastern Conference Playoffs and defeated each of them.

Home court advantage may have been an important factor in the 1999 Finals.  The Spurs finished with a 37-13 record in 1999 and possibly may have had home court advantage against the Bulls in the Finals.  The team which had home court advantage may have come down to the only meeting in the Regular Season meeting between the teams on 14 February 1999 at the United Centre in Chicago.  The Spurs actually won that game by 13 points against the Jordan-less Bulls.  However, if the Bulls had won that game, the Spurs win total would have been 36 games that season and the Bulls would have held the tie break had the two teams finished with the same regular season record.  Given that the Bulls were 115-8 at the United Centre in the previous 3 seasons, it is likely that the Bulls would have won that matchup.

The 1999 Spurs team was comprised mostly of the same players as the 1997-98 Spurs.  The key players Tim Duncan, David Robinson, Sean Elliot, and Avery Johnson all returned from the 1998 team.  They did add Mario Elie and Antonio Daniels who were important contributors to the 1999 Championship team.

The Bulls swept both games against the Spurs in 1997-98; winning in Chicago by 4 in double overtime and in San Antonio by 10.  

The early season game in Chicago was played without Scottie Pippen and the Bulls needed Jordan to hit a 3 pointer at the buzzer to send it into overtime.  Jordan scored 29 points and Robinson and Duncan had 21 and 19 points respectively.

Interestingly, the game in San Antonio the Bulls played without Luc Longley and the Bulls started a small lineup of Jordan, Pippen, Kukoc, Rodman and Harper against the Spurs Twin Towers.  Robinson dominated the game with 35 points, but Duncan was held to 14 points by Dennis Rodman’s defence.  Jordan and Kukoc scored 30 and 21 points respectively and the Bulls won quite easily.

The great shot blocking of Robinson and Duncan could have caused problems for the Bulls, but by the 1998 season the Bulls were very much a perimeter orientated team.  The triangle offense almost always gave the Bulls good opportunities to score from the perimeter and also would not have allowed Duncan and Robinson to place close to the rim on defence.  The strength of the Bulls centers, Longley and Wennington, was their medium range jump shots, which would have drawn Duncan and Robinson away from the rim.

The Spurs may actually have had more trouble scoring than the Bulls.  The Bulls almost never double teamed dominant post players, leaving Rodman and Longley to defend Duncan and Robinson one on one.  The Bulls were more focused on shutting down the other perimeter players to make sure that they did not get open 3 point attempts and Jordan, Pippen and Rodman were three of the greatest perimeter defenders ever. The Spurs only averaged 84.8 points per game in the 1999 Finals against the Knicks, who were an inferior team defensively to the Chicago Bulls.

It may have come down to the fact that the Spurs just did not have anyone that could stop Jordan.  Jordan always raised his game in the Finals, with a career average of 33.6 points per game in the Finals and Robinson and Duncan’s great interior shot blocking would have been negated by Jordan’s outstanding perimeter jump shots.

The Spurs couldn’t beat the Bulls in the 1998 season and there is no reason to believe that they could have in the 1999 season.  I think the Bulls would have won in 6, but it would have been a great series.  

Why Kobe should try to be like (Wizards) Mike

Throughout his career, Kobe Bryant has been compared to Michael Jordan more than any other player in NBA history.  There is no doubt that in terms of style of play, no other player has been more similar to Michael Jordan. However, after battling injuries over the past couple of seasons, the comparisons to Jordan seem to be becoming less frequent.

Recently, Kobe brought this comparison back into the spotlight when he was quoted as saying “My 37 (years old) isn’t MJ’s 37, you know what I mean? Nor is it the same team or the same system that he was playing in. It’s much, much different. There’s really no barometer, no (precedent) for training physically, for recovery. It’s unchartered territory.”

Although Jordan never actually played in the NBA as a 37 year old, Kobe’s comments seem to show that he does not want to be compared to Jordan’s years with the Wizards.
But Kobe should draw inspiration from Jordan’s last season in the NBA. 

Why?

Firstly, Jordan played all 82 games in 2002-2003; a remarkable achievement for a 40 year old coming of a season ending injury.  Jordan’s 2001-2002 season was cut short by a knee injury which required surgery and entering the 2002-2003 season, it was unclear whether he would be able to make it through the rigorous NBA season.

Similarly, over the past 2 seasons combined, Kobe has only been able to play in 41 of the possible 164 games due to injuries.  He has not been able to play in all 82 games since the 2010-2011 season. It would truly be a great accomplishment if Kobe could play in all 82 games this season.

Secondly, Jordan shot .445 from the field in the 2002-2003 season.  You may be thinking that statistic initially does not seem very impressive. In fact, it is way below Jordan’s career field goal percentage, which was .5003 before the 2002-2003 season.  So why should Kobe strive to be like Wizards Mike in field goal percentage?

Well, Kobe’s career field goal percentage is only .451 and last season, Kobe only shot .373 from the field.  If Kobe can match Jordan’s .445 from the field this season, that would be a huge improvement for him and he should aim to do so.

Thirdly, in 2002-2003, Jordan’s averaged 20.0 points, 6.1 rebounds, 3.8 assists, 1.5 steals and 0.5 blocks per game.  Although these statistics are nowhere near as impressive as his career numbers (30.1 points, 6.2 rebounds, 5.3 assists, 2.3 steals and 0.8 blocks per game), they are still very impressive.  Kobe should use Jordan’s 2002-2003 statistics as a barometer to measure himself against. 

Finally, and probably most importantly, Jordan made the 2002-2003 into a playoff contender. Although they did not make the playoffs, the Wizards finished 9^th in the East and missed out on the playoffs by 5 games.  The Wizards were in the hunt for the playoffs until the last month of the season when they suffered two losses to the Atlanta Hawks at the buzzer.  They also lost to the Knicks by 1 point in March (a game where Jordan scored 39 points). In total, the 2002-2003 Wizards suffered 13 losses by 5 points or less. Had the Wizards been able to win half of those games, they would have made the playoffs, and possibly finished as high as 6^th in the East.

On the other hand, the Lakers have not been a playoff contender since 2012-2013.  They have finished 14^th in the West for the past two seasons with a 21-61 record last year and a 27-54 record in 2013-2014.  It would be an incredible achievement if Kobe can bring the Lakers back to the playoffs and must be his main goal for this season.

Although Kobe may not want the comparison to Wizards Jordan, I hope that he can perform as well as Jordan did in the 2002-2003 season.  I truly hope that he can stay healthy so that he can finish his career the way he deserves to.