Early NBA

I notice more early NBA footage is available online. The standard of play was really high and very competitive. I rarely watch the NBA these days as it has become a snore fest. The three point shot has killed the modern game, and a host of other rule interpretations haven't helped either. I still think a three point shot light needs to be introduced. That would mean a three point attempt can be made when the light is illuminated but not when it is off. One way this could work is if a three point shot is missed, the light goes off and no further three pointers can be made until the team makes another basket (1 or 2 pointer).

NBA Three-point Field Goal - Suggest Rule Change

NBA games have developed into three-point field goal shooting contests. Several reasons for this, the first being shooting accuracy has improved. The second is down to game statisticians who point out that a three-point goal is worth a lot more than a two-pointer. Thus, players now often step back behind the three point line to ensure a higher return. The downside is that fans are subjected to a lot of misses, and this is very boring to watch.

Change the Rule

I suggest a three-point light be introduced that is activated by the score bench. When illuminated it allows a three-point shot, but when the light is off any shot from the field is only worth two points.

Like this: when the game starts each team will have their respective three point light showing. When a three-point shot is attempted, the referee indicates, and if the shot scores the light stays on and the referee motions to the score bench, counting three points. However, when a three-point shot is missed, the light goes out. Thereafter, a two-point shot must be made to once again get the three-point light back on (free throws would also count toward resetting the three-point shot).

This simple rule would prevent the three-point shot boring play you see now. Many times the offensive team can regain possession off a missed shot and repeat the three-point attempt. It becomes 'bombs away' play. With this simple rule, any missed attempt at a three-pointer would mean any basket must be first scored to get the three-pointer back, so teams would experience no advantage if they kick the ball back out to the wings for a low percentage shot.

This is an idea worth investigating as it promotes play across the whole court, and counters the addiction teams have to putting up as many three-point attempts as they can.

Los Angeles Clippers

Did Steve Ballmer make the worst investment in human history when he paid...wait for it...two billion dollars for the NBA's Los Angeles Clippers?

They've currently got; Paul George, Kawhi Leonard, Russell Westbrook and James Harden and they still cannot win games. 

Shut the franchise down.

NBA 2021-2022 Season

I'm not following the current NBA season. The league is a joke now what with players such Kyrie Irving being excluded because of a simple health choice he has made. Wake me up when or if the league comes to its senses.

Steven Adams to the Pelicans

It is being reported that NBA big man Steven Adams has been traded from the Oklahoma City Thunder to the New Orleans Pelicans. He'll still receive his final year bonus worth about 7% of his salary, meaning he'll earn about US$29 million in 2020 (or $42 million NZ dollars). For Adams this is good move, it matches him up with NBA sensation Zion Williamson. It also moves Adams out of tractor town small market, into the main news cycle with Williamson being a monster, and that can only be good for Adams career.

NBA Season Going to be a Blast

All that moving around in the off-season has had a real impact. Now it appears just about any team has a realistic chance of beating any other team. Look at the current standings; the Phoenix Suns are winning, partly due to their gaining some muscle, and I'm talking about Aron Baynes of course. Then over in the eastern conference you can throw a blanket over the top eleven teams. They're going to be absolutely throttling one another for a place in the top eight.

Regular readers will know I can be critical of regular season play in the NBA. I have statistically proven there is a tendency for teams to play 'I have a go, you have a go', meaning they don't contest possession often enough. This has the effect of padding individual player stats, self-interest amongst pro's is a real thing, and saves their bodies. Once the play-offs start, it's all on, do or die. But with this current spread of talent all bets appear to be off.

There is a movie just out about the betting scandal that rocked the NBA. It's called Inside Game, read about it here: https://deadline.com/2019/08/inside-game-tim-donaghy-scandal-movie-release-date-1202661501/  In the mid 2000's there were several highly suspect games refereed by Tim Donaghy, which in hindsight we now know turned out to be influenced by him. But right now, it can't happen as any calls will be noticeable, more so than back then, given the even spread of talent across the league.

I'm sticking with my picks about which team is looking good and which is not, read about that here: https://kenhorlor.blogspot.com/2019/10/nba-season-201920.html

Australia v Spain @ FIBA World Cup 2019

Now THAT'S basketball. Disappointment for Australia to go down in double overtime, I couldn't believe I was rooting for Australia. In the end, they ran out of juice and Spain showed their class. Australia play an abrasive style, it looks ugly to my eye, but they're effective and are a team. Spain look more stylish, smooth, and when they needed to they upped the ante and put the stops on defensively.

US Basketball Aura of Invincibility Ends

The USA are going to playing off for 7th place at the FIBA World Cup taking place in China. The US had been beaten in the quarter-finals by France 89-79 and following that defeat the US lost to Serbia 97-89 to prole them down to the basement of world basketball.

Is it because of a lack of talent and quality coaching? Hardly, as the team is fully stacked. Maybe many of the players are not exactly household names, but you cannot question the Team USA pedigree, especially the coaching staff which includes Greg Popovich and Steve Kerr. 

No, what happened is the rest of the world has caught up. They no longer fear the US, they see Team USA as beatable. Look at Turkey at this tournament, they lost by one point in overtime to the US, then lose to New Zealand and end up finishing in 21st place (or thereabouts). What I'm saying is that on the day any team can beat any other team and no outcomes are guaranteed. And as I write this the first quarter of the first semi-final has ended, Australia on 21, Spain on 20. Really close, the world of basketball just got intense.

NZ v Turkey @ FIBA World Cup 2019

Classification rounds: New Zealand beat Turkey 102-101. Does NZ understand how huge that is? Turkey are really good and NZ just beat them. This NZ team can score, only three players failed to get on the score sheet. C'mon NZ government, fund some proper development for these guys, NZ can be top 10 in the world at this rate.

NZ v Greece @ FIBA Basketball World Cup 2019

New Zealand's best performance by far, but a loss 97-103. NZ played with intensity throughout and the difference really came down to Greece's superior shooting skill. NZ won two quarters and only lost the final quarter by 1 point. So it was getting a little ragged in the first quarter that cost them the game. The verdict? They were under-prepared, going up against Euroleague and NBA players who have a lot more quality games under their belts. NZ are now out of the running for the title but still continue playing for a place at the Olympics. They'll likely regret not beating Brazil in their first game, they could have definitely won that game, shame as Brazil go through as the top team, having found their stride. For NZ it was so close and yet so far.

NZ v Montenegro @ FIBA Basketball World Cup 2019

New Zealand improved in beating Montenegro 93-83. Once again the stand out for the Kiwis was Isaac Fotu, along with Shea Ili's energy and speed.

The NZ performance was a more complete team effort, with their full court zone press creating several turnovers. But they still have things to work on; they need to stop the silly errors, such as stepping out of bounds, or trying to control the ball with one hand instead of getting two hands on it. The big men have got to learn to control the ball and stay on their feet, several times they fell over and lost possession.Shot selection improved but they still need to improve some more, with the hot hands getting the ball more.

The NZ team effort was assisted by the lack of discipline of the Montenegro coach who was ejected from the game.

Can NZ beat Greece? Why not, NZ is far better than its 38th rank in the world suggests. But they'll have to play a near perfect game, making their free throws count and not making stupid unforced errors.

NZ Breakers Basketball

I'm not a big fan of the Breakers, the Auckland based team that plays in the Australian NBL or National Basketball League. I think such teams detract from the game in New Zealand. Having said that though, they've had quite a bit of success, winning several titles.

They're now under new ownership and have undergone many changes for the upcoming season. New players, new coaching staff. Will this new outfit be any good? I'm going to stick my neck out and say, no, they won't be any good. I've seen teams stacked with overrated talent crash and burn too often to have any faith in the approach they're taking. If they were prepared to invest more in locals, then I'd be more positive, but a team made up principally of imports won't have the same commitment.

RJ Hampton

High school US basketball star RJ Hampton has signed to play professionally with the New Zealand Breakers, a team that plays in the ANBL. The Breakers have won several titles but their fortunes have waned in recent years. What to make then of this latest move.

The basketball scene Downunder is stronger than many realise. Andrew Bogut finished his season with the ANBL's Sydney Kings and then winged his way to Golden State and will be playing at centre for the Warriors in the NBA Finals. The Sydney Kings came third in the ANBL with Bogut, so that may indicate the depth of the league. They're not bunnies.

The Breakers have new owners and they're keen to get things back on the right track. But there are potential problems with their approach; many former NBA players have played Downunder and come up short. The style of play Downunder is not the same as in the NBA. RJ Hampton has only played High School basketball and looks quite slim. He'll be up against grown men, and they're from all over the place, they don't play like Americans. This is code for - the games are much rougher than in High School basketball in the US. Players have to deal with getting beat up.

Will RJ Hampton measure up and is this league the right preparation for the NBA? If I'm going to put money on the outcome, my bet would be it will be a failed though interesting experiment.

Virginia Wins NCAA Basketball, Kiwi Connection

The University of Virginia are the 2019 winners of the United States NCAA men's basketball championship. Turns out there is a Kiwi connection here as New Zealander Jack Salt plays for the team. He came off the bench in the final and put in 4 minutes. Virginia coach Tony Bennett also has a connection with NZ, he played for North Harbour in the NZ National Basketball League and started his coaching career there as well, coaching the team in 1998 and 1999.

The Virginia win affirms the importance of defense. They play a system referred to as the Pack Line D; called Pack Line as the team line up in a pack just inside the three point line when defending. I have no doubt that such a configuration must look intimidating to the team bringing the ball up the court. Apart from that there isn't a lot different to other man-to-man defenses. With the Pack Line they put pressure on the player with the ball and players not guarding the ball-carrier sag off to help out if needed. Then they do not allow any easy looks to the shooter. They double-team any player receiving the ball at the low post, and attach like limpet mines to any cutter. Oh and they prefer to hedge off screens as well. Below I've embedded a useful YouTube description of how Pack Line works. It's a good system, with reservations:

This kind of defense can be exposed if coming up against a team of good perimeter shooters. That double-teaming of the low post leaves an attacker free, the ball can be kicked out to him, and an easy two results. That is if the attacking team has good shooters of course and this is where I think the Pack Line has been so successful. The USA has seen a decline in the accuracy of perimeter shooters, these days players like to drive, cut and take it to the hoop. No doubt the Virginia coach is exploiting this weakness by inviting teams to shoot from outside, and then boxing out to get the rebounds. Virginia then exploit this weakness further at the other end as they have good shooters. It's simple arithmetic.

What could beat Pack Line? Good shooters as said above, as well as wide body post players who are hard to double-team. Maybe a wide body at both low posts. Note I'm talking wide bodies, not just about height. Wide bodies are also hard to deal with in relation to setting screens, making them the key in any team offense (like book ends).

Carmelo Anthony Moving On?

The rumour is Carmelo Anthony is going to be waived by the Houston Rockets. It would make sense as he hasn't clicked with the Rockets roster. My pick is he'll head to the Lakers, teaming up with Lebron James. The two get along and Anthony is desperate for an NBA title.

But let's dispel something shall we, Anthony is not that bad a player. After all I've said, I now find myself defending him. Why? It's due to some of the nonsense I hear from analysts that's why. It has been said that Anthony will be waived because he's no good coming off the dribble and can't hit threes. Well boohoo, if that's how the Rockets intend playing no wonder they've not had a title since the mid 1990's. And I'm a Rockets fan!

Anthony is a good shooter and defends capably. What he's not good at doing is sharing. The ball goes to him and he shoots. Often he does this well, particularly when he's one on one against his opponent. But he doesn't have excellent vision and tends to stay put after he receives the ball. I think a combination with James would work well as James can take it to the hoop and get the rotation going, with Anthony able to isolate opponents and score when that rotation stalls or taking it to the hoop doesn't work and the ball needs to be kicked back out.

The Lakers are going to be around come playoffs time, but they need one or two heavy scoring bigs. Carmelo Anthony is one such player.

NBA 2018/19

The new season is under way and these are my picks:

Surprises

Eastern Conference: Detroit Pistons
Western Conference: New Orleans Pelicans

Disappoints

Eastern Conference: Boston Celtics
Western Conference: Oklahoma City Thunder and Los Angeles Lakers

Even Better (than last season)

Eastern Conference: Philadelphia 76ers
Western Conference: Portland Trailblazers

Still No Chance - Ever

Eastern Conference: Orlando Magic
Western Conference: Los Angeles Clippers

Basketball Obsession

My first novel Basketball Obsession is free today and tomorrow on Kindle.

https://www.amazon.com/Basketball-Obsession-Ken-Horlor-ebook/dp/B00VIEZ51G/ref=asap_bc?ie=UTF8

Denver Nuggets v Cleveland Cavaliers - Statistics

Today's NBA game between the Nuggets and the Cavaliers produced a set of figures even more stark than the earlier Warriors v Grizzlies match-up.

I followed the Nuggets v Cavaliers game from the 8:10 mark in the third quarter, until the end of the game. This was to compare apples with apples. This time I made a note of open looks, not just when shots were taken.

From the 8:10 mark in the third quarter, until game end; the Denver Nuggets took a shot from an offensive set that involved three or fewer passes, 100% of the time. 47% of those shots were completely open looks.

The Cleveland Cavaliers took such a shot 99% of the time, 45% of those being completely open looks.

This 'open look' figure would be higher if I included lay-ups, which I decided not to include, only set or jump shots in open play.

The Nuggets started out 13 points down and ended the game 16 points adrift. This has got to be a failed strategy then, that of bombing away without considering whether the shot is truly on or not. But then, were the Nuggets trying to win? Or were they maintaining an open style of play with a lot of shots, in order to entertain, with the result being secondary.

During the monitored period of play there were no suspect calls of the type I've mentioned; that is where the referee relieves the pressure for a favoured attacking team by calling an off-the-ball foul, but then the offense generally flowed for both sides.

The only dodgy call was in the third quarter when the Cavaliers Kyrie Irving was called out of bounds. He had stepped out but then put a foot back in, the other foot being in the air, when he regained control of the ball. Someone may like to correct me if I'm wrong, but generally in basketball, if you're out of bounds, you re-establish yourself inbound by having a piece of you touching the floor, which Irving had actually done. I figured this incorrect call was designed to hand the Nuggets possession and keep the game close coming up to half time. But then I could be getting paranoid.

I'm going to stick my neck out and call this matter proven. There appears a modus operandi whereby players are left open most often on the second or third pass of an offensive set, and when behind on the scoreboard the tactics employed rarely change, the spectacle must be maintained. The teams are not playing to win.

What tactics should the Nuggets have employed? The approach that seemed to get them the best results was to slow their offense down and feed their big man, Jokic. He would either draw shooting fouls or get a close two points. They did not do this often enough, preferring to try and look good instead. Then on defense they did not foul enough. They needed to send Cavaliers players to the free throw line more often. But then my approach lacks pizazz, hmm.

Golden State Warriors v Memphis Grizzlies - Statistics

I was watching the Warriors v Grizzlies game and it occurred to me that this game conformed with my claim that NBA games are rigged. I started tracking two of my claims, that players get easy looks and when the favoured team falters on an offensive play, they're handed the ball back, usually off an off-the-ball foul.

I started taking Stats from the 8:10 mark in the third quarter, the score was 74-60; the Warriors up by 14. I kept tracking the game until the end, 122-107 to the Warriors.

This is the way it looked:

Off all offense which resulted in a shot being made: Memphis took a shot in 3 or fewer passes 92% of the time, while Golden State took a shot 79% of the time.

What I am saying is that room is made for the shooter to get an open look, on average off the second or third pass after the ball crosses the half way line, or from when the ball is passed inbound from the sideline in the front court. The next step will be to refine this some more, separating out open looks from contested looks. But I think this is pretty conclusive and prima facie evidence of rigging.

I was also looking for suspicious calls when the favoured team faltered on an offensive play, and this happened twice. The first time was when an off-the-ball foul was called during the third quarter. Golden State had fumbled, their offense had no structure and the referee quickly blew his whistle and gave the ball back to Golden State.

The next time something happened; it was the fourth quarter and Kevin Durant was fouled forcing a shot from beyond the three point line and he went to the line to shoot three. This was a dumb foul as the Warriors offense had stalled and the shot clock was running down. Was there collusion? Hard to say in this case, I didn't get to hear if Durant called to the defender to move into him. But the earlier example, where the referee relieved the pressure for the Warriors was exactly what I'm saying happens frequently.

Memphis finished the game roughly where they stood with 8:10 to go in the third quarter. They took many shots, most with no chance of success, they simply did not want to win. Meanwhile, Golden State expected to win and the referees obliged.

If this game wasn't rigged, how should Memphis have approached the game? They should have made every possession count that's what, not flung shots will nilly. They were within reach if they stayed disciplined and picked away at the score. Players that experienced know to pick up all shooters, fight over all screens or if you have to switch then do so quickly, not leave wide open space for shooters to line up.

I'll follow one or two more games, but I know what the result is going to be, shooting takes precedence over defense; the spectacle being more important than the result. The teams set out to entertain, not to win. And seeing as there must be a winner, then the favoured team usually wins, the referees see to that.

How I think the NBA is rigged

I've been following the NBA for decades, right back to when I first learnt to play basketball in fact. In the early days, from where I lived, it wasn't easy to get information. It was all about Rugby and Cricket. But over the years that changed and now there are a lot of games on the television and the internet is a godsend.

The games are brilliant entertainment. The skill is exceptional, no doubt about it. But here's the rub, I think the games are manipulated for certain outcomes and the below is my take on how that is achieved.

Firstly, to address this, we need to ask ourselves what the NBA is and what it is not. It is an entertainment business, it is not there to organise fair competition between participants. That said, there is a type of player favoured, no secret this, they must have good shooting skills and be athletic. That generally means taller players, with elevation. But first they must be able to shoot. In this equation, defensive skills are secondary.

What you don't find are teams full of 5'8" defensive specialists. Hmm? Is that a marketable commodity?

Here are the four ways I feel the games are orchestrated. There must be either an express arrangement or at the very least a tacit understanding.

1. Shooters get good looks

That's right, I think the top entertainers are given room to shoot. Time and again players hang off known lethal shooters. Space appears made on the second or third pass in-bounded in the front court, or the second or third pass once the ball comes over the half way line. This is not all the time, but often enough that I've had to question it. The ball handler brings the ball up, then passes off > pressure > receiver passes  > second receiver then gets an easy look and he shoots.

The reason I feel they do it like this is not to look too lame. If there is an easy shot every time first pass, well, questions would be asked.

2. Do not pick up in transition

If there is a turnover, the team that is now attacking seems to get an open shot. This happens a lot. Defenders do not pick up players as they come over half way, especially when their opponent is on a fast break. Players should know to shut down fast breaks, but instead defenders routinely allow them. What happens is defenders retreat into the restricted area, seemingly trying to prevent a drive to the hoop. This rarely works as either a shot is open from the outside or the attackers drive and draw a foul.

I think they do not pick up players in transition in order to promote an open style of play, a free-wheeling and shooting style. High scoring games are achieved this way.

What I'm describing is counter intuitive; if the defense put pressure on the perimeter shooters, they'd shut down the chance of a three point shot. Yes, this leaves the basket open and a cutter could score two points, but in this equation you've saved one point. So it makes sense to deny three pointers, not leave players open, and in so doing open the team up to fouls when players do drive or cut to the hoop. It makes statistical sense to instead pick up all players as they come over half way, especially if they're on the break, and to deny them easy looks from beyond the arc.

It even makes statistical sense to foul players on the break in open play, to prevent them getting set. But this rarely happens. What does happen is players retreat to the keyhole and wait, leaving the outside shot open. This happens often enough to be noticeable.

3. Referees collude

There is a body of evidence to show how referees dictate the outcome of games. The most valuable research has been in professional Rugby League. Referees there decide games according to where and when they blow the whistle. The team not favoured is always penalised when hard on defense or hard on attack and this happens most often earlier in the game. This has the effect of either applying more pressure or relieving the pressure on their favoured opponent, and dictates how the game will develop - this is Rugby League (the penalty count is evened up later once the game is effectively over, with a lot of paddy-whack penalties that amount to nothing for the unfavoured team).

In the NBA I believe they do something similar. Referees call off-the-ball fouls on the defender that is less favoured. They do this if the favoured team has not made headway on their first offensive attempt. Thus, the favoured team often gets a second chance.

At the other end of the court, the unfavoured team gets no such luck, they're just as likely to be denied fouls or they'll be called for charging.

4. Not slowing the game down

NBA games must always be up tempo and high scoring encounters. When was the last time two teams scored less than 70 points each? More than ten years ago? (I looked this up, I think it was 2002).

Surely, as a game tactic, it pays to slow the game down to frustrate the opposition and tire them out. But you know what I see too often; a team that wins the ball off a turnover, takes an irresponsible shot early, instead of holding the ball up and making the other team work on defense some more. Bear it in mind next time you watch an NBA game, how often do you see a team having won the ball quickly off a turnover, take a quick long range and low percentage shot and often before their own players can get under the basket for offensive rebounds.

Think about the cumulative effect of irresponsible shot selection. If the team on attack quickly loses the ball and is now suddenly on defense, the team that has won possession should want to slow the game down, to drag the opposition back down the court, if a quick layup is not on, or if there isn't a two on one happening (at minimum a nice high percentage shot from the top of the key). Even if they fail to score, slowing the game down once the easy basket is not available, has the effect of making the opposition defend one more time for the duration of the shot clock, and have them up and down the court one more time each way.

But if an irresponsible shot is attempted, it has to be made good, or the effect is to give the opposition a rest, while their big men wait down the court for their guards to bring the ball up. They are spared having to make the trip back into their own half.

Failure to slow the game when it is tactically appropriate is obvious in the NBA, that's how they achieve high scoring games, with pizzazz. The actual outcome, winner and loser, is secondary to the spectacle, I believe. But seeing as there must be a winner, the team preferred is that which represents the best scoring potential, not the best team defensively.

Does the NBA favour teams from the big media markets? I see no evidence of that. If this was true and the NBA was chasing audience above all else, then the Knickerbockers and the Lakers would be on top, but they aren't. No, each team sits in its own market and the NBA has strong business reasons to see all teams prosper, having their moment in the sun. The way I see this league, they favour the team that provides the best spectacle, and they engineer a certain type of open game over alternatives which are often more defensive.

There you have it, there may be something I'm missing, tell me how I'm wrong.