Confessions of an Unapologetic Fantasy Baseball Champion: 3 Tips of the Trade

Hello and welcome, dear reader. I am here today to talk about fantasy baseball. Or, more specifically, how to win at fantasy baseball. Or, MORE more specifically, how I won at fantasy baseball this year. Now, everyone has a different strategy when drafting, or what type of players to target, and how many players at each position to keep, so I'm going to stay away from all that jazz. What I want to focus on is some of the other stuff that goes on in the winner's circle, some of the behind-the-scenes ideas you can put to use in your fantasy life. Now that all this introductory bunk is over, let us begin.

1. Remember Kenny Rogers

When making day to day moves in fantasy sports, specifically baseball (since it's a long season), the key is to remember Kenny Rogers. If you're from the group that's asking why you should be thinking of a country music legend when playing fantasy baseball, sit tight. If you are of the other group that's asking why you should be thinking of a former Texas Rangers starting pitcher (baseball diehards, I solute you) who retired in '08, also sit tight. I have an answer that will make all of you happy. Now, let's take a look at one of my rosters for a second. First guy on there, starting catcher, Yadier Molina. Molina was the 157th pick of that draft (I drafted from the 12th and final slot), my 14th player. In the months of May and June, Molina batted .212 and .235, respectively. His ownership rate plummeted. There I was, sitting with a team that had been average to that point, and Molina was slumping big time from his hot start (in the season's first calendar month he batted .341). Was I temped to cut ties permanently? Yes. Did I? Well, I looked at the waivers, I looked at my roster, and I heard the first line of that legendary chorus in my head. "You've got to know when to hold 'em" (ah, you say, now it's coming into focus). The Gambler can teach us many lessons, and this is the first one: don't be too quick on the trigger when it comes to cutting a player. If something tells you that a slump will end (stats, past patterns, gut feelings, whatever), don't just put that out of your mind. Molina ended up finishing the season with a batting average over .300 and a ranking of #4 on ESPN's Positional Rank. On the other side of that, let's look at a player who is no longer on my roster: the 85th pick, Ben Revere (which, going back, was a terribly stupid pick). Revere, well, let's just say he was rather poor this season. He failed to finish with a batting average over .220, and might not even make his own team's postseason roster. Revere was playing badly, and I was hopeful that a guy I took so early would turn it around, but it got to the point where I tried to trade him for something ("know when to walk away"). Nobody would give me the time of day, so I cut him ("and know when to run"). That worked out for me (it very well could have gone another way, but nobody knows that for sure), just knowing "when to fold 'em". Alright, former-pitcher-Kenny-Rogers crowd, you've been patient. It's time for your answer. If you know about Kenny Rogers (I had to look it up), you know he was decidedly "meh" for about the first decade of his career (he had one All-Star appearance, and never won 20 games). Then, at about the 11 or 12 season mark, it started to get worse. His career path was taking a predictable turn when, all of a sudden at age 39, he started throwing like he had in his younger days. He was dealing as many, if not more, innings as he was in the mid 90s, and actually was an All-Star in 2005. He had a decent season in 2006, and then boom. His 2007 campaign, in which he was over forty years old, was the stuff of legend. He was an All-Star, 5th in Cy Young voting, and 26th in the MVP race (baseball-reference.com) that year, seemingly without warning. So, when you are drafting or trading, always remember Kenny Rogers and how he tapped into the fountain of youth. For example, I drafted 37 year old Adrian Beltre 61st overall. Some people were iffy about relying on such a veteran player, but it's a risk I was willing to take. Beltre improved his home runs, RBIs, batting average, WAR, and walk totals from 2015 to this past year. I was able to luck out and catch a turn back the clock season from Beltre because I didn't strike him from my board because of age concerns. If there were injury concerns, then maybe, but straight up age is (in my opinion) not a great reason to put someone on the no-draft or emergency-draft list (sliding him down a little is fine, that'll happen). So, however you do it, make sure you remember Kenny Rogers.

2. Overreaction=Reaction

Hey, everyone overreacts sometimes. Maybe a player you took early on is really having a rough week, maybe he's not quite as healthy as you would have liked, and you have just had enough. You just don't feel like stashing him for brighter days anymore, and he finds himself on waivers or the trade block. For everyone else in the league, that's a golden opportunity for a possible steal in the cheapest way possible. However, often times a guy who's in that boat ends up not being that highly sought after once he hits the open market. That's often because many of your league mates would have done the exact same thing had the player been on their roster. That's how I added Corey Kluber and Yu Darvish in one of my leagues (also how I ended up with C.J. Anderson in fantasy football last year). When someone overreacts a little (it's bound to happen), try to capitalize. Guys who are bigger names, or higher draft picks, are usually worth stashing unless something really bad happens (like a big injury or benching). Don't follow the crowd and stay away from a situation like that. Remember, regardless of a slump or minor/moderate injury or stuff like that, somebody drafted that player high for a reason. When an owner overreacts, it almost always works in your favor to react.

3. Stash and Grab

Time to be honest. Who do you wish you could roster because you're such a big fan (or have a great feeling about), but just don't feel like you should? Everybody has players like that. For me, it's Jonathan Villar. I am a huge Villar fan, but I didn't know if drafting him over certain others was such a good idea. However, what's great about fantasy baseball (especially larger roster size leagues) is nabbing a guy you have a feeling about isn't going to hurt you at all. I owned Villar in every league I won this year, and he was a vital part of each of my rosters. However, I would not have owned him at all had I not decided to follow my gut and give him a spot on my bench. On average, Villar was taken with the 222nd pick in espn.com drafts. However, Villar ended up 5th overall (!!!!) in ESPN's Player Rater (only Mookie Betts, Jose Altuve, Mike Trout, and Max Scherzer eclipsed Villar on that list). The moral of this story is, stash that guy you really want to stash. Sometimes he ends up in the top 8 in DK-style fantasy points for each of the three positions he's eligible in (like Villar), and sometimes he ends up a dud. Regardless, what damage does it do? Maybe you catch a look from a fellow owner, at the absolute most. So go ahead, do it. You know you want to.


I will not be wearing any fantasy loser tattoos this season. However, if you didn't fare as well, get your fantasy loser tattoos on Twitter or Amazon from @Fantasylosertat!

If you have any comments, concerns, questions, wisecracks, ideas, theories, or you have anything at all to add, hit me up in the comment box or on Twitter @hoover__26! Thanks and fantasy on!

Disaster on Flatbush Ave? Why The Brooklyn Nets Aren't As Bad As They Look

Want to hear a joke? The Brooklyn Nets. Yes, yes, we've heard it all before. From the outside looking in, this roster looks like a dumpster fire rolling down a cliff into a radioactive volcano. I mean, who is even going to start for them? They paid Jeremy Lin 38 million dollars just so they could say they drew a free agent, and couldn't even keep the likes of Allen Crabbe and Tyler Johnson on the roster for more than fifteen minutes. They ended up with a team of NBA misfits, outcasts, rookies, and Brook Lopez. Now, how on earth could they be better than they look? Well, here goes nothing...


Rebounding-

This team ranked 23rd last year in rebounding, so that wasn't a bright spot. And, they lost their best rebounder Thaddeus Young to the new-look Pacers. But, I have hope. They still have Brook Lopez, who can be a dominant center in the NBA when he isn't surrounded by total scrubs, but that's it when it comes to big name rebounders. However, consider this: Rondae Hollis-Jefferson and the newly signed Trevor Booker both  averaged at least 12 rebounds per 100 possessions (Booker averaged over 14, both more than Brook Lopez), and Hollis-Jefferson will only be in his second season in the league next year (basketball-reference.com). Also, Chris McCullough (the team's youngest player last year) averaged nearly 10 boards per 100 possessions to go along with shooting 38% from long range. With Hollis-Jefferson finally healthy, the possible emergence of the still young Booker in the lineup, and the additions of Luis Scola (whose career rebounding percentage is higher than Marc Gasol's and on par with that of Pau Gasol), Anthony Bennett, and Egidijus Mockevicious (who led the NCAA in rebounding his senior year at Evansville), the Nets' rebounding situation could be sneakily on the rise. Concerning Egidijus, you would be perfectly correct in pointing out how poor his competition was in college. However, try comparing him to first round pick of the Raptors, Pascal Siakam (for the record, I love Siakam as a prospect, just using him as an example). Egidijus averaged 15.7 points and 13.9 rebounds per game in his senior year on a .637 FG%. In Siakam's sophomore year with New Mexico State, he averaged 20.2 points and 11.6 rebounds on a .538 FG%. According to the SOS rating (a strength of schedule stat used by sports-reference.com where 0 is NCAA normal), Egidijus' schedule was a strength of -0.39. In contrast, Siakam's SOS rating his sophomore year was -3.54 (to add a third factor, Skal Labissiere's SOS rating was 8.84). So, the undrafted Mockevicious might just give the Nets some good minutes off the boards. Mix in what they already have, and I think they may have made up for their losses on this front.


Field Goal Percentage-

Little known fact here, the Nets were in the top half of the league in field goal percentage last season. They got rid of three of their top four shot takers from last year (Young, Jarrett Jack, and Joe Johnson), and that made a big ripple in their balance of power on the offensive end. However, when you average the field goal percentage of the three, it comes out to a number under 44%. If they can get newer players to step up and take those shots, like Sean Kilpatrick (46.2%), Rondae Hollis-Jefferson (45.7%), or Trevor Booker (49%), they might be in even better shape. If you toss in their change in point guard from Jarrett Jack (39.1%) to Jeremy Lin (41.2%), the numbers get a little better. Honestly, with what this team has already, coupled with what they changed, they could be a top half team in field goal percentage again this season, if not sneaking into the top 12 or 10. From long range, this team might be sneaky good as well. Jeremy Lin has been a way better shooter when he gets big minutes, and guys like Bojan Bogdanovic and Randy Foye being on the roster will only help your jump shot as a team.


Guard Play-

Last year, Brooklyn played three point guards for consistent minutes at one point or another (injuries didn't help). Jarrett Jack, Shane Larkin, and Donald Sloan manned the point for the team's 21 win season, and it wasn't the prettiest thing in the world. However, not one of those three is on the roster this season. Now, they have a new committee to oversee the 1 spot, consisting of rookies Isaiah Whitehead, Caris LeVert, and Yogi Ferrell, along with signees Jeremy Lin and Greivis Vasquez. Those three rookies may be the finest group of rookie point guards in the league, from Whitehead the athletic volume scorer to LeVert the sometimes injured star (reminds me of a kid who came out of Memphis a few years back, what was his name again?), and Ferrell who has more experience than most NBA point guards without ever stepping on the floor. Lin is the projected starter (and historically better at stuffing the stat sheet when he starts as opposed to a bench role), and nobody knows who is going to be on the main roster from that rookie trio (or how many minutes Vasquez sees, if any), but I think it's safe to say that the point guard spot has improved from generally depressing to slightly optimistic.


Coaching-

Brooklyn was coached by Lionel Hollins and Tony Brown last season, and that didn't work out too well. Brown won more games than Hollins, but only finished with a record of 11-34. Now, they have a newly inked head coach named Kenny Atkinson who is not only a Long Island native, but a product of the Mike Budenholzer system. Now, that might just work for this team. Kenny has also worked as a player development director for many years, another big selling point if a good part of your roster hasn't even had their official NBA pictures taken yet. Guys like  Egidijus, LeVert, and Beau Beech (not to mention Anthony Bennett, everybody knows he needs some development BAD), who will need refining early in their careers, might be better off playing for a coach that knows player development like the back of his hand. Especially when that coach will have to be playing guys like that on a consistent basis. A defensive mind doesn't hurt either, as Kenny will be stepping in a role where he has to put guys like Vasquez and Randy Foye on the court to play both ends.


Final Thoughts-

Hey, I did my best. If we're being honest, this team is not good at all. We all know that. But, in all fairness to Brooklyn, they have a decent ceiling. It is my opinion that this team could win 30-35ish games, if they bite the bullet and play their young guns as opposed to playing it ridiculously safe and sending guys like Chase Budinger and Joe Harris out for 20 minutes a game. Regardless, this dumpster fire may have a leg to stand on after all. Look out for some of these younger players Brooklyn has gotten their hands on lately as well, a few of them could be superstars in the making. So, that's what I think. But I want to hear what YOU think!!! Hit me up on my off-the-chain Twitter account @hoover__26, or in the comments button directly below the words you are currently reading!

Thanks for coming!

Hoover's NFL Week One Predictions

Hello #HooverSportsTalk readers! Quickly today, on the day of the NFL opener, I wanted to share my final Week 1 predictions. Here they are, in a handy photo:

Wish me luck! I would love to hear your comments, and your own predictions, in the comment box below or on Twitter @hoover__26. Also, go ahead and ask me whatever questions you want about sports, fantasy football, more predictions (spoiler alert: Tajae Sharpe OROY and Nick Chubb Heisman), or whatever! Thanks!

Zhou Qi- The Houston Rockets' Chinese Mystery Man

Before the NBA Draft, I was doing my yearly prospect research and film study when I tripped across a name I hadn't heard before. I usually have a pretty good understanding of the games of guys projected down into the late first and early second (or at least have some idea of who the heck they are), so I was eager to learn more about this Chinese big man named Zhou Qi. As soon as I saw him, I knew I was intrigued. Normally, when I think of a Chinese player in the NBA, I think of someone like Yao Ming or Yi Jianlian. Tall, powerful shot blockers and rebounders, without a huge amount of perimeter skill (you may think of Jeremy Lin, but Qi is 7'2", so that image didn't really pop into my head). However, this super young big man is of a breed that is only in it's infancy in the NBA, the long and thin jump shooter. With the drafting of Kristaps Porzingis, who could also be classified as tall, skinny and an elite shooter, we can clearly see that there is a place for players like this in the league. However, just looking at Zhou Qi certainly wasn't close to enough to evaluate his game. So, I have made a post-draft scouting report for all of you who are still unsure of the Houston Rockets' 43rd overall pick.

OFFENSIVE SKILL SET

Qi is a very talented player for his age (we will touch upon his age later) on the offensive side of the ball. I have rarely seen players as tall as Qi as fluid and smooth with the ball as he is (besides perhaps top college prospect Deng Gak, and Milwaukee Bucks' draft pick Thon Maker, who we will touch upon again later). While he may sometimes seem lost when he is moving without the ball (I attribute this in part to a lack of tactical coaching), once he does get himself open and make the catch, he looks like a guard. He has strong ball handling, and makes some of the smoothest moves attacking the basket off the dribble that I have ever seen a 7'2" player make. He has a nice set of moves in the post, and while he hasn't quite mastered them yet, the potential is obvious. He is a really ready player on the offensive end, if he can hold his position at only about 215lbs.

DEFENSIVE SKILL SET

This is where it gets a little more murky for Qi. You may look at his numbers and see that he has led the Chinese Basketball Association in blocked shots for two years running and draw the conclusion that he's a fine low post defender. However, in reality, Qi relied heavily on a wingspan that is nearly 7'8" to block a majority of his shots, without using very many low post positioning skills required to block NBA shots. When forced to make a decision in the post, he didn't always react quick enough to cover a driving player or get in the right position to block a shot. I think that's the kind of thing that Houston can remedy by "locking him in a room with Hakeem Olajuwon". He has all the length he needs to be a shot blocker in the NBA, he just needs to add muscle and muscle memory. If he can be taught to make better and faster choices and movements on the interior, he could be a dominant defender. When, say, the shot clock is winding down and the ball handler can only shoot, Qi times his jumps well and does a very good job contesting. It's only when a player is threatening to do multiple things that Qi has a hard time finding himself in the right place defensively. On the ball defense on the perimeter is never really a strong suit for someone of Qi's size and position, but he shows flashes of guard-like man defense on the outside. This is detailed in an excellent piece you can find here: https://onebasketblog.wordpress.com/2016/06/21/zhou-qi-scouting-report/. Overall, I think if he adds muscle and gets a little more versed in the subtleties of playing defense, he could be a more than passable defender in the NBA. Because, as he is now, he is nearly useless in the paint against someone like Boogie Cousins or Andre Drummond. Rebounding is another issue, as he relies on his size and reach to snatch rebounds over less talented players. While that's surely going to be a learning curve, I think it's something he can learn to improve at. It's the kind of thing where he needs to be told how to do it right, and focus on it until he fully grasps it (it's difficult to break a habit at 19 or 20 years old, which is why I knocked Dragan Bender down to 10 on my pre-draft board).

BODY EVALUATION

Two words: get bigger. Normally I go against the grain when it comes to gaining weight and muscle, as I was against Porzingis picking up too much and losing some of what got him to the NBA in the first place. However, Qi is going to be in a position where he will be matched up against some of the NBA's biggest and best, and he needs to be bulkier if he wants any chance at success. His height and length obviously are tremendous, and he doesn't seem to have much of an injury history, so he has that going for him. But, honestly, all he needs on this front is to just get bigger. Once he does that, he should be good as far as matching up against some of the stronger players in the NBA.

CONTROVERSY

Ah, here we go. You know I love a little controversy (I mean, it feels so empty without it), so I have to talk about the questions swirling around Zhou Qi's age. Supposedly, Qi is in fact closer to 22, which was suggested because of normal rules about Chinese players not declaring for the draft until that age. I don't know if I believe that, as the examples that are being used were quite a a few years ago. CBA and NBA alumni Bobby Brown's translator has also alleged that Qi is possibly even closer to 25, which is not corroborated and frankly even harder to believe. However, even if Qi IS in fact 22, there is even more evidence on 10th overall pick Thon Maker being as old as 23. Even if both are in their twenties, there is more evidence proving Maker than Qi, and Maker still was taken in the lottery (if you haven't already, check this out on Maker- http://bit.ly/29hQXEY) So, this really doesn't bother me, but I would have been missing an opportunity to talk about conspiracy theories if I didn't mention it.

CONCLUSION

After watching Qi intently during the Olympics so far, I am able to come up with the following conclusion. Qi is a very fluid and NBA ready offensive player who needs to add muscle mass and work on a better feel for the game defensively and when positioning for rebounds. He has a great amount of potential, but he needs work on understanding more complicated principles of being an NBA center. Houston is a great place for him with the history of Chinese players having success, and the different training available for an interior player. Qi is a great value in the mid second round, and might just be the next big thing you've never heard of.

Cleveland Browns NFL Record Prediction 2016

Recently I got into a debate with some NFL writers and podcasters about the Cleveland Browns' record for next season. So, I decided to post a prediction. There won't be too much glamour in this post, I'm mostly just announcing my thoughts on how many wins Cleveland will have next year.

Week 1- Win vs. Eagles
Week 2- Loss vs. Ravens
Week 3- Loss vs. Dolphins
Week 4- Win vs. Redskins
Week 5- Loss vs. Patriots
Week 6- Loss vs. Titans
Week 7- Win vs. Bengals
Week 8- Win vs. Jets
Week 9- Win vs. Cowboys
Week 10- Win vs. Ravens
Week 11- Loss vs. Steelers
Week 12- Loss vs. Giants
Week 13- BYE
Week 14- Loss vs. Bengals
Week 15- Win vs. Bills
Week 16- Loss vs. Chargers
Week 17- Win vs. Steelers

So, 8-8. I know many people don't think they can win more than 4 (the Vegas over/under is 4.5), even @DownWithDamon (Browns fan extraordinaire) puts them at 6 wins. But, I love to be bold (if you have read anything of mine, especially my last post, you knew that), and I think RG3 has Pro-Bowl potential in Cleveland. Duke Johnson is a very versatile running back (and a great PPR fantasy option), and the return of Josh Gordon in week five coupled with a great rookie in Corey Coleman and a proven tight end in Gary Barnidge, that's a scary offense. This Browns team can be very solid in my opinion, but I want to hear yours as well! Tweet me @hoover__26, and comment below!

What Could Have Been- The Legend of Arvydas Sabonis

Quick- name the most skilled and talented big men in basketball history. Instantly names like Hakeem, Kareem, Wilt and Shaq come to mind. Maybe even Dirk, KG, Tim Duncan, or David Robinson. Now, what if I told you the most skilled big man ever might just be missing from that list. Now, you're searching your brain banks trying to figure out who could possibly be better than these legends of the game. Finally, your brain lands on the name Arvydas Sabonis (pronounced ar-VEE-das). Perhaps you recall his NBA stats (12 points, 7.3 rebounds and 2.3 assists career) and think, what could possibly give this guy a chance against those greats we just mentioned? He played for only seven seasons over eight years, and never had as much as one single 20/10 season. Here you are, staring at your screen wondering what the heck I must be smoking to think this guy might be better than someone like David Robinson. I tell you, however, that in order to truly understand the legend of Arvydas Sabonis, you have to go back. I mean way, way back.

Let's begin this odyssey in 1981. Sabonis was 17, and playing in the European Championship for Cadets. His Soviet Union team went undefeated, winning all seven games by a combined margin of 241 points. Young Sabonis averaged 17 points per game, but unfortunately we have no records of rebounds, assists or blocks until years later. Plus, unless you happened to have been watching in person in 1981, we really have very little good video of a young, healthy Sabonis. We have some grainy and undated film of Sabonis looking like a young, athletic center with dark Larry Bird hair shooting one of four shots- a three off the catch, a turnaround midrange jumper, a practically un-blockable sky hook, or a monster dunk. We can gather a few things from this film, one being he wasn't always the slow and pudgy guy that hobbled around the court in a Portland uniform in the late nineties. He was once a super athlete, with a pair of quick feet to go along with his incredible size and bodybuilder strength.

Let's move forward to our next spot on the timeline (big thanks to chile2011.fiba.com for this). It's now the 1983 World Championship for Junior Men, and an 18.5 year old Sabonis is the Soviet Union's undoubted star. He leads the team in scoring with 18.5 points per game, and averages 23.5 points per game against the eventual champion United States (the Soviets finished second against a USA team that featured Kenny Walker and Larry Krystkowiak). Well okay, you say, but that's for Junior Men. What could he do against real men? Let's take a look at the 1983 European Championship for Men. Sabonis again led his team in scoring with 17.7 per game, despite being the youngest player on the Soviet Union's roster by five to ten years. Also keep in mind that Sabonis' field goal percentage hasn't dipped below 60% even once. In Sabonis' final game of the tournament, he scored 28 points on 10/12 shooting from the field. He was completely dominant in European play, despite being so young playing against older, more experienced veterans.

Sabonis and his Soviet team continued to be a force to be reckoned with, bowling through the 1984 European Olympic Qualifying Tournament and 1985 European Championship for men, winning both while scoring an average of 15.3 and 20.1 points per game, respectively. Now, 1985 is an extremely interesting year in the story of Arvydas. The Atlanta Hawks were considered one of the teams at the forefront of the international athlete boom, and decided to take a crazy risk and reach blindly behind the iron curtain attempting to snag Sabonis. According to Stan Kasten (courtesy of sports.vice.com),  "Sabonis was widely regarded as the greatest basketball player in the world at that time." Okay, hold up. After reading and processing the implications of this (considering this is 1985 and guys like MJ, Kareem, Magic, Bird, Hakeem, Dr. J, Isiah Thomas, and Moses Malone were all active in the NBA), you may question just how honest was Los Angeles Dodgers CEO (and former Hawks GM) Stan Kasten being when he said "greatest...in the world". If you say maybe he was just talking about centers, I will direct you towards Kareem, Hakeem, Moses Malone, and Robert Parish, who were all technically "in the world" at the time. Okay, you say, maybe he was just talking about that draft class. If that were true, his statement would still include guys like Patrick Ewing, Karl Malone and Chris Mullin. So clearly, regardless of whatever stipulations are put on Kasten's statement, it's still an obvious compliment from someone who really knows sports and a good young athlete. Now, this is Sabonis' first chance to come to America and play in the NBA. Unfortunatly, he wasn't quite 21 yet (in those days the old rule about having to be of the most recent college graduating class or older was still hanging on), and since he was unlucky enough to share his draft year with the arrival of the legendary (expletive) David Stern, his choice was voided. Atlanta honestly didn't know Sabonis wasn't 21 yet, and it deferred the drafting of Sabonis another year. Imagine if Sabonis had been allowed to come to Atlanta in 1985, the kind of team they would have had. A 26 year old Dominique Wilkins (who was already scoring 30 points per game at the time), a rookie Spud Webb, a 24 year old Doc Rivers,  a 23 year old Kevin Willis, and Sabonis, all maturing together. The Hawks had won 50 games in 1985, despite their best shooter (Randy Wittman) making only five threes on the year. Wilkins was shooting .186 from long range, and not one player on that team averaged at least one three point attempt per game. If Sabonis comes over at almost 21, he's instantly the team's best shooter. Any team that can win 50 games without much experience or shooting ability (and 57 the next year with only one player shooting over 30% from long range) would have been instant title contenders if they added a skilled and experienced (but still young) Arvydas Sabonis. But, they didn't, so let's not harp on that for too much longer.

Sabonis averaged 15.3 points in the 1986 World Championship for Men, and topped that average in the final against the United States by scoring 16 in a duel with David Robinson (the Soviets actually lost that one, which wasn't a familiar feeling for Sabonis). This was the last event Sabonis played at near 100% (he had been hurt before, but nothing career threatening). While running up the stairs to answer the phone (thank you nytimes.com for this little detail), he ruptured his Achilles tendon. The return to "routine activities" usually takes 4-6 months (clearly, however, being Arvydas Sabonis was far from routine". He rehabbed the injury in Portland, who had drafted him in the first round in 1986 and crossed their fingers that they could wrestle him away from the Soviet Union, but he was rushed back into action after only 2-3 months. And not just any action. He was rushed back into the Seoul Olympics in 1988. He still managed to average 13.3 points, 11.1 rebounds and 1.7 assists per game (this is the first event in which we have more detailed stats), and led his team to a Gold (knocking out the USA and Yugoslavia in the process). While he was third on the team in scoring, he was probably the most important player on the team, as his 13/11/2 line was (to me, anyway) more powerful than an 18/2/2 line (held by Raimondas Marciulionis, the team's leading scorer). He wasn't just the leader of his team, he was also (apparently) the life of the party. The ever fun Sabonis supposedly got into a drinking contest somewhere in the Olympic Village, and was, (cough, cough) "unavailable" for the gold medal ceremony (his request after his first two a day practice with Portland many years later consisted of one word: beer).

Sabonis averaged 16.4 points in the 1989 European Championship for Men (again, we go back to having no other stats), but he was a very limited version of his early eighties dominant self that shattered backboards like Shaq (if you don't believe me, look it up). The USSR ground him (and his legs) to a pulp, and it left him a shadow of the all-powerful giant he once was. Just because he was a shadow, however, didn't mean he couldn't still go out and play like one of the best. He averaged 23.3 points, 13.5 rebounds, 1.9 assists, 1 steal, and 3.6 blocks per game for Forum Valladolid of the Liga ACB in Spain in 1989-90, while shooting over 40% from three point range. Keep in mind, Sabonis has the foot speed of Frankenstein by now with all of his overuse leg injuries (and unfortunately, cut his legendary mullet). By the time the 1992 Olympics rolled around, the Soviet Union had fallen and Sabonis was set to be the star player for the Lithuanian National Team. He was once again on the top of his team's scoring list, with a stud-like average of 23.9/12.5/1.8. Somehow, despite being ravaged by injuries, Sabonis was still able to be a dominant international force. He led the Lithuanians to a bronze finish in both the 1992 and 1996 Olympics, with perhaps his greatest international performance ever in the 1995 European Championship for Men, where he averaged 22.3 points, 13.3 rebounds and 6.3 assists per game. Also, his Liga ACB stardom has been running concurrently with these tournaments (he finished his 6 year career there with averages over 20 points, 12 rebounds and 2 assists per game).

Let's go right to the 1995-96 NBA season, the one that finally saw the "debut" of "rookie" Arvydas Sabonis (a laughable moniker for a guy as weathered as him). Sabonis did exactly what was expected of him as a 30 year old rookie. Play around 24 minutes off the bench, average about 15/8/2, and be a veteran presence (and oh, I almost forgot, shoot 37.5% from long range at 7'3.5"). He actually averaged over 23 points per game in the 95-96 playoffs for Portland. Sabonis was inexplicably exciting to watch for someone who ran like he was trying to keep his legs from imploding (mostly because he was). His passes were so flashy, always going around his head, behind his back, and NEVER looking at who he was passing to. He could still throw down some dunks as well, with a legendary reverse jam that looked like a flashback to that grainy, Russian narrated film from the eighties (except this was grainy, Bill Walton narrated film from the nineties). His best season in the NBA came in 1997-98, where he finished with a line of 16/10/3 and made 73 starts for Portland. He also finished his career with a Win Shares per 48 minutes of .200, which is equal to that of Wilt Chamberlain (basketball-reference.com).

Arvydas Sabonis continued to suit up for various teams (including one he owned) after his NBA retirement in 2003. He actually had some pretty good seasons. But, he eventually hung it up for good, leaving behind the ever rare "what could have been" Hall of Fame legacy. When you are a Hall of Famer, usually you "hit all of your lights" so to speak, and realized your full potential. Sabonis is in the Hall of Fame because he deserves it. He is a legend in the game of basketball. But, we will never really know just how high on the list of greatest big men in NBA history he would have gotten. I personally think he could have been one of the greatest of all time. But, this article is about him being the most skilled big ever. Brian Mazique (@UniqueMazique) said "[Sabonis] would've been an all-time great in the NBA had he arrived in his 20s," and "he was the greatest passing big man I ever saw." Now that I've made my case, let me know what you think. Tweet me @hoover__26 or drop your opinion in the comment box below. As for my final thoughts, if you've made it this far, congratulations. I hope you know more about Arvydas Sabonis than when you began reading this. If not, the public must be more informed than I thought. But if that was true, would he be so underappreciated (the player who the NBA, the government, and the people of America campaigned to acquire, and the Russian government dare not give up)? I certainly hope not.

T.J. McConnell: The Next Generation of Great Point Guards?

Pure point guard. You hear the term so often in today's NBA, but what does it even mean? Is it a ball distributor who looks for the pass first, and all else later? If so, then you could say Ben Simmons is a "pure point guard" despite the fact that he's 6'10" and may not even play point guard in a real game. Is it an offensive facilitator, who does what is necessary for his team to score points? That may sound like the same thing, but the difference between the two is the distributor proactively looks to get his teammates good looks at the basket on every possession, while the facilitator allows his teammates to by default get good looks by being an active threat. If a "pure point guard" is an offensive facilitator, then you could call Stephen Curry one of the purest in the business, despite the fact that he often takes deep jumpers off the dribble. Is a pure point guard someone who CAN do it all, but chooses to work his teammates into the offense whenever he can? One example a lot of people have brought up is Chris Paul, and he more than likely falls closer to that last example. When I asked the public about this, I got responses like "always looks for the pass, selective shooting" (first example), "able to lead a team on both sides of the floor...able to distribute and shoot as well as defend." (second example), and "runs the floor, sets up teammates, takes care of the ball" (closer to the first example). The most common player comparisons were Chris Paul, John Wall, Rajon Rondo, John Stockton, Steve Nash, Mike Conley, Tony Parker, and Damian Lillard (listed in order of most mentioned). Why am I asking this question? Well, because there is a young man playing for Philadelphia that just may be the exact definition of "pure point guard". T.J. McConnell is one of the most willing and talented passers in the game, shot nearly 35% from long range in his rookie season, and was 10th in the league in steals per 48 minutes last season (espn.com). But, since I know the burden of proof is on me to provide adequate statistics and observations in order for you to join me as a McConnell believer, I will certainly not stop there.

Another trait of a real pure point guard is "someone who can make every pass with ease". If you need proof that McConnell can do that, watch the video I will end this article with. If having the "ability to pass from anywhere, selective 3pt shooting and arsenal of mid range moves to get off shots" is also a key part, then McConnell fits that bill as well. He shot nearly 52% from within 16 feet last season, and despite being a solid long range shooter, attempted less than a fifth of his shots from long range. For reference, Kemba Walker (a career 33.4% three point shooter) has attempted more than 30% of his shots from three in his career. McConnell also has stats that top some of those "pure point guards" that were mentioned the most. McConnell finished 6th in the NBA in assists per 48 minutes, ahead of guys like Tony Parker, Damian Lillard, and Mike Conley. He also finished in the top 15 in assist/turnover ratio for point guards while guys like John Wall fell to the 20s. (courtesy of espn.com). McConnell also finished in the top 10 in assist percentage and finished above the Devensive Player of the Year Kawhi Leonard in steal percentage (basketball-reference.com). Sounds to me like McConnell's numbers and style fit perfectly with the "passing and defense" mold of a pure point guard. And if guys like CP3 and John Wall can be All-Stars and elite players, why not T.J.? Let's just say, for argument's sake, that McConnell continues to improve and eventually (say his 3rd or 4th season) gets in a situation where he is playing 28-32 minutes per game consistently. That's a feasible start to McConnell's career path, and it also happens to match Kyle Lowry's early career almost exactly. You can make the argument that McConnell was three years older than Lowry when he came into the league, but if you compare ages, you have to make a note of the following. Lowry averaged 13.5 points, 6.7 assists and 5.4 rebounds per 36 minutes in his age 23 season, with many years of NBA experience already. In McConnell's rookie season (also his age 23 season), he averaged 11.1 points, 8.2 assists and 5.6 rebounds per 36 minutes (courtesy of basketball-reference.com). If Lowry went on to be a an All-Star, what is stopping T.J. McConnell from ascending to that height?

Earlier in the article, I promised that I would show you a video that proves just how good T.J. McConnell has already become. Not being one to disappoint, here is that video...

Enjoy. If you agree, disagree, or just have a comment in general, drop that in the comments section or on my Twitter account, @hoover__26. Thanks!

The Case For: Al Jefferson

First off, NBA contracts have been nuts this year. I know, I know, a new precedent has been set for contracts in sports. But, two guys who I don't even count as top 5 in their position have both received the largest contracts in their leagues' history. However, in the middle of all of this money flying around, the Indiana Pacers have made a move that has gotten so few kudos yet may be one of the most important moves of free agency.

Al Jefferson is on the back end of a historic career, no arguing that. His stats last year were the lowest he's had since his Boston days (the first few years of his career). He was injured and suspended, and was only able to play in 47 games last season (averaging only 23.3 minutes per game). However, he still turned in a respectable line of 12/6.4/1.5 heading into a contract year, and signed a 3 year, 30 million dollar deal with Indiana. While 10 million a year for a 31 year old big man with nagging injuries and off the court concerns may sound high, consider the salaries of a few other freshly inked players. Joakim Noah is making 18 million a year with the Knicks, coming off an injury filled age 31 season in which he scored less than five points per game. Courtney Lee is making 12.5 million a year. Jared Dudley is making 10 million a year. Joe Johnson is making 11 million a year. Anthony Tolliver is making 8 million a year. Now, Tolliver is an interesting example. According to spotrac.com, Tolliver has made between $41,854 and $3,000,000 in salary every year of his career. However, despite being the same age as Jefferson (and having a line of 5.3/3.2/0.7), is going to be making 2 2/3 times more than he was the previous year. While he may not have the injury concerns like Al, he has been consistently and considerably worse than Al his entire career and isn't getting any better. So, using that logic, Al (who made $13,500,000 last season) should be making at least 15-20 million this season with the inflation of contracts, right? Nope.

Another thing to consider is, Al is only two years removed from his last 20/10 season. His offensive rating, defensive rating, win shares per forty minutes, and true shooting percentage all improved from 2014-15 to 2015-16 (basketball-reference.com). I honestly don't care one bit about his suspension and fine last season for what was called "A violation of the Anti-Drug program" or "PEDs" (come on now, we all know what it was, don't play it up like he was popping HGH or doing heroin in an alley). If Al can come into next season more healthy than he was last season, I see no reason for him not to finish with a line around 15/8/2 if he gets at least 28 minutes per game. For $10,000,000 a year, I'd call that a steal considering the team's lack of experience in the post. Also, if you estimate Big Classic will at a minimum score as many points as he did last year (which he will top, I am sure of that), Indiana is paying him $17,793 per point. The other Al, Al Horford (who just signed a deal with Boston) would be paid $22,683 per point if he repeated his previous season.

With the great signing of Al Jefferson, Indiana just further solidifies their place as a favorite for a top 5 seed in the east. Honestly, with the addition of Jeff Teague, the dominance of Paul George, the development of Myles Turner, the great drafting of Larry Bird and company, and the signing of Al Jefferson, this is a team that could be finding themselves in a place to make a run at a spot in the finals.

NBA Draft 2016 Big Board

I thought I would pitch in to the massive bank of people giving their two cents on the fast approaching NBA Draft. This is my big board (not my mock, simply the best guy available). I could go into a whole explanation of why each guy is here or there, but instead I choose to present it in a clean way that incites conversation (go ahead and comment or tweet me @hoover__26 with #NBABigBoard to chat about my thought process and share your own).

1.   Brandon Ingram
2.   Ben Simmons
3.   Jamal Murray
4.   Kris Dunn
5.   Jaylen Brown
6.   Marquese Chriss
7  . Henry Ellenson
8.   Skal Labissiere
9.   Buddy Hield
10. Dragan Bender
11. Timothe Luwawu
12. Jacob Poetl
13. Deyonta Davis
14. Furkan Korkmaz
15. Damantas Sabonis
16. Wade Baldwin
17. Denzel Valentine
18. Thon Maker
19. Malachi Richardson
20. Demetrius Jackson
21. Taurean Prince
22. Dejounte Murray
23. Brice Johnson
24. Ante Zizic
25. DeAndre Bembry
26. Cheick Diallo
27. Damian Jones
28. Tyler Ulis
29. Juan Hernangomez
30. Ivica Zubac

Some other guys that are lower on my board,  I think are underrated and could have great NBA careers are:

Wes Washpun
Cat Barber
Kay Felder
Egidijus Mockevicius
Mike Tobey
Isaiah Cousins
Wayne Selden
Gary Payton II
Michael Gbinjie
Ben Bentil
Pascal Siakam
Jarrod Uthoff

Wes Washpun Vs. Isaiah Thomas NBA Draft Prospect Analysis Evaluation

Wes Washpun vs. Isaiah Thomas

Body Type Evaluation

Wes Washpun out of UNI is a hard guy to make a comparison to. At first, Kyrie Irving jumped out to me. However, Washpun being generously listed at 6’1” made that a hard comparison to make. While Isaiah clearly has the height disadvantage (standing at only 5’9”), they have similar physical traits. Both are ridiculous jumpers, with Washpun hitting 36.5 inches on the no-step vertical and Isaiah having what is rumored to be a 38.5 inch max vertical. Washpun is considerably longer than Thomas, being 3-4 inches taller and having a wingspan of nearly 6’7” (according to hoopshabit.com), almost five inches longer than Thomas’. Washpun, despite being the taller and longer of the two, weighs about ten pounds less than Thomas. However, both are similar in that they are undersized point guards with wingspans that exceed their heights by about 5 inches.

Statistical Evaluation

Statistically, this is another interesting argument. Metrically, they are very similar. Their rebound percentage, assist percentage, steal percentage, block percentage, turnover percentage and usage percentage for their last year in college all are within a few points of each other (Washpun having the lead in all of them except turnover percentage and steal percentage, and a lower usage percentage). Thomas has the lead in true shooting percentage by .014, as well as the lead in Win Shares and Box Plus/Minus (all stats courtesy of sports-reference.com). While Thomas seems to have been the more impactful player for his team, scoring and assisting at higher averages than Washpun, Wes appears to be the more well rounded player. He was seventh in the Missouri Valley Conference in blocked shots at 6’1”, and second in the conference in points produced. Thomas was also playing with three future NBA wing men, which may have aided in his assist numbers. Regardless, both were very capable college point guards, and they were both vital parts of their team's’ success. Washpun is a more well rounded player, while Thomas is a better passer and shooter.

Film Evaluation

When you go to the film, a few things become obvious. Both Washpun and Thomas are great penetrators and finishers around the rim, and they are both extremely bouncy and light on their feet. While, as I said, I initially compared Washpun to Kyrie, the fact that Washpun has to rely on quickness and explosiveness as opposed to Kyrie having his 6’4” frame backing him up makes it a harder comparison to make. Isaiah’s college mixtape shows a ton of jumping into passing lanes, driving and juking shot blockers, and passing from the interior. Washpun is versed in all three of these things, and while Thomas may shoot a few more threes, Washpun has the ability to expand his range (if you need proof, look up Washpun’s three quarter court jumper in UNI’s upset win over #1 North Carolina). While Thomas’s flashy interior lob and drop off passes are a thing of beauty, I was really impressed with Washpun’s ability to drive, turn into the post, and find an open shooter from the painted area like a Greg Monroe.

Final Thoughts

Wes Washpun is one of my favorite sleepers in this year’s draft. As I have said, I think he could very easily be a starting point guard in the NBA one day. He compares to Isaiah Thomas in many areas, including style of play and rebounding as a shorter player. Potential landing spots for Washpun could be places like Chicago, Memphis, Atlanta, or New York, teams that either need a point guard now or are preparing for the impending loss of their current point guard but also have other needs to fill earlier in the draft. For instance, I could see Chicago addressing their needs in the frontcourt first, then going after Washpun as the possible heir of Derrick Rose. Nonetheless, I think Wes Washpun has a tremendously high ceiling in the NBA, and should get the recognition he deserves.

Henry Ellenson vs.Kevin Love Prospect Analysis and Evaluation

Henry Ellenson vs. Kevin Love

Body Type Evaluation

If you look at the measurables on both Love and Ellenson, it may seem pretty clear cut. Ellenson, the Marquette product, is listed on espn.com at 7’, 242 pounds. Love is listed at 6’10”, 251 pounds. Ellenson’s pre-draft standing reach and wingspan top Love’s pre-draft numbers by one and two inches, respectively. It looks as though Ellenson has the right body to be a center in the NBA on day one. However, according to Zach Brunner (@fantasyflurry has played basketball with Ellenson), Henry is probably closer to 6’10” (at only 19, nothing says he can’t reach 7’ at some point, but he will be quite undersized at the 5 on draft day). But, that doesn’t mean he and Love see eye to eye when it comes to height. Love’s 6’10” listing is one of the most controversial in the game, and he was measured at 6’ 7.8” without shoes at his NBA combine. Adding the average 1 ½” for basketball shoes, Love would have had to have grown nearly an inch since his combine to be a legitimate 6’10” in shoes. Ellenson fits the Kevin Love bill as far as being a slightly undersized rebounder with an offensive game that stretches out as far as anyone’s. But, I would say Ellenson has the edge on physical measurables, as he is now (at 19 years old) what Kevin Love has tried to grow into (and maybe never has, but nobody really knows).  

Statistical Evaluation

As far as the numbers go, these two are pretty close. Ellenson averaged 17 points, 9.7 rebounds, 1.8 assists and 1.5 blocks per game for Marquette (sports-reference.com). Love averaged 17.5 points, 10.6 rebounds and 1.9 assists per game for UCLA (basketball-reference.com). Just looking at that, you may be tempted to give Love the slight edge. However, teammates and competition have to also be considered (not to mention metric stats). Ellenson’s Marquette played against 12 NCAA tournament teams, and went 4-7 against those teams. Kevin Love’s UCLA team went 7-2 against ranked teams in 2007 (technically it was 7-1-V, after Memphis had their wins vacated due to some supposed shenanigans with Derrick Rose’s brother). However, Kevin Love played with three other future NBA players in his starting lineup (including Russell Westbrook). Ellenson’s right hand man (junior forward Luke Fischer) averaged 12.1 points, 6.2 boards and 1 assist (granted it was on a FG% of 60%, but still not even close to matching the impact of Russell Westbrook and Darren Collison). Love has the metric edge in pretty much every stat, but he was also quite a bit more free to shoot as he pleased with such impressive teammates. Ellenson has the potential to boost his rebounding to a Love-like level, but he needs to improve there if he wants to be equally as strong on the boards. I give the statistical edge to Love, but Ellenson had quite a bit bigger role on his team (and in turn more pressure on him to perform on a nightly basis).

Film Evaluation

When you go to the film, it’s clear that these two are similar players. They both are adept at using both hands on finishes in the post, and both have strong touch when putting up floaters. Love may appear to be a better and more willing passer, but just look at who he was passing to! Ellenson was tasked as a freshman to be the main contributor on a Marquette team that wasn’t stacked with talent, while Love was tasked to be ONE of the contributors on a #1 ranked team with multiple future NBA All-Stars on it.  While Ellenson may have seemed inconsistent with his jumper, just look at the following images.

Love has more space there than Ellenson would know what to do with (this is not the only time this happened, I just picked that play for an example). In addition to this, Love’s low post game was bolstered by the fact that defenders often fronted him to avoid being sealed on a drive by Westbrook or Collison (both accomplished drivers to the hoop). Don’t get me wrong, Kevin Love had an elite post game in college (and still does today). However, the numbers may be a little misleading.  Another thing that I have seen people knock Ellenson with is his defensive ability. While that is one of his weaknesses, I see things that tell me he will improve. For one, he really didn’t have any help on defense! When a player is driving on Ellenson, he was left to protect the rim on his own many times. It also seems like Ellenson has the physical, mental and emotional ability to work hard at improving his weak spots. For more on that, here is a quote from Zach Brunner: “That kid has his head on straight and has improved an insane amount from when I first met him when he was a freshman in high school. He has the work ethic to be the best, and that is his only goal right now. He has this slight arrogance that I think you need to succeed in this league. In his mind, if he wants to do something, nobody is going to stop him. Luckily, his head is on straight, comes from small town roots, and has that humbleness to back it up. Think like how Larry Bird was.” I’d say those are some pretty strong words.

Final Thoughts

I think Henry Ellenson is a very good prospect, and I would certainly take him in the top 15 in this year’s draft. Do I think he can be Kevin Love? Well, they are similar (but not identical) players. Ellenson has a better NBA body than Love, but his overall fundamentals are still lagging behind where Love was at his age. Ellenson is still adjusting to being a low post presence on both sides of the ball, as he tended to work more from the midrange area in high school. I’m very excited to see Ellenson in the NBA, and if he can continue to improve as a 19 year old player, he should be someone to watch for years to come.

Kris Dunn vs. John Wall NBA Draft Prospect Evaluation

Kris Dunn vs. John Wall

Body Type Evaluation

To begin this assessment, I am going to focus on one thing that makes both Wall and Dunn extraordinary from a measurements standpoint, (channeling my inner Jay Bilas here) their wingspan. An average NBA point guard has a wingspan of about 6’5” (nyloncalculus.com). Wall’s wingspan of 6’9” would have put him well over the 90th percentile. Now, according to espn.com, Kris Dunn out of Providence has a wingspan of 6’10”. We just saw how valuable a point guard who can shoot over defenders is when Shaun Livingston torched the Cleveland defense by penetrating and releasing over the shorter guard playing him. If Dunn’s wingspan is really that massive, that’s a big selling point for me. As far as standing reach goes, Wall’s 8’6” tops Dunn’s 8’4”, but 8’4” is still enough to put him close to the 90th percentile in that respect. From there, I can see why the comparisons are made. Both are slashing guards who have above average speed and athleticism, and both have had injury problems in the past (proving the while Dunn’s past injuries may be a red flag, the story can have a happy ending as it did with Wall’s success in the NBA). While the height and weight measurements on Dunn varies from listing to listing, most have him at nearly 6’4” and a little over 200lbs. Wall is approximately the same height, and just a little lighter at 196lbs. As far as this goes, I would say Wall and Dunn have very similar body types, which suit a very similar playing style. However, that certainly doesn’t paint the whole picture. If we want to fill in all of the blanks, and be able to make the most educated guess possible on Dunn’s potential, we need to look at this comparison from a few more angles.

Statistical Evaluation

Statistically, this is another interesting comparison. Both Wall and Dunn played with other dominant stars in college, Wall having played with guys like DeMarcus Cousins, Patrick Patterson and Eric Bledsoe, and Dunn with Ben Bentil (who is staying in the draft as of now) and Rodney Bullock. Wall and Dunn’s college scoring in the year before they were drafted (Wall was a one and done, so that was his freshman year) was separated by about a fifth of a point. Wall averaged 0.3 assists more per game that Dunn, but nearly a whole rebound less. Dunn also played less minutes per game than Wall, and therefore has better stats per 40 minutes. However, when it comes to Win Shares Per 40 Minutes, Wall has a considerable lead on Dunn (sports-reference.com), while concurrently having a lower usage percentage. Dunn has the lead in Player Efficiency Rating, which for the record I don’t like to rely on as a true judge of efficiency. Overall, the stats are pretty close. They both steal the ball at a very good clip, and they both are pretty prone to turnovers. In a purely statistical evaluation, I would have to give Wall the edge (also accounting for the fact that he was a freshman and Dunn has parts of four seasons played in college). But, while Ben Bentil was a great player for Providence, Wall had much better teammates (they had five players taken in the first round that year). Metrically, however, the edge probably goes to Dunn. He has a greater assist percentage, rebound percentage, steal percentage, and a lower turnover percentage (sports-reference.com). Shooting is a big topic for these two, as Wall’s shaky jump shot was often a question earlier in his career (he once shot less than 10% from long range in a year). Dunn’s three point shooting percentage his last year in college was better than Wall’s, but keep in mind that Dunn has had more time in college to work on it (he is only 3 years younger than Wall despite being in the draft six years after him). One thing about Dunn that has me worried is his rather low True Shooting Percentage. It sits at .541, which is lower than Wall’s college number. If Dunn is going to have a similar career arc as Wall, he will need to pick up his shooting as Wall did. From this perspective, it seems like Wall and Dunn share many of the same statistical strengths and weaknesses. But, there is one last test for them to go through, and that is perhaps the most important one of all for NBA scouts: the eye test.

Film Evaluation

Now, with the last two angles to this comparison, it’s pretty obvious how Kris Dunn drew his John Wall comparisons. But when it comes to the mixtapes, it goes beyond just a comparison. It gets to the point where it’s hard to tell them apart. I have watched both players, and I found John Wall’s college play a little more “dynamic”, but that doesn’t really matter much as far as production. Dunn has great speed, like Wall. He uses that speed and twitchy quickness to jump passes and get easy dunks, like Wall. He uses those easy dunks to create future openings when it comes to penetration, like Wall. In fact, I re-watched a few mixtapes of Wall and Dunn from college, and I was a little bit frightened by the similarities. If you get a chance, find Wall’s game winner vs. Miami (Ohio) on YouTube, then find Dunn’s game winner vs. Creighton. It’s the same play. Dunn goes the same way as Wall, he steps back in the same spot, shoots pretty much the same shot, and it ends with the same result. Wall’s was a splash, it barely touched the net. Dunn’s hit the back of the rim, and bounced around a while before going down. Regardless of how it went in, it did on both occasions, and ended with a win being put in the column of Kentucky and Providence.

Final Thoughts

John Wall is a tremendous player. Kris Dunn is a tremendous prospect. Will their career parabolas share the same arc? I don’t know the answer to that question, nobody does right now. However, what I can say is that Dunn shares many of the traits of a player like Wall. While Wall did what he did as a freshman, and therefore seemed to have more potential, Dunn is still someone I certainly would take in the Lottery. Without doubt, I can say that Kris Dunn is the real deal, and could fill a similar role as Emmanuel Mudiay did last season. But, comparing those two is another story entirely, one that I don’t choose to tell. I conclude this article by saying the following to any NBA team who thinks they can contend with a combo guard who can step in and competently score and defend in a number of ways- Kris Dunn is available, and ready to go.

UVA vs. Syracuse

With all the talk about this game, I thought I would weigh in before us sports fans have something else big to talk about. With all the talk about the possibility of fixing games, questionable calls (see photo below) and late game collapses, nobody seems to be talking about a brutal mistake that may have cost UVA the game that was NOT made by a player or referee. Many people refuse to believe that Tony Bennett failed to coach his way around a surging Syracuse team (for the record, 'Cuse is a great team that deserved to be in the tournament) and was a main cause of UVA's demise. If you look at the numbers, the glue that held UVA together was senior center Mike Tobey (who SHOULD hold a future in the NBA, if GMs had any sense). However, Tony Bennett played Big Mike sparingly in times when he should have been featured in a starring role. Tobey had 10 points, 4 boards, 1 highlight reel assist and multiple blocked shots in only 18 minutes of action in his final game. If you look at the games when Tobey got real minutes, a pattern starts to emerge. 26 minutes against Georgia Tech netted a final line of 7 points and 7 boards. 20 minutes against Clemson? 6 points, 6 rebounds, 2 blocks and 2 steals. 25 minutes on senior day against Louisville? 15 points and a whopping 20 boards. Tobey was also averaging 11.5 points, 4.8 rebounds and 1.3 blocks in the NCAA Tournament while playing only 15.5 minutes per game. Now, one would think that a 7ft powerhouse on a hot streak would be playing crunch time minutes against a Syracuse team that lost it's best rebounder to foul trouble. However, Bennett saw that 'Cuse center Tyler Lydon had a good shooting touch and decided that they would sacrifice post dominance for a slightly better perimeter defender and benched Tobey. That, in part, cost them the game. Tony Bennett is a tremendous coach, and is partly responsible for getting Tobey on this streak in the first place. However, I am now hypothesizing that Bennett has "frozen up" during the tournament and has caused his team to make repeated early exits as 1 or 2 seeds. For instance, he couldn't adjust his team's defensive strategy to Travis Trice's hot shooting for Michigan State in a previous tourney, which caused a bracket busting early loss for his team.  I can't put the blame on Bennett alone, a team is usually the main force behind it's own collapse. However, multiple mistakes were, in my opinion, made by Coach Bennett that in a way "helped his team down". Another one of those mistakes was not making sure that London Perrantes, who had made 5 consecutive long bombs at one point in the game, took the final three. As we all know, he did not, and the game was left up to a far less consistent shooter.

Food for thought- Mike Tobey averages 18.7 points, 11.1 rebounds, 1.5 blocks and 1.7 turnovers per 40 minutes, per sports-reference.com. Considered one of the best big men in the NCAA, Notre Dame's Zach Auguste averages 18.9 points, 14.5 rebounds, 1.5 blocks and 3.3 turnovers per 40 minutes. NBA prospect Kaleb Tarczewski out of Arizona averages 13.7 points, 13.6 rebounds, 2.0 blocks and 1.9 turnovers per 40 minutes. Cal star center Ivan Rabb averages 17.5 points, 11.9 rebounds, 1.7 blocks and 2.1 turnovers per 40 minutes. I just compared Mike Tobey's numbers to the numbers of three NCAA bigs that are considered elite, and he seems to fit in quite nicely.



Courtesy of AP and NewsOK
 
 

NBA G.O.A.T. List

It's one of the most debated questions out there. Who is the greatest player in NBA history? It isn't one that is easily answered. However, I have attempted to make a list using only a collection of stats. Without further fanfare, here it is: *some stats estimated

1. Wilt Chamberlain*

2. Julius Erving

3. Michael Jordan

4. LeBron James

5. Hakeem Olajuwon

6. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar

7. Vince Carter

8. Jason Kidd

9. Tracy McGrady

10. Karl Malone

11. Kevin Garnett

12. Allen Iverson

13. Antwan Jamison

14. Spencer Haywood

15. Tim Duncan

16. Charles Barkley

17. Dirk Nowitzki

18. Mitch Richmond

19. Shaquille O'Neal

20. Kobe Bryant

21. World B. Free

22. Magic Johnson

23. Reggie Miller

24. Alex English

25. George Gervin


That was just the top 25. Normally, these lists are very opinionated. However, this one is entirely stat based and also takes into account the talent of teammates in each candidate's best season or two. I have added a few players that usually wouldn't be considered for a list like this just for reference, I'm sure you can find them. Have questions, comments, anything you want to say, just toss it in the comment section or hit me up on Twitter at @hoover__26!

March Madness 2016 Breakdown

2016 March Madness Breakdown

March Madness is finally here! The zenith of the fantasy sports year (at least for me), this year’s March Madness is primed to be one of the maddest on record. This article will break down some of the tougher (or more exciting) matchups in the first and possibly second round. Have your bracket ready? Good! Now, let’s begin!

1 Kansas vs. 16 Austin Peay, Round of 64

Kansas is going to win. Let me say that right off the bat. You may be thinking, I thought he was going to be breaking down the tougher to decide matchups. Well, I started with this one because Austin Peay is going to give Kansas a fight (and make this one of the most watchable 1/16 games in the tourney). Chris Horton is averaging 18.9 points and 12 boards per game for the Governors, and Josh Robinson is averaging nearly 17 points to go along with his 80+ FT%. This should be an awesome game, and if any #1 seed is going down this year (I’m 99% sure they won’t) it might be Final Four favorite Kansas (but probably not). If Kansas can make it past this game (which they will, in all likelihood) it may seem that a matchup with the Cal Golden Bears is the only legitimate challenge for them until the Final Four. But wait a minute, what if Cal never goes that far (they wouldn’t meet until the Sweet Sixteen)?

4 California vs. 13 Hawaii, Round of 64

This one may seem like an easy choice on the surface. Cal has a bunch of future NBA players on their roster, and Hawaii is 0-1 vs. Top 25 teams (yahoo.com). However, the Rainbow Warriors (yes, the Rainbow Warriors) are a much tougher team than you may think. Hawaii’s points scored vs points allowed differential is better than that of Cal, and they out-assist Cal by 2.8 dimes per game. Understand, however, that Hawaii’s numbers came against less talented teams. That is a detracting factor, as Hawaii would be the favorite if their stats came against the same opponents as Cal. Nevertheless, Hawaii is one of the better teams in the nation defending the perimeter, and also have stud post player Stefan Jankovic averaging 1.2 blocks per game. Hawaii is also much deeper than Cal, having eight players scoring over 5 points per game (compared to just the starting five for Cal). If you want to be contrarian with your picks, Hawaii is one of my favorite first round upset choices against a slow, methodical Cal team.

7 Iowa vs. 10 Temple, Round of 64

First off, Iowa has only two players that average double digit scoring. That may seem like a disadvantage, and it usually is, but take into consideration that those two guys are Jarrod Uthoff and Peter Jok. Uthoff has an elite stat line of 18.9 PPG, 6.4 RPG and 2.7 BPG, as well as a .392 percentage from long range.  Jok is a top-notch shooter, and is second on the team in scoring and steals while averaging only about 27 minutes per game. Temple has their share of star power, with do-it-all player Quenton DeCosey leading the team in scoring. They also have elite rebounder Jaylen Bond, who will help them on the glass against a solid rebounding team in Iowa. This is one of the closer matchups, but I would have to say that Iowa has the edge here. I just don’t think Temple, who sits at 271st in the nation in scoring, can keep Iowa from out-shooting them. I know that jump shooting teams are usually frowned upon in the tourney, but Iowa is more than just a one trick pony.

8 St. Joseph’s vs. 9 Cincinnati, Round of 64

This one is a bit odd, as the higher seed in St. Joe’s is actually losing the “popular vote”, so to speak, 48% to 52%. That is more than likely because of the Bearcats’ stifling defense (fun fact, the Bearcats are NOT named after the animal, which is actually called a Binturong, or the Stutz Bearcat, but after former Cincy fullback Leonard Baehr). Cincy also has a star guard in Troy Caupain, who dropped 37 points in the team’s quadruple overtime loss to UConn. However, St. Joe's has a stud guard of their own (as well as Timmy Parks, who currently suits up as the most awesome mascot in sports, the St. Joseph’s Hawk). DeAndre Bembry is one of the most consistent players in all of basketball, having scored in single digits only once in the entire season. He also leads the team in assists and steals, and is second in scoring and rebounding. The team’s scoring and rebounding leader is Isaiah Miles (who also led the Philadelphia Inquirer’s all-improved team), a 6’8” forward who has also drained 62 treys at a 38.8% clip this season. Cincy may be a little deeper than St. Joe’s, but the Hawks may have found a new threat in forward Papa Ndau. In all, Cincy’s tough defense and electrifying guard play will be a formidable task for the Hawks, but I feel that St. Joe’s consistency will win out in the end.

6 Texas vs. 11 Northern Iowa, Round of 64

This one was a puzzler. I stared at the numbers for what seemed like forever, took into consideration everything I knew about both of these teams (which is probably more for Texas than UNI, as I followed Shaka Smart intently), and I still had trouble coming up with a conclusion. First, let’s revisit the numbers. The first thing that jumps off the page is UNI’s lack of depth. It isn’t that they don’t have a lot of good players,because they do, but the fact is they only have ten players all together who actually play. UNI’s top gun, Wes Washpun, is putting up a very strong 14.3 points, 4 rebounds and 5.2 assists per game. They don’t have anyone with outstanding rebound numbers, but they have a bunch of players with pretty solid totals (they are still low on the rebounding list). The same pretty much goes for Texas, as Cameron Ridley (whom I forsee getting around 15 minutes in their game) is the only Longhorn averaging more than 5.3 boards per game. Texas is bigger, but UNI is a far better shooting team. UNI also has taller guards, which I have found leads to deeper tournament runs in some cases. It seems like there teams could cancel each other out. Next, I look to the points scored/points allowed differential, and I find that UNI is winning that category. Lastly, I see that UNI is coming off a 6 game winning streak (including a win over possible 11 seed Wichita State), while Texas lost their last game against Baylor, as well as two losses in their last three games (the one win came against a non-tourney team in Oklahoma State). As much as I love Shaka Smart’s coaching style (it isn’t Havoc anymore, but it’s close), I am feeling UNI by a nose here. But I don’t think this could be any closer.

8 USC vs. 9 Providence, Round of 64

One thing I usually don’t like to use in the tournament, as it corrupts your perception of statistics, is the eye test. However, IF we were going on the eye test, this wouldn’t even be a question. Ben Bentil and Kris Dunn can only be described with one word, that word being “WOW”. USC has had a history of giving up big games to strong centers, so Bentil should come close to his 20+ points per game average. Dunn is so athletic, I don’t know if Julian Jacobs can run with him. USC is no pushover, though. They are in the top 20 in the nation in scoring, and grab nearly 40 rebounds per game. However, they give up about 75 points per game, which is especially bad when you play a team that has multiple 90+ point performances. In my opinion, Providence takes this one. However, I don’t think they have a huge chance of beating North Carolina in the round of 32 (assuming UNC beats either Florida Gulf Coast or Fairleigh Dickinson, probably Fairleigh if I were to pick that First 4 game).

7 Wisconsin vs. 10 Pittsburgh, Round of 64

The classic battle of the big name school vs. the low expectation cinderella. Wisconsin went to the big game last season, but lost a boatload of players. Pitt is an elite passing team, with some very physical players to match up with Wisconsin’s Nigel Hayes (16.3 PPG and 5.8 RPG). A main issue for Pitt is their lack of shooting, as no Panther made more than 46 threes (Jamel Artis). Wisconsin's Bronson Koenig, a 39.4% shooter from long range, made more threes than Pitt’s second and third best shooters combined. Wisconsin has a few players that rely on post scoring and rebounding, but Pitt and 6’9” forward-center Michael Young have held guys like Brice Johnson to only 7 boards. Personally, I think Wisconsin is getting a little too much credit for what they did last year. Pitt looks to me like a team primed for an upset, and could set you apart from your fellow bracket makers.

7 Dayton vs. 10 Syracuse, Round of 64

Now, Dayton has given me some huge boosts in the past when they made surprising runs (well, not too surprising to me). However, I think the Dayton magic has run out. They looked out of sorts in their last few games, and could be in a position to lose to a team many thought should have been NIT bound. Michael Gbinije is a star for Syracuse, and if Trevor Cooney can find his shot again, they could be a dangerous team. I contacted a team manager on Syracuse who hinted that he expects Syracuse to pull this one out (which isn’t all that surprising, seeing as he IS a team manager for them), and I agree with him. The ‘Cuse is loose!

NBA- Who Replaces San Antonio's Big 3?

NBA Dynasty- Who Replaces San Antonio’s Big 3?

The San Antonio Spurs are one of the NBA’s premier teams, and have been for over a decade. This is due, in large part, to their Big 3: Tim Duncan, Manu Ginobili and Tony Parker, who are accounting for 72.5 espn.com fantasy points per game this season. However, the Spurs’ Big 3 have a combined age of 110. Timmy is having some serious knee issues, and Tony has struggled to put up numbers on a consistent basis this year. Manu may not be sitting out games for rest, despite being 38 years old, but he hasn’t been seeing as many minutes in the first place. Fortunately for the Spurs, they have a franchise that is stacked with young talent. Talent that will be stepping into some big shoes once the Big 3 either retires or starts to see Kevin Garnett-esque minutes. In this article, I will outline the players that you NBA dynasty players should be targeting now from the San Antonio Spurs bench and D-League.

Ray McCallum, PG, 9.9 MPG

While he isn’t exactly the heir apparent to Tony Parker (Patty Mills appears to be next in line for the throne), he should still see a spike in minutes when Parker’s role regresses. Patty has only seen enough minutes to be fantasy viable when Parker is injured, but I suspect McCallum should see plenty of court time when Patty is starting. The drop-off from Parker to Patty was considerably larger than the drop-off from Patty to McCallum, so the minutes will be more than likely closer to a split. The issue with McCallum is, we have really no idea what he can do in the long term. He went to the University of Detroit Mercy, which hasn’t been to the NCAA tournament since 2012 (when McCallum was playing), and is coached by McCallum’s father. He averaged 18.7 PPG his senior year in college, and hasn’t made more than 30 starts in any of his three NBA seasons. He did hit the 30 mark last year with Sacramento,  but ended up averaging only 7.4 points and 2.8 assists per game. That could have something to do with the fact that he was playing with DeMarcus Cousins, who was averaging over 18 shots per game. When he gets his chance in San Antonio, he will be more developed, and playing alongside Kawhi Leonard who is far more selfless. I would target McCallum in deeper dynasty leagues, as he will be taking a good portion of the minutes when Tony Parker is no longer holding the reins.

Kyle Anderson, SF, 12.5 MPG

Kyle Anderson is an interesting player. He has played his entire 2 year career with the Spurs, but hasn’t cracked the permanent rotation yet. His days at UCLA really are the only thing we have to go on as far as future production goes. He was a Swiss Army Knife to be sure, averaging 14.6 points, 8.8 boards and 6.5 assists per game in his second and final year of college. Anderson is a great target in dynasty leagues because with all the minutes that are going to be opening up, Anderson can fill multiple holes. At 6’9”, 230lbs, Anderson could conceivably play all five spots on the floor. His natural range would be the 2-3-4, but his passing skills could allow him to play “point forward” and take the ball in. His rebounding ability could also make him a valuable small-ball 5, not unlike Draymond Green. One of my favorite resources, FiveThirtyEight’s CARMELO career projection of Kyle Anderson isn’t exactly fantastic. However, this may not be accounting for the fact that Anderson might be primed to take over the Big 3’s lost minutes. Take a look at Anderson’s projected WAR, but keep an eye on the

similarity scores. We just have to hope that Anderson’s career line ends up more like the one I circled in red than the one in blue.

 

This just shows how little we really know about how good he could be. But, what I do know is that he is versatile as can be. That will really give him a big boost in the race to claim the legendary minutes that are about to be forfeited, as he can step in to fill any need his team has. Anderson is someone I would be targeting in dynasty, purely do to his huge upside.

Boban Marjanovic, C, 8.4 MPG

Boban is one of my favorite young players in the NBA. He is a huge, humongous, hulking center, standing at 7’3” and weighing in at 290lbs. His hands are supposedly bigger than Kawhi Leonard’s (Leonard’s hands measure 9.75”, which is huge), and he has a wingspan of 7’8”. He is a ridiculously ginormous man. He can also play some basketball, which is sometimes hidden by his giant stature and limited minutes. If you expand Boban’s stats so they are per 100 possessions, he averages 34.9 points and 21.2 rebounds with a ridiculous 128 Offensive Rating (basketball-reference.com). Consider the fact that “The Admiral” David Robinson’s best season for that stat was 1996-97, where he averaged 39.6 points and 19.1 rebounds with a 117 Offensive Rating per 100 possessions. Boban is starting to look pretty good, huh? I understand that Boban is mostly playing against second units, but by the time Timmy is retired and LaMarcus Aldridge is in his 10th or 11th year, Boban will be ready to jump in and play some big minutes. I’m not expecting David Robinson out of him by any stretch, but I would be surprised if he didn’t put up really good fantasy stats when his number is called.

Jonathon Simmons, SG, 13.9 MPG

With Manu Ginobili nearing the end of his storied career, San Antonio needs someone to step up and fill that gaping hole. Simmons stands at 6’6”, the same height as Ginobili, but he has more athleticism than three of Ginobili. Simmons has the ability to play above the rim, which could be a useful skill as the Spurs transition from fundamentalists to a more modern system. Simmons also has a very nice touch from long range, shooting nearly 43% from deep. The thing that Simmons really needs is a midrange game. He attempts over 70% of his shots from either within 3 feet of the hoop or from behind the arc. If anyone can turn Simmons into a more well rounded player, it’s Gregg Popovich. Simmons has tremendous upside at only 26 years old, and could be leaping into a big role with the high number of minutes that are about to be unclaimed.

Cady Lalanne, C, 25.8 MPH (D-League)

Lalanne has never played in the NBA, but if the college and the D-League is any indication, he should be pretty good. He averaged 11.6 points and 9.5 boards per game his senior year at UMass, and is averaging 12.3 points and 7.7 rebounds in 27 Austin Spurs games this season. When the young man finally gets his chance, he will have probably learned to use his 6’10” 250lb frame (with a 7’5” wingspan) to his advantage significantly more. For someone who has already come close to averaging a double-double, that could spell doom for anyone trying to box him out. He also needs to work on his passing, which is something he didn’t really have to do in college. However, as I said before, Pop (the master of ball sharing) can do something to change that. If you are a dynasty league player looking for someone who could get you great rebounding and block numbers (and you can’t get or already have Boban), I really like Lalanne. He is a raw talent to be sure, but if any team can shape him into a star, it’s San Antonio.