The New NBA Playoff Seeding System: Does it Really Matter?

In a move that many feel was required, the NBA Board of Governors unanimously approved a change to the playoff seeding structure that will be immediately implemented. Division winners will no longer automatically be placed within the top four seeds. Instead, playoff positioning in both conferences will be determined solely upon their records. As for tiebreakers, head-to-head results are now the first determinant, making the winning of a division a secondary tiebreaker.

At first blush, these changes seem necessary. Divisional rivalries are not essential to the NBA of today. Unlike the NFL, divisional games do not bear a substantial impact upon the whole of a team’s schedule and record. Less than 20% of an NBA team’s schedule is comprised of divisional matchups. (For reference, an NFL team’s schedule is 37.5% divisional games, and teams out-of-division will never meet more than once in the regular season.) And the perceived advantage of a guaranteed four-seed for division winners is mostly superficial; if the five-seed has a better record, they will retain home-court advantage in the first round series against the four-seed.

The problem, however, was that the guaranteed seeding threatened to destabilize competitive balance and reward less-successful teams ahead of others. Allowing the five-seed to have home-court advantage against an inferior four-seed resolved the potential unfairness in that particular pairing, but the greater issue was that additional seedings may have needed to be adjusted in order to allot a division winner the four-seed.

This became a greater concern due to the seedings for last season’s playoffs. The Portland Trail Blazers won four less games than both the Memphis Grizzlies and the San Antonio Spurs, but were awarded the four-seed, pushing Memphis to the five and San Antonio to the six. While this does not inherently seem like a dramatic fall, Memphis and San Antonio ended the season only one game behind the two- and three-seeds (the Houston Rockets and Los Angeles Clippers, respectively). In fact, San Antonio was in position to be the two-seed going into their last game of the regular season against the New Orleans Pelicans. Yes, the loss in that game certainly assured a precipitous fall in the cluttered standings, but without the four-seed being given to Portland, Memphis and San Antonio would have met in the playoffs, and Portland would have played the Clippers.

To suggest such changes would have had a significant impact on the way the postseason played out would be impractical and a matter of pure speculation without an ounce of substance. San Antonio fans are wont to claim that they unfairly had to play the Clippers right away, whereas Clipper fans blame their second-round exhaustion on exerting too much effort against San Antonio when they felt they had earned the right to play Portland. Ultimately, neither team even earned the right to play against the future champion Golden State Warriors, so it’s difficult to give much merit to such thoughts.

Nevertheless, the new rule amends such trifles. While I certainly see how guaranteeing a division winner at least the four-seed can be problematic, the reality is that the previous system has not been excessively troublesome. Over the last ten seasons, a division-winner has been awarded an unearned seed five times. Of those five occasions, three were essentially a swap of the “four-seed” and “five-seed” title — an entirely superficial and pointless exchange. The “five-seed” in those instances still had home-court advantage in their matchups, so the shift had no effect whatsoever on the playoff landscape.

Aside from last season, a division winner’s jump to the four-seed has only had a major impact on the playoffs once in the last ten seasons. In the 2007-08 season, the Utah Jazz won the Northwest and climbed ahead of the Houston Rockets and Phoenix Suns, who were both one game behind the two- and three-seeds just like the situation that occurred last season. Unlike last season, however, we can claim that the postseason would have effectively played out differently had the new ruling already been in place. Houston and Phoenix would have met in the first round of the playoffs as the four- and five-seeds, respectively, which would have guaranteed that one of the two teams advance to the next round. However, neither team escaped the first round as Utah beat Houston and San Antonio beat Phoenix in matchups that would not have happened under the new structure. Again, there’s certainly no way to say that such differences would have truly changed much of anything, but the 2007-08 postseason was obscured much more so than last season’s due to the division winner jumping seeds.

On the surface, the new rule about NBA playoff seeding makes perfect sense, and as some would argue, needed to be implemented. In truth, it has not had as great of an impact as we may have been made to believe.

Still, this was a swift and decisive move to change something potentially troublesome, and we should applaud the NBA for taking action as was seen fit instead of getting tangled in concerns of tradition and sentimentality.

Becky Hammon, Nancy Lieberman, and the Minefield

The NBA is a copycat league. The Golden State Warriors’ small-ball tactics this last season will undoubtedly be more prevalent than ever next season for one simple reason: it has proven successful in the immediate past.

It’s somehow overlooked, but the truth is that the Warriors were solid all-around. Draymond Green realistically did not spend much time at center — regular season or postseason — but that’s what stuck out the most in the Finals. That one strategy grabs the headlines because it’s different.

Because it will force change.

Now, consider what the San Antonio Spurs have done. They have been the exemplary model franchise over the last 18 years. That is not simply because they’ve had Tim Duncan, but because Gregg Popovich is an innovative and progressive coach (despite the projection of his stodginess), while the team’s scouting and draft efforts have drastically expanded the reaches of the NBA world. And just last year, the Spurs began dismantling another antiquated barrier by hiring Becky Hammon as an assistant coach.

But that’s not the intent. It’s the byproduct of seeking success by reaching out to talent without regard for standard conventions.

Hammon, coming to the end of her prolific WNBA career with an ACL tear, was a regular at the Spurs facility and behind the bench at home games even before the hire made things official. As a member of the San Antonio Stars, she was already a staple of the community, and her own basketball accolades made for an easy transition — “easy” in the sense that she was not at all out of place as a tested and worthy basketball mind. (Bearing the media attention as a representative gender equality pioneer might be another story.)

This was most publicly demonstrated as Hammon took over as the Spurs’ head coach for this year’s summer leagues and claimed the Samsung NBA Summer League trophy from Las Vegas. The team won their final six games, despite the turmoil of playing 10 games in two weeks and an utter lack of quality practice time. (The Spurs participated in the Utah Jazz Summer League as well, in case you think the numbers are off.)

Thus the copycatting was launched.

Hammon’s aptitude has already lent further credibility for an already qualified coach. It was announced Friday that Nancy Lieberman has been hired as an assistant coach to George Karl with the Sacramento Kings. Like Hammon, Lieberman’s résumé is loaded with basketball experience. Unlike Hammon, Lieberman has established herself with time spent not only as a player, but as a head coach and general manager in the WNBA and D-League.

That being said, the reality should be that Lieberman could reach this level without the aid of precedent. But what should be doesn’t bud into what is often enough.

What’s most troubling, however, is not the lack of access to these positions, but the impetus one must apparently exert to even seek them. Janie McCauley of the Associated Press began her piece on Lieberman’s hiring (the previous link) by quoting Lieberman recalling a conversation with Pat Riley:

“When I said to [Riley], `You know, I really would like to coach,’ and he said, `You would?’ and he goes, `Nancy, if you want something you have to tell people what you want,”‘ she said. “I didn’t want to be that pushy broad. I just normally assumed: `Well, I’m Nancy, I’ve been around the game my whole life, they should know this. They should have a crystal ball and know what I want. That was absolutely horrible thinking on my side. The most important thing is that I started to share what my aspirations were – `I’d like to do this.”‘

The NBA is not your standard employer. They do not wait for the applications to roll in. They headhunt. Assistant coaches already in the employ of other teams are consistently approached about other openings. The same can be said of television personalities — more than a few have been nabbed away from their microphones (i.e. Doc Rivers, Mark Jackson, Steve Kerr). It’s not strictly a matter of availability or desire, but about being on a franchise’s radar.

Sure, making it known that you’d “like to do this” may allow you to arrive on teams’ lists of potential hires, but that responsibility is not thrust upon other people associated with the league — either on its fringes or fully immersed. They are there because, hopefully, they like to do what they’re doing; it’d be rather incredible to get that far in a profession without a passion for it. And it’s a fairly safe assumption to think that coaches of any level would like the opportunity to progress.

Visibility is not an inherent problem. Look at all the rumors that constantly swirled around Phil Jackson after leaving the Los Angeles Lakers. Once you have accessed the community, you remain an acknowledgable member. Though Lieberman does not bear the same clout as Jackson, she was already inducted into the Naismith Memorial Basketball Hall of Fame even before the WNBA came into existence.

And if an argument is permitted about presence, Lieberman has not been off the grid. She has previously drawn headlines as the head coach of the Texas Legends, the D-League affiliate of the Dallas Mavericks, for the 2010-11 season. She then proceeded to accept a role in their front office as an assistant general manager. Lieberman was even closer to the NBA proper more recently as an analyst for Oklahoma City Thunder pre- and post-game broadcasts.

It was not “horrible thinking” on Lieberman’s part to assume that her interests in coaching should have been known. It was made erroneous because of an inexplicable shroud that averted attention away from an entire pool of potential talent.

(Note: I won’t be touching Lieberman’s fear of becoming “that pushy broad [in seeking a desired employment position]” simply because that would be far too much of an aside from the basketball aspects. If you’ve stuck with me this far, I trust you can comprehend the hazards of such a pejorative deprecation distinctively driven into a gendered role. If someone else wants to take that ball and run with it, please send word about it.)

Fortunately, Hammon and Lieberman are demonstrating a route into the league for women. Unfortunately, it doesn’t shatter the glass ceiling, as others are wont to claim. Why? Because both coaches have expansive hall of fame records backing them up. They are extreme cases.

They are effectively inimitable.

Yes, what they are doing is groundbreaking and necessary. And they should absolutely be applauded and celebrated for it. But the problem is the manner in which they’ve arrived at this point.

Coaching is not exclusively reserved for the greatest players. Popovich never played in the NBA, yet he is its greatest active coach. Erik Spoelstra only played professionally overseas, but he has won two Larry O’Brien Trophies as Riley’s puppet LeBron James’ puppet the Miami Heat head coach. Bill Belichick never donned an NFL uniform, but he’s won four Lombardi Trophies as the head coach of the New England Patriots.

These coaches cut their teeth in many lesser positions before even sniffing the reins of a professional team. Popovich began at Pomona-Pitzer, a Division III school in 1979, and didn’t reach an NBA bench until hired as an assistant coach in 1988. Belichick began at a level “the equivalent of a quality-control coach” in 1975 with the Baltimore Colts. Seasoning his skills as he climbed the ranks, Belichick rotated through varying positional coaching roles and developed a deeper understanding of the game. Similarly, Spoelstra began with the Heat as a video coordinator in 1995.

What Hammon and Lieberman are doing is fantastic; there is no doubt about that. The problem, however, is that their path into the NBA does not suit many others. To borrow from Annette Kolodny, they came into the minefield from a different angle; their dance won’t help the vast majority dodge the hazards laid before them. Hammon and Lieberman do not adequately represent a standard ascension. Lieberman’s coaching experiences speak well to the sort of development and progression that would be most beneficial, but again, her background as a player overshadows much of it as she was an extraordinary player. Her steps can’t be readily retraced.

Progress is truly being made with Becky Hammon and Nancy Lieberman as assistant coaches in the NBA. But the truest indication of replicative and sustainable progress will be when someone not already boasting a hall of fame career rises through all of the ranks. Once success is found by such means, it will be continually sought.

After all, the NBA is a copycat league.

“In my view, it is a fine thing for many of us, individually, to have traversed the minefield; but that happy circumstance will only prove of lasting importance if, together, we expose it for what it is (the male fear of sharing power and significance with women) and deactivate its components, so that others, after us, may literally dance through the minefield.”
—Annette Kolodny

The last line of “Dancing through the Minefield: Some Observations on the Theory, Practice, and Politics of a Feminist Literary Criticism.”

Las Vegas Summer League Standouts

Spring may not have gone the San Antonio Spurs’ way, but they have dominated this summer. After starting off strong in free agency, the Spurs demonstrated the development of their young prospects and assistant coaches by winning the Samsung NBA Summer League championship in Las Vegas. Behind the play of league MVP Kyle Anderson, the Spurs came out on top after seven games in less than two weeks. But while they may have won the tournament, individual players across the league did well to showcase their talents. Some were high-profile prospects, while others may have been playing their way onto international rosters, but they are due respect. The recognition granted by the Samsung All-NBA Summer League 2015 Summer League teams is reasonably agreeable, but I believe several others stood out as well.

First Team

G Justin Dentmon (D-League Select): 17.0 PPG, 56.5 FG%, 2.2 RPG, 2.6 APG, 2.8 SPG through five games (five starts)

All the talk was about Seth Curry lighting up the scoreboard, but Dentmon was one of the most impressive shooters in Las Vegas. 56.5 percent from the field is highly respectable from a center playing right at the rim, but from a six-foot guard? And his numbers weren’t inflated by an abundance of easy lay-ups; Dentmon shot 54.5 percent from beyond the arc! A five game set can’t adequately speak to sustainability, but Dentmon averaged more than six attempts from deep per game — he wasn’t sheltering his stats by passing on opportunities. Oh yeah, and he nabbed eight steals in one game.

G Seth Curry (New Orleans Pelicans): 24.33 PPG, 45.9 FG%, 4.33 RPG, 2.67 APG, 3.17 SPG through six games (six starts)

All the talk was about Seth Curry lighting up the scoreboard because, well… he lit up the scoreboard. Curry led the Vegas summer league in scoring and led the Pelicans to the semi-finals of the tournament. One of his best assets was his ability to get to the free throw line, attempting more than 10 free throws in two games. His numerous visits to the stripe proved fruitful as he shot 36-41 for 87.8 percent. Like Dentmon, Curry was a frequent pick-pocket. Overall, Curry had a strong showing, except his penchant for outside shots was the weakest part of his game, going only 8-36 for 22.2 percent.

G/F Kyle Anderson (San Antonio Spurs): 21.0 PPG, 45.0 FG%, 6.0 RPG, 1.86 APG, 1.14 SPG, 0.86 BPG through seven games (seven starts)

Anderson earned the MVP honors not simply for the numbers he produced, but for his ability to manipulate the rhythm of the game. He is a heady threat that beats opponents with his vision and ball fakes. At 6’9″, his versatility was put to use as he bounced around three positions in the starting lineup alone. His size proved incredibly advantageous in guard matchups while he would take them to the post. His passing and shooting ability opened up the floor when drawing a frontcourt assignment. Anderson doesn’t have a reliable perimeter shot as part of his game right now, but knows how to create from outside.

F TJ Warren (Phoenix Suns): 18.71 PPG, 54.0 FG%, 3.57 RPG, 1.29 APG, 1.14 SPG, 1.14 BPG through seven games (seven starts)

Warren is an aggressive scorer and was able to excel as such in summer league. He plays the baseline and elbow with impressive strength as a small forward, capable and willing to throw his body around. Warren’s game is unique to the league of today because he is virtually a non-threat from the outside, but that does not stop him from creating around the paint. However, if he is to achieve success while maintaining his play style, Warren will need to be a more consistent rebounder. He can pull them down on occasion, but isn’t regularly in position.

F/C Alan Williams (Houston Rockets): 20.5 PPG, 50.0 FG%, 11.75 RPG, 2.0 APG, 1.0 SPG, 0.25 BPG through four games (four starts)

Williams is a perfect example of the fact that some of these players simply need an opportunity to shine. He attended the Orlando summer league as a member of the Charlotte Hornets roster, but did not see much court time whatsoever. Once in Las Vegas with the Rockets, however, Williams thrived as a rebounding machine. Sure, part of that may have been determined by the Rockets hoisting up 81 shots per game (most teams averaged near 70 shots per game), but five offensive rebounds per game — 12 in the Rockets’ final game — is impressive regardless of the situation. Williams certainly needs to develop more of a defensive presence, but recording a 22-point, 21-rebound game deserves First Team recognition.

Second Team

G Larry Drew II (New Orleans Pelicans): 9.0 PPG, 3.5 RPG, 7.83 APG, 1.67 SPG through six games (six starts)

Drew came away as the assist leader in Las Vegas. It was not that he simply racked up assists, but that he did so while protecting the ball; his assist-to-turnover ratio was nearly 3:1. Drew did not shoot especially well from the field in general, but demonstrated that he can hit from distance on occasion.

G Sean Kilpatrick (Milwaukee Bucks): 18.17 PPG, 3.17 RPG, 0.83 APG, 1.5 SPG, through six games (two starts)

Kilpatrick was a consistent threat from the outside, making at least two three-point attempts in every game. His 45.7 percent from deep (16-35) will certainly have its appeal, especially considering there wasn’t much help around the perimeter.

F Greg Whittington (Miami Heat): 13.0 PPG, 50.0 FG%, 8.2 RPG, 2.0 APG, 1.2 SPG, 1.6 BPG through five games (five starts)

Like Williams, a change in venue and greater opportunity greatly benefited Whittington. He did very little in Orlando (on the Heat roster), but produced when given more playing time. Shooting 47.1 percent outside the arc (8-17) certainly helps his roster prospects.

F Jordan Mickey (Boston Celtics): 13.8 PPG, 52.9 FG%, 9.6 RPG, 1.0 SPG, 2.6 BPG through five games (five starts)

Mickey was touted as a shot-blocker, and he hasn’t disappointed. In fact, knowing how to and sticking with his own game has netted Mickey a surprisingly lucrative contract for a second-round rookie. He may be slightly undersized, but he looks capable of playing on the block.

F/C Khem Birch (New Orleans Pelicans): 9.17 PPG, 63.6 FG%, 8.83 RPG, 3.33 BPG through six games (five starts)

Birch was another dominant shot-blocker, gathering rebounds at a respectable clip along the way. After a quiet stint in Orlando with the Brooklyn Nets, Birch exploded for six blocks in two consecutive games. He didn’t put up points, but that’s more so the result of a lack of shots (and playing alongside Seth Curry).

Third Team

G Erick Green (Denver Nuggets): 14.8 PPG, 53.7 FG%, 4.0 APG, 1.8 SPG through five games (one start)

While people were rightfully excited about Emmanuel Mudiay, Green was the far more stable point guard, which can be observed in their assist-to-turnover ratios (Green: 10:1, Mudiay 1.15:1).

G/F Jonathon Simmons (San Antonio Spurs): 17.0 PPG, 51.9 FG%, 4.0 RPG, 3.0 APG, 1.71 SPG through seven games (no starts)

Simmons already signed with the Spurs right before the Las Vegas summer league started, which might have encouraged his strong play — strong enough to claim championship game MVP honors. If only nba.com could spell his name right…

G/F Justin Anderson (Dallas Mavericks): 17.5 PPG, 4.17 RPG, 1.5 APG, 1.17 SPG through six games (six starts)

Anderson was far from shy, putting up 39 three-point attempts. Converting them at a rate of 38.5 percent is a strong showing; a good sign that he may be able to satisfy the “three-and-D” expectations.

F Bobby Portis (Chicago Bulls): 14.5 PPG, 41.6 3FG%, 8.67 RPG, 0.67 SPG, 1.33 BPG through six games (six starts)

Portis was not a consistent scorer, but his talent flashed in the performances bookending his summer league experience. Plus, his rebounding skills never wavered.

C Jeremy Tyler (Dallas Mavericks): 11.83 PPG, 56.9 FG%, 8.33 RPG, 1.17 SPG, 0.5 BPG through six games (six starts)

Tyler started off very slow through the first two games, but reached double digits his last four games. And his 25-point, 11-rebound game against the Los Angeles Lakers warrants this selection.

Orlando Summer League Standouts

The first of the three NBA summer leagues has drawn to a close, with the Memphis Grizzlies squad walking away from the Southwest Airlines Orlando Pro Summer League as the victors. Of course, there isn’t any real significance to winning these leagues from the standpoint of the teams themselves, but these games are critical platforms for players trying to find their way onto rosters, not just in the NBA, but around the world. Most teams try to feature players already with contracts, though standouts ranged from the recently drafted to the internationally seasoned. So let us take a moment to commend those deserving recognition regardless of contract status.

First Team

G Nate Wolters (Los Angeles Clippers): 14.0 PPG, 47.2% FG, 2.33 RPG, 3.33 APG, 2.33 SPG, 1.0 BPG through three games (three starts)

Wolters gets first team honors over other point guard candidates mainly due to his game management and ball security. He only turned the ball over four times through more than 92 minutes of court time, a commendable feat considering how rampant turnovers were throughout the week. Wolters was aggressive attacking the basket, but was seldom out of control and did not jeopardize offensive rhythm by unnecessarily seeking out his own points. His defense remains a concern, but Wolters contributed to stops and such results could get him back into the NBA.

G/F Justise Winslow (Miami Heat): 11.5 PPG, 21-30 FT, 2.25 RPG, 2.0 APG, 1.0 SPG through four games (four starts)

Yes, after the initial hype faded, Winslow did not put up boisterous numbers through all of the games, but his ability to draw fouls and get to the charity stripe looks promising. He only shot 34.3 percent from the field, but he continuously attacked defenders, getting around them with relative ease. It surely won’t be as easy once getting into the NBA proper, though this is a good start. Aside from finishing with greater frequency, another concern is that Winslow was put into an unfamiliar position, occasionally acting as point guard. He did well protecting the ball for the most part, but he had five turnovers in one game against the Brooklyn Nets. Though it’s probably not a role he’ll be expected to play much next year, it certainly needs work.

F Stanley Johnson (Detroit Pistons): 16.2 PPG, 57.7% FG, 6.8 RPG, 2.0 APG, 1.8 SPG, 1.0 BPG through five games (four starts)

It was easy to recognize that Johnson was one of the best players in Orlando this week. As a Pistons fan, I carefully watched him on both sides of the court, ready to criticize whatever flaws I could find. Fortunately, he was much better than I anticipated, demonstrating patience even while attacking from the wings. What was most surprising was that Johnson looked much more prepared to contribute on offense than on defense, having shot 41.7 percent from outside while also getting to the rim with regularity. Are there things he needs to work on? Absolutely. He was hesitant in catch-and-shoot situations, got in trouble dribbling above the arc, shot poorly from the free throw line, and played too tight to his assignments on defense, leading to bad footwork when having to chase. But that’s nitpicking a rookie; he was better than advertised.

F Aaron Gordon (Orlando Magic Blue Squad): 21.66 PPG, 50.0% FG, 11.66 RPG, 2.66 APG, 1.33 SPG, 1.66 BPG through three games (three starts)

Gordon showed off a vastly improved offensive game from last season without losing his defensive and rebounding tenacity. The most telling stat? He shot 50.0 percent from the perimeter with 12 attempts in total. It’s a relatively small sample size, but he made at least one in every game he played. Gordon didn’t get on the court for many minutes last season, but if he can prove that defenses will have to respect him, we can expect a better Magic offense next season. Unfortunately, it remains to be seen whether or not he can shoot free throws, which could put a damper on his playing opportunities.

F/C Myles Turner (Indiana Pacers): 18.66 PPG, 60.5% FG, 8.33 RPG, 0.66 SPG, 4.33 BPG through three games (three starts)

Turner looks like he wants to fill the void left by Roy Hibbert and David West. He was an aggressive rim protector, drifting through the paint to swat shots from the weakside. He also proved to be a consistent and strong rebounder on both ends of the court. Turner also showed off a soft touch on baseline shots while threatening to drive with a face-up game. Going forward, Turner has to learn how to look for teammates when in the post, and has to resist falling in love with the stepback; he made several shots with the extra space, but did not knock them down with regularity. He also needs to tone down his aggressiveness when trying to block; the 10 foul limit in summer league helped him out.

Second Team

G Semaj Christon (Oklahoma City Thunder): 15.6 PPG, 23-30 FT, 3.2 RPG, 6.8 APG, 1.2 SPG, 0.8 BPG through five games (five starts)

Christon looked like he took games over at times. He did not shoot especially well, only 33.8 percent from the field, but he was clutch, hitting two game-winners. (One was a walk-off free throw in a sudden-death second overtime against the Clippers). However, there is no getting around the fact that he recorded 21 turnovers; Christon needs to make ball security a priority.

G Joseph Young (Indiana Pacers): 22.5 PPG, 50.7% FG, 2.5 RPG, 3.25 APG, 0.5 SPG through four games (four starts)

Young demonstrated that he can replicate his scoring ability from college, generating points from all over the floor with respectable percentages (45.0 from the perimeter, 78.9 from the line). Like Christon, Young had too many turnovers (11) for comfort with a worse assist-to-turnover ratio.

F Chris Singleton (Orlando Magic White Squad): 8.0 PPG, 5.6 RPG, 1.4 APG, 1.6 SPG, 0.8 BPG through five games (no starts)

Singleton’s efforts don’t look like much when put into numbers, but his defense transformed games. In the championship game against the Grizzlies, the Magic started very sluggish and had absolutely nothing going for them until substituting for Singleton. So long as he understands his minimal offensive game, almost exclusively reserved for transition play, Singleton can return to the NBA as a rotation piece with a very defined role.

F/C Willie Reed (Miami Heat): 13.5 PPG, 60.0% FG, 7.75 RPG, 0.5 APG, 0.25 SPG, 1.75 BPG through four games (four starts)

Reed was a solid player on the block that did not try to do too much; he played within his game instead of trying to flaunt before the scouts. That has already paid off as Reed signed with the Brooklyn Nets before summer league was even over.

F/C Jarnell Stokes (Memphis Grizzlies): 12.0 PPG, 55.3% FG, 6.6 RPG, 1.2 APG, 0.6 SPG, 0.4 BPG through five games (five starts)

Stokes is a beast that feasts on glass. The summer league numbers don’t adequately show how much trouble he gave opposing teams underneath the rim fighting for missed shots. At 6’8″ he needs to have a greater defensive presence, but his rebounding skills are enticing regardless.

Third Team

G Russ Smith (Memphis Grizzlies): 14.8 PPG, 50.0% FG, 2.4 RPG, 6.2 APG, 3.2 SPG, 0.2 BPG through five games (four starts)

Smith is taking shape as a capable distributor.

G Troy Daniels (Charlotte Hornets): 13.5 PPG, 54.5% 3FG, 7.75 RPG, 2.5 APG, 0.5 SPG through four games (four starts)

Daniels can still catch fire from outside, though that’s never been in doubt.

F Branden Dawson (Los Angeles Clippers): 12.75 PPG, 52.2% FG, 10.25 RPG, 1.0 APG, 1.75 SPG, 1.25 BPG through four games (two starts)

Dawson proved he can rebound even amongst elite talent, but still can’t shoot anywhere outside of the paint.

F/C Keith Benson (Orlando Magic White Squad): 12.8 PPG, 6.2 RPG, 0.4 APG, 2.4 BPG through five games (two starts)

Benson showed off the shooting touch that made him a second round pick in 2011, but was shoved around when fighting for rebounds.

F/C Frank Kaminsky (Charlotte Hornets): 15.2 PPG, 7.8 RPG, 0.8 APG, 0.6 SPG, 1.0 BPG through five games (five starts)

Kaminsky’s shooting wasn’t as consistent as he’d like, though the range was there.

NBA Free Agency: One Week Later (Western Conference)

As the moratorium dissolved at midnight ET, there is a semblance of clarity as to what NBA teams will look like going into the 2015-16 season. Sure, not everything we’ve heard will happen as told — just ask the Dallas Mavericks or DeAndre Jordan — but most reported actions will come to fruition and that allows us to project where teams are headed with the presumed transactions. Of course, not all teams will fare equally well; though the end-goal ought to be championships, teams are at very different stages of their own strategies and have separate intentions for the immediate future. Even so, let us investigate how a couple of Western Conference teams have been tinkering with their rosters, one case with obvious promise and another more convoluted. (The Eastern Conference was discussed in the previous post here.)

The Promising: San Antonio Spurs

What a surprise: the San Antonio Spurs look like winners. The title of “offseason champions” is by no means enough for the Spurs, though. They aren’t making moves to take claim to big names — they want rings, and nothing else. Well, banners are good, too.

Their championship core, though aging, remains intact with Tim Duncan and Manu Ginobili returning for their 19th and 14th seasons, respectively. Though Ginobili certainly has been in decline, he and Duncan embody the Spurs’ aspirations for greatness even now, with both players coming back at reduced pay. Though Ginobili may not have considerable market value any more, Duncan was named to the Third Team All-NBA last season and is anticipated to accept a very meager contract compared to his worth.

And such sacrifices entice others to come on board, sometimes even passing on contracts themselves. David West declined a Player Option for this season with the Indiana Pacers in order to sign a veteran’s-minimum contract with the Spurs. Danny Green agreed to return to the Spurs early into free agency before other suitors started throwing their money at him. His four-year, $45 million deal is certainly near his value, but the Portland Blazers, Detroit Pistons, and New York Knicks could (and probably would) have offered more.

The selflessness of these contracts (“selflessness” doesn’t seem like the right word when we’re still talking about millions of dollars, but it’ll do) allows the Spurs to thrive as a team. It is a group of players that aren’t there for the paycheck; they could’ve gone elsewhere to earn more. (That’s technically not true in Kawhi Leonard’s case. His max contract from the Spurs could not have been matched by any other team, but his team-first play is representative of the Spurs attitude nonetheless. It should be noted that waiting to agree to terms after last season provided greater flexibility in the pursuit of others.) And while LaMarcus Aldridge isn’t taking a pay-cut moving to San Antonio, it became the optimal destination because of the camaraderie and atmosphere surrounding the somehow understated dynasty.

There are some consequences of signing Aldridge and Leonard to so much, though. Tiago Splitter had to be traded to the Atlanta Hawks to vacate cap space, and Marco Belinelli and Cory Joseph have gone to the Sacramento Kings and Toronto Raptors, respectively, via free agency. The Spurs have a glaring need for a backup center and could probably use a small forward to fill out the roster. But while they may be strapped for available cap, they’ve proven themselves a desirable location for players to chase championships; they will likely be able to net another under their market value.

Most of these moves are set to impact the immediate future — Duncan, Ginobili, and West are very near the end of their careers — but further demonstrating their established success will continue to draw talent to Texas in the long run.

Oh, and they’ll have Aldridge and Leonard for a while, too. That’s a pretty good core to take over after Duncan, Ginobili, and Tony Parker finally move onto Springfield, Massachusetts and the Hall of Fame.

The Confusing: Sacramento Kings

How much do I really need to explain about this choice? The Sacramento Kings’ management is seemingly a mess, with the debacle that is the conflict with head coach George Karl, but let’s keep things strictly to moves concerning free agency. Don’t worry though: there’s still plenty of dysfunction there.

First off, let’s address the move that allowed further transactions. As a means to create cap space, the Kings sent Carl Landry, Jason Thompson, and last year’s eighth overall selection Nik Stauskas to the Philadelphia 76ers for virtually nothing. Skauskas was a remnant of the former regime, but still very early in his career, and hardly the worst loss in the trade. Handing over a potential first round pick and giving Philadelphia the right to swap picks in the next two years is a devastating cost for cap space.

Anyway, the move succeeded in terms of its intent; the Kings had plenty of room for negotiations. At the very least, they weren’t bashful about trying to spend that newfound money. It was apparently intended to go to Monta Ellis and/or Wesley Matthews, but they’ve since signed with the Indiana Pacers and Dallas Mavericks, respectively.

They did, however, land their other target: Rajon Rondo. And not with a cap-friendly deal. The one-year, $9.5-10 million signing (depending on what you read) does not offer any convincing improvements, and, if this happens to pan out, it is a quick fix that will evaporate immediately; Rondo looks like he’s just trying to cash in next summer. Yes, if Rondo returns to his old form, he may be an ideal fit to run Karl’s free-flowing offense, but that is a best-case scenario that would have to dismiss last season as an anomaly of exponential proportions. To be fair, he simply did not fit into Rick Carlisle’s offense with the Mavericks and they should never have traded for him. The greater issue with the Kings is the overload of point guards; Darren Collison, Ray McCallum, and Rondo are strictly point guards.

McCallum has played some shooting guard over his first two seasons, but is not a strong enough shooter to spend extensive time at the position. Collison is by far the best shooter of the three, but is too undersized to play off the ball. And Rondo? He won’t be shifting positions, that’s practically a guarantee.

With all of that said, not all of Sacramento’s moves have been horrendous. I’ve previously suggested Omri Casspi could be a reasonable steal, and the Kings did not let him go. In fact, signing him to a two-year, $6 million deal should prove beneficial. Marco Belinelli and Kosta Koufos look like respectable acquisitions, as well, though the Kings will reportedly pay a steep price for both.

But the unfortunate truth remains: there is too much negative to accept these moves without confusion.

Whatever comes about with the chaos of free agency, these assessments are little more than projections. Injuries will happen. Front offices and benches will shuffle. What looks like a sound strategy now may not hold up in the future.

We’ve got a long way to go to see how any of it will (or won’t) work.

NBA Free Agency: One Week Later (Eastern Conference)

The moratorium in the NBA has kept almost everything unofficial, but there are plenty of moves already set to go through. Some teams have kept busy trying to retain their own players, while others have been shopping the market for pieces big and small. Not every team had the cap space — or ambition — to chase after the biggest of fish, but that does not necessarily mean their intended transactions are less significant. Of course, measuring the successes of these moves has no tangible effect here in July, but let’s review a case from both ends of the spectrum in the Eastern Conference. (The Western Conference will be addressed tomorrow.)

The Promising: Milwaukee Bucks

After a significant jump in wins — from 15 wins in the 2013-14 season to 41 (and the sixth seed) last season — the Milwaukee Bucks are attempting to become legitimate contenders in the mostly open Eastern Conference. A substantial amount of last season’s success can be attributed to the improvement of the Bucks’ young players, namely Giannis Antetokounmpo and Khris Middleton, and the defensive emphasis and strategies instilled by head coach Jason Kidd. However much they were able to play suffocating defense, they left much to be desired on offense; Michael Carter-Williams led the team in scoring at 14.1 points per game while only shooting 42.9 percent from the field. (Brandon Knight was actually their leading scorer, but traded mid-season.) As such, Milwaukee’s moves went markedly against their identity in order to provide much needed scoring.

Their biggest acquisition this offseason will be Greg Monroe, an offensively skilled big the Bucks have reportedly agreed to sign for a max-three year deal worth $50 million. Monroe was a steady and seemingly underrated contributor through his five seasons with the Detroit Pistons, scoring more than 15 points and nine rebounds per game over each of the last four seasons. He has fluid post moves and very good vision with the ball in his hands, often making the right pass. Monroe is also a relatively strong offensive rebounder, pulling down more than three per game for his career despite (or possibly due to) spending three seasons alongside Andre Drummond. Questions about his defense are legitimate — he’s never even averaged one block per 36 minutes — and he is turnover-prone when doubled over his topside shoulder, but he will add a dimension to the Bucks otherwise absent from what John Henson offers and should provide a sizable increase to their offensive production.

In another substantial move, the Bucks re-signed Middleton to a five-year, $70 million contract. Originally a throw-in piece of the Brandon Knight-Brandon Jennings trade two years ago courtesy of Joe Dumars and the Pistons, Middleton has come into his own as a lethal shooter. Undoubtedly the best shooter on the Bucks roster, they could not afford to lose the restricted free agent and acted before another team even sent in an offer sheet. Paired with his length, Middleton’s ability to spread the floor is made all the more valuable with the lineups Kidd pieces together, which led to Middleton spending time at four different positions last season. The return of Jabari Parker and the arrival of Greg Monroe will likely reduce Middleton’s time at the power positions, but his versatility was established last year and worth locking down. Plus, he delivered wins at the last second against the Heat and Suns last year and clutch earns bucks.

The Bucks also made a couple of trades so far, sending future picks to the Toronto Raptors for Greivis Vasquez and shipping Jared Dudley to the Washington Wizards for a future second round pick. Neither transaction is earthshaking, but moving Dudley unpacks the crowd in the frontcourt and Vasquez is more offensively inclined than Jerryd Bayless at the backup point guard position. He probably won’t steal many minutes from Bayless as they could be paired together, but Vasquez’s aggressiveness on offense should warrant the loss of a first round pick in 2017 (lottery-protected, based on the Clippers’ record) if the Bucks can improve immediately.

The Confusing: Toronto Raptors

Let me preface this: I trust Masai Ujiri. His time with the Denver Nuggets as the executive vice president in charge of basketball operations — essentially their general manager — made me a fan. Moving Carmelo Anthony to the New York Knicks for a handful of talent was genius, and acquiring Andre Iguodala from the Philadelphia 76ers was another success story. His first official move as the GM of the Toronto Raptors — duping the Knicks (again) into trading for Andrea Bargnani — was another brilliant demonstration of his ability to build a team.

But I just don’t get what he’s doing this offseason.

Yes, agreeing to sign DeMarre Carroll for $60 million over four years should prove to be an upgrade from Terrence Ross at small forward, but the current roster has holes. Last season’s starting power forward Amir Johnson is leaving to join the Boston Celtics and, assuming that Patrick Patterson will fill that void, the Raptors lack reliable depth at most positions as reigning Six Man of the Year Lou Williams will be a Los Angeles Laker next season.

The replacements acquired through free agency — Cory Joseph and Bismack Biyombo — are decent rotational pieces, but they won’t be filling those shoes. Joseph shoots a better percentage than Williams, but doesn’t hoist as many shots, and his strong assist-to-turnover ratio may suffer with Biyombo as a target. The comparison isn’t particularly fair since the point guards play with vastly different styles, but Williams sports a lengthy track record and did not demand much contractually. In fact, Joseph’s deal is apparently larger than Williams’ with the Lakers. Joseph is a stronger defender, but he and Delon Wright (the Raptors’ first round selection in the draft) likely won’t match the numbers provided by Williams and Vasquez. (Note: Receiving a future first for giving up Vasquez is certainly worth the risk, especially after landing Wright.)

Biyombo comes at a far cheaper price tag than Johnson, but he will only replicate his rim protection and rebounding. Both players tend to operate in the paint, but Johnson is a reliable pick-and-roll player (on offense and defense) and has a capable baseline jump shot, whereas Biyombo shooting at all is a liability. Biyombo will make for an acceptable backup center, but he won’t be able to adequately play away from the basket at all; he can’t fill in at power forward. With the uncertainty of what Lucas Nogueira and Bruno Caboclo may contribute, the Raptors are looking thin behind Jonas Valanciunas and Patterson, especially after burning through their cap space. They won’t have many options to add to their depth, limited to players accepting Mid-Level Exceptions or their own free agents (Landry Fields, Tyler Hansbrough, Chuck Hayes, and Greg Stiemsma) if they’re willing to toe the cap.

We’re only a week into free agency and there are surely moves to be made in the coming months. Rosters are far from complete — players still can’t even officially move until Thursday. We’ll have to wait not only for the proposed moves to actually take place, but for the teams to be competing in real games to adequately judge anything happening right now. What we’ve seen so far won’t tell the whole story. The promise the Milwaukee Bucks show is by no means promised, and concerns for the direction of the Toronto Raptors may be entirely unfounded.

We’ll just have to wait and see.

NBA Free Agency: Rotation Options

July marks the turning of the NBA calendar, when big names ink even bigger contracts. And while most teams will focus their attention on the alignment of the stars during the moratorium, sustainable success requires a reliable rotation of players. The free agency period is consistently highlighted by starters changing locker rooms, but rosters will be revamped in their entirety. Not every transaction will be glorified, but building a bench can be vital, so let us recognize a few of the smaller pieces that may be shuffled around this offseason.

As a practical matter, this list will only attend to players whose status as unrestricted free agents is clear. It would be irresponsible to attempt to predict what will happen in cases of restricted free agents, or to include players with Options that remain to be exercised or declined. With this condition in mind, I won’t be addressing Nick Calathes, Jared Dudley, KJ McDaniels, or Henry Sims in any greater detail, but still wanted to mention their pending availability. Like the players to follow, they can contribute respectable production and deepen a bench.

Following the guideline used for previous posted lists, the players are ordered alphabetically without any inclination as to one’s value over another. As a matter of coincidence, however, the list may actually represent a steady progression in salaries — an expected result of established experience and previous contract numbers. At any rate, here are some of the top options for filling out rotations.

Alexis Ajinça

Alexis Ajinça was a late bloomer. His first three seasons in the NBA, he simply wasn’t good. Fortunately, after returning to Europe for a couple of years and a strong 2013 Eurobasket tournament en route to a gold medal with France, Ajinça found himself in the Pelicans’ rotation for the last two seasons and has been reasonably productive.

He is a vastly improved rebounder from when he originally entered the league; his rebounding percentages are comparable with such players as Joakim Noah and Greg Monroe. Equally valuable is his ability to remain a viable scoring threat without clogging the lane. While almost 70 percent of Ajinça’s field goal attempts occurred within 10 feet of the basket, he made 50.8 percent of shots between 10-16 feet. He won’t be toeing the arc, but can contribute in pick-and-pop situations out just past the free throw line. And while he won’t have to sit in the paint on offense, he is a mildly good rim protecter and with nearly two blocks per 36 minutes.

However, the blocking numbers fail to note that Ajinça racks up fouls. Fast. Teams will have to be wary about his ability to stay on the court, but that doesn’t mean he can’t be a meaningful contributor in a rotation. It likely means that he can’t be relied upon as a second center, though.

Cole Aldrich

Cole Aldrich does not offer much in the way of offensive versatility, but he is strong in the typical categories for a center. Aldrich boasts greater rebounding percentages than Ajinça and is a far more effective paint presence on defense. In fact, his blocking percentage is better than DeAndre Jordan’s! Granted, he doesn’t face the same number of opportunities as Jordan so the stat is somewhat skewed, but Aldrich is a dependable defender nonetheless.

It must be reiterated that he doesn’t provide much help on offense, though. He is virtually a liability when shooting outside of three feet from the rim. Thankfully, he doesn’t test his range with any frequency, so it shouldn’t pose too much trouble.

Teams seeking Aldrich will know what they are getting: an active body that will work hard around the boards. There isn’t much to his offense, but his defense will certainly draw in a fair share of suitors.

Omri Casspi

For teams looking to experiment with small-ball lineups, Omri Casspi has experience shifting down into the power positions and can help stretch the floor. Last season, he posted the best shooting numbers of his career. Part of that fact can be attributed to the reduced amount of attempts from outside, but being more selective with his shots means that Casspi surpassed the coveted 40 percent shooting from beyond the arc. Whatever the case, he has been a good shooter from the corners throughout most of his career; the improvement in his percentages elsewhere should speak to his growing versatility.

Though Casspi is well-suited for teams looking to create space on offense, he is a below-average defender without any particularly beneficial skill on either the perimeter or block. His defensive rebounding percentage is respectable, but not outstanding, and he doesn’t generate many disruptions.

In truth, Casspi does not put up numbers that jump out at you. He doesn’t stuff all of the categories of the stat sheet. In aspects that determine efficiency — PER and win shares — he is essentially graded as an average player. But he has played for struggling teams for most of his career; it is difficult to adequately assess what he may contribute to a contender. His corner shooting and versatility, however, will keep him bouncing around the league.

Jonas Jerebko

Jonas Jerebko has drastically improved as an outside and corner shooter throughout his career and should be on teams’ wishlists if they’re in the market for a stretch big. While the overall number of field goal attempts per game has decreased throughout his career (his stint with Boston actually ended that trend last season), Jerebko has made three-point shooting his primary asset as more than 35 percent of all his attempts the last two seasons came from outside.

The flaw in his game, however, is his dependence on others to create. Just like almost any other outside-oriented big, Jerebko contributes as a catch-and-shoot specialist. That is not inherently a bad thing, but making him put the ball on the floor drastically reduces his productivity. While a respectable shooter on deep twos, Jerebko has struggled inside the arc when he can’t get all the way to the rim. Again, that can be said of most players of his ilk, but it is something that likely sticks out on scouting reports.

While the numbers ultimately do determine games, Jerebko’s efforts are not wholly discernible through statistics. He is a scrapper, willing to sacrifice and battle for loose balls. He is a potential spark plug through his energy alone, which will endear him to coaches, teammates, and fans alike. And, even if we rely upon the numbers, he could become a favorite target of drive-and-kick ball handlers.

Brandan Wright

Brandan Wright has built a steady career without leaving the block. He averages 1.0 blocks per game for the whole of his career while only playing 16.4 minutes per game. More impressive is his 60.6 field goal percentage for his career, highlighted by the 74.8 percent he shot for Dallas last season before the disaster that was the Rajon Rondo trade.

Despite mainly playing with at least one foot in the paint, Wright is somewhat undersized for the power positions. It hasn’t effected his defensive abilities per se, but he has never been much of a defensive rebounder. He pulls them down at a lesser rate than oft-criticized Brook Lopez based on defensive rebounding percentage.

That hasn’t had much impact on Wright’s efficiency ratings, though. His PER has never been below the average 15 for a season, and was incredibly high at the end of his stint as a Maverick. He doesn’t require much usage and won’t be a threat outside of the restricted area, but there are few better drop-off options available this free agency period.

These aren’t players that teams will be looking to build around. Nor will any of these players break the bank — well, comparatively at least. They likely won’t be starters or even sixth men. But what teams have ever succeeded without a seventh, eighth, or ninth man ready to contribute?

Picking up any of these players won’t be cause for emphatic celebration right away, but they will help teams in their pursuit towards celebrating in June.

NBA Draft Winners

With the NBA Draft complete, fans may be giddy or groaning after their teams’ activities and too distracted to follow the whole of the event. While all of the attention focused on the draft has squarely been set on the first few picks, successes and hope should be found all the way through the 60 picks. This, however, is a simplified breakdown of three cases that I believe have strongly improved in one night’s time.

Minnesota Timberwolves

Okay, this one is practically a given. Karl-Anthony Towns is a promising talent, and the only matter of luck in getting to select him in the draft was winning the lottery with the best odds. However, I feel the trade netting Tyus Jones was a major steal. Capitalizing on the Cleveland Cavaliers’ desire to ship off the guaranteed money set aside for a first round pick, the Timberwolves turned second round picks into a dependable backup point guard. It takes Zach LaVine off the ball and provides a strong floor general as an understudy to Ricky Rubio, which is particularly valuable considering his injury history. Concerns about Jones’ defensive abilities won’t suddenly go away, but having Gorgui Dieng and/or Towns in the paint will hide some inevitable mistakes. Getting a cornerstone at the top of the draft was easy; finding another substantial piece without losing anything was magnificent.

Orlando Magic

The Magic had an opportunity to draft Emmanuel Mudiay, but are apparently comfortable with what they have in Elfrid Payton. Instead, they picked up a prized shooter in Mario Hezonja, whose game is not limited to sitting behind the arc. A confident athlete, Hezonja is not afraid to go up and down the court and throw his body into the paint, though he does not seem to attempt to draw contact. While he is somewhat strong in pick-and-roll, he has some turnover issues, but with Payton and Victor Oladipo, he won’t have to handle the ball extensively. He and second round selection Tyler Harvey add desperately needed scoring threats to a Magic team that was sixth-worst in scoring per game and fourth-worst in offensive efficiency last season.

Branden Dawson

The Michigan State product is an incredible offensive rebounder with an instinctive ability to block shots. That being said, his skills and body frame are not an ideal match for an NBA player; he is built like a small forward, but does not have the shooting or ball-handling skills to play on the perimeter. I have long been a fan of his, but never very hopeful that he would make it into the NBA. And while being drafted certainly doesn’t mean he will make a roster, it means there was enough interest in him that his rights had to be scooped up. As an undrafted free agent, Dawson would have been able to negotiate where he went for Summer League play. Despite the prominence of the draft-and-stash tactic at the end of the draft, the Los Angeles Clippers — through a trade with the New Orleans Pelicans — felt pressed into grabbing him. Being drafted, particularly by a team that wasn’t just waiting at the end of the draft, was an intriguing indication that Dawson’s skills have a legitimate appeal to NBA teams, and if he doesn’t catch on with the Clippers, there may be interest elsewhere.

The NBA Draft is not only an opportunity to refresh or redefine teams’ rosters, it has an unfathomable impact on young players trying to reach the highest level of competition. The suggestion that the process should immediately be narrowed down to categorizing those involved as “winners” or “losers” is ultimately ludicrous. Of course, there are teams that very likely missed out on players at the top of their boards and fans may be disappointed, but being involved at all is inherently a win.

Batum on the Move: Breaking Down the Hornets-Trail Blazers Trade

One week after accepting his Player Option, Gerald Henderson will not be staying with the Charlotte Hornets. The Hornets have kept busy between the NBA Finals and Draft, first trading Lance Stephenson to the Los Angeles Clippers, and now shipping Henderson and Noah Vonleh to the Portland Trail Blazers in exchange for Nicolas Batum.

While Henderson is certainly a respectable player, the trade indicates that Portland is shifting gears. After trying to build around LaMarcus Aldridge for nine years, the unrestricted free agent All-Star is not expected to re-sign. Though the Blazers haven’t made it past the second round of the playoffs in 15 years, it’s not as if they have not been competitive. Despite injuries derailing the careers of Greg Oden and Brandon Roy, Portland has remained a challenger in the Western Conference for the last several years, including starting out last season 26-7 before the change of the calendar year. But injuries eventually diminished their chances of making it out of the West, particularly after losing Wesley Matthews to a ruptured Achilles, and the Memphis Grizzlies made quick work of them in the first round.

With a roster now in turmoil — Matthews, Arron Afflalo, Robin Lopez, and Dorell Wright will all be hitting free agency as well — Portland is basically hitting the reset button, which made Batum a luxury. He is a very good player, and is compensated as such; he would have been the highest paid Blazer next season by far. However well Batum might play, though, won’t hide the loss of Aldridge. Losing a player of his caliber drastically impacts Portland’s chances of winning a chase for a playoff spot next season. As Batum is entering the last year of his contract, the Blazers are making sure to get something of value now before he walks away like Aldridge.

Vonleh is only 19 and was the ninth overall selection in last year’s draft. He did not contribute much of anything to the Hornets on the court last season, but with the position Portland now finds itself, they can afford to be patient with him. He is by no means Aldridge, but he is attempting to fill out the same mold — a power forward that stretches out the high post and occasionally steps behind the arc. As it stands, Meyers Leonard may be the only player on the roster to see minutes at power forward, so Vonleh will likely have a legitimate chance to get some meaningful playing time in the immediate future. Even if Vonleh does not become a significant part of Portland’s rotation, moving Batum now saves them from going through the agony they must be suffering this offseason again next year.

As for Charlotte’s involvement in this deal, the Hornets must be anticipating a substantial improvement from the disappointment that was last season. Batum is an upgrade over Henderson, particularly as a three-point shooter and perimeter defender, but his contract is only keeping him in Charlotte for one year. Any cap space that might have opened after the Stephenson trade (paired with whatever is happening to Matt Barnes and his contract) has vanished with Batum’s lofty cap hit; the Hornets won’t be able to make any moves in free agency, except for using a Mid-Level Exception, and retaining Mo Williams will undoubtedly put them over the cap.

Still, Batum adds a new dimension to the Hornet offense. A reliable passer, he can feed Al Jefferson the ball on the block without tunnel vision; he will recognize and assess other options as they reveal themselves and won’t force the first option when it is not necessary. As a corner threat, he makes the possibility of Kemba Walker drive-and-kicks more potent and can punish double teams looking to trap Jefferson.

Pairing Batum on the wing with Michael Kidd-Gilchrist will also give Charlotte a formidable perimeter defense.

But why would the Hornets make such an aggressive move? Because they are entering the last year they have Al Jefferson under contract. They are handing over a young player that needs time to develop in order to compete for this season without concern for what happens afterwards. Drafting Vonleh last year was treated as a luxury; Charlotte expected to be much better than they were last season and thought they could wait for him to blossom. After the flop that was the Stephenson signing and the season as a whole, the Hornets need results immediately and their best chance for success still resides in Jefferson. This trade is a short-sighted effort as a means to remedy recent disappointments, but it may only be delaying more since their roster will be more bare than Portland’s when the season is over.

Portland is facing the reality that they must rebuild now that Aldridge is nearly out the door. Charlotte, however, is grasping at the remnants of an image lingering in the ether, unperturbed by how fast it will fade.

Potential and “Potential”: Addressing Fans’ Uncertainty About Kristaps Porzingis

Any player taken Thursday in the NBA Draft is bound to take their bumps and bruises. There is no way around that. They will be rookies entering a league brimming with elite athletes, many of which can’t break into their teams’ rotations or even their rosters. There is absolutely no guarantee any of them will succeed; any number of things can hinder their careers.

Even so, their entry into the league exhilarates so many fans. Because there is potential. It is an overwhelming belief that improvement is inevitable, that what we see now will be altogether better in several years’ time.

But that is potential, not “potential.”

Potential is when we have seen what is and imagine we can grasp what will be. We ascribe concrete dimensions to potential through physical measurements and eye tests. There is something attainable, real about potential. It exists because prospects are exposed to our ever-prying curiosity as early as possible.

But that is potential, not “potential.”

“Potential” is riddled with doubt. It is an amorphous rumor without a face. It’s a name we struggle to pronounce and take no care learning to say correctly. It is “years away.” “Potential” is burdened by unknowing.

And so is Kristaps Porzingis.

The 19-year-old Latvian is a mystery to many NBA fans’ eyes. His slender seven-foot-plus frame eludes our vision; he slips through the cracks of our pseudo-scouting excursions. He doesn’t register on our radars because they don’t scan far enough to reach him.

Porzingis gets dismissed as a prospect because there is very little expectation that he will contribute much of anything for a few years. There is bound to be a complication or two adjusting to the differences between playing in the ACB League in Spain and stateside in the NBA. The game isn’t a completely foreign beast — basketball is basketball — but he will have to adjust to the stressed emphasis in weakside help defense, which won’t just change the way in which he plays defense, but will also clog floor space much more quickly on offense. And he may struggle moving the ball against close-outs as he has not demonstrated a consistent willingness to pass with less than half an assist per game over the last three years.

He will need time to grow, there’s no reasonable way to deny that. He needs to add weight — a fact he is aware of and seems to accept, since he spent last summer working with trainer Joe Abunassar (owner of IMPACT Basketball) and returned there this summer in better shape after following the regiment for the whole year.

That’s where executives and scouts gathered to watch his only workout performance before the draft, and where Chad Ford collected the insights of such experts on Porzingis. Ford sought to know whether Porzingis deserved consideration as a candidate to go first overall in the draft, and while most everyone quoted gushed about his abilities, the idea was still met with a bit of resistance. But it had nothing to do with him as a basketball player; the problem rested in his status as an international player — an unknown, unseen player that has not demonstrated his potential within the scrutiny of our own culture. His experience in the ACB somehow doesn’t qualify Porzingis as “established.” Instead, he inexplicably bears the weight of previous international failures, though similar risks are not attached to other prospects. As Ford said:

“Established has nothing to do with it,” one long-time NBA scout told me in Vegas. “That’s code for, ‘I won’t get fired if I draft Okafor and he turns into Greg Oden. But I will get fired if Porzingis is the next Darko [Milicic].'”

Organizations, scouts, and executives that select foreign players have to be ready to accept the doubt of its fanbase because they find the unfamiliar unsettling. We treat the college game as a farm system; finding talent from an external source encourages criticism. It’s a presumed slight to domestic players. And if the pick doesn’t pan out, it’s an affirmation that what is known is best.

But that whole thought process seemingly dismisses the uncertainty of it all.

Plenty of top picks and top college players do not succeed in the NBA. Remember Ike Diogu? Sean May? Adam Morrison? Michael Beasley? Hasheem Thabeet? Jonny Flynn? Wes Johnson? Jimmer Fredette? Thomas Robinson?

None of those names will drag down any prospect in this year’s draft. They have no relevance to the circumstances of other college-trained players. But that should be obvious; there’s no reason any of those players’ histories should reflect upon the possibilities of anyone draft-eligible this year.

But the same should be said of Porzingis. He won’t be Pau Gasol or Dirk Nowitzki. Nor will he be Darko Milicic, Jan Vesely, or Yi Jianlian. His career has no template; it will take shape through his own efforts and skills, just as any other player. The tendency to typecast the possible scenarios for Porzingis’ career is a means of denying the unknown; it reduces his “potential” to the extreme ends that have played out for others coming from similar situations.

It’s assumed that it will take years to even catch a legitimate glimpse of Porzingis’ “potential.” But that’s often true of other rookies. Look at Mike Conley, Paul George, Gordon Hayward, Enes Kanter, and Klay Thompson. They all took years to become players of substantial impact.

Teams picking at the top of the draft can’t anticipate suddenly becoming competitive with the acquisition of one rookie. They can afford to be patient, and fans must understand that. In certain situations, they have to be patient if they want to see what can become of potential. Let’s just hope “potential” is provided the same luxury and isn’t rushed by the anxiety of the unknown.

Kristaps Porzingis is bound to take his bumps and bruises. There’s no way around that. And there is absolutely no guarantee he will succeed; any number of things can hinder his career.

But the fact remains: he has potential like any other, even if we tend to veil that fact with quotation marks we struggle to see through.