rAm
02-28-2008, 01:19 PM
http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/insider/columns/story?columnist=hollinger_john&page=Storylines-080228a&action=login&appRedirect=http%3a%2f%2finsider.espn.go.com%2fnba %2finsider%2fcolumns%2fstory%3fcolumnist%3dholling er_john%26page%3dStorylines-080228a
Welcome to one of the more exciting stretch runs in NBA history. It's difficult to recall a season during which there has been this much uncertainty about who the favorites are, or even who the top seeds will be.
Obviously, this state of affairs lends itself to some great stories to watch in the last two months of the regular season. Kobe and the Lakers, KG and the Celtics, Shaq and Kidd in their new digs ... all this and more make for great theater.
But I want to look a little deeper. We all know what the major plot lines of the moment are, but I want to focus on some under the radar stories that could become major topics of their own in the next few months. Yes, we'll be tracking the headliners but in addition here are 10 underplayed stories that I'll be following the next two months ... with a few suggestions for the league sprinkled in.
1. The mighty Raptors
I've been getting a lot of puzzled e-mails lately about the Toronto Raptors, who are fourth in this morning's Hollinger Power Rankings despite having the league's 13th-best record.
The Raptors didn't have a big reputation coming into the season, have only one household name in the lineup, and haven't been past the first round of the playoffs in half a decade. So what gives?
Here's the deal: They're a lot better than their record. As I keep saying, victory margin is a better indicator of future success than win-loss record, and the Raptors' average margin of plus-4.64 is better than that of the Mavs, Magic, Rockets, Warriors and Nuggets -- all of whom have better win-loss records.
Additionally, that number has ballooned of late. The Raptors haven't put together an impressive win streak, so they have slipped past everyone's attention -- the Raptors are a solid but hardly awe-inspiring 10-6 in their past 16 games.
But look closer and you'll see what an impressive stretch it's been. Five of the six losses were by five points or less, while eight of the 10 wins were by 17 or more; one of the two that wasn't was a 114-112 win in Boston that was the best shooting display a team has put on all season.
Let's put it more simply: The Raps aren't beating people, they're killing them. Toronto topped Milwaukee by 31, Washington by 39, Miami by 32, Minnesota by 23 and 22, New Jersey by 18, Orlando by 17, and New York by 23. In a 16-game stretch, half their games were blowout wins.
Sum it up and you'll see in that modest-looking 16-game stretch the Raptors are outscoring opponents by an impressive 10 points per game.
And although the Raps may seem short on star power, you might want to revisit that assumption. Check out what Chris Bosh has done lately -- he's risen to fifth in the league in player efficiency rating thanks to a huge two-month stretch. Since New Year's Day he's averaging 25.7 points per game and shooting 56.9 percent from the field.
Not much further down the list is Jose Calderon, who ranks 16th in PER thanks to his insanely high efficiency. I've already expounded on his unique combination of high assists, low turnovers and high-percentage shooting so I won't repeat myself here; suffice it to say that he's been far superior to several players with much greater reputations.
And although their supporting cast lacks stars, it also lacks duds. Everybody can shoot -- the Raps lead the league at 42.2 percent on 3-pointers -- and they have the second-lowest turnover rate in the league. So even though the Raptors attack doesn't seem that awe-inspiring, they're actually fourth in the league in >a href=http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/teamstats?sort=offeff&league=nba>offensive efficiency and first in the Eastern Conference.
And it gets better. With T.J. Ford back from injury, Toronto has a third dynamic offensive player to plug into the equation.
Yet despite their weapons, I don't see anybody taking this team seriously as a contender in the East. So I must report that they are, most definitely, a contender in the East. I still like Boston and Detroit's odds better, but if you're looking for a dark horse and thinking Cleveland, I'd suggest shifting your gaze further north.
2. Manu as The Man in San Antonio
The defending champion Spurs are up to their usual tricks, lying in the weeds for half a season only to make a late run. Once again they're on top of the Southwest division, and nobody will be surprised to see them make another deep playoff run.
However, one thing has changed: the team's offensive focal point. For years, the Spurs' primary weapon has been Tim Duncan and, to a lesser extent, Tony Parker.
Not anymore. This season, it's the Manu Ginobili show. The sneaky southpaw leads the team in scoring at 20.6 points per game, but even that understates things. Ginobili's usage rate this season has climbed all the way to 28.0, the sixth-highest figure in the league.
This has escaped people's attention because Ginobili only plays 31.5 minutes per game. But to see how much he's getting the rock, and how productive he's been when he's had it, let's compare Ginobili's per-40-minute stats to those of another prominent player: Kobe Bryant.
You think he can't hang? Guess again. Kobe averages 29.3 points, 6.4 rebounds and 5.7 assists per 40 minutes; Manu gets 26.2, 6.4 and 5.9.
Wait, it gets better. Kobe plays on one of the league's faster-paced teams; Manu is on the second-slowest. Plug Bryant's numbers into the Spurs' sluggish pace and you get 26.9 points, 5.9 boards and 5.2 assists, making the comparison a dead heat.
Additionally, Ginobili has done it with a spectacular 61.7 true shooting mark that ranks fourth among all shooting guards, and trumps Kobe's 57.7.
All this helps explain why Ginobili ranks fourth in the league in PER. Not that it's anything new -- he was ninth in this category a season ago. It also explains why the Spurs can continue to win despite off years from most of their role players and declining numbers from Duncan and Parker. If every time Ginobili comes off the bench you think to yourself "Kobe Bryant is checking in for the Spurs," their success becomes a lot easier to understand.
Yet because of Ginobili's low minutes and his team's low Q rating, he's failed to get his due as one of the game's biggest stars. He's been amazingly slow to get a superstar's acclaim, with his puzzling All-Star snub being the latest example.
One common misconception is that he benefits from playing mostly against opponents' second-unit players because he comes off the bench. First off, this defies common sense -- nobody else is playing their subs 30 minutes; if Ginobili gets 30 and the opponents' sub at his spot plays 15, it's at most a 50-50 split (and that's only if the minutes align perfectly).
More importantly, the data doesn't support this hypothesis. Check out Ginobili 's splits, folks. Ginobili has been far better as a starter this season, shooting 49.5 percent against 44.5 percent while averaging six points and two assists more per game. This isn't unusual -- the vast majority of players perform better as starters, because apparently the disadvantage of coming into a game cold is greater than the advantage of getting a few extra minutes against the other teams' scrubs.
In short, Ginobili's ability to dominate isn't because he's coming off the bench; it's because he's a flat-out superstar and has been for two years now. The prospect of he and Kobe going shot-for-shot in the conference finals is one of many reasons to be excited about the upcoming playoffs.
3. Seriously, Mr. Stern ... about those playoff seedings
David Stern basically shot down the idea of retooling the playoffs during his "State of the Union" address at the All-Star Game, but humor me for a minute. One thing I'll be watching closely the next few weeks is the disparity between the West's No. 9 team and the East's No. 8.
Presently, we're looking at a situation in which a Western team might be in the lottery with 48 wins, while an Eastern club with 34 wins makes the playoffs. Call me crazy, but if you win 14 more games than another team, they shouldn't be the ones getting to the postseason.
A less discussed side effect of this is how it plays with the draft. Our theoretical 34-win team will pick after the 48-win team; in fact, the 48-win team has a chance (albeit a tiny one) of picking first. It's odd to think that making the playoffs in the East will cost a team four spots in the draft (11th to 15th); while missing it in the West could possibly move a team down six (20th to 14th).
Of course, all this rigmarole would be unnecessary if the league would just take the top 16 teams into the postseason, or something approaching that.
My last proposal on this topic addressed the strength in the West from the perspective of improving the Finals, but didn't look at our new situation in which a couple of very bad Eastern Conference teams will make the playoffs while at least two pretty good Western Conference squads stay home.
So let's try again. I had proposed cross-matching the top seeds in each conference, preserving the 1-through-8 structure but using a 2-3-2 format and playing East vs. West in the first round.
That has to be augmented by something else, however -- selecting the correct 16 teams in the first place.
To do that, it's pretty easy -- just have the teams with the best 16 records make the playoffs. In case of a tie, the first tie-break should be the conference with the least representation (i.e., if two teams tie for the 16th spot, whichever conference had fewer of the other 15 teams would earn the berth). That gets us as close to an 8-8 mix as possible in most years, and means this system only rears its head when there is a disparity in win-loss record.
Additionally, the league can continue its fetish with rewarding division winners by giving six of the top eight seeds to division champs. This has an added bonus, for you TV execs in the audience, because it guarantees at least two first-round series in the Mountain or Pacific time zones (well, unless the Timberwolves win the Northwest Division ... but fortunately, we needn't consider that possibility).
Seeding teams 1 through 16 would produce some huge geographic imbalances, but those can be addressed partially by allowing the top eight seeds' opponent to shift one spot up or down to produce matchups from the same conference.
What you end up with, if the season ended today, looks like this:
(1) Boston vs. (16) Washington
(8) Orlando* vs. (9) Phoenix
(4) San Antonio vs. (13) Toronto
(5) New Orleans vs. (12) Golden State
(2) Detroit vs. (14) Cleveland**
(7) Utah* vs. (10) Houston
(3) L.A. Lakers vs. (15) Portland**
(6) Dallas vs. (11) Denver
* - seeding moves up as division champ
** - pairing shifted to create conference match-up
I think we can all agree this would be vastly more compelling than what's actually on offer; in addition, it would let teams like Portland and Sacramento keep pushing for a playoff spot and put some actual pressure on clubs like Washington to win a game once in a while.
There are drawbacks. Every round would have to use the 2-3-2 format or the travel will quickly get ridiculous for series like Orlando-Phoenix. Additionally, TV people won't like this because it potentially could give them some troublesome second-round pairings if several teams from the Eastern time zone make the second round -- with 13 of the league's 30 teams there, this is certainly a real possibility down the road (given the state of the East, way down the road).
In my humble opinion, what this format adds to the other rounds of the playoffs more than offsets what might be lost in the second round. Not to mention what it does for the regular season. The current system's credibility will take a huge hit if 48 wins gets one team in the lottery and 34 puts another in the playoffs.
4. Tankapalooza II
Last year we witnessed one of the greatest tanking fests in history, as the potential prizes of Greg Oden and Kevin Durant proved too great for many teams to bear. Several teams, most notably Boston and Milwaukee, appeared to be sitting players with questionable injuries, playing sub-optimal lineups, and otherwise sabotaging their chances to win once it became clear they wouldn't make the playoffs.
With the stakes lower this year, one wonders if we'll see the same "effort" made toward improving draft position. Certainly, the karmic slap given to last season's most egregious tankers helped; the Blazers and the SuperSonics, who achieved their records honestly, got the top two picks. But the percentages still indicate that dropping games is the most direct path to lottery rewards.
Given that four teams are between 42 and 44 losses this morning, there certainly is an incentive for teams like Memphis, Miami, Minnesota and Seattle to let the losses mount. The Wolves are heavily experienced in this department, having tanked the end of 2006 to keep their draft pick from going to the Clippers (culminating in an absurd Mark Madsen 3-point assault in their season finale), so keep an eye out for sudden bouts of 'tendinitis" from Al Jefferson or other shady injuries.
But really, I'll be watching all these teams as well as the Knicks, Clippers and Bobcats, to see how honest an effort we get from them down the stretch. What happened last season was shameful, and if it becomes an annual phenomenon, the league needs to step in to curb it.
5. The second arms race
Now that the trade deadline has passed, contending teams are lining up to sign waived veterans and semi-retired free agents. P.J. Brown is in Boston. Jamaal Magloire is in Dallas. New Orleans seems to be waiting on Chris Andersen. Yes, the battle to sign former Hornet big men has officially run amok -- can a Kenny Gattison comeback be far behind?
But those aren't the only players teams are going after now that the trade deadline has passed. The Celtics have eyes for Sam Cassell, the Spurs and Suns are angling for Brent Barry, and other players (Tyronn Lue, Ricky Davis, Antoine Walker and Michael Doleac, for example) could also enter the mix between now and Saturday.
Of these, Barry's case is by far the most interesting. Not only is he the player with the most left in the tank, but his situation is going to be a topic of much discussion if he returns to San Antonio.
The NBA has instituted a rule that bans teams from signing players whom they just traded and were immediately waived for 30 days -- this was to prevent shenanigans like that between the Pistons and Celtics in 2004, when Lindsey Hunter was "traded" to Boston, then ended up back with Detroit in a matter of days.
Nonetheless, this year's trading season has shown the limitations of that rule. Dallas appeared to openly flout it by including Jerry Stackhouse in the first incarnation of its trade with New Jersey, only to have Stackhouse blow it by blabbing about how he'd be back in 30 days.
The Spurs and Barry are a different case, because all the available evidence suggests everyone was completely aboveboard. Nonetheless, conspiracy theorists are going to have a field day if he ends up back with San Antonio, and this is why the league needs to take another hard look at the rule in the offseason -- even if the teams do nothing wrong and have no prior agreement with the player, it gives off a bad smell.
It seems to me two possible modifications to the 30-day rule would prevent circumvention -- or, just as importantly, the appearance of circumvention. The first would be to say the 30-day rule only applies to players who haven't received a formal contract offer from another team -- otherwise they can't return that season. In other words, Barry could only return to the Spurs if nobody else offered him a contract in the preceding 30 days.
The second way to do this would be to establish a cutoff date -- say Jan. 15 or Feb. 1 -- after which a player can't return to the team that traded him. That would prevent players from being included in deadline deals, then magically coming back after a month's vacation.
Either modification would have made the Stackhouse and Barry situations impossible, and for the health of the league that has to be considered a good thing.
• Click here for storylines 6 through 10
Welcome to one of the more exciting stretch runs in NBA history. It's difficult to recall a season during which there has been this much uncertainty about who the favorites are, or even who the top seeds will be.
Obviously, this state of affairs lends itself to some great stories to watch in the last two months of the regular season. Kobe and the Lakers, KG and the Celtics, Shaq and Kidd in their new digs ... all this and more make for great theater.
But I want to look a little deeper. We all know what the major plot lines of the moment are, but I want to focus on some under the radar stories that could become major topics of their own in the next few months. Yes, we'll be tracking the headliners but in addition here are 10 underplayed stories that I'll be following the next two months ... with a few suggestions for the league sprinkled in.
1. The mighty Raptors
I've been getting a lot of puzzled e-mails lately about the Toronto Raptors, who are fourth in this morning's Hollinger Power Rankings despite having the league's 13th-best record.
The Raptors didn't have a big reputation coming into the season, have only one household name in the lineup, and haven't been past the first round of the playoffs in half a decade. So what gives?
Here's the deal: They're a lot better than their record. As I keep saying, victory margin is a better indicator of future success than win-loss record, and the Raptors' average margin of plus-4.64 is better than that of the Mavs, Magic, Rockets, Warriors and Nuggets -- all of whom have better win-loss records.
Additionally, that number has ballooned of late. The Raptors haven't put together an impressive win streak, so they have slipped past everyone's attention -- the Raptors are a solid but hardly awe-inspiring 10-6 in their past 16 games.
But look closer and you'll see what an impressive stretch it's been. Five of the six losses were by five points or less, while eight of the 10 wins were by 17 or more; one of the two that wasn't was a 114-112 win in Boston that was the best shooting display a team has put on all season.
Let's put it more simply: The Raps aren't beating people, they're killing them. Toronto topped Milwaukee by 31, Washington by 39, Miami by 32, Minnesota by 23 and 22, New Jersey by 18, Orlando by 17, and New York by 23. In a 16-game stretch, half their games were blowout wins.
Sum it up and you'll see in that modest-looking 16-game stretch the Raptors are outscoring opponents by an impressive 10 points per game.
And although the Raps may seem short on star power, you might want to revisit that assumption. Check out what Chris Bosh has done lately -- he's risen to fifth in the league in player efficiency rating thanks to a huge two-month stretch. Since New Year's Day he's averaging 25.7 points per game and shooting 56.9 percent from the field.
Not much further down the list is Jose Calderon, who ranks 16th in PER thanks to his insanely high efficiency. I've already expounded on his unique combination of high assists, low turnovers and high-percentage shooting so I won't repeat myself here; suffice it to say that he's been far superior to several players with much greater reputations.
And although their supporting cast lacks stars, it also lacks duds. Everybody can shoot -- the Raps lead the league at 42.2 percent on 3-pointers -- and they have the second-lowest turnover rate in the league. So even though the Raptors attack doesn't seem that awe-inspiring, they're actually fourth in the league in >a href=http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/teamstats?sort=offeff&league=nba>offensive efficiency and first in the Eastern Conference.
And it gets better. With T.J. Ford back from injury, Toronto has a third dynamic offensive player to plug into the equation.
Yet despite their weapons, I don't see anybody taking this team seriously as a contender in the East. So I must report that they are, most definitely, a contender in the East. I still like Boston and Detroit's odds better, but if you're looking for a dark horse and thinking Cleveland, I'd suggest shifting your gaze further north.
2. Manu as The Man in San Antonio
The defending champion Spurs are up to their usual tricks, lying in the weeds for half a season only to make a late run. Once again they're on top of the Southwest division, and nobody will be surprised to see them make another deep playoff run.
However, one thing has changed: the team's offensive focal point. For years, the Spurs' primary weapon has been Tim Duncan and, to a lesser extent, Tony Parker.
Not anymore. This season, it's the Manu Ginobili show. The sneaky southpaw leads the team in scoring at 20.6 points per game, but even that understates things. Ginobili's usage rate this season has climbed all the way to 28.0, the sixth-highest figure in the league.
This has escaped people's attention because Ginobili only plays 31.5 minutes per game. But to see how much he's getting the rock, and how productive he's been when he's had it, let's compare Ginobili's per-40-minute stats to those of another prominent player: Kobe Bryant.
You think he can't hang? Guess again. Kobe averages 29.3 points, 6.4 rebounds and 5.7 assists per 40 minutes; Manu gets 26.2, 6.4 and 5.9.
Wait, it gets better. Kobe plays on one of the league's faster-paced teams; Manu is on the second-slowest. Plug Bryant's numbers into the Spurs' sluggish pace and you get 26.9 points, 5.9 boards and 5.2 assists, making the comparison a dead heat.
Additionally, Ginobili has done it with a spectacular 61.7 true shooting mark that ranks fourth among all shooting guards, and trumps Kobe's 57.7.
All this helps explain why Ginobili ranks fourth in the league in PER. Not that it's anything new -- he was ninth in this category a season ago. It also explains why the Spurs can continue to win despite off years from most of their role players and declining numbers from Duncan and Parker. If every time Ginobili comes off the bench you think to yourself "Kobe Bryant is checking in for the Spurs," their success becomes a lot easier to understand.
Yet because of Ginobili's low minutes and his team's low Q rating, he's failed to get his due as one of the game's biggest stars. He's been amazingly slow to get a superstar's acclaim, with his puzzling All-Star snub being the latest example.
One common misconception is that he benefits from playing mostly against opponents' second-unit players because he comes off the bench. First off, this defies common sense -- nobody else is playing their subs 30 minutes; if Ginobili gets 30 and the opponents' sub at his spot plays 15, it's at most a 50-50 split (and that's only if the minutes align perfectly).
More importantly, the data doesn't support this hypothesis. Check out Ginobili 's splits, folks. Ginobili has been far better as a starter this season, shooting 49.5 percent against 44.5 percent while averaging six points and two assists more per game. This isn't unusual -- the vast majority of players perform better as starters, because apparently the disadvantage of coming into a game cold is greater than the advantage of getting a few extra minutes against the other teams' scrubs.
In short, Ginobili's ability to dominate isn't because he's coming off the bench; it's because he's a flat-out superstar and has been for two years now. The prospect of he and Kobe going shot-for-shot in the conference finals is one of many reasons to be excited about the upcoming playoffs.
3. Seriously, Mr. Stern ... about those playoff seedings
David Stern basically shot down the idea of retooling the playoffs during his "State of the Union" address at the All-Star Game, but humor me for a minute. One thing I'll be watching closely the next few weeks is the disparity between the West's No. 9 team and the East's No. 8.
Presently, we're looking at a situation in which a Western team might be in the lottery with 48 wins, while an Eastern club with 34 wins makes the playoffs. Call me crazy, but if you win 14 more games than another team, they shouldn't be the ones getting to the postseason.
A less discussed side effect of this is how it plays with the draft. Our theoretical 34-win team will pick after the 48-win team; in fact, the 48-win team has a chance (albeit a tiny one) of picking first. It's odd to think that making the playoffs in the East will cost a team four spots in the draft (11th to 15th); while missing it in the West could possibly move a team down six (20th to 14th).
Of course, all this rigmarole would be unnecessary if the league would just take the top 16 teams into the postseason, or something approaching that.
My last proposal on this topic addressed the strength in the West from the perspective of improving the Finals, but didn't look at our new situation in which a couple of very bad Eastern Conference teams will make the playoffs while at least two pretty good Western Conference squads stay home.
So let's try again. I had proposed cross-matching the top seeds in each conference, preserving the 1-through-8 structure but using a 2-3-2 format and playing East vs. West in the first round.
That has to be augmented by something else, however -- selecting the correct 16 teams in the first place.
To do that, it's pretty easy -- just have the teams with the best 16 records make the playoffs. In case of a tie, the first tie-break should be the conference with the least representation (i.e., if two teams tie for the 16th spot, whichever conference had fewer of the other 15 teams would earn the berth). That gets us as close to an 8-8 mix as possible in most years, and means this system only rears its head when there is a disparity in win-loss record.
Additionally, the league can continue its fetish with rewarding division winners by giving six of the top eight seeds to division champs. This has an added bonus, for you TV execs in the audience, because it guarantees at least two first-round series in the Mountain or Pacific time zones (well, unless the Timberwolves win the Northwest Division ... but fortunately, we needn't consider that possibility).
Seeding teams 1 through 16 would produce some huge geographic imbalances, but those can be addressed partially by allowing the top eight seeds' opponent to shift one spot up or down to produce matchups from the same conference.
What you end up with, if the season ended today, looks like this:
(1) Boston vs. (16) Washington
(8) Orlando* vs. (9) Phoenix
(4) San Antonio vs. (13) Toronto
(5) New Orleans vs. (12) Golden State
(2) Detroit vs. (14) Cleveland**
(7) Utah* vs. (10) Houston
(3) L.A. Lakers vs. (15) Portland**
(6) Dallas vs. (11) Denver
* - seeding moves up as division champ
** - pairing shifted to create conference match-up
I think we can all agree this would be vastly more compelling than what's actually on offer; in addition, it would let teams like Portland and Sacramento keep pushing for a playoff spot and put some actual pressure on clubs like Washington to win a game once in a while.
There are drawbacks. Every round would have to use the 2-3-2 format or the travel will quickly get ridiculous for series like Orlando-Phoenix. Additionally, TV people won't like this because it potentially could give them some troublesome second-round pairings if several teams from the Eastern time zone make the second round -- with 13 of the league's 30 teams there, this is certainly a real possibility down the road (given the state of the East, way down the road).
In my humble opinion, what this format adds to the other rounds of the playoffs more than offsets what might be lost in the second round. Not to mention what it does for the regular season. The current system's credibility will take a huge hit if 48 wins gets one team in the lottery and 34 puts another in the playoffs.
4. Tankapalooza II
Last year we witnessed one of the greatest tanking fests in history, as the potential prizes of Greg Oden and Kevin Durant proved too great for many teams to bear. Several teams, most notably Boston and Milwaukee, appeared to be sitting players with questionable injuries, playing sub-optimal lineups, and otherwise sabotaging their chances to win once it became clear they wouldn't make the playoffs.
With the stakes lower this year, one wonders if we'll see the same "effort" made toward improving draft position. Certainly, the karmic slap given to last season's most egregious tankers helped; the Blazers and the SuperSonics, who achieved their records honestly, got the top two picks. But the percentages still indicate that dropping games is the most direct path to lottery rewards.
Given that four teams are between 42 and 44 losses this morning, there certainly is an incentive for teams like Memphis, Miami, Minnesota and Seattle to let the losses mount. The Wolves are heavily experienced in this department, having tanked the end of 2006 to keep their draft pick from going to the Clippers (culminating in an absurd Mark Madsen 3-point assault in their season finale), so keep an eye out for sudden bouts of 'tendinitis" from Al Jefferson or other shady injuries.
But really, I'll be watching all these teams as well as the Knicks, Clippers and Bobcats, to see how honest an effort we get from them down the stretch. What happened last season was shameful, and if it becomes an annual phenomenon, the league needs to step in to curb it.
5. The second arms race
Now that the trade deadline has passed, contending teams are lining up to sign waived veterans and semi-retired free agents. P.J. Brown is in Boston. Jamaal Magloire is in Dallas. New Orleans seems to be waiting on Chris Andersen. Yes, the battle to sign former Hornet big men has officially run amok -- can a Kenny Gattison comeback be far behind?
But those aren't the only players teams are going after now that the trade deadline has passed. The Celtics have eyes for Sam Cassell, the Spurs and Suns are angling for Brent Barry, and other players (Tyronn Lue, Ricky Davis, Antoine Walker and Michael Doleac, for example) could also enter the mix between now and Saturday.
Of these, Barry's case is by far the most interesting. Not only is he the player with the most left in the tank, but his situation is going to be a topic of much discussion if he returns to San Antonio.
The NBA has instituted a rule that bans teams from signing players whom they just traded and were immediately waived for 30 days -- this was to prevent shenanigans like that between the Pistons and Celtics in 2004, when Lindsey Hunter was "traded" to Boston, then ended up back with Detroit in a matter of days.
Nonetheless, this year's trading season has shown the limitations of that rule. Dallas appeared to openly flout it by including Jerry Stackhouse in the first incarnation of its trade with New Jersey, only to have Stackhouse blow it by blabbing about how he'd be back in 30 days.
The Spurs and Barry are a different case, because all the available evidence suggests everyone was completely aboveboard. Nonetheless, conspiracy theorists are going to have a field day if he ends up back with San Antonio, and this is why the league needs to take another hard look at the rule in the offseason -- even if the teams do nothing wrong and have no prior agreement with the player, it gives off a bad smell.
It seems to me two possible modifications to the 30-day rule would prevent circumvention -- or, just as importantly, the appearance of circumvention. The first would be to say the 30-day rule only applies to players who haven't received a formal contract offer from another team -- otherwise they can't return that season. In other words, Barry could only return to the Spurs if nobody else offered him a contract in the preceding 30 days.
The second way to do this would be to establish a cutoff date -- say Jan. 15 or Feb. 1 -- after which a player can't return to the team that traded him. That would prevent players from being included in deadline deals, then magically coming back after a month's vacation.
Either modification would have made the Stackhouse and Barry situations impossible, and for the health of the league that has to be considered a good thing.
• Click here for storylines 6 through 10