Real Team Ratings as of December 31, 2010

REAL TEAM RATINGS
2010-11 Season
As of December 31, 2010

--See Sub Rating notes below for some information about how these ratings are calculated.

--See the overall User Guide for Real Team Ratings for complete details about why Real Team Ratings are the best possible ratings and for complete details about how they are calculated.

1 Boston Celtics 104.13
2 San Antonio Spurs 98.99
3 Miami Heat 89.79
4 Dallas Mavericks 81.08
5 Orlando Magic 50.71
6 Los Angeles Lakers 41.22
7 Utah Jazz 37.47
8 Oklahoma City Thunder 27.58
9 New Orleans Hornets 21.40
10 Chicago Bulls 17.29
11 Denver Nuggets 14.66
12 Atlanta Hawks 14.56
13 Portland Trail Blazers 3.44
14 New York Knicks -0.06
15 Houston Rockets -5.61
16 Indiana Pacers -6.46
17 Memphis Grizzlies -6.69
18 Philadelphia 76ers -7.81
19 Milwaukee Bucks -8.12
20 Phoenix Suns -29.53
21 Los Angeles Clippers -30.74
22 Charlotte Bobcats -39.18
23 Toronto Raptors -39.31
24 Detroit Pistons -49.84
25 Golden State Warriors -56.32
26 New Jersey Nets -56.55
27 Washington Wizards -68.71
28 Minnesota Timberwolves -73.79
29 Cleveland Cavaliers -79.71
30 Sacramento Kings -83.31

PROJECTED 2011 CHAMPIONSHIP BASED STRICTLY ON REAL TEAM RATINGS
San Antonio Spurs versus Boston Celtics
If the Spurs had the home court advantage it would be a toss-up; if Boston had the home court advantage they would be slight favorites.

What follows is a very important section of the overall User Guide which explains how to interpret the differences in the ratings from a playoffs perspective.

Following that, for each team there are six sub ratings that when combined together give you the overall Real Team Ratings. If you check these sub ratings you can find out in detail the particular strengths and weaknesses of the teams.

USER GUIDE EXCERPT: INTERPRETING RTR DIFFERENCES BETWEEN TEAMS / PREDICTING PLAYOFF SERIES
NOTES
(1) This is an excerpt from the User Guide for Real Team Ratings .

(2) Injury adjustments for injuries occurring within the last month or so can not be and are not completely accounted for. For larger differences between teams (greater than 25-30 RTR points) the higher rated team would generally have to have injury problems in order to lose. The probabilities mentioned below reflect the injury wild card factor about as much as they do all other uncertain factors combined. Were it not for injuries Real Team Ratings alone would correctly predict the outcome of most playoff series.

(3) For playoff series predicting, add five or six points to the rating of the team that has home court advantage.

QUICK PLAYOFF SERIES PREDICTION SCALE
After you have added five or six points to the RTR of the team with home court advantage, calculate the difference between the two RTRs. Then find the range in which that difference is below and then you can see the probability that the series will be won by the higher team.

0 to 5.9 Complete toss-up: flip a coin
6 to 11.9 Roughly 60% chance the higher team will win
12 to 17.9 Roughly 70% chance the higher team will win
18 to 23.9 Roughly 80% chance the higher team will win
24 to 29.9 Roughly 89% chance the higher team will win
30 to 35.9 Roughly 95% chance the higher team will win
36 to 41.9 Roughly 98% chance the higher team will win
42 to 47.9 Roughly 99% chance the higher team will win
48 or more Roughly 100% chance the higher team will win

DETAILED GUIDE TO INTERPRETATION OF DIFFERENCES BETWEEN IN REAL TEAM RATINGS
NOTES
(1) This is an excerpt from the User Guide for Real Team Ratings.

(2) In the detailed interpretation guide that follows, the word "roughly" is repeatedly used in front of the probability numbers, as a reminder about the small amount of unavoidable statistical error, and to emphasize that unknown factors, especially injuries, will in some cases result in substantially different actual probabilities.

(3) For playoff series predicting, add five or six points to the rating of the team that has home court advantage.

(4) The probability percentages are based on the historical results in the NBA and on accepted statistical theory.

DIFFERENCE IN RATINGS IS BETWEEN 0 AND 5.9
The series is a complete toss-up, when statistical error is considered. There is a strong possibility of a 7 game series. The higher team has a 50% to 55% chance of winning, depending on what exactly the difference is. These probabilities are too low for anyone to have any confidence in using RTR to say who will win. All series of this type are decided quite simply by who plays better, by who coaches better, or both.

DIFFERENCE IN RATINGS IS BETWEEN 6.0 AND 11.9
The series can easily go either way, although the higher team has a small edge, and has between a 55% to 65% chance of winning, depending on where in the range the difference is. There is a very substantial chance of a 7-game series. If the lower team wins, it is a small upset. Either slight differences in the quality of coaching, certain players playing a little better or a little worse than they did in the regular season, or both could be responsible for an upset at this level.

DIFFERENCE IN RATINGS IS BETWEEN 12.0 AND 17.9
The series can go either way, and this type of difference gives a significant chance for a 7-game series. But the higher team has a clear edge. The higher team has between a 65% and a 75% probability of winning, depending on where in the range the difference is. If the lower team wins, it is a moderate upset. Either slight differences in the quality of coaching, certain players playing a little better or a little worse than they did in the regular season, or both could be responsible for an upset at this level.

DIFFERENCE IN RATINGS IS BETWEEN 18.0 AND 23.9
The higher team has roughly between a 75% to 85% probability of winning, depending on where in the range the difference is. There is a chance, but only a small one, for a 7-game series. If the lower team wins, it is a fairly big upset. Either coaches, certain players, or both could be responsible for an upset at this level.

DIFFERENCE IN RATINGS IS BETWEEN 24.0 AND 29.9
The higher team has roughly between an 85% to a 93% probability of winning, depending on where in the range the difference is. In this kind of series, often the only way the lower team can win the series is by extending the series out to 7 games and then somehow winning the 7th game, thus taking the series 4 games to 3. However, it is not uncommon, assuming there is an upset in this type of series, for the lower team to so severely disrupt the favored team that the lower team upsets the higher, favored team 4 games to 2. Whichever way it does it, if the lower team does win coming in down by this amount, it should be considered a major upset. In many such cases, the coaching would have to be very wrong and/or negligent.

DIFFERENCE IN RATINGS IS BETWEEN 30.0 AND 35.9
The higher team has roughly between a 93% and a 97% probability of winning depending on where in the range the difference is. In this kind of series, often the only way the lower team can win the series is by taking the series 7 games and winning the 7th game, thus taking the series 4 games to 3. However, there have been a tiny number of series where a team with this amount of a RTR deficit has won the series by so severely disrupting the favored team that it is able to win the series 4 games to 2. In the vast majority of such cases, the coaching for the higher team was severely wrong and/or negligent. Whether accomplished in 6 games or 7, the lower team winning despite being this far behind in RTR is extremely rare, and would be considered a very major and very surprising upset.

DIFFERENCE IN RATINGS IS BETWEEN 36.0 AND 41.9
The higher team has roughly between a 97% and a 99% probability of winning, depending on where in the range the difference is. Obviously, an upset would be extremely rare, shocking, and historical. It would in most cases be caused substantially by incompetent and/or severely negligent coaching or by one or more major injuries. With this amount of difference, any upset would almost certainly have to be with the series going all seven games.

DIFFERENCE IN RATINGS IS 42.0 AND 47.9
The higher team has a roughly 99% probability of winning the series. Obviously, an upset would be extremely rare, shocking, and historical. It would in most cases be caused substantially by incompetent and/or severely negligent coaching or by one or more major injuries. With this amount of difference, any upset would almost certainly have to be with the series going all seven games.

DEFFERENCE IN RATINGS IS 48.0 OR MORE
It is close to a 100% certainty that the higher team will win the series. Obviously, an upset would be extremely rare, shocking, and historical. It would in the vast majority of cases be caused substantially by incompetent and/or severely negligent coaching. With this amount of difference, any upset would almost certainly have to be with the series going all seven games.

COMPLETE USER GUIDE
Above are only excerpts from the full User Guide. See this User Guide article for full details about the revamped Real Team Ratings system.

========== REAL TEAM RATINGS SUB RATINGS ==========

For each team there are six sub ratings that when combined together give you the overall Real Team Ratings (that are near the beginning of this Report). If you check the sub ratings below you can find out in detail the strengths and weaknesses of the teams. For some of the sub ratings there are some limited but important notes from the User Guide. For full understanding and details the complete User Guide must be consulted.

EFFICIENCY SUB RATING
2010-11 Season
As of December 31, 2010

1 Miami Heat 52.00
2 Boston Celtics 44.50
3 San Antonio Spurs 44.00
4 Los Angeles Lakers 34.50
5 Dallas Mavericks 28.50
6 Orlando Magic 25.00
7 Utah Jazz 15.50
8 Oklahoma City Thunder 12.50
9 Atlanta Hawks 12.00
10 Denver Nuggets 10.50
11 New Orleans Hornets 8.00
12 Houston Rockets 7.00
13 New York Knicks 3.50
14 Chicago Bulls 0.00
15 Portland Trail Blazers 0.00
16 Memphis Grizzlies -1.00
17 Philadelphia 76ers -4.00
18 Indiana Pacers -5.00
19 Milwaukee Bucks -12.50
20 Phoenix Suns -13.00
21 Los Angeles Clippers -20.50
22 Detroit Pistons -22.50
23 Toronto Raptors -22.50
24 Golden State Warriors -23.50
25 Charlotte Bobcats -27.50
26 New Jersey Nets -30.50
27 Washington Wizards -33.50
28 Minnesota Timberwolves -33.50
29 Sacramento Kings -36.00
30 Cleveland Cavaliers -48.50

USER GUIDE NOTES FOR THE ABOVE SUB RATING
--For purposes of RTR this sub rating is calculated as three times the difference between offensive efficiency and defensive efficiency.

--Efficiency is how many points scored (or for defense how many given up) per 100 possessions.

--Note that teams can have the same net efficiency with very different team makeups and/or strategies. For example, a team with a mediocre offense but the best defense in the League could have the same exact net efficiency as a team with the best offense in the League but only a mediocre defense.

--Net efficiency is the best single measure of exactly how good a basketball team potentially is and to a large degree how good it actually is. Therefore, this sub rating carries big weight toward overall Real Team Ratings. However, how good the team will actually be in the playoffs requires other sub ratings.

--See the User Guide to Real Team Ratings for complete details regarding this sub rating

PERFORMANCE VERSUS THE GOOD AND VERSUS THE BEST TEAMS SUB RATING
2010-11 Season
As of December 31, 2010

1 San Antonio Spurs 34.19
2 Dallas Mavericks 31.38
3 Boston Celtics 28.43
4 Miami Heat 11.69
5 Oklahoma City Thunder 10.48
6 Denver Nuggets 9.36
7 New Orleans Hornets 8.30
8 Utah Jazz 8.07
9 Chicago Bulls 6.69
10 Orlando Magic 6.31
11 New York Knicks 2.94
12 Portland Trail Blazers 2.94
13 Los Angeles Lakers 0.02
14 Phoenix Suns -0.73
15 Toronto Raptors -0.81
16 Memphis Grizzlies -1.59
17 Philadelphia 76ers -3.31
18 Milwaukee Bucks -3.62
19 Indiana Pacers -5.16
20 Atlanta Hawks -6.64
21 Los Angeles Clippers -6.84
22 Houston Rockets -9.31
23 Charlotte Bobcats -10.58
24 Golden State Warriors -12.02
25 Detroit Pistons -12.94
26 Cleveland Cavaliers -14.91
27 New Jersey Nets -16.75
28 Washington Wizards -18.31
29 Minnesota Timberwolves -19.19
30 Sacramento Kings -23.31

--See the User Guide to Real Team Ratings for complete details regarding the sub rating above.

MOST RECENT GAMES SUB RATING
2010-11 Season
As of December 31, 2010

1 San Antonio Spurs 19
2 Boston Celtics 17
3 Dallas Mavericks 15
4 Miami Heat 15
5 Chicago Bulls 11
6 Oklahoma City Thunder 9
7 Utah Jazz 9
8 Orlando Magic 7
9 Atlanta Hawks 5
10 Los Angeles Lakers 5
11 New York Knicks 5
12 Denver Nuggets 3
13 Houston Rockets 3
14 Portland Trail Blazers -1
15 Indiana Pacers -3
16 Memphis Grizzlies -3
17 Milwaukee Bucks -3
18 New Orleans Hornets -3
19 Philadelphia 76ers -3
20 Phoenix Suns -3
21 Charlotte Bobcats -5
22 Toronto Raptors -5
23 Detroit Pistons -7
24 Los Angeles Clippers -7
25 Golden State Warriors -9
26 Minnesota Timberwolves -11
27 New Jersey Nets -11
28 Washington Wizards -11
29 Cleveland Cavaliers -17
30 Sacramento Kings -19

USER GUIDE NOTES FOR THE ABOVE SUB RATING
--This sub rating over weights the most recent performance: from the most recent 25 games.

--It reflects momentum, playoff motivation, and morale.

--It substantially but indirectly and inexactly reflects the current injury situations.

--It partially, indirectly, and inexactly reflects the likelihood that coaching strategies and tactics will work or not in the playoffs.

--The last five games of the Regular Season are ignored due to playoff coaches resting key players and due to other distortions.

--See the User Guide to Real Team Ratings for complete details regarding this sub rating.

GENERAL DEFENSIVE SUB RATING
2010-11 Season
As of December 31, 2010

1 Boston Celtics 5.80
2 Miami Heat 5.40
3 Orlando Magic 5.00
4 Milwaukee Bucks 4.60
5 Dallas Mavericks 4.00
6 New Orleans Hornets 4.00
7 Indiana Pacers 3.40
8 San Antonio Spurs 3.00
9 Atlanta Hawks 2.40
10 Chicago Bulls 2.40
11 Los Angeles Lakers 1.80
12 Memphis Grizzlies 1.40
13 Philadelphia 76ers 1.00
14 Utah Jazz 0.60
15 Portland Trail Blazers 0.20
16 Charlotte Bobcats -0.20
17 Oklahoma City Thunder -0.60
18 New Jersey Nets -1.00
19 Los Angeles Clippers -1.60
20 Sacramento Kings -1.60
21 Houston Rockets -2.20
22 Denver Nuggets -2.80
23 Washington Wizards -2.80
24 New York Knicks -3.40
25 Detroit Pistons -3.80
26 Toronto Raptors -4.20
27 Cleveland Cavaliers -4.60
28 Golden State Warriors -5.00
29 Minnesota Timberwolves -5.40
30 Phoenix Suns -5.80

USER GUIDE NOTES FOR THE ABOVE SUB RATING
--The general defensive sub rating is a relatively small but important adjustment that slightly to moderately modifies the ratings of teams according to where they rank defensively (the better the defense, the better for the playoffs).

--Since many playoff series feature teams with very similar ratings, even a small general defensive adjustment can flip the predicted winner from one team to the other.

--Aside from being a sub rating, this shows you exactly how the NBA teams rank defensively.

--See the User Guide to Real Team Ratings for complete details regarding this sub rating.

PAINT DEFENDING SUB RATING
2010-11 Season
As of December 31, 2010

1 Boston Celtics 5.80
2 Orlando Magic 5.40
3 Milwaukee Bucks 5.00
4 Indiana Pacers 4.60
5 Cleveland Cavaliers 4.20
6 Los Angeles Clippers 3.80
7 Miami Heat 3.40
8 New Orleans Hornets 3.00
9 Utah Jazz 2.60
10 New Jersey Nets 2.20
11 Charlotte Bobcats 1.80
12 Portland Trail Blazers 1.40
13 Atlanta Hawks 1.00
14 Chicago Bulls 0.60
15 Dallas Mavericks 0.20
16 Philadelphia 76ers -0.20
17 Los Angeles Lakers -0.60
18 Minnesota Timberwolves -1.00
19 San Antonio Spurs -1.40
20 Memphis Grizzlies -1.80
21 Houston Rockets -2.20
22 Denver Nuggets -2.60
23 Washington Wizards -3.00
24 Oklahoma City Thunder -3.40
25 Detroit Pistons -3.80
26 Sacramento Kings -4.20
27 Golden State Warriors -4.60
28 New York Knicks -5.00
29 Phoenix Suns -5.40
30 Toronto Raptors -5.80

USER GUIDE NOTES FOR THE ABOVE SUB RATING
--Defense is a little more important in the playoffs than it is in the regular season; At the same time, in the playoffs, paint defending (aka interior defending aka down low defending) is more important than perimeter defending (aka outside defending).

--See the User Guide to Real Team Ratings for complete details regarding this sub rating.

PACE ADJUSTMENT SUB RATING
2010-11 Season
As of December 31, 2010

1 Boston Celtics 2.60
2 Charlotte Bobcats 2.30
3 Miami Heat 2.30
4 Dallas Mavericks 2.00
5 Orlando Magic 2.00
6 Philadelphia 76ers 1.70
7 Utah Jazz 1.70
8 Los Angeles Clippers 1.40
9 Milwaukee Bucks 1.40
10 Cleveland Cavaliers 1.10
11 New Orleans Hornets 1.10
12 Atlanta Hawks 0.80
13 Sacramento Kings 0.80
14 Los Angeles Lakers 0.50
15 New Jersey Nets 0.50
16 Detroit Pistons 0.20
17 San Antonio Spurs 0.20
18 Portland Trail Blazers -0.10
19 Washington Wizards -0.10
20 Oklahoma City Thunder -0.40
21 Memphis Grizzlies -0.70
22 Toronto Raptors -1.00
23 Indiana Pacers -1.30
24 Phoenix Suns -1.60
25 Houston Rockets -1.90
26 Golden State Warriors -2.20
27 Denver Nuggets -2.80
28 New York Knicks -3.10
29 Chicago Bulls -3.40
30 Minnesota Timberwolves -3.70

USER GUIDE NOTES FOR THE ABOVE SUB RATING
--The pace of a basketball team is the number of possessions it gets on average per game.

--Teams that run a lot of fast breaks and/or take shots early in the 24 second shot clocks have fast paces, and vice versa.

--The pace adjustment is a small but valid adjustment that slightly modifies the ratings of teams according to the effects of pace on ability to win playoff games.

--The best pace is a little below the League average pace.

--This sub rating has been improved. Beginning with 2010-11, optimum pace is to be the 20th fastest (or in other words the 10th slowest) team in the League. The further from that a team is the lower the pace sub rating. The lowest rating possible is for the team with the fastest pace. The slowest team in the League has a moderate pace sub rating rather than the highest rating as in prior years.

--See the User Guide to Real Team Ratings for complete details regarding this sub rating.

========== USER GUIDE ==========
See User Guide to Real Team Ratings for full details about these ratings which accurately predict who will win in the playoffs.

Rick Carlisle is Caught Red-Handed Making George Karl Type Coaching Errors

In the Real Coach Ratings that were reported at the end of November Quest for the Ring (QFTR) informed everyone that Dallas Mavericks Coach Rick Carlisle has been repeatedly badly beaten in the playoffs. In fact, Carlisle’s playoffs record is substantially worse than that of Denver Nuggets Coach George Karl! Rounding to the nearest whole number, both Carlisle and Karl have lost ten playoff games that should have been wins. But Carlisle has done this out of just 78 playoff games coached, whereas with Karl it took 167 playoff games for him to lose ten that he should have won. But both of them are near the bottom of the heap in terms of playoffs coaching and QFTR is certain that neither of them will ever win a Championship.

When in 2009 the Mavs and the Nuggets played in the West semifinal, the two most unsuccessful playoffs coaches among current coaches were matched up head to head. At that time, when the Nuggets thrashed the Mavericks, how bad Carlisle is at coaching in the playoffs was not known. This greatly increased the worry level here at QFTR that we might possibly have overstated how bad Karl is. Had we had to apologize for overstating how bad Karl is we probably would have shut down QFTR! But today, virtually everything that happened in 2009 makes total sense. There are as always a small number of mostly minor mysteries left over from that one of a kind Nuggets year, and there is one medium mystery: why did it take so long for the Lakers to buckle down and use their offensive system to overcome the Nuggets’ defensive overdrive strategy? Fast forward to now, and another similar Lakers mystery appears to be ongoing.

In the 2009 Nuggets-Mavs series, in accordance with the research showing how all the coaches do in the playoffs, neither coach coached well, but Karl clearly outcoached Carlisle. So after this the Nuggets amazingly appeared in the West final against the Lakers. Even more amazingly, the Nuggets in the first four games of that series created the illusion that they could possibly beat the Lakers in that best of seven. When the Lakers demolished the Nuggets to eliminate the Nuggets in game six IN DENVER, 119-92, it was the end of the illusions. Karl had ultimately been outcoached by the master, Phil Jackson. Whenever a team is blown out in an elimination game, coaching has to be at least partly involved, and it surely was here.

FAST FORWARD TO RIGHT NOW: CARLISLE IS CAUGHT RED HANDED
Last night the Dallas Mavericks, still coached by Carlisle, were defeated in their own building (99-93) by the big time revamped and reenergized San Antonio Spurs, coached by one of the very best coaches in the League, Greg Popovich. (Yes, I am starting to think that the Spurs are a real threat to beat the Lakers in the 2011 West Final; more on this later). Although we don’t know ALL of the ways in which Carlisle screws up yet, we do now know that he shares with George Karl the trait of cheating players out of minutes and starts due to personality and style evaluations.

Last night Carlisle refused to play the experienced and at least slightly underrated center Brendan Haywood. Instead, a very young and inexperienced center from France named Alexis Ajinca played. Ajinca has played only 242 minutes in the NBA so technically it is problematic to show a Real Player Rating for him because 300 minutes are wanted for that. But doing it anyway, even QFTR is surprised by how low Ajinca’s rating is. Prior to adding on the Hidden Defending Adjustment his number is only .297. Correctly calculating a HAD is not valid with so few minutes (and would be more difficult than it would be worth anyway) so we just made an educated guess in favor of Ajinca and assumed he is a better hidden defender than 75% of all other players, which gives him a HDA of .235. The resulting overall estimated Real Player Rating for Ajinca is .532. That puts Ajinca in the low end of the marginal role player category; a player with a rating this low should by rights not play in the playoffs and should play sparingly if at all in the regular season on a major playoff team.

So what we saw last night was Ajinca trying to prove himself as a pro in the NBA because he sure has not done so up until now. Ajinca’s game RPR was .736 using an estimated HDA of .140. (Because his plus-minus was miserable it would be absurd to use a HDA higher than this). That is just about the average RPR for centers in the League so you can say that Ajinca was decent in this particular game. (The announcers were gushing about Ajinca as if he was the second coming of Christ, laugh out loud).

But unlike Ajinca, Haywood might have had a game RPR of over 1.000. And the odds are quite high that Haywood would have been at least a little better than Ajinca. By contrast, Ajinca could easily have been a .500. To say that Carlisle was gambling with Ajinca is an understatement. Ajinca played much better in this game than in most prior ones, which matters a lot less than you might think. Ajinca could probably be safely played when the Mavericks were playing bad teams, but to play him when playing the mighty Spurs was just plain stupid.

Brendan Haywood in 2009-10 had a Real Player Rating of .929 for the Mavericks (Superstar) and .744 for the Wizards (Major role player and good enough to start). In 2008-09 Haywood hardly played due to injury. In 2007-08 Haywood’s rating was .833 (Star) using a conservative estimate of .200 for HAD. So Haywood is a bona fide, quality center in the NBA while Ajinca is a shot in the dark. And yet Carlisle plays Ajinca over Haywood in what was an important game for the Mavericks.

True, the Mavericks probably would have lost to the Spurs even if Haywood had played; after all, their historic superstar Dirk Nowitzki was out with a minor injury. But when Haywood didn’t play, anyone watching the game was wasting his or her time because there was no way in hell the Mavericks could possibly have won. So QFTR caught Rick Carlisle red handed making a big coaching error.

A little hunting and clicking around the Internet confirms that some people think that Haywood’s personality (as it shows up on the court anyway) is sort of undependable and a little “soft” at times. Coaches like Carlisle and Karl heavily penalize those who they think have undependable or soft personalities. So we can deduce that Carlisle thought that the very young and very highly motivated Ajinca would do better than the older and relatively inconsistent Haywood. Ajinca’s personality just seemed so much stronger and more dependable than Haywood’s to Carlisle (and to be fair, it might seem that way to others) that Carlisle could not resist making the move.

But this was the wrong decision. Haywood is so much better than Ajinca in basketball terms that the abstract and subjective stuff (that favors Ajinca) could not offset the real basketball stuff. Ajinca was decent in the game but Haywood could have been outstanding in the game if he had been given the opportunity. You might be able to win a regular season game against a medium or bad team with Ajinca but there is no way you are going to beat the Spurs in a playoff game with Ajinca (even with Dirk Nowitzki back).

Overall Haywood is being cheated of minutes by Carlisle, but for the Nuggets George Karl is cheating Renaldo Balkman much more so. Balkman is being robbed of everything by Karl whereas at least Haywood still gets to play in a fairly substantial number of games. By the way, Gary Forbes is apparently the Ajinca for the Nuggets: getting someone else's playing time.

CARLISLE, KARL, AND OTHERS LIVE IN THE NETHERWORLD
The bottom line is that Carlisle apparently lives in the same netherworld as Karl, where players who have personality or style characteristics not liked (by them) don’t get to play as much as they should. You want to know what the real truth is? Its Carlisle’s and Karl’s personalities that are the real problem with respect to winning games, especially playoff games. They are too sensitive about the personality problems of others, which makes their own personalities problematic with respect to winning playoff games.

Meanwhile, successful playoff coaches such as Greg Popovich and Phil Jackson do not overreact to perceived problems with personalities and styles. They coach rather than punish; they try to make little changes where possible, but most of all they try to correctly integrate even the “bad personalities” and the “bad styles” into the team’s offensive and defensive strategies and tactics. And they mostly succeed in doing that, of course. Coaches such as Popovich and Jackson do not expect players’ personalities and styles to magically transform into something completely different while the player is held out of games and is sitting on the bench. Rest assured that Karl and Carlisle are dead wrong: no basketball player’s personality or playing style ever changed worth a damn while he or she was sitting on the bench.
























AND RILEY, INTERESTINGLY ENOUGH, SAYS RICK CARLISLE IS "WACK"

Fast Break Update on J.R. Smith and Carmelo Anthony

If you look around Internet Land you find that a big majority of bloggers (and an even bigger majority of higher traffic ones) write only remarkably short posts that are basically just little pieces of a real article, or at best outlines of a true article, and/or they are updates of a running story. This is the by the book, establishment way to do it. The main two advantages of doing it this way are that it is easy for the writer to produce this way and it is easy for readers who have very little time to spare to read these little postings; the latter means that traffic will be higher. Also, search engines tend to give more traffic to sites with frequent short posts than to sites with infrequent but far longer posts.

Of course, since Quest for the Ring (QFTR) is a one of a kind site that has it's own custom book and that does things by the establishment book only by accident, QFTR does mostly very long to extremely long reports chock loaded with evidence to as we like to say prove things beyond the shadow of a doubt.

However, as QFTR gets older and due to impossible to contain curiosity about what it's like to try something very seldom tried before, in this post and from time to time in 2011 we will experiment with the shorter update oriented post.

With short update posts the proof beyond a shadow of a doubt will be found in other reports that you can find in many ways. One easy and good way to find recent reports is to use the recent title indexes. The indexes for the latest 40 reports are right at the top and three indexes for the next 60 recent reports (20 in each index) are scattered down the home page. Probably the best way to look for reports on a subject regardless of how old they are is to use Google custom search. That search is NOT at Google; you run a Google custom search right here on this page. For example the subject of this little update post is primarily J.R. Smith. So to find out what all the controversy is regarding J.R. Smith and to find out everything we have already proved beyond a shadow of a doubt regarding J.R. Smith, type "J.R. Smith" into any of the Google custom search boxes on this QFTR home page.

Hell must have frozen over because J.R. Smith has been starting lately. Hell did freeze over for the Nuggets and especially for Carmelo Anthony who left the team December 23 due to the death of his sister Michelle at the age of 36.

Michelle Anthony was always more important than basketball, was always loved, and will never be forgotten by those who loved her, including especially Carmelo Anthony. Tears flow yet there is love and peace. Now win here a Championship, Carmelo.



When Carmelo Anthony left the Denver Nuggets on December 23 Coach George Karl was forced to start J.R. Smith. Think for a second what these latest developments really mean for J.R. Smith. Even though objectively speaking Smith was, back in 2006 and 2007, more than good enough to start, not long after Smith came to the Nuggets, George Karl refused to start Smith due to refusing to accept Smith's personality and playing style. Since like any player Smith wants to start, he made major changes in his game thinking that by doing so Karl would start him and give him the playing time he is supposed to get. Trouble is, Karl’s theories are wrong and when Smith changed he changed for the worse-substantially for the worse. That is, Smith's way of playing now makes him less valuable as a shooting guard than he used to be (and less valuable to other teams who now will be less eager to trade for him and will offer less in trade for him).

So Smith's theory in making big changes in response to Karl's badgering must have been that if he made those changes he would be able to start and would get the full playing time due to him. Certainly Smith was aware that he was "supposed to be" starting. And Karl must have at least implied and may have directly told Smith that he could start if he did as he was told. Even though Smith followed Karl's commands, Arron Afflalo is starting over J.R. Smith at shooting guard and this is not going to change anytime soon. As soon as Carmelo Anthony is back, J.R. Smith will no longer be a starter again.

But what Smith is going to have to learn the hard way is that people who have dictatorial powers in their positions and roles in an organization do not necessarily follow through on what they have hinted at or even stated. They can do whatever they want whenever they want, and those who make a lot of money in American society are known for going back on their word and doing the opposite of what they "promised". With respect to those with high incomes and real power, there is really no such thing as a promise anymore; that kind of thing went out of style and out of the picture decades ago. Again for emphasis, many powerful, high income people today (including some, not all NBA Coaches) do NOT follow through on pledges made to players, whether hinted at or stated openly. Sometimes it’s not even that they are intentionally breaking a promise. For example, if a great new player comes along a coach may not be very able to follow through on a pledge made to another player.

The bottom line is that Smith’s big reward for becoming less of a player than he used to be was to start if the Nuggets were ever very shorthanded as a result of Carmelo Anthony not being there. Obviously, this “reward” was essentially nothing; it was essentially no reward at all. The Nuggets technically have only two shooting guards and one small forward (Anthony) on their roster. The one power forward who sometimes is talked about as a small forward is Renaldo Balkman, who Karl refuses to play at all. So Karl ran out of warm bodies and was essentially forced to start J.R. Smith; this was not really any kind of a reward at all.

While Smith gets essentially nada as his reward, he will be fully penalized by the League as a whole for the fact that he can not and does not make threes as he used to, and for a few lesser changes for the worse he has made in this game. To say the least, Smith has been left with the short end of the stick.

And to be blunt, when new contract time comes, J.R. Smith is going to get many, many millions (probably several dozen millions) of dollars less than he would have received had he not changed his game. There is a rough but fairly high correlation between how good a player actually is and how much money he makes in total during a career. Individual coach opinions about style and personality don't in any way, shape or form determine a player's career pay total (and as we know those opinions do not determine whether rings are won). Career pay totals are largely determined by how good the player is objectively speaking (thank goodness).

BEWARE NBA PLAYERS
--Don’t automatically assume the Coach knows what he is doing, and
--Definitely do not assume that the Coach will reward you if you do exactly what he wants you to do.

Instead of making false assumptions like that, you need and want to get a second opinion (and perhaps a third). Open a channel outside the organization and try to get valuable advice from it. A channel could be a retired coach or an agent who really knows basketball. Another great idea is to find a mentor. For this to work well, your mentor should be a retired player (or better still a retired player-coach) who closely matches your playing style and your personality. Whether or not you can find a mentor or a secret channel, read QFTR, which among other things is in effect a free mentor service for players (and agents and coaches and managers and more).

MICHELLE ANTHONY: MORE IMPORTANT THAN BASKETBALL, ALWAYS LOVED, NEVER FORGOTTEN; TEARS OF HEAVEN AND OTHER TEARS FLOW, BUT LOVE AND PEACE REIGN

The Nuggets Lose at Home to a bad Team that Among Other Shortcomings Could Hardly Make Layups or Free Throws

I don’t know what’s come over me. I’ve been watching a good number of regular season games lately, including the 76’ers at Nuggets game the night of the day after Christmas.

Since I generally reveal all my secrets, let me tell you this: I like to watch the Nuggets play major losing teams in the regular season because I don’t want to miss the big enjoyment (for me) that comes out of where the Nuggets are so badly coached that they lose to a bad team. Mostly I have had the door shut in my face over the last few years while trying to observe what would be a special treat. Instead of seeing the Nuggets lose to bad teams, I have repeatedly seen the Nuggets use massive scoring power to overcome bad coaching. And as for the bad teams opposing the Nuggets, I have repeatedly seen them cheated by circumstances (often by bad calls late in games) repeatedly seen them not able to make free throws, repeatedly seen them not able to make layups, repeatedly seen them lose by just a point or two at the buzzer, repeatedly seen them not able to make quality assists, and sometimes seen them just plain stink so bad that there is no way any team could possibly lose to them.

But tonight I was for a change handsomely rewarded for my persistence in looking for Nuggets losses to bad teams. Tonight, the lowly Philadelphia 76’ers defeated the soon to be lowly Denver Nuggets 95-89. It was more fun than a basketball person should be allowed to have.

True, there was no Carmelo Anthony. And true, Al Harrington was slightly injured and played only 4 minutes. But if you are one of the best teams in the West and you are at home, you are supposed to be able to beat one of the worst teams in the East with or without Carmelo Anthony and Al Harrington. Not to mention that the Nuggets are going to face a hell of a lot more games with no Carmelo Anthony in the future if you know what I am saying, laugh out loud.

Like all major losing teams in most games, the 76’ers certainly made big efforts to lose this game. They could barely make any threes at all and they missed at least five free throws that they should have made. They missed a lot of layups and looked more or less incompetent on offense outside the paint as well. Their point guard, Jrue Holiday, looks and plays like he is 14 years old. He looked like he was up past his bedtime laugh out loud. On the other hand, at least Holiday made most of his free throws and had an excellent scoring night, which is more than can be said for the other 76’ers.

Yet the Nuggets imploded and could not beat this team that, Doug Collins notwithstanding, looks to be so far this year no better than in recent years, which is not good at all.

Let’s make some observations and break down the main reasons the Nuggets lost to a bad team:

Nene seems to only score early in games and by the fourth quarter he’s like a zombie on the offensive end, standing around near and in the paint waiting for someone to pass to a zombie, which doesn’t happen too often. Most guards instinctively avoid passing to zombies, even ones in decent scoring position. Would someone remember to wind up Nene at the half; he’s ticking down to nothing before the game is over.

George Karl failed to call time out as the Nuggets were demolished by one of the worst teams in the League in the 4th quarter in their own building, 29-18. This was a virtual carbon copy of the recent game in Denver versus the Timberwolves, where the Nuggets also imploded in the 4th as the Timberwolves outscored the Nuggets in the period 38-27. In that collapse too there were no Nuggets 4th quarter time outs to speak of. (But the Nuggets escaped with a 2-point win in that one).

Four of the most common smoking guns of an inferior offense are (1) there are too many isolation plays and not enough passing and (2) there is too much standing around and (3) The guards (especially the point guards) don’t make enough assists and (4) there are players who, despite being capable of scoring, seem to be completely out of the offensive flow and therefore they take only a fraction of the shots they should take. The Nuggets were guilty of (2) (3) and (4) in this single pathetic game!

THE JR SMITH BLACK SHEEP SAGA: THE 2010-11 CHAPTER
It was sad to see J.R. Smith unable to make threes in this game; he was a miserable and pathetic one of nine from beyond the arc. To make a long story short (reported in great detail elsewhere here) the coach of the Nuggets belittled Smith’s love of the 3-ball, made him think that shooting threes is "soft," and so he induced him to cut way back on threes even though he was at the time one of the most talented (and valuable) 3-point shooters in the NBA. Check this record:

J.R SMITH THREE POINT SHOOTING RECORD
Shown are the year, the number of threes made per 36 minutes, and the percentage of threes attempted made.
2006-07 3.6 @ .390
2007-08 4.0 @ .403
2008-09 2.9 @ .397
2009-10 2.7 @ .338
2010-11 2.3 @ .380

The first two years above were the golden years where Smith would be a major asset to a playoff team facing a very tough paint defense. In 2008-09 Smith cut back on threes (due to Karl) but he did maintain his percentage. In 2009-10 he cut back a little bit more, but the big story was that he could not make threes all that well anymore. Now so far this year Smith is no longer an enthusiastic or volume three point shooter and his percentage is up from last year but down from the golden years.

Smith’s percentage is more likely to go down in the future than back up to where it was. Folks, if you are not enthusiastically and aggressively trying to optimize a skill it is only a matter of time before you don’t have as much of that skill as you used to have when you were enthusiastic and aggressive about it. If in response to bad coaching a player becomes less enthusiastic and less aggressive about a skill then sooner or later that skill is going to fade away and no longer be an asset in playoff games.

The best coaches tell their players to try to get even better at what they are already very good or extremely good at. They don’t tell them to try to rearrange their skills and/or to change their style in pursuit of trying to be a more balanced or “well rounded” basketball player. That thinking is garbage and will never win you playoff games. You want to know the real truth? There really is no such thing as a completely well rounded basketball player. Even the very best basketball players have a few things they are not good at and will never be good at.

So here is an extremely important memo to coaches who don’t want to make the same mistake Karl did with J.R. Smith: Being able to make threes is very, very important toward winning playoff games and championships and any player, but especially a 2-guard who can shoot very close to or over 40% on threes and do so in volume (as J.R. Smith used to be able to do) is very, very valuable and should be encouraged. I mean, get this type of player to mix in some drives and some fast breaks with the threes so that the defenders won’t be coming all the way out to the 3-point line and making life miserable out there. But the last thing you should do is what George Karl did, which is to deny the importance of the three and make players who like to make a lot of threes and who are good at making them feel guilty about that.

Mathematically, making just 33% of threes is equivalent to making 50% of twos, which is roughly the standard or average make percentage for twos. Players who can make more than 38% and especially ones who can make more than 40% of threes (and who aggressively and enthusiastically make a lot of them including contested ones) are rare and should be greatly praised, encouraged, and facilitated. If you instead discourage the 3-ball you run the risk of causing the player to lose the ability to make the threes at all; J.R. Smith is living proof of this hazard.

THE NUGGETS WERE PATHETIC IN THE PAINT DEFENSIVELY
The 76’ers like almost all bad teams are a poor shooting team which means they need to drive into the paint more than would normally be wise. What was especially pathetic about this game was that although the 76’ers are such a weak scoring team that they even had a lot of trouble finishing at the rim (even though in other words they missed a lot of layups) the Nuggets were still hammered in the paint as the 76’ers scored 48 points in, as Hubie Brown calls it, “the painted area”. I mean, the 76’ers could not buy a layup and yet they still scored 48 points in the paint! They should have scored about 60 in the paint.

Surrendering any more than 40 points in the paint is not very good and giving up anything more than 45 is really bad. A fairly large majority of playoff games are won by teams who have surrendered fewer than 40 points in the paint.

The 76’ers made 17 offensive rebounds where 11 is the normal or average number. Offensive rebounds surrendered is a key indicator for who wins in the playoffs; teams with great paint defenses keep the number of offensive rebounds surrendered (made by the opponent) under ten in games. It is almost impossible to win a playoff game when your opponent makes 17 offensive rebounds.

THE JR SMITH BLACK SHEEP SAGA: THE 2010-11 CHAPTER (CONTINUED)
Arguably even more pathetic than this is the fact that J.R. Smith led the Nuggets in rebounding along with Chris Andersen; each of them made 11 rebounds. But a shooting guard should never ever lead your team in rebounding.

In a game like this we can see the total freak that George Karl is trying to turn J.R. Smith into. J.R. Smith is on the verge of becoming some kind of a freak 2-guard who specializes in rebounding instead of shooting and who drives into the paint all the time only to have trouble finishing (because that’s not his highest potential skill) whereas he used to be an extremely valuable shooter who could make threes but now he can’t make threes reliably anymore. In some games, J.R. Smith doesn’t even attempt to make threes; in those games he drives into the paint most of the time. Yet Smith is never ever going to be as good finishing drives as he used to be at making threes. I mean, he’s decent, probably above average at that, but he’s never going to be outstanding or one of the best driving 2-guards. In short, Smith has been induced to trade his best skills away in exchange for doing things that he will never be outstanding at.

The biggest mistake Smith ever made (in basketball, anyway) was to change his style in response to the coaching of George Karl. The situation is so bad that Smith, who should have been a starting 2-guard for Denver and failing that somewhere else in the League, may never start anywhere now. And there is even the possibility that Smith’s NBA career will be cut way short. Certainly, the Nuggets at this point should be motivated to try to trade him to another team and Smith should want to get the hell out of there before even more damage is done.

The Nuggets continue to pay a high and increasing price for injuries to Kenyon Martin and Chris Andersen. Although both of them are back and although both of them played extensively in this game, players do not generally play at 100% very soon after coming back from long injuries. Also, the Nuggets continue to pay a high and increasing price for George Karl’s essentially permanent benching of defensive specialist Renaldo Balkman. Last year the Nuggets were able to use luck and some carryover defensively from their one of a kind, miracle 2008-09 season to escape heavy regular season damage due to refusing to play Balkman. They did, however, lose in the first round of the 2010 playoffs even with home court advantage due to not being able to defend the paint.

This year, however, things may be different. The Nuggets have slipped down yet another notch in terms of defending the paint and now this season they seem destined to pay a fairly large price even in the regular season for refusing to play Balkman and for being unable to defend the paint.















LET'S CHECK WHAT RILEY HAS TO SAY >>>
"DENVER NUGGS, YOU