81

I hate to do a quick post without contributing any analysis, but in honor of tonight's Raptors-Lakers game, I have to post this.  Enjoy.

Okay, maybe a bit of analysis.  The curious thing about this video is that the Raptors rarely if ever double-teamed Kobe.  Sure, the Raptors were in control of the game until about 5:50 was left in the 3rd Quarter, but at that point, Kobe had 41 of the Lakers' 65 points.  41 points from one guy and the rest of the team was shooting so poorly that they had 24 points total.  You would think that the Raptors would double team, or do something.  Nope.  Only after the Lakers sealed the game and after Kobe had 74 of the Lakers' 115 points did the Raptors actually do anything (foul Kobe every time he got the ball).  That is inexcusably bad coaching.  It is no surprise to me now to hear that Sam Mitchell is on the hot seat in Toronto.  He showed just what poor judgment he has in this game.

The Fix for College Football

I'm not a fan of college football.  I'm a fan of Michigan Wolverine football, and I follow the travails of the Northwestern Wildcats and USC Trojans football teams loosely because I have a connection to both institutions, but I can't really be bothered to think about college football in general because of the fraud that is the college football "national championship."

Let's be clear: Division I-A college football does not, nor has it ever had, a real national champion. It has had conference champions, for sure, but it has and always had nothing more than glorified election winners.  As long as college football is stuck using polls and computer rankings to determine who is the "champion" or who gets to play for the "championship," it has nothing more than an election.  Before you comment, I'm aware that the college basketball selection committee uses polls to help determine the NCAA Tournament field every year.  But they're just that: help.  Those polls and rankings (like the RPI) are just guidance to fill out the bracket with bubble teams: teams that aren't going to contend for the championship but are good enough to fill out a 64-team field.  Bubble teams rarely if ever have an effect on the tournament in the end (before you say, "What about George Mason?" remember that GMU won its conference tournament and thus was an automatic selection; it wasn't a bubble team).  The teams that do the best during the regular season, the teams that have a chance to win the championship, always make the tournament.

I'm not going to get into all of the histrionics about why the current system is still in place when I-AA football has a long and successful history of playoff football.  Suffice to say, it's down to three shortsighted things: money, inertia, and tradition.  Let's talk about the money first.  Despite what the NCAA likes to say, money is what  big time college sports really is about.  The BCS system is a cash cow, there is no doubt about that.  Bowls distribute around $100 million to the teams and conferences that participate in them.  The diehard proponents of the current system are so concerned with preserving the current cash cow and so risk adverse that they refuse to consider any change to the system that alters this status quo in any significant way.

The second problem is inertia.  It's easier to keep doing what you're already doing, maybe make a few tweaks along the way, than it is to be brave and blow something up. The risk is massive, and the reward is somewhat speculative.  I can understand that, but it is still not a good enough reason, especially considering what we're dealing with: universities.  We should expect these institutions of higher learning to be the exemplars of forward thinking and courage.  That is what they demand of the people who fund them - their students - after all.  Cowering behind archaic structures is not the behavior we need from the places that produce our leaders, and we should not tolerate the hypocrisy.

Finally, we get to tradition.  Proponents of the BCS system claim it should stay the way it is because we've always had polls and bowls, and we should protect the tradition of the bowl.  My question: why?  Why continue this charade of popularity contests and glorified exhibitions?  That is all the polls and bowl games are, right?  The BCS system has done an extraordinary job exposing this truth.  It has not made bowls matter more, it has made them even more irrelevant.  Fifteen years ago, the big bowls - the Rose Bowl, the Fiesta Bowl, the Orange Bowl, and the Sugar Bowl - all could matter because an undefeated team could appear in any one of them and lay a claim to the "title."  Those four all also had their own special significance, too:  they were grudge matches between conferences.  The Rose Bowl, for example, was a test between the Big 10's and the Pac 10's respective conference champions to see which conference was better.  That alone gave the bowls a decent amount of significance. 

The desire to keep the "tradition" of the bowls alive has resulted in the destruction of the bowls relevance.  Only one bowl "matters" today: the Tostitos BCS Championship Game (everything needs a sponsor).  The Rose Bowl, et al. have been reduced to glorified exhibition status along with the Sun Bowl or Chick-fil-A Bowl (which have always been glorified exhibitions).  The same desire has also destroyed one of the better parts of the tradition of the major bowls, as well: the virtual elimination of the inter-conference rivalries.  For example, since 2002, the Rose Bowl has only once held the traditional matchup between the Big 10 and Pac 10 champions.  One set of traditions have been sacrificed in the name of another, poorer set.

I'm not here just to criticize.  I'm here to point to a better way, a way forward for all of college football.  A way forward that will not only enhance the game, but also make the games important for a host of schools that have little to play for even at the beginning of the season, other than perhaps a trip to El Paso for Christmas, of course.

I give you the College Football Relegation Model. 

How It Works

- The traditional conferences are dissolved, and teams are divided into 8 new geographic conferences with 15 teams each.  Each conference is divided into a Tier 1 division, with 8 teams, and a Tier 2 division, with 7.  Here's how I see the divisions breaking down:

South Atlantic

Tier 1: Alabama, Auburn, Georgia. Georgia Tech, Florida. Florida State, Miami, South Florida

Tier 2: Clemson, Florida Atlantic, Florida International, South Carolina, Troy, UAB, UCF

North Atlantic

Tier 1: Boston College, Marshall, Penn State, Pittsburgh, Rutgers, Virginia, Virginia Tech, West Virginia

Tier 2: Army, Buffalo, Connecticut, Maryland, Navy, Syracuse, Temple

South

Tier 1: New Mexico State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Southern Methodist, TCU, Texas A&M, Texas – Austin, Texas Tech

Tier 2: Baylor, Houston, North Texas, New Mexico, Rice, Tulsa, UTEP

South East 

Tier 1: Kentucky, Louisville, Memphis, Mississippi, Mississippi State, North Carolina State, Tennessee, Wake Forest

Tier 2: Duke, East Carolina, Middle Tennessee, North Carolina, Southern Mississippi, Vanderbilt, Western Kentucky

 

Great Lakes

Tier 1: Akron, Cincinnati, Michigan, Michigan State, Notre Dame, Ohio, Ohio State, Purdue

Tier 2: Ball State, Bowling Green, Central Michigan, Indiana, Kent State, Toledo, Western Michigan

 

Central

Tier 1: Arkansas, Illinois, Iowa, Iowa State, Miami (Ohio), Louisiana Tech, LSU, Wisconsin 

Tier 2: Arkansas State, Eastern Michigan, Louisiana-Lafayette, Louisiana-Munroe, Northern Illinois, Northwestern, Tulane

 

Pacific

Tier 1: Arizona, Arizona State, California, Oregon, Oregon State, UCLA, USC, Washington

Tier 2: Fresno State, Hawaii, San Diego State, San Jose State, Stanford, UNLV, Washington State

 

Mountain

Tier 1: Air Force, Brigham Young, Colorado, Colorado State, Kansas, Kansas State, Nebraska, Utah

Tier 2: Boise State, Idaho, Minnesota, Missouri, Nevada, Utah State, Wyoming

 

- This is just my idea of how to break the teams out by geography.   There are any number of ways to break the conferences down, i.e., preserving each of the current major six conferences and just add teams to them from the minor conferences and the independents.  The only thing that really matters is preserving 8 conferences made of 15 teams.  Which team is in Tier 1 and which is in Tier 2 when the system starts should be based on some formula of historic record.  It'll be unfair for the first season or two for one team or another, but it'll work itself out in short order.

 - Each team plays every team in their division once each season.  So, teams in Tier 1 divisions have 7 automatic games, and Tier 2 teams have 6 automatic games.  Tier 1 teams play 3 non-divisional games against teams of their choosing, and Tier 2 teams play 4.  The non-divisional games can be against any team.  This allows old rivalries, such as USC-Notre Dame, to continue.

- The champion of each Tier 1 division goes on to an eight-team playoff.  Intra-division record determines Tier 1 champions.  In the event of a tie, head to head record is the first tie-breaker.  In the event of a three-way-plus tie and head-to-head cannot determine, out of conference record determines.  If that does not break the tie, then out-of-conference strength of schedule will determine.  This is so teams do not schedule too many easy opponents to pad their schedule.

- An RPI-like formula determines the tournament seeds.  Seven traditional bowl sites can act as hosts for each tournament game, with championship game, semifinal, and, first round duty rotating amongst the sites.

- The Tier 1 teams that are 2nd-4th in their respective divisions play in bowl games.  The only reason for this is to placate the people who are obsessed with bowls and bowl payouts.  No, these bowls don’t matter, but, like I’ve already said, only one matters now anyway.  The fifth rank team in each Tier 1 division is excluded from any post season games, bowl, or otherwise.

- The bottom team in each Tier 1 division is automatically relegated to its conference's Tier 2 division.  For example, if Stanford has the worst record of any Western Conference Tier 1 team, it is automatically relegated to Tier 2 for the next season. 

- The champion of each Tier 2 division is automatically promoted to its conference's Tier 1 division.  For example, if Clemson is the South Atlantic Conference's Tier 2 champion, it is automatically promoted to that conference's Tier 1 division for the next season.  Each Tier 2 champion also get bowl game invites.  The formula for deciding tiebreakers for Tier 1 champions also applies to Tier 2 tiebreaking.

- The Tier 1 teams that are 6th and 7th in their respective divisions play relegation games against the 2nd and 3rd ranked team in their associated Tier 2 division.  Winners of those games are in Tier 1 the following season, while losers are in Tier 2.  These would be bowl games, as well. 

 

If this looks familiar to you, you're right: it’s based on how European soccer leagues work.  European soccer leagues have 90+ teams, like in Division I-A college football, and this league organization works for a number of reasons. 

First, it recognizes the complexity of running a competition with a lot of teams.  With that many teams, you need a complex system to properly figure out champions.  This is a complex system, but it is quite simple when seen in its totality.

Second, it addresses a fundamental inequity in American sports: there is little organizational penalty for failure in any league.  Here, a big and obvious penalty for failure exists: you get demoted.  Pure and simple.

Third, the seasons of most college football teams are currently more or less done at the beginning of the season because most teams have no chance at a championship, either for their conference or the "national" one.  At most, they have the possibility of playing in a postseason exhibition, er, sorry, bowl game.  Well, in this system, teams have that, but a lot more.  The top teams in Tier 1 are competing for a playoff berth.  The middling teams are playing for that exhibition game, like they currently are doing.  The not-so good teams are struggling to stay in Tier 1.  Finally, the top Tier 2 teams are trying to get into Tier 1. Now, only a few teams have something to play for at any stage during the season, other than pride.  Most teams have something tangible to play for under my system. 

Fourth, it makes it increases the likelihood of more games being competitive.  The I-A level is supposed to be the elite schools, but even at this level, the spread of talent is just so big that too many games are uninteresting.  Schools like Duke and Indiana just cannot hang with conference-mates Florida State and Ohio State, respectively.  My system groups teams with similar caliber of competition.  Tighter grouping of talent means more close games, which equals more excitement for everyone. Great teams play each other in Tier 1, and mediocre teams play each other in Tier 2.  More competitive games equal more interesting and exciting games. 

Fifth, being segregated from the elite teams should provide some of these aforementioned perennial cellar dwellers the opportunity to experience some success.  Because the games they play will likely be more competitive, the odds of them winning enough to get promoted, and thus attain a real goal for the first time in many of these programs’ histories, exist.  Having an attainable goal such as promotion within sight makes it more feasible for programs to develop a culture of winning, because one of the keys to doing developing a culture of success is to have attainable goals.  This is just so difficult in the current system.

Sixth, the importance of the college football regular season is not diminished one bit because just to get to the playoffs you probably have to go undefeated: one loss is as much of a killer in this system as it is in the current BCS system, if not more so.  The drama and story line possibilities grow exponentially.  And yes, sure there are programs like Connecticut or Duke probably who won't have much to play for year after year and will be stuck at the bottom of Tier 2 for years.  But do they have anything to play for as it is?  No, they do not.

Seventh, This system also keeps those “beloved” bowl games around.  Out of the fifteen teams in each conference, 9 teams will play in some sort post season game: the Tier 1 champion goes to the playoffs, the Tier 1 teams ranked 2-4 and Tier 2 champion play in bowl games, and the four teams playing in relegation battles.  That's 39 total postseason games, 23 of which mean something, instead of the 1 that currently means something.  That's an improvement by any measure.

Eighth, it eliminates that inequity of the current conference system.  The Big Six conferences (Big 12, Big 10, Pac 10, SEC, ACC, and Big East) have unfairly dominated college football to the exclusion of teams in other conferences.  Witness Boise State, BYU, and Hawaii in the past few years.  These teams have no chance of reaching the “championship” in college football, regardless of the merits of the actual team’s performance.  Every team has the same opportunity to play for the championship. 

Ninth, my system will not totally do away with the Cinderella upsets, like Toledo beating my Wolverines this season.  Teams can and will still schedule supposed cupcake games for their non-conference games, so opportunities for upsets still abound.

Finally, it brings a championship tournament to I-A college football with little opportunity for arbitrary decisions to enter the mix: everything is settled on the field.  That is what matters the most. 

Now, is this ever going to happen?  Hell no, for the reasons I outlined above.  Oh, and ponder this: the institutions the produced the “leaders” who put us in this financial crisis are the same institutions that maintain the BCS.  That thought ought to reinforce the fact that the BCS folk don't have the best interests of the game at heart: they have their own narrow, short-term, myopic self interest at heart, and that's why no changes will be made to the BCS system unless they are forced to change.

The Only NBA Preview You Need, 2008-2009 Edition, Part Two: Eastern Conference

. . . And here's your Eastern Conference.  The East is deep this year.  The right coast has a load of teams that are going to contend for a title this year, and a lot of teams that will threaten for the playoffs.  Let's get to it.

Eyeing the Gold

1. Boston Celtics

They're the champs until they're proven unworthy of the title, and as much as it hurts this Lakers fan to admit it, the Celtics are as deserving a champion as any in recent memory.  A now-veteran Rajon Rondo has replaced Ray Allen in the Big Three, I think, along with Kevin Garnett and Paul Pierce.  That's not to say that Allen is done; he's just starting to fade seriously.  Add in solid rotation players in Eddie House, Tony Allen, Kendrick Perkins, Leon Powe, and Glen Davis, along with the return of the entire coaching staff(including player-coach Sam Cassell)  means that the Celtics are going to play stifling defense again, making life miserable for its competition.  The loss of James Posey may be an issue, especially since they didn't really replace him, but I don't think the Celts will suffer too much.

2. Cleveland Cavaliers

LeBron James alone makes the Cavs a contender.  Now King James finally has a decent PG to play with in Mo Williams, meaning the Cavs will be even more dangerous, since they have two guys on the floor who can distribute and find the open guys.  Zydrunas Ilgauskas is a serviceable center when healthy, and Wally Szczberiak, Sasha Pavlovc, and Daniel Gibson are good role players. The Cavs do have one 'problem': they can't really afford to have both Ben Wallace and Anderson Varejao: both are just too offensively limited and are basically clones of each other.  Since AV's contract can expire this year, the Cavs should look into trading him for another PF that can add some low post scoring and bolster their depth, since they're a bit thin otherwise.  Still, King is so good that he can take a mediocre supporting cast all the way to the Eastern Conference Finals when he's healthy.

3. Detroit Pistons

I knew there was a reason I was delaying putting up the Eastern Conference Preview, and the Pistons are why.  The Pistons had gotten stale over the past few years, and the acquisition of Allen Iverson for Chauncey Billups and Antonio McDyess really does mix this team up.  The Pistons now have two different ways to start games off with: they can either go with a lineup of Iverson at the PG spot, with Rip Hamilton, Tayshaun Prince, Rasheed Wallace, and Amir Johnson, or they can move Rip to the 3, Iverson to the 2, put Rodney Stuckey at the 1, and bring Tayshaun off the bench.  I think the latter will prove to be a more effective lineup because Iverson isn't a PG, he's a SG, and Rip is good and tall enough to be a SF.  Either way, though, the Pistons are now a much more explosive team, and should be fun to watch.  The real problems with the trade is that Billups was a defender (although he was slowing down a bit), while Iverson isn't, and the Pistons' depth gets sapped without McDyess: they now only have Jason Maxiell, Walter Hermann, and either Stuckey or Tayshaun to come off the bench.  Okay, Kwame Brown is a decent defender and should soak up some minutes, but you can't count on him for anything better than that.  If anyone gets injured, Detroit will be too thin to compete for a title.  As they are now, I'd say they are better than they were before, and, barring injury, they're as much a threat as ever. 

Pretenders to the Crown

4. Orlando Magic

The Magic have one of the best - if not THE best - centers in the game, Dwight Howard.  They have good and deadly sharpshooters at the 3 and 4: Hedo Turkoglu and Rashard Lewis.  They are just average defenders, though.  Mickeael Pietrus. however, is a solid defensive presence and can drain the three well.  He's not a spectacular shooting guard, but he's a solid starter at the position.  The same applies to Jameer Nelson.  He's definitely starter quality, but is by no means in the top tier of point guards in the league.  The Magic truly do have great starting five.  They have NO bench though: JJ Reddick can hit the 3, but he's otherwise useless.  Tony Battie, Adonal Foyle, Anthony Johnson, Courtney Lee . . . well, the less said about them the better.  The Magic will contend on the strength of their starting 5, but won't get far without some more bench support.  

5. Toronto Raptors

Jose Calderon has a strong argument for being the best pure point guard in the East.  Chris Bosh is a tremendous power forward, and among the top five in the East.  Jermaine O'Neal isn't Jermaine O'Neal anymore, after all those injuries and surgeries; he's probably still a starter but is by no means a star anymore.  The Raptors have two decent guys at the swingmen spots.  Anthony Parker is a decent 2 guard; nothing extraordinary, but a solid shooter and a decent defender.  Jamario Moon ought to be better than he was as a rookie, but the small forward is already 28 years old, so he's probably really close to his ceiling as it is.  The only bench player of any note is Jason Kapono, who's absurdly good from long range, but has miserable defense and is just okay from inside the arc.  Everyone else . . . well, when draft bust Andrea Bargnani is your second best bench player, you have problems.  The team has no one to back up Calderon (I nonetheless think the O'Neal-T.J. Ford trade was a good idea because Ford didn't seem particularly enthused about being a second stringer and the Raptors needed a center badly), and no one to spell Bosh.  I just don't think the Raptors are deep and good enough to it done this season, but they are pretty close.  I think they need one good piece and two solid pieces: a swingman good enough to send Parker or Moon to the bench and someone to back up Bosh/O'Neal and a good backup PG.  Add those, and the Raptors would vault to the third or fourth spots in the East.  

6. Philadelphia 76ers

Bill Simmons has the best line about the 76ers.  They're paying superstar money to a second banana (PF Elton Brand), and second banana money to three second tier players (PG Andrew Miller, SG Andre Iguodala, and C Samuel Dalembert).  Yes, Iguodala did well last season, but it was a contract year; expect him to regress this year.  Last year was an anomaly for Andre Miller: it was the first year since his second as a pro that his PER was over the 16.5 range.  given his age, he ought to regress, too.  Then again, he's in a contract year, so he's going to do his damnedest to stay up there.  Dalembert is and will be an average starter: nothing special, but he's not going to hurt you.  As for Elton Brand, well, he's an improvement over what they had last year, but he's a small PF and has never been a go-to guy.  I'd take Bosh over Brand at this point in their careers: remember that the Clippers weren't even a .500 team in Brand's last full season, and the Clippers weren't an untalented team that year.   $46 million - 80% of the salary cap - to those players is absurd.  Fortunately for the Sixers, their second best player, SF Thad Young is only making about $2 million this season.  Willie Green, Theo Ratliff, Lou Williams, and Reggie Williams form a decent bench, but the bench isn't good enough to overcome my reservations about the starting 5.  I really don't see how these guys are a threat to the Celtics, Cavs, or Pistons, let alone the Magic or Raptors.  

Early Exit Fodder

7. Miami Heat

The Heat are a bit of a mystery this year.  They get a healthy and hungry Dwayne Wade back, which is going to be HUGE.  Wade is one of the few players in this league who can carry a team all by his lonesome, along with LeBron, Kobe, Tim Duncan, Paul Pierce, Chris Paul, and Steve Nash.  Shawn Marion in a contract year and a good chunk of time at small forward means that he's going to be motivated and as effective as ever.  Add in rookies PF Michael Beasley, a super-scorer who has the leaders he needs around him now so he can fulfill his potential, and PG Mario Chalmers, who's going to be looking for revenge after sinking to the second round, and veteran center Udonis Haslem, who's the definition of solid at center, and you get an intriguing starting five.  Marcus Banks, last year's starting PG, will do well coming off the bench, as will Dorell Wright, Mark Blount, and Chris Quinn.  Shaun Livingston is an interesting X Factor, too: if he gives the Heat anything, it'll be bonus.  If he can get and stay healthy, Livingston will make for a great backup combo guard.  The bench isn't anything great, but it should be good enough to help the Heat be a dangerous playoff team this year.

8. Atlanta Hawks

Whether or not the Hawks make the playoffs will depend on Marvin Williams.  The East is a lot better this year, and the former first rounder has to both replace Greece-bound Josh Childress and make the most of that sweet J and size that he has.  We know what Josh Smith, Joe Johnson, and Mike Bibby are going to give us, and Al Horford should make a step forward this year, although he's undersized at center.  Williams showed us more than flashes of his potential in the playoffs last year, and if he keeps that upward trajectory, the Hawks will be a force this year: they won't just barely make the playoffs, they'll contend for the Southeast Division title with Orlando.  Atlanta needs a deeper bench, though, to compete for a title: Acie Law was so bad last year that the Hawks had to give up half of their roster for Bibby, but he's still young and should be better this year (he certainly couldn't be worse).  Maurice Evans and Flip Murray are decent backups, but nothing more.  That's the extent of their bench.  Combine that with their in-progress starting lineup, and you get a team that ought to make the playoffs, but not get past the first round again.  

8. Chicago Bulls

The Bulls are a thoroughly mediocre team, which is better than a team that had the first pick in draft should be, and they ought to be on the rise.  Derrick Rose is going to be a star, and should be pretty good this year, too.With Kirk Hinrich backing him up, they should be solid at the PG spot for years to come.  Luol Deng and Andres Nocioni make a good combo at SF, and Deng is still on the rise.   Tyrus Thomas and Joakim Noah will eventually be great at locking down opposing power forwards, but they're not there yet, and Drew Gooden is a serviceable center and provides some desperately needed low-post scoring.  The SG slot is less settled: Larry Hughes and Ben Gordon are going to get the bulk of the minutes, but neither of them are starters.  Thabo Sefolosha may be the starter eventually, but he's not there yet.  The Bulls really are a poor man's version of the Blazers: young, upcoming but they don't have the same promise for this year.  Plus, the coaching situation will be one to watch: Vinnie Del Negro hasn't really coached at any level; how well will he pan out?  They're only as high as they are because of the uncertainty below them.

10. Washington Wizards

The Wizards are done.  PG/SG Gilbert Arenas getting $111 million over 6 years and PF Antawn Jamison getting $50 million over 4 means that the team is stuck as it is for the foreseeable future, and as it is isn't very good.  This season, they'll be lucky to make the playoffs with as many injuries as they have already (Arenas and starting C Brendan Haywood both out until around December).  Okay, Arenas is a hell of a shooter, but the guy is just too injury-prone, and he's not a point guard anymore: he's too much of a shoot-first guy, but he's not that great when the ball is out of his hands.  Jamison is a very good PF, but he's getting up there in age, and he's no longer in a contract year.  The team's best player is SF Caron Butler, given his production and durability.  Plus, he has the best nickname in sports: "Tough Juice."  After them, well, Haywood is a marginal starter, but the same cannot be said about his backups, Etan Thomas and Andray Blatche, who now will compete for the starting job for the first couple of months.  DeShawn Stevenson is a decent SG, but I'd like him better coming off the bench.  Same can be said for starting PG Antonio Daniels.  All in all, I'm not impressed with the Wizards, and if everyone was healthy, I wouldn't expect anything better than a 6 or 7 seed.  With two key players on the injury list, I don't even expect that this year. 

11. Milwaukee Bucks

The Bucks can theoretically contend.  Michael Redd is a lights-out shooter, and Charlie Villanueva is a good starting PF.  Richard Jefferson, as overrated as he is, will bring enough scoring and defense to win some games, if he's not sulking.  Andrew Bogut should to make the leap to solid starter, as well.  Add in a healthy point guard competition between Luke Ridnour and Ramon Sessions, and the Bucks' starting five is respectable.  But that's it.  They have zero depth, and will struggle at times this year.  They'll compete for the eighth spot, but that's all they'll do: compete.

Trying to Collect the Most Ping Pong Balls

12. Indiana Pacers

I'm not sold on T.J. Ford as a starting point guard.  Good thing the Pacers have Jarrett Jack as a combo guard  backup; JJ really is an ideal bench guy: he's not quite starter talent, but he's still quick, he can shoot, he can defend, and he's versatile enough to give you a few different looks, depending on where he's played (no, an ideal bench guy isn't starter quality because guys of starter quality start agitating, ruining chemistry, when they're bench guys).  Danny Granger won't ever be an elite player, but he's on the upper end of the second tiers of players, and will be an All-Star in good years.  Troy Murphy can contribute on offense at PF, but he's a massive liability on defense.  C Rasho Nesterovic is the opposite: a decent defender but mediocre at best on the offense.  Mike Dunleavy could be the X Factor here: he improved a lot last year, but how much of that was a fluke?  He also really does play the same position as Danny Granger, but isn't as good.  Brandon Rush was a nice draft pick, and will be the next Bruce Bowen/Raja Bell.  After that . . . good luck.  The Pacers need to improve at the big spots and need more depth.  If they get that, they'll be playoff contenders.  As it is, by the end of the season, I think the Pacers best lineup will be a small lineup with TJ Ford, Jarrett Jack, Brandon Rush, Mike Dunleavy, and Danny Granger.  That 5 will run other teams ragged and would be really fun to watch.

13. New Jersey Nets

What's the over/under on how many games it takes before Vince Carter starts mailing it in, like he did in Toronto?  Sure he's probably upset that his buddies are gone, but I have no doubt that the Richard Jefferson and Jason Kidd trades were made in the best interests of the team: they weren't going to compete with them, so why pay them? The Nets were able to pick up a nice piece in the Kidd trade: Devin Harris.  He won't be an elite PG any time soon, but he's going to be a Tier 2 PG for years to come, which can't be said about Kidd.  The big pickup in the Jefferson trade, Yi Jianlian, is years from being what he could be, but even then, he's not a PF except in a small ball lineup.  The Nets won't go small ball, though, considering they drafted Brooke Lopez, who will be a good space hog in the middle down the line.  This year, probably not.  Bobby Simmons is a decent SF, but that's about it.  The Nets also have a lot of flotsam and jetsam filling the rest of the roster, which means that they won't compete for anything, but a lottery spot.  I also expect the Nets to pick up some good young pieces when some contender eventually comes calling to take VC off their hands.

14. New York Knicks

Well, the Knicks are finally on the road to redemption.  It's going to be a long road.  They have two contractual albatrosses: Stephen Marbury and Eddy Curry.  Of course, Marbury will be off the books next season, and Curry the season after.  The team just isn't very good.  Chris Duhon and Nate Robinson are both pretty mediocre PG's, but they do bring different looks: Duhon can defend and distribute well enough, and Robinson can shoot and bring a lot of energy.  Swingmen Jamal Crawford and Quentin Richardson are shooters, but that's about it.  David Lee is a good PF, but he'll never be better than a solid starter.  Zach Randolph is great shooter, but he always looks for his own shot first, second and third, and as good as he is on the offensive end, he's far worse on the defensive front.  Mike D'Antoni is a HUGE improvement on the coaching front, though, and he'll make the most of this weak Knicks roster.  New York will be better this year, but that's it.  Wait until next year.  Or the year after.

15. Charlotte Bobcats

This team is a mess.  They have nothing.  Gerald Wallace should be the third best player on a contender, not a feature player.  Emeka Okafor is a nice piece, but that's it.  Raymond Felton could be nice, but he's not.  Sean May could be a dominant PF if he ever got healthy and stayed in shape.  The fact tat they have no one else of worth says that they've just drafted so badly over the years.  A washed up Larry Brown at coach, who's notoriously impatient with young talent doesn't help matters, either.  Say hello to another top draft pick this year, and another bad draft pick.