Random Rumblings: April 26th

After a weekend in New York, the blog returns for NFL Draft week and some interesting turns in the NBA Playoffs. "Reads of the day" will also be different today. No reading involved! The four hour bus ride back from NYC lead to some great podcast listening, so I'll give you those instead. To the blog:

Don't Poke The Bear

Mavs owner Mark Cuban is really, really smart. Sometimes really, really smart people do really, really dumb things. Mark Cuban did a really, really dumb thing before Game 5 of Mavs-Thunder on Monday night.

Cuban said that Kevin Durant was the only superstar on Oklahoma City's roster. Asked about Russell Westbrook, Cuban said he's just an all-star, not a superstar. Westbrook proceeded to go score 38 points as the Thunder ended the Mavericks season.

Cuban's comments didn't make any sense on a number of levels. First, they were blatantly wrong. Westbrook set an NBA record with 18 triple-doubles this year. The Thunder were 18-0 in those games, meaning he wasn't out there collecting empty stats. He's a force of nature that defies science in how hard he plays every night. His intensity and passion are palpable. He's a more than occasional pain in the ass for the media, but there is no denying his greatness as a player.

So while Cuban was wrong and may have fired up Westbrook if the comments got back to him before tipoff (the Mavs seemed to try to get under Westbrook's skin all series), there are larger implications at play as evidenced by Kevin Durant's post-game press conference.

Thunder's Kevin Durant responds to Mavericks owner Mark Cuban saying Russell Westbrook isn't a "superstar" pic.twitter.com/6jPw9WktV0

— Ben Golliver (@BenGolliver) April 26, 2016

Durant is a free agent this summer. Westbrook is one next year. The Mavericks have consistently put themselves in a position to land big free agents, but have never reeled one in. Why would an owner, who is consistently mentioned as a major positive of the franchise (and is one of the very best in sports), put himself in a position where he could hurt his team? It seems short sighted and self-defeating. Even if the Mavericks consider Westbrook less than Durant from a scouting standpoint, there's no reason to publicly say that. Instead, you do what Rick Carlisle did after the game, which is to overly emphasize the greatness of both players.

I'll never complain about honesty from someone we cover as a collective media, but this one just doesn't make sense. There's a part of me that wonders what Cuban's motivation was and if there is some ulterior motive. Cuban's way smarter than me. He's a genius on many levels, so I'd be naive to just assume that I've got all of this figured out without at least acknowledging he might have some grand plan here. The question is if that plan exists and if it is ill-advised.

From my seat, it seems like it is. There seems to be no benefit. The Mavericks will certainly try and get in a room with Durant this summer. We'll see if they get a visit with one of the league's premier superstar after their owner diminished his friend, who is also in that class.

The Injury Bug Bites Twice (UPDATE: Three Times)

The NBA Playoffs were likely to play out in a rather direct fashion if everyone stayed healthy. The Cavaliers would face some challenge along the way to winning the Eastern Conference where they would lose to the Warriors, who would be pushed on some level (possibly to a decisive seven games) by the Spurs on their way to winning the west. However fast-forwarding is not allowed and the "if everyone stayed healthy part" is always a long shot. This is why they play the games.

Steph Curry hurt his ankle in Game 1 and had the entire NBA holding its collective breath after falling in Game 4 of the Warriors opening round series. The MVP has a grade 1 knee sprain and is out at least two weeks. In the regular season, that means a set amount of games. In the playoffs, that's a giant TBD.

This is where one injury affects another. The Clippers were having a hard enough time with the Blazers with Chris Paul and will likely now be without him. The star point guard broke his hand Monday night as the Blazers tied their series at 2-2. The winner of that series faces the Warriors, who will presumably close out the Rockets in Game 5 tonight at Oracle Arena. While Golden State isn't going to root for another team to suffer a key injury, they're undoubtedly rooting for that series to go as long as possible. The more time the series needs, the fewer games Curry misses while his knee heels.

While you make think the Warriors would be just fine without Curry, the numbers say otherwise. The Warriors were more than 1,000 points better than their opponents this year. They were also outscored with him on the bench for the second straight year.

	2014-15	2015-16
Curry On-Court	+920	+1022
Curry Off-Court	-92	-140

It's astounding that team that won 73 games and outscored opponents by more than 10 points per game could possibly have a player it couldn't live without, but it seems the Warriors are in that position with Curry.  It's worth pointing out that Dryamond Green actually had a bigger plus and lower minus in his splits than Curry, although with the two playing a high percentage of their minutes together, it's impossible to separate who is responsible at what percentage. Clearly Curry is massively important and it'll be tough for the Warriors to beat whoever is next without him. Perhaps the Paul injury will extend the Blazers-Clippers series just enough that Golden State won't have to worry about playing without Curry for more than a game or two, both of which would come at home.

Update at 5:04 PM EST on Tuesday: Clippers forward Blake Griffin will miss the rest of the playoffs with a quad injury. Paul is officially listed as out indefinitely.

The Clippers with Griffin, but no Paul were still formidable. Griffin's good enough to run a highly effective offense through, at least against the Blazers. The Warriors might've been a different story because Griffin would be guarded by Green, but the Clippers could (and have before) figured out how to score without Paul. Now, beating the Blazers is not only going to be difficult, I'm predicting it won't happen. I just don't see how they guard Damien Lillard or score enough to win. Injuries are a part of sports. The absolute worst part of sports.

Don't Read, Just Listen

As mentioned, here are the podcasts I enjoyed on the bus ride from NYC to DC.

Clippers guard J.J. Redick has done an exceptional job with his podcast. I enjoyed his chat with Late Late Show Producer Ben Winston. The two somewhat interviewed each other, providing some cool insight into both the entertainment and sports worlds: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/vertical-podcast-jj-redick/id1078782233?mt=2&i=367039936

Redick also had Packers QB Aaron Rodgers. The two comparing notes was really insightful. I especially enjoyed Rodgers comfort with his own greatness. He skipped the fake humbleness that a lot of athletes indulge in, acknowledging his high level of play comes from a place of extreme preparation: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/vertical-podcast-jj-redick/id1078782233?mt=2&i=367472055

The same can be said for ESPN analyst Louis Riddick. Listening him talk to Sports Illustrated's Richard Deitsch on both football and media was really interesting and entertaining: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/si-media-podcast-richard-deitsch/id997819235?mt=2&i=367080648

1-11 Mavs Magazine

On the January 11th edition of Mavs Magazine, we talked about a bad week for the Mavericks. We also played interviews with Dirk Nowitzki and Mark Cuban. Those interviews are available in full on the Mike and Mike page on ESPNRadio.com

Sterling Reaction: Adam Silver Got It Right

Today the NBA, led by Commissioner Adam Silver, did the right thing. They started the process of getting rid of Donald Sterling, but understand this is going to be a process and it's going to be complicated.

It's not complicated because of the actions, or more accurately the words in the tape shared by TMZ.

Donald Sterling is a racist. Donald Sterling is an adulterer.

Both of these things are known by anyone who's paying attention including his wife who not only apparently has given up (if she ever started) fighting them, but she has participated in the racism portion. You're reading this on the internet, if you want to know more look up the lawsuit settled in 2009. You'll find her name too.

This situation is complicated by the laws and the fact that Donald Sterling is a litigious cheapskate who loves to use them.

He's famously not paid coaches after firing them, making them sue him for money he plain as day owes them. If they do, he drags them through the courts and they cost themselves money. So most of them settle and Sterling gets to keep some of his cash.

This is just one small example of how Sterling has been the worst owner in sports over the last 30 years. His team has the worst winning percentage in sports over his reign and it wasn't until he was gifted the best point guard in the league two years ago by David Stern that his team became relevant.

In that time, Sterling started to change who he was as an owner in that he actually showed a willingness to invest in his team, but make no mistake he has not changed as a man.

He's still a racist. This is on the record. Forget the words from this recording. We have actions to prove that and those actions are FAR more important than what happens to him and his basketball team. This point was made by Bomani Jones on The Dan Lebetard Show far more eloquently and effectively than I could ever dream of making it and in urge you to listen to it as soon as you're done reading this if you haven't already. (Starting at 4:33)

However what happened to him was still a valid and important question.

There's a large group of people, largely the general public, who had never heard of Donald Sterling before Saturday or even Monday when they saw these comments on their daytime TV shows that are outraged by this and want Sterling's head on a platter. There's another group that's going "wait a minute, we're mad now? This is who this guy is!" and then go "this is kinda what we've got and there's nothing we can do." and in a weird way they're both right.

I can't expect someone who doesn't follow sports to be aware of who Sterling is and what he is which is a racist scumbag and not be mad upon finding out. It's like those of us who don't really follow politics finding out about some awful thing a politician said and putting it up on Facebook. More attention is good. It outs them. Which is why despite "knowing the score" so to speak, I'm all for all these people piling on. Sometimes we need a concrete reason to take action and now the NBA has a reason to do something with Donald Sterling, which many owners have wanted to do for years and that's try to get rid of him.

Today Adam Silver started just that. He was widely applauded.

For those that didn't think a lifetime ban and max fine for an 81 year old billionaire, what the hell did you want? For Silver to kill him?

The NBA did the right thing today. Sure Sterling should've been gone years ago. Sure this isn't even close to the worst thing Sterling's done.

But Donald Sterling is all gone from the NBA and anybody who tries to minimize that very good thing by bringing up other factors is doing Adam Silver, who wasn't in charge for Sterling's other incidents, a disservice.

Well done Adam. In your first test as commissioner, you've passed with flying colors.

Fake Trade That Will Never Happen But Should

The NBA's trade deadline is today at 3 pm and I have a deal that I love the more I think about, but it will simply never happen. Why? It makes too much sense. And one of the players involved wouldn't waive his no-trade clauses but it would never get to that point because there's just zero chance of the GM's coming together to make it happen. But it should. Because it would make all three teams better. Holy blockbuster here's the deal and yes, the salaries work:

Lakers get:
G Rajon Rondo (BOS)
F Jeff Green (BOS)
F Lamar Odom (LAC)

Celtics get:
C Dwight Howard (LAL)
G Steve Nash (LAL)
G Eric Bledsoe (LAC)

Clippers get:
F Kevin Garnett (BOS)

That's it. That's the trade. Every name you've heard from these teams in trade rumors (plus Nash and Odom) all for each other and somehow with all the zillions of trade restrictions in the NBA, it actually works. Here are the positives and negatives for all involved.

Lakers

The first and biggest mental hurdle of this trade is the Lakers willingness to trade Howard. They insist they're not. I've long said they should and this deal in particular makes sense for multiple reasons. The reason you keep Howard is he gives you a next superstar after Kobe Bryant retires. By getting Rondo, you get that and you do so at a position of need. While Nash has been alright offensively this year, he's never been a great defensive player. Rondo is better than Nash at both ends at this point in their careers and in the point guard heavy western conference, having a stopper at that position is essential.

Unlike Howard, he has the competitive drive to keep up with Bryant and while "every night Rondo" is different than "national TV Rondo" he never fails to show up for big games and that would resonate with Bryant. Now for the thing you didn't think of.

If the Lakers keep Howard, they have to fire Mike D'Antoni for reasons well documented (they hate each other). D'Antoni's on a multi-year deal. The Lakers are still paying Mike Brown. They'd have to hire a new coach (and would flirt with the uber-expensive Phil Jackson). That's a whole lot of money. So who could possibly run Mikey D's system?

What is needed is a younger Steve Nash. I pass-first point guard with an outstanding handle who looks to pass first but can also score. Also known as Rajon Rondo. Nash was/is a much better shooter than Rondo (understatement) but Rondo puts pressure on a defense much like Nash did which opens the passing angles that pick-and-rolled Nash to two MVP trophies. By also adding Green, the Lakers get younger and more athletic at the four spot. Green's a stretch four too which is essential to D'Antoni's system. Pau Gasol shifts to center. Earl Clark and Green play the four or Green can play some at the three for the most athletic lineup the Lakers have had in years. Bada boom. Bada bing. You don't have to fire D'Antoni and the only financial hell you're in is your luxury tax instead of players and coaches dismembering the Buss family bank account.

Is it a perfect, fool-proof plan? Of course not. Rondo and Bryant could butt heads as to who's the alpha-male much like Rondo has with Pierce. Unlike with Pierce, Rondo would lose this battle and who knows how he would handle it. Rondo could also look at all the other guys who think D'Antoni is clueless, not listen to him and not come close to the production Nash enjoyed in Phoenix. While Rondo can lock in defensively, he likes to gamble much like Bryant which could cause very inconsistent defensive play and Gasol isn't exactly an elite rim protector like Bryant used to have with Bynum/younger Gasol/Odom or Rondo has had in KG.

If my options are "keep malcontent Howard and either have to fire a coach/lose him for nothing this summer" or "guarantee something to build around, not have Russell Westbrook, Tony Parker and Chris Paul dribble in circles around me in the playoffs and get the added bonus of not kill my finances," I'll take the latter. Does it wave the white flag on this season cause Rondo's hurt? Probably, but the Lakers are about titles and if you think this team is winning a title this year, you haven't been paying attention.

Celtics

The Celtics are willing to trade Rondo in part because they realize their window is closing as fast as the Lakers is with Bryant. They weren't very good this year with Rondo and are playing better now without him (hooray ball movement!) but in the playoffs they'll miss him if they don't make a move. Unlike the Lakers who are trying to compete in the point-guard heavy west with the Spurs, Thunder and Clippers, the C's have one opponent in mind: Miami. What's the way everyone thinks is best to beat Miami? Size.

By bringing in Howard, Boston at worst stays neutral or more likely upgrades defensively over KG depending on Dwight's back. Maybe not competing with Green for minutes re-inspires Brandon Bass and you don't wind up missing Green at all and it also creates an interesting backcourt dynamic. Courtney Lee moves to the bench and you start Nash with Avery Bradley. It's a small backcourt but who has two supreme offensive guards? Milwaukee, who's trying to trade one. So no one and it's not a problem. Bradley guards the more explosive offensive guard (Wade, Raymond Felton/JR Smith, Paul George, etc) while Nash can stand in the corner with Ronnie Brewer and Mario Chalmers. I love Mario as a spot up guy, but if the offense is being run through him and not Wade/LeBron, advantage not Miami.

Lee then comes in with Jason Terry who can spark the second unit (again thinking the "new role, stop playing like garbage" theory here) while Lee can be your traditional pressure the ball 94 feet backup point guard.

You miss the leadership of KG but gain a lot of it back in Nash. There's potential tension between Pierce and Howard but if you convince Dwight that Pierce is a billiondy times better version of Hedo Turkoglu whom he took to The Finals in '09 maybe they play nice. Also, Doc Rivers isn't exactly Mike D'Antoni at managing egos. Which is a good thing.

Clippers

If the Clippers make it out of the west and meet Miami in The Finals, do you feel good about their chances? As we saw last year with OKC and really Miami before that, there's a process in the NBA and you have to learn to win. This group of Clippers is just too young and outside of Chris Paul and Chauncey Billups, them coming up short on a big stage wouldn't be shocking. Enter KG.

While it would no doubt still be Paul's team, Garnett would provide some experience amongst the bigs and his presence might do even more in the long-term development of Blake Griffin and DeAndre Jordan (who I managed to keep in LA doing this deal) than help LA this season. From a basketball standpoint, he also provides them stability in late game situations. Right now you're scared to play Jordan or Blake, nevertheless both, late in games because each is a horrific free throw shooter. Add in the fact that neither is an elite defender and the decision to play Garnett over one of them is easy.

While no one's talking about it, Dwight Howard isn't the only superstar in LA with an expiring contract. Paul's deal is up when the season ends as well and it makes sense that maximizing this year's playoff run maximizes the chances Paul resigns. While you give up uber potential in Bledsoe, you've got plenty of guard depth and he's a backup guard. Is he one of the best backup guards in the league? Yes, but he's a backup guard. This logic also applies to Lamar Odom who might actually be the deal breaker (see below).

Why it doesn't happen

Nash signed in LA this summer so that he could be close to his kids in Phoenix. While he doesn't have a no-trade clause, the Lakers aren't trading him even though this move makes a ton of sense as it would be a horrible look for the organization. That kind of classlessness could set off Kobe too and how the Lakers come off after the passing of Dr. Jerry Buss is important. Garnett does have a no-trade clause and has said he's not going anywhere unless the Celtics trade Pierce, which they wouldn't do because in this scenario they're still going for it this year, just without Garnett.

Odom is the interesting piece. I had to throw him in for salary purposes but that's actually the closest thing to a deal breaker in this whole thing because trading him away takes away such a unique piece of the Clippers bench, their biggest strength and gives more to the Lakers who lack it, making one of your rivals stronger. The argument to do it anyway is Garnett is an upgrade on Odom on both ends, Jordan becomes a bench player because KG takes his starting spot and to hell with the Lakers because you think you're the better team and can beat them.

You could also do this trade subbing Jordan for Odom. The salaries still work and the Clippers keep an experienced piece in Odom while giving up a guy who still has a lot of potential and is definitely getting better in Jordan. You're basically sacrificing future for present. While the thought of another young, athletic piece for the Lakers is exciting if they keep D'Antoni, the chance to re-unite Bryant, Gasol and Odom along with the fact that Odom's on a one-year deal is probably more appealing to the Lakers. Either way, I'd pull the trigger if I'm any of these teams.

The reality is this trade will never ever be discussed nevertheless happen. If it were somehow to make it to the right desks though, who (besides Garnett), says no?