I’ve spent the last several years as a die-hard LeBron James fan, and by association a Cleveland Cavaliers fan, ever since I got a fist-bump from LBJ at a game. In the the wake of the LeBron Circus, however, I’m in the market for a new favorite team—and I’m chronicling my search. Maybe I’ll announce my decision on ESPN.

Subscribe to the RSS feed to get the continuing saga.

Along with the Sacramento Kings, the Oklahoma City Thunder are leading the race to become my new favorite team. And there’s no mistaking why.

Kevin Durant is rad.

The Thunder have hit collective puberty as a team, transitioning out of their Rising Young Team phase and into actual Awesome Team phase. Kevin Durant is leading the way, moving himself from being Full Of Potential to being a Full-Blown Star, and somebody who will rightly challenge LeBron James for the MVP within a year or two.

Durant has always been tremendous, ever since he came out of University of Texas at 6’9”, roughly 75 pounds. And yet his 2009-2010 campaign was something special, as he upped his game and became a legitimate force on both ends of the floor. After his online scuffle with Henry Abott about Adjusted Plus/Minus, he put together one of the biggest one-year turnarounds in history: From a -8.62 rating in 2009, one of the worst in the league, to +17.75 in 2010—good enough for third-best in the NBA, behind only Dwight Howard and LeBron. He also took home the scoring title, outpacing LeBron with 30.1 points per game.

Part of what makes Durant a good player to be a fan of is his complete lack of bravado. He’s still playing the underdog role, as his team isn’t a juggernaut or ever picked to win much. One more season and it’ll be too late, but becoming a Durant/Thunder fan now won’t be jumping on a bandwagon.

KD's numbers stack up pretty well, even against KB's.

It’s happened fast. Two years ago the Thunder won 23 games, then this last year they won 50—a mind-soggying improvement of 27 games. If that keeps up, they’ll win 77 games this year, and in ten years they’ll win 320 games over the course of an 82-game season. That’s going to be a team worth watching.

Hyperbole aside, it’s still easy to forget that this team did actually win 50 games. They’re that good. They had the same record as a team we’re all well familiar with—the Boston Celtics, and those guys went to the Finals.

Durant quietly signed an extension this summer, which means that his three-year rookie contract has gone up. Part of the Thunder’s maturation process is that they’re not going to be able to continue assembling an entire team of high draft picks, because they’re getting good enough that their picks are getting lower and lower in the drafta. But how remarkable is it that they took Kevin Durant one year, Russell Westbrook and Serge Ibaka the next, and James Harden the next—and have them all being key pieces of the team?

While Kevin Durant is finally starting to get the recognition he deserves as one of the league’s few truly-elite players, his teammates still go largely under the radar. If there’s anybody in the NBA that doesn’t know about Russell Westbrook, they’re about to find out.

Westbrook made some huge improvements this past year, in just his second year in the league, upping his assists per game from 5.3 to 8.0 and boosting his assist-to-turnover ratio from 1.6 up to 2.5. His real coming out, though, was in the Thunder’s playoff series against the Lakers. Westbrook dropped 20.5 per game in the series where OKC stole two games, and stirred up the ire of Kobe Bryant enough that Kobe insisted on guarding him for games five and six.

Westbrook’s number from this past season aren’t too unlike those of Deron Williams, though with an iffier jump shot. But as his game continues to develop, Westbrook is going to be a rockstar second banana to Durant.

It’s a shame that I can’t dedicate as much space to talking about more of the Thunder supporting cast, as they deserve it. Jeff Green certainly deserves some discussion as a player that goes wildly under the radar despite being a key cog on this team (and contributing more Win Shares than Westbrook). He’s one of those tough, versatile defenders… and he also happens to put in 15 points a game. Rock on, Jeff Green.

This year they’ve added former Kansas Jayhawks center Cole Aldrich with perhaps their last lottery draft pick they’ll have in a while (and they traded to get it—thanks to GM savant Sam Presti). If he pans out he’ll be a defensive monster in the paint—Scout.com compared his size and strength to Paul Bunyan, and he looks strikingly like a sure thing. At a position where they started Nenad Krstic last year, Aldrich could eventually provide a compelling upgrade.

They’ve got offense, they’ve got defense, they’ve got a bona fide star, and they’ve even got some great underdog likeability. They’re not from LA or Boston, either. But perhaps the biggest reason that the Thunder are a frontrunner to become my new team of choice is that they look like a team that could win a title.

Maybe not right now. Maybe after Kobe’s knees give out and the Miami Heat’s unholy trinity implodes. But the Oklahoma City Thunder are built for the long run, and I could see myself coming along for the ride.

If I’m missing any important reasons why the Thunder are awesome, leave them below in the comments.

When the Golden State Warriors changed hands last week, I sent a Facebook message to a buddy of mine who’s the biggest Warriors fan I know. The Warriors were never in the running to get LeBron this summer, but for this beleaguered team, getting a new owner was nearly as good.

His words? “Playoffs by 2012 isn’t out of the question.”

They’ll for sure be better in the long run, by virtue of having a better owner. But this is a team that won 26 games last year, when it required 50 to make the playoffs in the Western Conference. A team that’s made the playoffs only one time since Ace of Base was topping the charts (that’d be 1994).

And yet, I agree. I don’t have a problem penciling them in for ‘12 (pronounced oh-twelve). The thing about these new owners, Peter Guber and Joe Lacob, is that they’re basketball guys. It’s been made clear that their purchasing the team is “not an investment… it’s a dream.” With that kind of mindset running the front office, it’s possible that the Warriors can turn the ship around. But there are several things they’ll need to figure out, and they all revolve around key people.

1. Don Nelson

It’s hard to not like Nellie. He’s the winningest coach of all time (he started coaching in 1976—before almost all current players were born), and he puts together team performances that are worth watching. It was that way in Dallas, when they won 60 games, and it’s been like that in the Bay too.

That all said, Nelson is first on the list—both figuratively, and literally here—of things that need to change for the Warriors. Nellie Ball is designed to score plenty of points, win a lot of games, and then fizzle in the playoffs. That strategy put together a lot of wins over the years, but with this Warriors incarnation unable to win even in the regular season the plan needs revising.

Change has to start at the top. As boring as it sounds, the Warriors need some taming. And Don Nelson isn’t going to do it.

2. Stephen Curry

Curry stays—don’t get confused. He’s clearly the cog that this team needs to be built around. But the reason he’s on this list is that he needs his foil. This team isn’t going anywhere until he’s got someone to play off of. He needs a Karl Malone.

The modern NBA is not a point guard’s league. Teams whose best player is a point guard are in trouble: Consider the New Orleans Hornets led by Chris Paul, the Utah Jazz and Deron Williams, and especially Steve Nash’s Phoenix Suns. Good teams, all three, but also teams that haven’t been able to get over the hump (the Phoenix Suns made the Western Conference Finals this year, but they didn’t rise and fall with Nash—instead with his go-to guy, Amare Stoudemire).

Steph Curry is the cog that will make this Warriors team go for years to come—but if they really want to compete they need him to play in the shadow of another star. Somebody who can score without needing the ball in his hands. Somebody Curry can set up, like good point guards do; somebody whose NBA life he can make much, much easier.

The Warriors need that guy. And let me be clear about who isn’t him.

3. Monta Ellis

Sigh. Get ready to either emphatically agree or furiously disagree. There’s no gray area on Monta. But the stark reality is that he’s a brick weighing the Warriors down to the bottom of the NBA ocean.

He’s the team’s leading scorer, and if they move Ellis the points will be hard to replace. But you can’t overlook Ellis’s tendency to stop the ball, and his teammates’ tendency to stand and watch when he does. Curry fans may point you to Stephen’s February triple-double, which came when both Ellis and Corey Maggette were off the floor. Without Ellis, the ball is in Curry’s hands. And the sooner that’s a permanent setup, the better.

Not with me yet? This is the guy who came in an appalling 10th on his team in Win Shares this season. His 1.3 Win Shares mean he was responsible for just 1.3 of the Warriors’ total wins. Want me to go one better? In +/- he was only able to muster 15th-best out of 20 total players that suited up for the Warriors last year. With Ellis on the court, team team went -7.2, with him off, they were +3.8: meaning they were about 11 points per game better without him. Despite leading the team in scoring, his Simple Rating was still a basement-dwelling -3.2.

That should be plenty of statistics. Feel free to argue as you feel necessary. I like Ellis as an off-the-bench scoring threat, in a Jamal Crawford-type role, but not as a team’s primary scoring threat. If the new owners are serious about making this team better, it’s going to mean shedding Monta Ellis.

4. Big Man X

The Warriors are thin everywhere. The most obvious lack, though, is defense, and they’re not going to move up much in the uber-competitive Western Conference until they play some. A menacing presence in the paint would be a big, big step toward not allowing 150 points per game (okay, really just 112.4. But that’s still worst in the league).

David Lee could conceivably be the second scorer to complement Curry, but he doesn’t have a defensive bone in his body. It’s not him.

Andris Biedrins could be the defensive post presence the Warriors need, but his 2009-2010 campaign goes down as one of the most horrifying seasons I’ve ever witnessed. A groin injury and subsequent abdominal surgery kept him to only 33 games. His 7.8 rebounds and 1.3 blocks per game weren’t terrible (though down from 11.2 and 1.5 the year before), but his going 4-25 from the free throw line, a horrific 16%, is historically bad. The psychological effect made him frigid on offense as he was afraid to go to the line and waste a possession by missing two free throws (reminder: nobody guards you when you shoot those). He should be healthy this season, but we’ll see where his brain is.

New draft pick Ekpe Udoh could add some much-needed defense at the power forward position (3.7 blocks per game last year at Baylor!), but we won’t know for a while—a wrist injury is keeping him out for the first half of the season. He’s raw, but the Warriors took him at #6 based on being the best talent available.

5. The Rest of the West

The Warriors with a new coach, a scorer that’s not Monta Ellis, and a defensive presence in the paint sounds like a solid upgrade. But probably the biggest obstacle to Golden State making the playoffs in two years is simply the strength of all the other teams in the Western Conference.

Making the playoffs means squeezing another team out, and which of these teams is going to drop out of the top 8 by 2012: the LA Lakers, Dallas Mavericks, Phoenix Suns (reinvented with Hedo Turkoglu and Josh Childress), Denver Nuggets, Utah Jazz (minus Carlos Boozer, but plus Al Jefferson), Portland Trail Blazers, Oklahoma City Thunder (getting better every year)? The Clippers are better, the Rockets have Yao Ming back, and the Hornets still have Chris Paul. The only team that shows imminent decline is the San Antonio Spurs, and yet they always find a way to compete (Tiago Splitter, anyone).

2012 might be a bit optimistic. It’s going to be a hard road for the Warriors to jump back into playoff contention. And yet they’ve already made the most important personnel move—the Warriors’ toned-down version of signing LeBron, Wade, and Bosh—by bringing in dedicated, motivated owners. The team has already shipped out six players this offseason, and if they’re going to elevate themselves to playoff contention, they’re not done yet.

But I’ve gotta give a shoutout to my Warrior-fan buddy. I can’t say they don’t have a shot for 2012.

I’ve spent the last several years as a die-hard LeBron James fan, and by association a Cleveland Cavaliers fan, ever since I got a fist-bump from LBJ at a game. In the the wake of the LeBron Circus, however, I’m in the market for a new favorite team—and I’m chronicling my search. Maybe I’ll announce my decision on ESPN.

Subscribe to the RSS feed to get the continuing saga.

There’s a good chance the Sacramento Kings are going to be awesome this year.

There are still plenty of questions, and they’re still coming off a 25-win season (and that was after a 17-win season). But let’s be clear: Tyreke Evans and DeMarcus Cousins are going to be AHHHHHHHHH SUPER AWESOME WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!

Ahem. Sorry.

‘Reke is coming off a monster rookie season, handily winning NBA Rookie of the Year and just generally being much more than expected in his all-around game. Fair or not, he’s drawn an inordinate amount of comparison to a young Michael Jordan—not at all hurt by Evans joining Jordan, Oscar Robertson, and LeBron James as the only players to average 20 points, 5 rebounds, and 5 assists as a rookie.

What’s more, only Evans, LeBron, and Kobe Bryant averaged those numbers last season. One more, then I’m done: Tyreke is only the 7th player in the last five years to put up that line.

Tyreke isn't Kobe, but the numbers aren't too far off. Click to see it bigger.

Now enter DeMarcus Cousins. At Kentucky he was 6’11”, 270 pounds of brute force, bodying up on both ends of the floor and showing impressive improvement in his offensive game as the season progressed. Now’s he manhandling the NBA Summer League, showing off that he also has a jumper and some pretty impressive passing skills for a big man—let alone one who’s 19 years old.

Barring any sort of injury or rookie season flame-out, the Kings should be spectacular to watch this season with Evans and Cousins running the show. Both have shown refined ability to run the pick and roll, and that’s good—because they’ll be running it about 7,000 times per game this season. Think of them as a hardcore, gun-slinging, non-short-shorts version of Stockton and Malone.

While Tyreke and DeMarcus are expected to be the show, the rest of the team is young and (for the most part) talented as well. If they can keep the core together, the Kings could be contending for a while.

Omri Casspi played the fourth-most minutes on the team last season while just a rookie, after elbowing his way into the starting lineup in December. He became a quick fan favorite for his intensity on the court, and despite struggling late last season he looks to be a bright spot this year. He shoots the long ball, he’s eager to defend—here’s a 22-year-old guy who’s halfway to becoming a rockstar in the league.

Also worth mentioning is Carl Landry, who joined the team in the deal that sent Kevin Martin to Houston (which, while it’s frightening to ship off most of your offense, opened up a lot of shots for the Kings’ young core). Landry had only started one game in two seasons in Houston, but started in all 28 remaining games for Sacramento and showed some serious offensive chops (including two 30-point games). While only 6’9” he has a refined post game, and as only a three-year veteran he could also be a long-time fixture on this team.

The Kings have been relatively quiet during this offseason (no free agent signings! None!), but their one move is expected to make them better: they moved Andres Nocioni and big man Spencer Hawes to Philadelphia in exchange for defensive-minded center Samuel Dalembert. Moving Nocioni was a no-brainer, as he was unhappy in Sacramento and his tendency to force offensive put him at odds with the new-look Kings. Dalembert gives Sac-Town some serious shot-blocking and rebounding in the middle, and next to Cousins gives the Kings a formidable front line.

Ultimately, the Kings have got it going on. They have to assume the position of frontrunner to become my new favorite team because of this whole ‘Reke-DeMarcus business. It would mean dealing with purple being their primary color, but that can probably slide as long as there’s no teal involved as well.

If I’ve missed any reasons why the Kings are going to be great to watch, throw them in the comments. Meanwhile, I’m going to go back to watching DeMarcus Cousins devour the Summer League.

But what do the Superfriends actually have on their resumés? Do they have the experience to make it happen? There’s no better way to find out than an infographic.

Please link to this page instead of posting the graphic on your own site. Thanks!

Is he in? Is he out? Will he continue to play for the team he’s been with for his whole career, or will he cut and run, following the money?  And most importantly, can’t he just decide already? Or is this more about stroking his ego and getting people to talk about him than the sport?

Clearly, I’m talking about LeBron James, the most sought-after free agent in the NBA right now. The last three years have been building up to this moment, from James wearing a Yankees cap to hosting charity events in Akron to the “free agent summit” a couple of weeks ago. But the whole thing sounds eerily familiar, doesn’t it? Remarkably like a certain other high-profile free agent last summer. And the summer before.

Like Brett Favre.

Favre spent weeks and weeks debating whether he should retire or come back for just one more season two years ago. He had just come off a tremendously successful season with the Packers and had made a big deal about wanting to retire on top. However, once he realized retirement would take him out of the spotlight, he publicly stewed and went back and forth on the issue. After what seemed like an eternity, he ended up forcing a trade to the New York Jets.

And once we thought we’d been through the worst, he did the exact same thing the next summer, finally ending up with the Minnesota Vikings.

Admittedly, Favre has a genuine love for the game and probably couldn’t bring himself to stay away. That said, if he’d wanted to, he could have made his decision quickly and without much fanfare (like Kurt Warner, or Phil Jackson, or countless other examples). Instead, he dragged out the process as long as possible so he could remain in the spotlight. As a result, he’s beloved in Minnesota for nearly carrying them to the Super Bowl – and reviled virtually everywhere else.

He’s certainly hated in Green Bay, where he once was the single best-liked athlete in history. It’s tough to top legends like Bart Starr, but Favre played long enough and well enough to unseat him. But once he stabbed the city in the back by not only skipping town, but signing with a bitter rival, he lost all of that overnight.

It’s not as though it’s just Green Bay that hates him, too. Most of America grew sick of constantly hearing about him during the summers of 2008 and 2009. All of the credibility he’d built up over his career eroded away as it became clear he was concerned about one person and one person only – himself.

Sound familiar at all?

Looking back, we should have seen the signs. We should have recognized that when James showed up to a Cleveland Indians game wearing a Yankees cap, he didn’t care about Cleveland – or New York, for that matter. He’s looking out for number one. He just wants to make sure he’s in the spotlight for as long as possible. His every move and word are being scrutinized, and he’s certainly not doing anything to discourage that.

He was famously asked a few years ago what his long-term goals were. His response came in the form of two very revealing words: “Global icon.” Not championships. Not building up the city of Cleveland. Just international fame, pure and simple.

Now, that’s not to suggest that he needs to have purely altruistic goals because he’s famous. It’s his life, and he can do what he pleases with it. If his heart’s desire is to be famous and to have his picture plastered on every billboard in the world, far be it from me to tell him otherwise.

What I am suggesting, however, is that none of us should have been surprised when he turned out to be the basketball reincarnation of Brett Favre.

The kicker, of course, was last night’s announcement that he was going to announce his free agent signing in a live, hour-long ESPN show. That, combined with his sudden decision to join Twitter and the unveiling of lebronjames.com, lets us know that this is an event that the entire world should consider themselves privileged to be a part of. At least, that’s what James seems to think.

Really, there’s only two ways his decision could go. He could decide, after years of dragging it out, that he wants to stay in Cleveland after all. In that case, Cleveland loves him, but for the rest of America, the bloom is gone from the rose at being subjected to the free agent circus of the last few weeks. On the other hand, he could decide to sign with New York, Chicago, or wherever else, in which case the new city loves him, America is still sick of him, and Cleveland absolutely hates him.

In short, exactly the same situation as Brett Favre.

So enjoy the spotlight while you can, LeBron. I’m here to tell you that none of us will think of you the same way after this summer.

Most of the positions in 2010 NBA free agency are pretty clear cut. For centers, Brendan Haywood in the head of a lackluster class. For point guards, Raymond Felton is tops in a similarly weak class. Dwyane Wade leads the way among shooting guards, followed eventually by Joe Johnson, and LeBron James is the top small forward (and, of course, the biggest prize of the summer).

The power forwards aren’t so clear-cut. There’s Chris Bosh, Amare Stoudemire, and Carlos Boozer all in the mix, and it’s not entirely clear who is better than who.

They’re all fine players, but all perennial underachievers. Chris Bosh has been the best player on a non-playoffs Raptors team. Amare Stoudemire is a max-contract player in one out of every five games. Carlos Boozer is well-respected, but wasn’t even the best player on his team.

Today I’m using How To Watch Sports’s brand-new, super-cool tool, the NBA Spider Graph Generator (found at www.spidergraphs.com) to stack up the three PF’s statistically, based on their 2010 performance. If you’re unfamilar with how Spider Graphs work, get caught up here first.

Graphing all three players together is a little confusing, but it gets us started:

Right off the bat, I’m willing to say that Carlos Boozer, who is usually assumed to be the third-most-preferred PF in free agency, probably isn’t getting enough credit. He’s got an edge, if slight, in four of the six measured statistical categories—but he’s last (again, if only by a slight margin) in scoring, and that’s everybody’s favorite stat.

To make this a little easier to look at, let’s take two at a time. First, Chris Bosh vs. Amare Stoudemire.

The graphs of Bosh and Stoudemire come out surprisingly similar. And the differences probably aren’t a big surprise to anyone who’s seen them play.

There are three categories, including scoring, where they line up quite nicely—which leaves only three categories in which they differ significantly. Amare has the edge in field goal percentage, which comes with his habit of slamming it home whenever possible. SHis jumper is passable, as well, but the higher shooting percentage clearly comes from taking the higher percentage shots.

Bosh, in return, leads in rebounding and assists. Both of these power forwards find themselves in similar rebounding situations—neither plays next to a strong center, and so both are called upon to grab a few boards. Bosh is the only one that does (which is doubly surprising considering Stoudemire’s 20-pound edge on Bosh.). His higher assist number is also appealing to a team looking to land Bosh plus another star, as he is both capable and willing to dish back out from the post.

The edge does indeed go to Bosh here, as most people will tell you, but statistically it’s not by much. The bigger edge is in his consistency, where Amare leaves a handful to be desired.

If Bosh wins this battle, then let’s put him up against Boozer.

Here’s where it gets a little trickier. If Bosh is the big prize among power forwards, then why does Carlos Boozer beat him in four out of six statistical categories?

Bosh leads in scoring, with 24 points per game last season—good enough for 9th in the league (Boozer put in 19.5 ppg, good for 21st). He also has the edge in blocks, averaging about one per game to Boozer’s .5 per game. Boozer’s advantages, however, are just that much more in quantity. He has a better percentage from the field plus more rebounds, assists, and steals.

So why does everybody want Bosh? At this point, it has more to do with who you’d rather build your franchise around. Bosh is slightly younger (he’s 26; Boozer is 28, which to a GM sounds a lot closer to the dreaded 30), and has exuded a bit more of the superstar vibe since he entered the league.

I don’t think the stats are misleading here, though, as I’ve never been as high on Bosh as many. I think Bosh’s inclusion with LeBron James and Dwyane Wade as a top-tier free agent is a media creation—he’s an excellent player and one of the top bigs available this summer, but the numbers back up the idea that he’s not head and shoulders above Stoudemire and Boozer. None of them are MVP material, and none of them should be considered to be in LeBron and D-Wade’s tier.

Finally, to have all bases covered, here’s Stoudemire vs. Boozer:

More of the same. Both players like to finish at the rim, so there’s no big advantage in field goal percentage. Stoudemire, like Bosh, has the edge in blocks and scoring, but loses out to Boozer in everything else.

In the end, the numbers give us a couple things: (1) there isn’t a tremendous statistical difference between Chris Bosh and Amare Stoudemire, though you still have to give Bosh the edge in consistency; and (2) Carlos Boozer won’t necessarily be a consolation prize to whoever gets him (likely Miami or Chicago). He still has plenty of juice left, and he’s going to be making that angry face at opposing players for a while longer.

As of writing this, it sounds like Amare Stoudemire is a done deal to the New York Knicks. More power to them. While they might regret the contract in a few years when Amare’s knees/eyes/motivation give out, they’re getting a solid big man who can cause some real trouble in the middle.

With these three power forwards available, any of the three is a pretty good bet.

Play around with the NBA Spider Graph Generator at www.spidergraphs.com.

Deep in Cleveland Cavaliers headquarters, team executives are huddled in low light around new GM Chris Grant. Every known deity has been supplicated in preparation for their upcoming meeting with LeBron James. And barely loud enough to hear, a hidden stereo plays Eminem’s Lose Yourself over and over:

If you had one shot, or one opportunity
To seize everything you ever wanted, in one moment
Would you capture it? Or just let it slip?

They’ve got two days until LeBron’s self-imposed deadline, and by all accounts they’re losing the battle. There’s likely little that can keep LeBron in Cleveland when there’s the possibility of playing with Dwayne Wade or Chris Bosh or some combination of top players somewhere else. If they’re going to come out winners, they need to pull out the stops. Go big, or go home—without LeBron.

It’s time to go get Chris Paul.

He’s available. Reports say he’s clamoring for a trade. He’s a good friend of LeBron’s, he’s one of the best point guards in the business, and he’d do the trick. Cleveland has the sentimental edge in the LeBron sweepstakes, and the prospect of Chris Paul as a sidekick would be too much for the King to pass up.

Essentially, the time for incremental changes is over. The Cavaliers’ brass have spent the last several years—since the team’s NBA Finals run in 2007—adding marginally-better pieces to improve the team. They’ve brought in Mo Williams, Delonte West, Anthony Parker, Shaquille O’Neal, and Antawn Jamison, among others. They didn’t win a title, and none of it matters much now.

The Cavs have always been hurting at the point guard position. Replacing Larry Hughes with Mo Williams after the ’07 campaign was a step up, but Mo has proven to be a major defensive liability and a playoffs no-show. While Chris Paul doesn’t have much on his playoffs resumé, he’s an exceptional defender—statistically he’s a spot-on match for Rajon Rondo, who gets considerably more credit for his defending.

But who are we kidding? The stats don’t matter, and the logic doesn’t matter. If trading for Chris Paul convinces LeBron to stay, they’ve got to do it. Because in that case, trading for Chris Paul means exactly the same thing as trading for LeBron.

And with that in mind, it makes none of the players on the Cavs’ roster untouchable. Is there any situation where you say, “No, I’d rather have J.J. Hickson than LeBron.” Or, “No, we were ready to pull the trigger on keeping LeBron but they wouldn’t do it without Anthony Parker.” You line up your players, let the Hornets take their pick, and run away with Chris Paul before they change their minds.

So who would they actually have to trade? Well, we know it would be significant. The Hornets got cold feet on a fairly attractive package put together last week by the Portland Trail Blazers: Paul in exchange for Andre Miller, Joel Przybilla, Nicolas Batum, Jerryd Bayless, and the 22nd pick in the draft. The assumption is that it will take an even more impressive offer to steal Paul away.

It would certainly include Delonte West, for reasons that won’t be discussed here. It would likely include Mo Williams, since the Hornets would need to get a point guard back. Beyond that, it’s whoever the Hornets want and whoever makes the trade balance correctly. My hunch is that the Cavs would like to keep Anderson Varejao and Antawn Jamison, but neither of them are more important than Chris Paul—especially if Chris Paul also means LeBron James.

It’ll be tricky. It’ll take an eleventh-hour trade. It’ll mean dropping everything, abandoning every other plan, and throwing everything at LeBron.

And if it works, it’ll be entirely worth it.

There’s nothing they can say to LeBron at this point that’s really going to change his mind (“please” isn’t going to do a whole lot). They’ve had a seven-year audition, and at this point it looks suspiciously like they’ve failed. The only persuasive arguments they can still make are with their contract-signing pen.

The Cavs’ executives have to be feeling it. They have to know that inaction is going to mean letting LeBron slip through their fingers, and the Cavaliers returning to complete NBA irrelevance. A last-minute, all-or-nothing LeBron blandishment might not be glamorous, but if you’re the Cavaliers’ GM, you have everything to lose. Everything.

You’ve got to go for it. Or, as Eminem puts it:

You only get one shot, do not miss your chance to blow
This opportunity comes once in a lifetime, yo.

Couldn’t have said it better.

Sometimes people think I’m kidding when I write about the Los Angeles Clippers. Especially about how good they’re going to be next season.

But it all sincerity, Richard Jefferson could be a key piece that the Clips are missing for a playoff run. And he should take an offer from them, if he gets one.

RJ had a bit of a bumpy road last season, as his usual 20ish points a game dwindled to 12 and he never really fit in with the San Antonio Spurs. At 30 years old, it’s likely that he still has a few good years left to play; all reports say that Jefferson, despite meshing fine with Gregg Popovich, wasn’t a good fit with the Spurs’ complex half-court offense. If that’s true, then the reduced production isn’t entirely his fault (some, yes, but not all).

It’s worth noting his shooting percentage didn’t go down. At 46.7%, it was actually the highest it’s been since a career year in 2006. The key stat is that he took fewer shots: 4.5 per game, down from 7.5 two years ago in his last season with New Jersey.

The possible conclusion is that Jefferson wasn’t incapable of scoring last season—he just didn’t. This bodes well for the Clippers, as it puts RJ low (very low, very very low) on the free agent radar this summer, and there’s a chance he could be had for cheap. He opted out of $15.2 million this year with the Spurs, but there’s an outside chance the Clips could lock him up for somewhere around the mid-level exception (roughly $5.6 million a year).

And then, if the new situation facilitates a return to his old form, the Clippers are in great shape.

It works because the small forward position is the one most in flux in the Clippers’ starting five. Baron Davis starts at the point, the rising Eric ‘Webster’ Gordon at the 2, twice-over-rookie Blake Griffin will surely start at power forward, and Chris Kaman was an All-Star last season at center. None of those figure to change.

But at the 3? One-time starter Al Thornton now wears a Wizards uniform. Rasual Butler started most of last season after being acquired from the New Orleans Hornets, but with unimpressive numbers. Travis Outlaw joined the team later in the season as part of the Marcus Camby trade with the Portland Trail Blazers, and managed to start a handful of games. And now the Clippers have drafted up Al-Farouq Aminu, the small forward from Wake Forest, to help plug this leaky position.

But as always, if you think you have several possible starters it’s because you don’t have one player good enough to be your starter. Richard Jefferson would be that guy.

It gives the team some trade ammo, as they could unload Butler, Outlaw, or Steve Novak in a deal to shore up some other positions—they could use a quality backup point guard, as Steve Blake’s contract is up and Baron Davis tends to take breaks. With Camby gone, they could use another big as well. But at least they have solid starters at those positions. And Jefferson would be a nice guy for Aminu to learn from as he grows into his NBA shoes.

The rumor after Day 1 of free agency is that Jefferson wants to move back to the Big Apple and play for the New York Knicks or the New Jersey Nets. Both teams have a lot of money to spend, but let’s be honest—neither have Jefferson even close to their radar at the moment, and both teams would consider him a last, last resort given his performance last season.

The Nets could at least use a starting small forward; the Knicks start Danilo Gallinari at the 3, and he’s one of the few bright spots on that abysmal roster.

Obviously Jefferson isn’t first on the Clippers’ list either, as they met with LeBron James today. But the Clips are still expected to be a long, long, longshot in the LBJ sweepstakes, despite their solid core (their meeting today went less than an hour, and they didn’t have an owner or a coach present). Jefferson looks to be a free agent that will still be standing after all the top-tier and even second-tier players have been taken by sexier teams.

This all said, the chances of the Clippers both getting lucky and striking a great deal—especially with their track record, and current ownership—are very slim. This free agency has already been repeatedly punctured with big deals that are probably too large for the players involved (see: Gay, Rudy and Gooden, Drew). The temptation to overpay when there’s cap space in your pocket is overwhelming.

And in reality, RJ deserves a good solid paycheck when he’s playing up to his standards. It’s unlikely that he’ll dive down into single-digits-per-year when he turned down $15 million from the Spurs. But there’s a chance.

So where does it put the Clippers if they reel in Jefferson? Well, it depends on whether RJ rebounds back into good form, and perhaps even more on how Blake Griffin fares in his NBA debut season. It doesn’t put the Clippers on top of the West, or probably even in a middling playoff seed.

But it puts the 8 seed within reach. Does it make them better than the Rockets (pending any off-season acquisitions), Grizzlies, and Hornets? Likely so. Beating just one more team slides them into that last playoff spot—maybe the Spurs can’t hold on to a playoff spot this time, or maybe the Suns without Amare Stoudemire fall off the map. Or maybe all the Portland centers bust their knees—oh wait, that happened last year.

Richard Jefferson to the Clippers. It’s looking good on paper.

Which probably means it doesn’t happen.

The ball went into the goal. Frank Lampard saw it. Fabio Capello saw it. Tens of thousands of screaming, vuvuzela-clutching fans saw it. Even Germany coach Joachim Loew saw it.

Unfortunately, referee Jorge Larrionda didn’t see it, and he’s the one who counts. The goal didn’t count, the score remained Germany 2, England 1, and the Germans went on to a commanding 4-1 win. Any English player – and for that matter, any German player – will tell you that the no-goal was the turning point of the game.

You, however, are probably shaking your head. How on earth can a no-goal in the first half be the difference maker when Germany went on to win by three goals? Not only did England have plenty of other chances, but they allowed two more goals in the second half, so it’s not as though one goal would have mattered. Right?

Sure, that’s true and all, but a single goal like that can dramatically change the way soccer is played, far more than a single point changes a sport like basketball, football, or hockey.

If you’ve watched even a single World Cup match over the last month (and if you’re reading this blog, chances are excellent you either watched USA-Algeria or USA-Ghana), you probably know that soccer is a low-scoring sport. Most matches end with two or fewer goals. Since goals are in such short supply, the team that scores first tends to win, or at least tie. So far in the 2010 World Cup, the side scoring first went on to win the match 69.6% of the time, and went on to at least tie it a whopping 82.1% of the time.

That’s a staggeringly high rate. Coaches in any sport would love to know a sure-fire way to win their games over 82% of the time. In soccer, it’s that easy – just score first!

Of course, in the Germany-England match, the Germans scored first, so the odds were already against the English. In fact, only two sides that scored first went on to lose their match this year (3.6%). While it’s not perfect, you could say that after they allowed that first goal, England had a 96.7% chance of losing. Odds like that don’t do much for confidence. So what did England do? They started to play a little more aggressively.

While playing aggressively certainly increases your chances of scoring a goal, it also increases your chances of giving one up, since your players are spending most of their time focusing on offense and not spending much time on the defensive end of the pitch. If the ball squirts over the midfield line and even just one attacker breaks free, chances are excellent that you’ll give up a goal.

The strategy paid off for England, though, and they scored their goal. Germany went on to score another, and then just before halftime, Lampard appeared to score his, which would have tied the game at 2. Instead, England went into the locker room knowing they’d have to play aggressively to have a chance at winning.

The mental difference is an important one. England could have played a normal game if they were tied in the second half, and perhaps (though we can’t be sure) they wouldn’t have conceded those two extra goals.

But do the numbers back it up? We already know that teams that score first only lose about 3.6% of the time. Teams with a one goal lead at any point in the match fare about as well, only losing about 3.9% of the time. But teams that are tied? They actually go on to lose the match 41.7% of the time, a huge increase over the one goal lead. That’s a big, big difference. According to those numbers, England was actually ten times more likely to win the match if the goal had been counted than if it hadn’t.

You can understand why they were so upset.

So how do we fix the problem? Fans worldwide are now clamoring for FIFA to implement instant replay on the goal line to prevent something like this from happening in the future. FIFA has responded by saying that’s unlikely, since they don’t have the funding to provide equipment for every match. Some have suggested something as simple as having two people stand by the goal line just to check if the ball goes over the line, which could be done relatively cheaply.

Personally, I feel like FIFA already has those guys on staff. They stand by the sidelines throughout the whole match. You’ve probably seen them – they’ve the guys who hold up the flags when the ball goes out of bounds. Yes, they’re the line judges. During shots on goal, they’re usually close enough to the action to be able to see whether the ball goes in or not. If there’s a question, couldn’t the referee just refer to them for confirmation? We already see this in MLB, when the home plate umpire refers to the first or third base umpires to see if a batter’s swing crossed the baseline.

Certainly that’s not the only way it could be done.  I’m sure plenty of other people will offer up suggestions. But the important thing is that something needs to be done. Goals don’t come easily in the World Cup, so every single one ought to be counted, and counted correctly. If they aren’t, teams could see their chances of winning drop by ten times or more with a single missed call.

Just ask England.

The Arizona Republic’s Dan Bickley set off a minor firestorm this week, when he bandied about Charles Barkley’s name as a possible replacement for Steve Kerr as the Phoenix Suns’ General Manager.

I, for one, think that’s a fantastic idea.

Can you imagine how entertaining that would be? This is the guy who suggested that the NBA doesn’t really need refs, except that white guys need something to do.

Growing up in Arizona, I loved Sir Charles back when he was a fat, sweaty power forward for the Suns, winning an MVP in 1993 and taking his Suns to the NBA Finals.

Now I love Barkley as a fat, sweaty analyst for TNT, where he’s gained quite the reputation as a straight-shooter. He says exactly what’s on his mind, no more, no less, and his dogmatic style leaves us as viewers with two options: (1) agree with him, or (2) get the heck out of his way.

Or, in his words: “I don’t create controversies. They’re there long before I open my mouth. I just bring them to your attention.”

Consider, for example, his thoughts on resigning Amar’e Stoudemire. It would be a popular move in Phoenix, but would Charles Barkley give a big contract to the Suns’ best power forward since the Round Mound of Rebound himself was on the floor?

No. N-O. Not in a million years.

“I wouldn’t do it for three reasons,” Barkley said. “One, his knees; two, his eyes; and three, he wants a maximum deal. Now, he’s a terrific player. Don’t get me wrong. But at this stage of his career, he’s never been the best player on his team. That’s not a max player.”

Concise, throught-through, honest—and, admit it, it’s what everybody is thinking. At least a little bit.

Needless to say, he might not be a terribly popular GM, given his propensity for not caring who he upsets. He may not even be a terribly successful one, as I could see him following his substantial gut rather than the sound advice of his assistants.

If you go looking for reasons why you wouldn’t want to hire Barkley, for any position, you won’t have any problem finding them. His playing career was marred by an incident where he tried to spit on a heckler, missed, and spit on a little girl. Post-NBA, he’s famous for his reckless gambling and a 2008 DUI conviction.

But Barkley has made it clear that he’s got the itch to eventually get out of the TV booth, and back in the trenches. At least for the right job.

“I’m ready to get into management,” he told the Boston Globe. “But it’s going to have to be a great situation. I’m not going to give up a great situation for a bad situation. I got a great situation here but I’m ready to be a GM.”

And does he think Phoenix is a good situation? Well, no.

“I don’t think it’s a good job right now,” Barkley said. “But I would listen to the Suns because I love Phoenix. I would listen to (Suns owner) Robert (Sarver) out of respect for working in Phoenix.”

Given the reservations a team would have about hiring him, it’s extremely unlikely that we’ll see Barkley hold the reins anywhere but Phoenix—and only very unlikely that he’ll take charge there. Especially if he makes enemies at the top:

“Let’s not kid ourselves: Just because you have a lot of money doesn’t mean you know anything about basketball. I don’t think (Sarver) made his money in basketball. He made his money in banking. We don’t get stimulus packages in the NBA.”

It’s a shame to get our hopes up when Charles may never be pulling the strings for an entire NBA franchise. But if he ever does?

I’ll be getting a front-row seat.