At The Hive

For His Next Trick, Byron To Start Devin Brown

2009-11-08T02:10:12Z

Yep. Yep yep yep.

I've made clear who I want starting at the 2, despite his struggles. Honestly though, I don't have anything against trying out a committee and seeing who performs. I'm just dubious when that committee includes Devin Brown.

A fifth starter who plays with Chris Paul, David West, and Emeka Okafor needs to be able to shoot and not take over offensive plays with those three guys on. Devin Brown does not fit this bill at all. He really has no range to speak of, as he shot 29% from three last season and 30% the year before. The unfortunate thing is Brown seems to think he's good at shooting- he attempted almost 100 last year after 146 the year before. Byron Scott, for whatever reason, has allowed him to indulge this fantasy. Moving him into the starting lineup into a role that has frequently been on the receiving end of kickouts for three does not, well, solve this issue. At all.

There is really just one positive to Brown's game, and that's his ability to get to the foul line on broken plays. On units that don't have much creativity, he can force himself to the hole and occasionally pick up some cheap points. Thing is, this skill set will not be needed with Paul/West/Okafor on the floor. In the slightest.

Baskeball Prospectus' defensive stats indicate that Brown is actually a pretty solid defender. That's the one area I could see this move sort of working. If he can do a good job over the next few games on some upcoming opponents, then who knows. Perhaps he wrests control of the job from Mo-Pete for good. He's already shown the inexplicable ability to completely avoid Byron's doghouse.

In sum, I see this failing pretty badly on offense, and maybe, maybe, yielding some defensive results. Either way, Byron has indicated that this is a "6 game tryout." Which means we can start the Marcus Thornton countdown- Thursday, November 19th vs. Phoenix.

12 more days, people.

NBA's "Race" to the "MVP"

2009-11-07T20:30:48Z

NBA's "Race" to the "MVP"

1. Melo 2. Pierce 3. Kobe 4. Wade 5. Howard 6. Nash 7. Joe Johnson 8. Ariza 9. Bosh 10. LeBron

HAHAHAHAHAH

Game 6: Hive Live

2009-11-07T18:42:23Z

More photos » by Bill Haber - AP

Browse more photos »

Toronto 107 (3-2) | New Orleans 90 (2–4)

Oof. That wasn't pretty.

The game was actually pretty close throughout the first half, but then the Raptors (who are the third highest scoring team this year) went bananas in the second half, shooting almost sixty percent and draining what felt like an endless barrage of threes (they finished with 14 to our 6... but they made theirs 50% of the time to our 30%). Credit the Raptors for shooting so well, but don't forget to thank the Hornet's new defensive scheme called "the sieve."

But seriously, though we did look pretty helpless on defense, the Raptors were simply on fire. For instance, there were several series where Emeka played Bosh really well on D giving him no space and always getting a hand in his face during shots. But Bosh seemed to sink every one of his shots anyway. And when I say every one, I mean every one. Bosh was a perfect 10 for 10 on the night (including a trey) and also managed 8 for 11 from the stripe. The guy was an absolute beast.

Our offense, on the other hand, looked so ineffective on the court that I was surprised when I looked at the box score and saw that we shot 48% from the field. If we could just cut down on the turnovers and play something that resembles defense once in a while, we might actually start winning games. You know, like in a row.

Bullets after the jump.

Your daily "Holy crap, Chris Paul!" line: 21 points (on 60% shooting), 7 boards, 18 assists, 2 steals, 1 turnover in only 36 minutes. And it was all for naught.
No other Hornet had a line worth sharing.
Score for the third quarter: Toronto 34, New Orleans 14.
Turkoglu and Bargnani shot a combined 7 for 14 from deep. And here I was getting all excited that Emeka could shoot from outside the paint.
We shot 62% from the line last night. Ordinarily, I 'd say you have to step up a bit more than that to win games, but the Raptors finished with 65%... so now I'm just confused.
The Hornets managed to get in the bonus with 5:30 or so to play in the second. So did we take advantage and attack the basket knowing we'd likely come out with a high percentage shot or free throws on most possessions or did we only make it to the line once (on a questionable Bargnani foul on Chris)? Think hard before you answer.
Bobby Brown once again sank half of his shots (finishing with 16 points), but his shot selection continues to be pretty poor (especially from deep). I keep going hot and cold on the guy... but then I end up staying hot because I remember the Mike James era.
Dear James Posey, I know you landed your big fat contract and all, but it'd be really nice if you pretended to work that money. The lazy play and stupid fouls are getting really old, especially from a guy who was supposed to be the "glue" that held us all together. Thanks.
Quick bit of trivia for you. On February 5, 1977 Pistol Pete Maravich scored a career high 68 points per game against the New York Knicks. His total could have been higher though, as Pete fouled out of the game. You know who blew the whistle on his 6th foul? Dick Bavetta. Who called the game last night. Holy crap. (Special thanks to Curry for this little tidbit).
Finally, I'm sure you're all aware of George Shinn's recent diagnosis of prostate cancer. I'm sure I speak for all us in wishing him a speedy recovery. For those of you who feel inclined to do a little more than wish, may I suggest Movember. For the month of November, this group is encouraging men everywhere to grow mustaches to raise awareness about prostate cancer (and collect donations).

Composed to: Crowded House's Woodface

The Opponent's Take: Raptors HQ

Mo-Pete Hops in the Delorean

2009-11-06T19:46:40Z

More photos » by Gus Ruelas - AP

Browse more photos »

Morris Peterson has always been the definition of a fringe starter. There are reasons to sit him, but there are also some reasons to start him. And perhaps chief among those is the way he fits into most any offense. Nobody wants an invisible player on the court, but nobody wants the 5th man to stick out any either. For much of his career, Mo struck that balance well.

Five miserable performances into the 09-10 season, is his time in that role over?

A trip down memory lane may be in order to predict his future.

For starters, the precipitous decline in PER over the past 5 years is ominous.

2006: 15.3
2007: 13.2
2008: 11.2
2009: 10.7
2010: 7.2 (5 Games)

It's not entirely unexpected either; wings in the mold of Mo-Pete tend to fade and fade hard as they hit their 30's. Two of Mo's most comparable players are George McCloud and Jaren Jackson... which is never a good thing. But while PER can be useful for comparing high value players, it often needs additional corroboration in its measure low value players who exist in different playing systems.

For example, in Toronto, Peterson's scoring role was far more pronounced. He averaged more than 3 FTA/36. In the long run, this seems pretty mediocre. Given Mo was averaged just around 10 FGA/game, though, it speaks to his more creative role. Upon his arrival in New Orleans, Peterson was transformed exclusively into a spot shooter. As much as people associate "Princeton offense" with Byron Scott (and others on that New Jersey staff, like Eddie Jordan), Peterson's role was hardly one characterized by off the ball cuts to the hoop. It was him hanging out on the corners or the wing, hoping for the kickout. It's only natural that his overall value would diminish in this system.

But how does one explain away Mo's decline with the Hornets? Changing system is one thing, but as we're all familiar with, the Hornets run virtually the same offense they did when Mo arrived.

The answer lies hidden in his floor percentages. Oddly enough, even as Mo's three point ability has remained stable, he's become a very poor two point shooter.

Year	2P%	3P%
2007	52.3	35.9
2008	44.5	39.4
2009	40.8	38.8

Clearly, his skills are in decline. He can hit the standstill three, but he can't do much else at all. Then again, the Hornets need Peterson to literally do only two things: (1) make open threes and (2) perimeter defense.

Mo has looked awful to start the year because both those things, arguably, haven't been there. In terms of defense, images of Rodrigue Beaubois blowing by him on four consecutive possessions still lingers in my mind. But in a relative sense, who else do we have defensively? James Posey has lost a step on the perimeter; leaving him on small forwards and power forwards is easily our best bet moving forward. I'm more than willing to give Peterson some more time to evaluate his defense. The three point shooting? He's been poor; however, it's 5 games, and it certainly looks like statistically insignificant.

In the 9 years prior this season, Mo's three point percentage has never deviated outside of the 30-40% range. It hasn't come close to the low end since a poor third season in the league. Basketball Prospectus' projection system has him very similar to last year. Basically, it's too early to say that Mo has lost his three point shot; in fact, all signs point to the contrary. It's the one aspect of his game he's kept as he ages, and the one aspect he's likely to keep for a while longer.

The moral of the story: Morris Peterson may be done as an average basketball player, but in the role the Hornets have created for him, he still has value. The numbers say his shot will recover, without much doubt. His contract runs till 2011, and the two aspects of his game we utilize most- shooting and perimeter defending- will remain until then. Off the bench, the value of both those things plummets. He no longer has Chris Paul to create threes for him, and his perimeter defense is inherently less valuable if he guards the opposition's bench.

I'm all for Marcus Thornton getting minutes (as Byron has alluded to recently). From a relative value added sense though, I think it makes more sense to bring Thornton off the bench. From what we've seen of him at LSU, he doesn't need Chris Paul as much as Mo does. And Mo is the far safer defensive bet at this point. Essentially, Thornton can (potentially) do things off the bench that Mo cannot; on the flip side, Thornton's creative ability is diminished as the fifth starter.

Projecting Mo's future is tough; defending his recent play is even tougher. For all his struggles though, there still isn't a better fifth starter option on this roster.

George Shinn Has Prostate Cancer

2009-11-06T19:02:39Z

George Shinn Has Prostate Cancer

"NEW ORLEANS -- The owner of the New Orleans Hornets has announced that he has cancer.

George Shinn made the announcement in a news release Friday that he was recently diagnosed with prostate cancer. Shinn says he remains healthy and is optimistic that he will conquer the disease."

Best wishes to the Shinn family for a speedy recovery.

How The West Is Won; Melo, Artest, and Other Stories

2009-11-05T19:25:31Z

More photos » by Jesse D. Garrabrant - NBAE/Getty Images

3 days ago: EAST RUTHERFORD, NJ - NOVEMBER 4: Carmelo Anthony #15 of the Denver Nuggets shoots against Josh Boone #2 of the New Jersey Nets during the game on November 4, 2009 at the Izod Center in East Rutherford, New Jersey. (Photo by Jesse D. Garrabrant/NBAE via Getty Images)

Browse more photos »

This should be the first in a weekly series documenting prominent stories in our conference.

Carmelo Anthony

Carmelo Anthony started his first 4 games ridiculously hot, before shooting 8-24 last night. It's ridiculously early, but he's drawn plenty of potential MVP talk nonetheless. A 31.1 PER, 36.2% usage, and 32 ppg will do that for you (well, unless you're Chris Paul, in which case it will earn you this). It's rather easy to see that Melo's base numbers are pretty unsustainable and a product of a small sample size. 47% three point shooting by a career 30% shooter. 12 trips to the line per 36 minutes vs. an average 8. A turnover rate slashed in half. Simple probability dictates that Melo will come down to Earth. But interestingly, his Nuggets team may truly be as good as they're playing. Chauncey and Nene have picked up where they left off. And like everyone but GM's predicted, Ty Lawson has been stellar.

Artest on the Lakers

I don't care that the Lakers have 4 wins in 5 games; they can't be happy with their play thus far. The offense has been downright mediocre, with offensive rebounding the only thing holding it up. Now Pau Gasol is out, but a team with Kobe Bryant, Andrew Bynum, Lamar Odom, and Ron Artest playing marginally better offense than the Clippers? They've squeaked by the Hawks, Thunder, Rockets, and Hawks, with a convincing loss to Dallas mixed in. And the initial returns on Ron Artest? Not good, despite what ESPN and everyone else wants you to believe. The one, monumental question all offseason was how Artest's efficiency would adapt, with a lower usage rate. Right now, he has the lowest usage rate of his career (16.3%), almost ten (!) percent lower than last season. And, huh, his PER has also plummeted to the lowest of his career by far. I assume Gasol's return will only serve to take further possessions from Ron. Yes, this is only 5 games, but Artest is not Ariza, no matter how much L.A. tries to stuff him into that role.

Steve Nash

Steve Nash is surprising a lot of people with the way he ages. He's still shooting and passing extremely effectively. As Hornet fans, I think we'll never truly appreciate Nash's game. Much of that is because we have a point guard who's way better than him, but has 2 fewer MVP's. So that bitterness will always persist. But Nash is playing basketball at a level that no 35 year old should be able to.. and minus Shaq, the Suns are actually watchable again.

Houston

The NBA statistical community has long had one very unsettled debate- what exactly is the value of shot creation? Everyone realizes that unefficient players could very well be undervalued by figures like PER, because shot creation is very much a basketball skill, in the style of speed or court vision. Everybody realizes that shot creation is valuable, but how valuable is another question altogether. In light of that debate, Daryl Morey has concocted the perfect test tube in Texas- a collection of high efficiency, lower usage (and lower shot creation) players. With Tracy McGrady out, this effect is just exacerbated. As Houston continues to force feed Ariza into taking shots, it's becoming more and more clear that Ariza is no #1 option. It's early, but the initial returns on Houston's experiment look positive. They've played the Lakers to within a point, played Portland close, and also beaten them, Golden State, and Utah.

Houston really isn't your typical anonymous team; their play this year could really change the way teams are constructed. Their first five have not disappointed.

Elias: Hornets Have 3rd Longest Winning Streak in OT

2009-11-05T19:06:35Z

Elias: Hornets Have 3rd Longest Winning Streak in OT

It took an extra period, but the Hornets defeated the Mavericks on Wednesday.

New Orleans has won its past 10 overtime games at home, dating back to 2006. That's the third-longest streak in NBA history. The Knicks won 14 straight home OT games from 1988-92, and the Rockets had an 11-game streak from 1976-80.

Game 5: Hive Live

2009-11-05T07:33:17Z

More photos » by Chris Graythen - Getty Images

Browse more photos »

Dallas 107 (3–2) | New Orleans 114 (2–3)

Great game. Any win at all would have been acceptable; however, the Hornets dialed it up a notch and found a way to win even in the face of adversity (aka Dallas, which is a way better team than Sacramento).

After flying out the gates and finishing the first with an 8 point lead, the Hornets started to sag while the Mavs, who started cold, began hitting open looks all over the court. The lead continued to change hands for the rest of the game until the end, when the Mavs were up 4 with 16 seconds to play to play. Things looked pretty bleak from section 325, and the Hornets seemed to be headed to yet another loss; a hard fought loss, yes, but a loss all the same.

One CP offensive foul and 4 missed Dallas free throws later, the Hornets find themselves down by 3 with 9 seconds to play and deem Peja "0 for the night and then some" Stojakovic the man to fire the tying shot... and he drains it. Un.be.lieve.able.

The Mavs went ice cold in OT, and really, that's all she wrote. The Hornets finished the contest with the advantage in every statistical category but blocks and three-point percentage. Perhaps the most important part was the Hornets owning the paint in the second half. They were able to penetrate and out duel the Mavs to the tune of 26 to 14 down low.

Bullets after the jump.

As we've noted, Chris Paul, who became the third-fastest player to tally his 3000th assist on Monday night, is freaking amazing. As such, it was no surprise that he finished the evening to the tune of 39 points (on 61% shooting), 7 assists, 5 rebounds, 2 steals, and perfect from the stripe.
Jason Terry was also on fire tonight. He single-handedly kept Dallas in the game and made me write a plethora of expletives (in all caps, mind you) in my little notepad. When an opponent drops 35 points (on 66% shooting) on us, I tend to get annoyed. Must be what everyone else in the league feels about CP.
Front court was solid for the Bees tonight as well. Sure, they got jammed up a few times playing zone D (though it looked like we played a fair amount of man to man as well), but Emeka and DX combined for with 36 points (on 60% shooting) 23 boards, 8 assists, 4 steals, 3 blocks, and 3 turnovers. Damn, that feels good.
While we're singing their praises, I'll go ahead and thank both of our starting bigs for the superb job they did locking down Dirk. The Big German finished the night with only 12 points and went 4 of 15 from the field. The refs were letting the boys play under the hoops, which led to a few tiffs, and ultimately, I think Dirk's frustration won out. His shortcomings (and his 6th foul with two and a half minutes to play in regulation) was as crucial to the W as those missed FTs from Terry and Berea.
Shawn Marion was also not much of a factor in this game. 8 points (on 33% shooting), 6 boards, 2 blocks, and 5 turnovers. I wasn't expecting "The Matrix Reloaded" or anything, but that's pretty mediocre/bad for a guy who logged 39 minutes.
Bobby "My Prerogative" Brown continued to launch shots (some of which were ill-advised), but managed to sink more than half of them, finishing with 18 points. I still think we're doing a disservice to Collison by letting someone as irresponsible as Brown live ahead of him in the depth chart, but for tonight, Brown was worth his salt (even if I cringed for every shot he took).
And one final thought: late in the game Emeka picked up a loose ball after a missed CP layup and slammed it home. After I was done clapping, though, I realized that we really don't dunk anymore. Ever since Tyson left, it just doesn't happen much. Of course, I'll take Mek's post moves any day over a guy who has to be under the hoop to score, but I'd be lying if I said I didn't miss the excitement.

Composed to: It's My Life by Talk Talk

The Opponents Take: Mav's Moneyball

Okafor After Four

2009-11-04T06:44:14Z

More photos » by Bill Haber - AP

But... he sat out my legendary preseason!

Browse more photos »

As I alluded to in the last post, four games is a tiny sampling of the NBA season. But we have to be thrilled with Okafor thus far.

A quick glance at his statistics indicates he's been playing at a high level. Duh. More interestingly, he hasn't done anything totally exceptional or unsustainable in four games.

For example, he's shot well from the floor. 54.5% from the field is pretty good, but it's less than his career high of 56.1% last year. It's also right on line with 53.5% the year before and 53.2% the year before that. Basically, 54.5% is where Emeka should be around for the year.

He's converting on 83% of free throw attempts... about 23% higher than his career rate. So that won't stand up. However, his true shooting has remained similar to last year's since he's going to the line less. So the unsustainable free throw percentage is basically a wash, not affecting his overall performance.

His offensive rebound rate- 11.2%- is .7% below his career. His defensive rebound rate is 29%, 4% higher than his career rate. But with David West's pathetic attempt at "rebounding," Okafor figures to have plenty of defensive rebounding chances.

Basically, the jump in Okafor's overall numbers (PER, etc.) may or may not be sustained through the season. It's four games. But breaking down his performance into component pieces suggests that there's nothing flukey about Okafor so far. Knock on wood that he stays healthy. But he's only going to get better with Chris Paul- I feel he's been mostly doing his own thing offensively... as he starts to play off Paul, he should only improve.

Emeka Okafor has been excellent, and we have no indications that that's going to change.

Hornets Defy Expectations, Find Lower Gear

2009-11-03T09:22:53Z

More photos » by Frank Franklin II - AP

Browse more photos »

The New Orleans Hornets have played four games. They've won one time, unconvincingly squeaking by the Sacramento Kings, perhaps 2008-2009's worst team. They've now lost, rather convincingly, to one of the perennial losers of the NBA. Unequivocally, the Hornets have stumbled out the gate.

At this juncture, the optimist points to the small sample. Yes, the Hornets have played 4 games. Yes, Ike Diogu and Sean Marks are hurt. Yes, the team will still gel and understand each other and play as a team.

Statistical fluctuation happens in small samples. It's why Alex Rodriguez was a playoff "choker," why Peyton Manning could never win the big one, and why Juan Pierre can get a hit off Tim Lincecum. The common thread in all these examples is the uncertainty. Increase the sampling, and the uncertainty is diminished from an overall sense. In basketball terms, this uncertainty can manifest in shots rimming out, low percentage players going on hot streaks, basketballs slipping out of hands, or any number of other possibilities that we've all seen happen.

These first four games will not define our season, obvious as it may sound, because they are just four games.

At this juncture, the realist steps in. Yes, these are just four games. Yes, a team with Chris Paul and David West and Emeka Okafor will not go 20-62. But even in these four games, there are signs of systematic flaws, flaws that are not merely a function of statistical fluctuation, but rather of longer term issues.

The optimist says the team will eventually hit its stride and that these first four games, though harmful, may prove more illusory than absolute.

The realist also says the team will eventually hit its stride, but that in these first four games, we've seen moments and plays that aren't entirely illusory, that aren't simply products of a small sample size.

What are those moments and plays? I think you know.

It's funny. I pulled up the advanced stats to look at how we lost the game. And then I realized... it doesn't take eFG%, or dORtg, or dTOR, or any such lofty measurement to realize what's wrong here.

The New Orleans Hornets are awful at defense. Absolutely, horrifically putrid. There are times when the viewer cannot tell if they are attempting to play man or zone, if Chris Paul is supposed to be guarding Larry Hughes by design or mistake. Watching the Hornets chase the ball around on passes would be analogous to watching Adrian Peterson play keep away with a baby.

A lot of this is clearly due to the disconnect between David West and Emeka Okafor. West was never the league's best defender to begin with, but he played very well in tandem with Tyson Chandler. He realized which negative aspects of his defense Chandler could cover, and he played to his strengths. With Okafor, that learning curve has begun anew. It will take time for the two of them to sort it out. This is where the optimist's take is probably right.

The Okafor-West issues explain the myriad blown pick and rolls and unfathomably high number of allowed layups. The open jumpers we've ceded for four straight games now? That's systematic, and it's been a hallmark of Byron Scott defenses since he's been here. In his years with New Orleans, the Hornets have consistently put up solid defensive seasons without necessarily the best defensive talent around.

A key to this success is Byron's proclivity to assign a single defender to most post players- including the Tim Duncans of the world, regardless of position on the block. Hornets' teams have excelled at bringing help defenders onto post players at exactly the right moments- never too soon or too late. The price a team pays for having this help defense always at the ready is poor defensive floor spacing. The strategy requires help defenders to be close; therefore, they're less likely to recover on kick out passes. In 2007-2008, the Hornets rode this defensive strategy to the league's 7th best defense. In the subsequent time, opponents have become more aware of the gameplan. Last year, Hornets defenders were often seen scrambling to cover missed rotations. While some of this can be attributed to injured personnel, it's also a case of the Hornets' system finally being gamed. The key to beating the Hornets defense is to use their post help against them, keep the ball moving once the advantage is gained, and find the open shooter. Teams have figured this out.

And honestly, it was a really good defensive strategy when first implemented. It worked. It hid the weaknesses of the interior defense by showcasing the individual defensive talent of Tyson Chandler. It forced opponents into jump shooting games. The Hornets avoided many post confrontations, and this helped them into one of the lowest fouling rates in the NBA.

Teams have changed. Opposing strategies have changed. In many ways, the evolution (or gradual stagnation) of the defense is very similar to what happened to our offense. Byron Scott literally designed the perfect offense for Paul, West, and Chandler back in 2006. New Orleans had its successes running the pick/roll/kick offense, but as teams started to catch on, Byron did nothing to change it up. As a result, teams could play the pick and roll heavily and not be burned by secondary offensive plans. Sure, it still produced its fair share of thunderous alley oops and West 17 footers; the number of broken and completely stagnant plays rose though, and along with injuries, doomed the Hornets season. The Hornets stubbornly stuck with the same offense forever- they're still doing it now, though Emeka Okafor's surprising creativity on the offensive end is definitely refreshing. I feel the same thing is happening with this aspect of New Orleans' post defense.

In either case, those are the two biggest flaws of the defense in my estimation. The former will self correct as we keep playing. The latter requires conscious effort to change. I'm not holding my breath.

Ultimately, the defense was what cost us against New York. The offense is slowly finding its way, which is good to see. For one, Chris Paul has seemingly found a new dimension to his game; the routes he takes across the key strike me as a little different from last year. He won't sustain these shooting percentages, but man is he on right now. 32/13/5 with 2 turnovers? Yes please. To quote my SBN Knicks counterpart over at Posting and Toasting: "Chris Paul, for his part, is a near-perfect basketball player. Good lord."

And Emeka Okafor... I love this guy already. The moves he was busting today were plain awesome. The little shimmy, cut back across the paint, soft fade? He has it down pat. I've never, ever seen him do it with Charlotte. Now granted I watch Charlotte maybe twice a year, but still. In completely unrelated news, Tyson Chandler went for an 8/8 on 2-8 shooting tonight, as the Bobcats picked up Win #2.

Bullet time:

Niall mentioned this over at 247, and I agree 100%: Byron Scott is using Darius Songaila horrifically poorly. He seems to think of Songaila as some sort of oversized Ryan Bowen, using him to do basically nothing. Songaila doesn't have much range, but he has a solid scoring ability closer to the hoop, and out of isolation settings. He's not specacular, or even "good," but his career scoring efficiencies are certainly better than a certain player who rhymes with Obby Rown.
James Posey, ugh. Mr. Invisible. He's not doing it on offense, and he's certainly not doing it on defense. In four games this year, he's registered a -32. We only have him for two more years, people!
JuJu needs to be more involved. I've been saying this for a while; if you're gonna isolate him, don't do it 20 feet from the hoop. He gets happy feet out there and just looks tentative. Isolate him 10-15 feet away, and he's gold. Now granted, setting up a closer iso takes more work in terms of offensive scheming. Then again, isolating him 20 feet away takes no work whatsoever, and who wants to actually think up new offensive ideas, am I right?
The Southwest Division is off to a decent start, with Houston crushing Utah tonight. We currently rank last, right on the heels of the Memphis Grizzlies. More losses to teams like the Knicks, and we'll have ourselves a pretty nice hole to dig out of.

I firmly believe that this team will hit its rhythm and ride Paul/West/Okafor to good basketball (again, as detailed as above, not as good as they could be.) Will we pick up a win against Dallas, Toronto, or the Lakers later this week? Maybe not. But we will be solid in due time, regardless of what Byron

Chris Paul Only Has Good Stats Because He Dribbles Around a Lot

2009-11-01T06:00:48Z

I would start by saying,"I'm sure you've all heard Rajon Rondo's comments...", but I won't say that, because I hadn't heard them, and by the transitive property of my intellectual superiority, you probably haven't either.

But seriously though, hat tip to Hornets Hype for linking me to the Chris Mannix tweet, and forcing me to address a topic I've long wanted to.

First, Rondo's alleged quote, through Kendrick Perkins, through Chris Mannix: "Chris Paul has the stats that he has because he has the ball in his hands all game."

This is an assertion I've seen echoed by many, many people before. In fact, it's one of the prime arguments that the Deron Williams > Chris Paul crowd affixes itself to. I.e., "if Chris Paul played in Utah's offense, where he would actually have to set screens and do things other than dribble 24/7, he'd be way worse than Deron Williams."

Random note: I just realized I get, like, an adrenaline rush whenever I see a Hornet even minorly slighted. I was just about to go to sleep, decided to check out the Hype one more time before turning in, and then boom! Wide awake, knifing through statistics, thinking up witty banter.

Anyways, as you might imagine, there's some very flawed logic that accompanies Rondo's statement.

First of all, I'm going to go out on a very short limb here and assume that Rondo is speaking of total stats, in lieu of rate stats. People that read this site (and people that do not, but are intelligent) are surely aware of the idiocy of relying on total statistics. But even if we cut Rondo a little slack, and assume he was talking about rate stats... he's still wrong.

Look around the league. You'll find plenty of point guards with very solid assist rate and scoring efficiencies, with usage rates in the 18%-22% range (oh, hey.... that's funny. Rondo's one of them!). If Rondo were right, every coach in the league is an imbecile for not giving his lower usage, higher efficiency players more possessions. The reason Rondo's wrong is that efficiency stats tend to decrease with increases in usage rate. You can't just assume that a player producing 1.1 points/possession, using 1 in every 5 team possessions, will sustain that rate while using 2 in every 5 team possessions. Specifically, sustainability is a skill set unto its own. It can come in the form of creativity (perhaps that one head fake will work when you use it once every 20 possessions, but not so well when your opponent sees it every other time down the floor), physical endurance, or a number of other aspects.

The reason Chris Paul (and Dwyane Wade and LeBron James) are so good is because they can be incredibly efficient on offense while using a ton of possessions. This is why they are given a ton of possessions. Rondo has the process precisely backwards. And before we dispense with Rondo, one more thing:

Rondo, career usage: 18.3%
Paul, career usage: 24.8%
Rondo, points/100 possessions: 108
Paul, points/100 possessions: 124

So not only would Rondo be worse than Paul if he were able to sustain his current efficiency and were given Paul's usage (unlikely), he wouldn't be close. And if we were to be realistic and pare down Rondo's projected efficiency at Paul's usage... um, yeah.

And re: the Deron Williams crowd. In Williams' case, it isn't the disparity in usage rate we should be looking at; DWill has highly comparable usage statistics to Paul. The DWill crowd's gripe is that Hornet plays are "set up" to either end on Paul assist or shots. They contend that Utah's offense doesn't center on Williams ending every play. Well, guess what! Hornets plays are set up like that, because Paul is extremely, extremely good at ending plays like that. Williams' efficiencies are far lower, running his offense however the hell he runs it; often, Utah plays end with Boozer, Millsap, Kirilenko, or others creating. The fact is, Utah has a much stronger supporting cast than New Orleans. Jerry Sloan wisely uses this to his advantage. To assume that Williams would have Paul's stats (rates and totals) if he played in a similar offense is dead wrong, because Williams' turnover rates and overall offensive efficiencies strongly point to the contrary.

Chris Paul has the stats that he has because he has the ball in his hands all game, and also because he happens to be Chris Paul.

Game 2: Hive Live

2009-10-31T04:32:07Z

More photos » by Bill Haber - AP

Browse more photos »

Sacramento 92 (0–2) | New Orleans 97 (1–1)

It would have been nice to win this one by a larger margin but a W is a W, especially after the Spurs dismantled us to start the season a couple days ago.

The Kings started strong (and we started weak), and held the edge in points for most of the first quarter. After the Hornet's first lead (with about 3 minutes to go in the first), the lead jumped back and forth with no team ever leading by more than 7. Our 5 point margin of victory was actually the biggest lead we had all night.

The Hornets were able to put this one away thanks largely to their efficient shooting (45.5% from the field) and their ability to get to the line (26 of 32 from the stripe compared to Sac's 13 of 20).That aggression down low led to a 40 to 30 advantage for points in the paint. The Kings, despite way out rebounding us on both ends of the court, were ultimately undone by their inability to hit any manner of shots (poor percentages across the board).

There's a lot of talent on this Hornet team and, frankly, I like the way things are shaping up for us, but I also think it's going to take some time before we find out sea legs. The guys are still getting used to playing with each other and it was pretty evident that we haven't quite adapted to this new zone defense. It'll be interesting to see what happens when we start firing on all cylinders.

Bullets after the jump.

CP and DX now have captain's patches. Nice. Curry said it was the first time he'd seen the patch since P.J. Brown was around.
CP3: What was that? Thank god he went 14 of 15 from the stripe because he was having some kinda trouble finding a rhythm in the field. The pull up jumpers, the smooth finger rolls, and the usual fair of circus-worthy and-ones just weren't finding their way in. Focus on the 31 points because if you venture down the line you'll see the 4 assists, 2 rebounds, and 4 turnovers. Oof.
DX: Low point totals (he too was missing open shots he normally knocks down), but a 13 point, 8 rebound, 3 steal, 2 block night is always welcome. Plus, the Kings came down hard on him and, despite not getting the calls (he went to the line 4 times), he refused to be his normal whiny self.
Emeka: Holy crap, I'm so glad we got this guy. He's an absolute beast. he only finished with 11 points, but he grabbed 13 boards, blocked 3 shots (including the one that iced the win), and stole the ball once just to prove he could. I mean, the guy's got post moves, he fights for rebounds. What's not to love? Welcome aboard, Mek (I'm told that's his nickname). Nice to have you playing the 5.
JuJu: Though he finished well, Julian started the game a little erratic. It's like we still haven't totally reigned in his potential, which is really frustrating since it's hard to describe someone who's been in the league for more than 2 years as "raw." Then again, he's 22 years old (crazy, right?). 11 points, 7 rebounds, and 2 assists is a step in the right direction for JuJu, but I think he can do more.
The Rest of the Team: Nothing terribly notable. Peja drained a couple of treys for 10 points off the bench, Hilton and Bobby Brown couldn't buy a bucket, and Songalia (despite decent contributions) found a way to turn the ball over 3 times in 13 minutes. Bench needs a shot in the arm, but that seems like old news.
Byron: Great job resting CP. He and DX each played around 36 minutes, which is nice considering CP averaged over 40 a game last season. Only knock on Byron was not giving Collison a look despite Bobby Brown's lackluster showing.
CP is still look for his first steal of the season. DX had 3 steals tonight.
The Kings: not a bad showing from a group I assumed to be much worse than they apparently are. Frankly, we're a tad lucky they shot as poorly as they did (37.5% from the field, 29,2% from beyond the arc, and 65% from the stripe) because they out-rebounded us to the tune of 52 to 43 (with a 21 to 10 showing on the offensive boards). Couple of thoughts on their guys...
Kevin Martin: Slow your roll, son. 9 for 29 from the field? Jeezum, let someone else try. Poor form to the coach that's green-lighting a guy who finishes 2 of 10 from 3 point land.
Jason Thompson: Bad shooting night (4 of 16 for 9 points), but his 12 boards and 6 assists were impressive. He's one to watch for when he puts it all together.
Tyreke Evans: This guy is good. Very impressive and (I hate to say stuff like this but) he's got quite a bit of gumption. He gave 110% and it showed. 22 points, 2 assists, 3 rebounds, 2 steals, and he got to the line 8 times. It'd be nice for him to up that assist total in the future, but he looks pretty darn good already.

Composed to: "The Freaks Come Out at Night" by Whodini

The Opponents Take: Sactown Royalty

The Case Against Stephen Jackson

2009-10-30T06:57:59Z

Marc Stein included this little snippet in his Stack Jax rumor column:

New Orleans, by contrast, would appear to have a clear and growing need for Jackson’s scoring threat and swagger from the wing, especially if you’re making judgments based on the mere 20 combined points managed by Morris Peterson, Julian Wright, Peja Stojakovic and James Posey in the Hornets’ season-opening loss at San Antonio. Yet it remains to be seen whether the Hornets will firmly enter the bidding for Jackson, who, remember, has a three-year contract extension worth nearly $28 million that kicks in after this season.

For now, it seems pure speculation. But despite Stein's claims to the contrary, the Hornets in no shape or form need Jackson's "scoring threat or swagger," mostly because the scoring threat was always greatly exaggerated.

Jackson is 31 years old; he's scheduled to make 10 million+ at age 34. He's not a particularly stout defender. He plays for the one coach in the league who wouldn't immediately bench him for his shot selection. He's never particularly been good at involving teammates, other than an anomalous 2007-2008. He can create his own shot, ~~but last year's 2.1 FTA/36 (half his career rate) is very, very ominous~~ (thanks, Caleb). He's an extremely lazy rebounder. And oh yeah, he's completely insane.

The Hornets probably never did nor ever will look into Jackson, and that's best for all involved.

Yeah, Let's Not Remember the Alamo

2009-10-29T18:20:29Z

I really hoped it wouldn't start this way.

2008-2009 was defined, more than anything, by our tendency to lose big games by massive amounts. There was the Christmas Day Special, the Los Angeles Massacre, and the Denver Wait Are You Serious? among others.

It's not all gloom and doom after a double digit loss to the championship-contender Spurs. After all, Chris Paul was still awesome. Emeka Okafor was quite impressive, especially if you buy his line that he's still sort of injured. David West was actually aggressive on the boards again. Even Julian Wright made some nice contributions after a shaky start. There is a lot of room for this team to grow, as Ike Diogu and Sean Marks come back into the lineup.

But one thing remains the same from last year, and it certainly comes as no surprise: the coaching.

I'm not worried about the players after one game; I am worried about the overall strategy.

Let's start with the obvious, Bobby Brown. I was relatively stunned when I saw him enter the game in the first quarter. Coming into this summer, Brown had played one NBA season, establishing himself as (a) a chucker, (b) a very, very poor shooter from the floor with even poorer shot selection, and (c) a thoroughly mediocre passer. Brown is, and was, the definition of a 3rd string point guard, one you put into the game in blowouts.

When he entered the game (Paul stayed for a couple, then left), this was the lineup: Hilton, DX, Peja, and Posey. The offensive possibilities for this lineup are so unbelievably limited, it's ridiculous. Hilton, Peja, and Posey need their shots to be created. Bobby Brown is generally never in a giving mood. David West can create his own shots, but Byron Scott decided it would be a great idea to keep isolating him 20 feet from the basket with limited time on the shot clock. This resulted in a couple long clangs. Meanwhile, the mildly amused Spurs ended the quarter on a 9-0 run.

In a stunningly cunning move to open the second, Scott decided to replace West with Darius Songaila. 4 guys that need shots to be created, and a shoot first point guard. Yep, +7 run Spurs.

From that point forward, the Hornets' offense was pretty decent. But that -16 run doomed the Hornets to the 17 point loss.

The second thing that stunned me was Brown from a defensive standpoint. In the first quarter, the Spurs had a backcourt of Parker and Ginobili when Brown checked in. This left Paul and Brown (5'11 and 6'2) guarding Parker and a 6'5" off guard. Scott executed his only reasonable option and switched into a zone. Cue an absolute barrage of three point shooting. Had Scott been smart about it, and not forced the Paul-Brown backcourt into the game at a poor time, the zone would never have become necessary. Instead, the zone plunged New Orleans' defense into a complete funk. Those were among the most awful rotations I've seen in years, college basketball included. Scott's insistence on his favored double-PG backcourt- hearkening back to the Pargo days- rendered the defense helpless. Is there blame to be placed on individual players? For sure. But Scott's decision made their job a little tougher.

Overall, I'm done with Byron Scott. Is this way too early to be saying things like that? Sure, maybe, whatever. Last night was the last straw. He played Darren Collison 3 minutes, left Thornton inactive, and found his new favorite ~~Pargo~~ chucker in Bobby Brown. He refuses to play anything but a slow, plodding, methodical style. I don't want him to be fired, but I will be happy when the Hornets fail to renew his contract at the end of this year. He's a good coach, he just hasn't adapted with the times.

And I'm really done complaining about Scott too. His style of coaching is what it is; there are so many other positives on the team I'd rather focus on. And after tonight, I don't have any great expectations for the team. I just want to watch the players play and have fun doing so; Byron can do whatever the hell he does on the sidelines.

So, in that spirit:

Chris Paul had a great shooting night. The 5 turnovers is shabby, but a couple were caused by mishandled transfers by Brown and West. It's nice to have one thing that's always thoroughly awesome on your team, no matter what.
Emeka Okafor was very, very impressive. Between the nice spin cycle he put Tim Duncan through, his active hands on the glass, and general athleticism getting up and down the court, he provided a lot more than I anticipated. It's hard not to be excited about him getting in rhythm with West and the rest of the offense. 18 pts, 10 rebs, 0 tos in 29 mins is a good start.
Julian Wright started slowly, but the monster coast to coast dunk seemed to snap him out. That pull up jumper looked steady; more oddly, it went in despite very un-confident looking approaches by Wright. The day that JuJu makes up his mind and goes into each move forcefully is the day he gets to the next level as a player. There's so much talent, but just equal parts hesitation.

Anyways, Sacramento on Friday, before Boston on Sunday. Let's hope we can get Diogu in here somewhere.

Chris Paul, the Super Star

2009-10-12T08:47:27Z

It's hard to believe Chris Paul has been in the league for four years, 300 games, and over 11,000 minutes now. It really is. These first four seasons of CP3 have been like the discovery of an amazing, underground band, and their subsequent evolution to the mainstream. They've been like a teacher watching a brilliant pupil move on to bigger things.

Above all, it's bittersweet.

On the one hand, there's elation that the world finally recognizes his talents. On the other, there's the feeling that "I knew he was going to be this good before anyone knew who he was." I'm not going to lie; I strongly associate with the latter. I remember following CP's first-ever game on ESPN GameCast, I remember that day was my birthday, I remember watching the highlights and being blown away by the flashes of brilliance in an otherwise mediocre debut, I remember how positively tiny he looked on the court. That feeling of "but I saw him first!" lingers on, and I'm sure any supporter of a downtrodden team that has experienced success (Rays, Pistons, Colts come to mind) can relate.

I find it hilarious that LeBron James came out with an autobiography this summer (with Buzz Bissinger, no less). But aside from the "you're 24, dumbass" kneejerk reaction I had, I realized it's easy to document many player's career arcs in terms of books and storylines.

As we look forward to Year 5, I can't help but feel that Act 1 of Paul's career has drawn to a close. There was Chapter 1, where we were introduced to the main character: Chris Paul, the rookie, running away with the ROY race, captivating everyone outside the 801 area code. There was Chapter 2, documenting his first trials and tribulations, in the form of a severely sprained right ankle. Chapter 3 offered not only redemption, but the national spotlight; suddenly the media was all over him and his team's playoff run. And of course, Chapter 4 delivered a pitstop to hell- the losses of Tyson Chandler, and his team's dignity. In essence, Seasons 1 through 4 have performed the role of the traditional first section of the typical 3-act novel or screenplay: an introduction to the character, a documentation of his strengths and flaws, and the preview to his life ambitions.

And of his strengths and weaknesses, these first four years have certainly been sufficiently instructive.

There will always be the people who conflate individual success with team success. Is the goal of any individual to help his team to a title? Absolutely. However, to equate the two is to completely ignore the effects of teammates, opponents, and good old random luck. The "what has he ever won?" crowd does indeed exist in force. Their arguments don't really mean much; Chris Paul's first four seasons have been of almost unparalleled brilliance.

Six players in the history of the NBA had posted rookie PER's better than Chris Paul's: David Robinson, Arvydas Sabonis, Terry Cummings, Michael Jordan, Tim Duncan, and Shaquille O'Neal. The shortest among those was Jordan at 6'6"... and he was Michael freakin' Jordan.

Short players are often among the most exciting; fans connect with them in ways they can't with 6'8" guys with 35 inch verticals. In the history of the game, there have been some exciting ones. There was Spud Webb in the 80's, whose dunk contest victory ranks among the more impressive feats in all sports. On the court, he was an underrated shooter and passer. There was Allen Iverson of the early 2000's; it's hard to think of a comparable player in NBA history, a 6 footer who could get a shot off at will over any defender in the league. There was the Hornets' own Muggsy Bogues. A 5'3" player logging over 25,000 minutes of steady NBA basketball is sheer insanity.

Ultimately though, these players were flawed. Don't get me wrong; Muggsy is in my top 3 favorite players of all time, but his height set an upper limit to what he could achieve on the floor. Spud Webb arguably could never replicate the successes of his rookie season. On top of that, he couldn't maintain his level of play upon promotion to a starting job. There were long stretches where Allen Iverson couldn't hit the backside of a barn; his annually poor floor percentages continually reflected this. Yes, he "took" his 2001 team to the Finals, but people quickly forget that he routinely fell back on his Sixers' top notch defense to bail him out of horrific shooting nights. In short, a short, brilliant player was nothing new. Sustained performance was.

Additionally, this "brilliance" was always a relative term. It was always so amazing that Player X could do all sorts of things... while being so short. The shortness was part of the brilliance. Remove the shortness, and Webb's dunks weren't so impressive. Remove the shortness, and Iverson's 45% eFG didn't look so cool. This was where Chris Paul deviated from the traditional short player path. Yes, it was impressive he could do what he did, at his size, but the numbers and performance also spoke for themselves. His assist numbers blew away Magic's, his steal rates rivaled Stockton's, his rebound rates were on par with Jordan's, his PER's trumped Shaq's.

Player	WARP, 1st 4 Seasons
David Robinson	90.7
Chris Paul	79.1
Shaquille O'Neal	77.8
Tim Duncan	74.2
Michael Jordan	73.0

Player	Win Shares, 1st 4 Seasons
David Robinson	59.0
Chris Paul	53.7
Michael Jordan	51.5
LeBron James	48.9
Shaquille O'Neal	48.6

Two very different rating systems indicate two very similar results. In the three point era, only one player has had a more impressive opening first four seasons (Robinson), and he was 28 years old at the end of Year 4. As defensive stats evolve, they are increasingly suggesting that Paul's gambling ways only aid his complete game (2nd in the last two years in adjusted plus/minus). There are loads and loads of Hall of Famers that CP has outperformed. I mean... just think about all this for a second. In the last 30 years, Chris Paul has been outplayed by one player this far into a career.

Best "point guard of all time" has become the vogue career ambition for media types to prescribe to Paul. Really? I know longevity is a huge part of the equation here, but is best point guard of all time the question we should really be asking here?

As far as the playoffs and Finals question goes... do you think Paul wouldn't have won a Finals with an early 2000's Shaq? With Kevin Garnett and Ray Allen? With Manu Ginobili and Tim Duncan? Team construction is an enormously integral aspect of championship contention. I know I mentioned this earlier, but to hold Paul's lack of hardware against him is to show a fundamental lack of understanding of how the sport works.

The best point guard debate is humorous on another level because while Paul's numbers are comparable to Jordan's, Duncan's, and Robinson's, you'd have to search high and low (and ultimately fail) in finding another point guard with a similar first 4 seasons.

Magic Johnson? Isiah Thomas? Kevin Johnson? In 4 years, Chris Paul has passed better, taken better care of the ball, and displayed more scoring range than any of the three ever achieved. Longevity again needs to be mentioned, but we can only judge CP on what he's done so far.

Off the court, Paul is a guy every Hornet fan would be proud to support. I love that he has no legitimate nickname (CP3 derives from the fact that he's the third C. Paul in his family, after his dad and brother). Other guys name themselves ‘Superman’ or ‘Mamba’ or ‘King,' but it feels fitting that Chris Paul is just ‘Chris Paul.’ I love that he has no tattoos, no earrings, no giant palatial mansion, no entourage, and so on. While I'm in no way against those things, it's just refreshing to have someone who doesn't feel the need to sport the same, ever-present image.

For me, the appeal of Chris Paul has only increased with his every failure. From the very beginning, Paul was always an easy NBA-er to relate to, relatively speaking. At 5'11" and a half, he's a guy that doesn't have the physical tools a lot of players in the league are blessed with. He doesn't have the insane body strength of a Dwight Howard, the athleticism of a LeBron James, the wingspan of a Rajon Rondo, or even the height and vertical combination of a Kobe Bryant. 5'11" and 175 pounds would probably be the average measurements of the guys at the gym I play at. This last year especially, we saw him battered and broken down by double and triple teams, physical defenders, and teams throwing their entire defensive kitchen sinks at him. "Failure makes you seem more human" is one of those things that was cool to say five years ago but is now a total cliche... but it's true. Paul's failures have been few and far between, but they've let me appreciate his successes more.

Basketball Prospectus does an annual projection for every single player in the league, based on similarity scores. For the second straight season this year, BProspectus was unable to use similarity scores to project Paul, deeming him "the most unique player in the NBA." Before Dwight Howard, there was Shaq. Before Kobe, there was Michael. Before LeBron, there was Grant Hill (and if you're laughing at that one, you probably didn't follow the NBA in the mid-to-late 90's). Before Dwyane, there was Clyde Drexler. Granted, some of these are "lite" versions of each other. But BProspectus' point is that there's never even been a Chris Paul Lite.

The main character's been introduced, his friends and foes stated, his ambitions laid out.

Turn the page, because here comes Part 2.

Hornets Beat Bobcats Via Big Easy Buzz Blog

2009-10-10T22:48:27Z

Hornets Beat Bobcats Via Big Easy Buzz Blog

Lots of interesting stuff from Jim. A few that stood out to me:

"Marcus Thornton looked sharp in his debut in front of his local fans, scoring six points on two treys in 12 minutes. His shots today came from spotting up and taking perimeter jumpers, but he’s also trying to mix up his offensive game by penetrating when the opportunity is there."

"Julian Wright had a second straight subpar game, now 2-for-17 from the field since Thursday.Scott said that he plans to use Wright as a starter all preseason "then see how it looks after that. I want him to get comfortable in that (starting) role. It’s a challenge to be a starter every night. It’s a lot of responsibility.""

Mo-Pete Will Start, Folks

2009-10-10T07:36:03Z

Morris Peterson has started the first two preseason games at shooting guard, scoring 16 points on 13 shots, including 5 for 9 on threes. Now, granted the preseason means absolutely nothing... but the rest of the Hornets' presumed starters (minus the injured Okafor) all started. So I assumed that Mo being out there was just a confirmation of his starting role.

The Times-Pic didn't portray it in as certain a light today, with their article "Mo-Pete Fighting To Retain Starting Spot."

The overall premise is that with Peja Stojakovic's move to the SG position, it's a three horse race between Mo, Peja, and Marcus Thornton.

Now I'm all for job competition and all that... but let's be honest here. Are Peja or Marcus going to guard Kobe Bryant? Tracy McGrady? Manu Ginobili? Kevin Martin? Dwayne Wade?

It's not official, but it's kinda official.

Can Hilton Rebound?

2009-10-09T21:51:22Z

More photos » by Bill Haber - AP

This is slightly amusing.

Browse more photos »

Ha ha ha, I'm funny.

Hilton Armstrong will have earned approximately $8.5 million dollars at the end of this season. It's a sum most of us can only dream of. More importantly, Hilton won't see such money again barring a quick turnaround.

The Hornets surprised me by picking up Armstrong's 2008-2009 option as quickly as they did. He did, after all, put up one of the most abysmal seasons (07-08) by a center in recent memory. In fact, only two centers have posted inferior sophomore seasons (Olowakandi, Diop), given comparable playing time, in the last two decades (win shares). I thought the Hornets would make him sweat at least a little.

They didn't, which makes me averse to flatly predicting that this will be his last year. New Orleans has a 3.85 million dollar option on him for next year. How good does he need to be to justify that contract and will he achieve it? It's unclear whether the front office seriously asked that question last offseason. Next summer, they may have no choice.

And this is why. If there is one thing Armstrong can do to save his career, it's reversing the above trends. Forget catching the ball, forget shooting the ball, forget anything and everything else. If Hilton can't stop this slide, his NBA career is effectively over. Sure, the Hornets might end up picking up a 2010-2011 option anyway. But being out-defensive rebounded by a guy a foot shorter than you is just plain ridiculous.

It's important to note that Armstrong wasn't always this bad. With a 17% D-reb rate as a rookie, he provided himself with a nice jumping off point. Granted, he never took advantage of it. But he was once at that point. If nothing else, he provided the team with solid boardwork now and again. Honestly, I think that's all it would take for the Hornets to give him another year.

Pinpointing the exact reasons behind the slide is difficult. I'm surely not alone in observing zero strength gain in the past three years. We've seen David West bulk up considerably, Chris Paul become much stronger, and even Sean Marks toughen up as last season progressed. But Hilton doesn't look much changed. The bigger problem with him seems to be not one of rebound anticipation, but inability to execute on box outs and positioning. It strikes me as a strength issue above all else.

My other main concern is a lack of footwork. This hinders his rebounding ability, and more importantly, his defensive skills. When a post player faces up on Armstrong, Hilton does a good job of using his length and height to deny most passing angles or the face up shot. The moment the offender makes a lateral move, though, everything falls apart. Of course, this quickly leads to him slapping the offensive player on the arm. Last season, Hilton averaged 6.0 fouls per 36 minutes... which was actually an improvement from his 6.4/36 the year before.

Moving to the offensive side, Hilton improved quite a bit last year. After a 57% true shooting performance as a rookie, he dipped dangerously to 50% as a sophomore. Last year saw him recover to almost 59%. I hate to keep hating on Hilton here, but there are signs that the recovery was illusory.

Most importantly, Hilton saw a sharp spike in his on-floor minutes with Chris Paul (due to Tyson Chandler's absence). Qualitatively speaking, it's fair to say big men are more efficient scorers with Paul around. There's quantitative evidence too. In his sophomore campaign of 45% shooting from the floor, Armstrong was assisted on a paltry 46% of his buckets. Last year, playing alongside Chris Paul more often, he was assisted on a significantly higher 59% of his field goals. In other words, there isn't much evidence suggesting that Hilton will maintain similar production, as he returns to a full time bench role.

Other flags: his ability to get to the free throw line (one of the best measures of isolated offensive performance) dipped again last year. Despite a decent increase in his jump shooting ability, he only converted on about 35% of them... not nearly efficient to justify the shot selection. Finally, he was blocked on 19% of his close range shots.

As much as I enjoyed seeing Hilton break out in three or four games last season, the numbers suggest he has an entirely new challenge ahead of him with an exclusive bench role. At this point, Sean Marks has to get the nod as the first C off the pine. His defensive rebounding is simply much beyond Armstrong's. Marks certainly relies on his teammates' shot creation just as much as Hilton, but until Armstrong can match the rebounding and defensive intensity, he should be saddled with the the 3rd string big man role.

NBA Previews- The Hornets

2009-10-09T08:23:30Z

More photos » by Gregory Smith - AP

Browse more photos »

As part of CelticsBlog's annual round of previews, it's the Hornets' turn.

Team Name: New Orleans Hornets

Last Year's Record: 49-33

Key Losses: Tyson Chandler, Rasual Butler, Antonio Daniels, Ryan Bowen, Melvin Ely

Key Additions: Emeka Okafor, Darren Collison, Marcus Thornton, Ike Diogu, Morris Peterson, Darius Songaila

1. What Significant Moves were made during the off-season?

New Orleans did its fair share of wheeling and dealing. Tyson Chandler for Emeka Okafor was the headliner, with the Hornets swapping out a defensive ace with injury questions. Okafor enters the season nursing his own injury, but the hope is he can offer more consistent minutes than Chandler did in '09. The Hornets also saved money by offloading Rasual Butler and Antonio Daniels. Via the draft, Chris Paul's new backup- Darren Collison- joined the team, as did Marcus Thornton, a potential scoring threat off the bench. Toss Darius Songaila into the forward mix, and the Hornets enter 2009-2010 with a significantly different look and feel- three new players will step into the starting roles (Peterson, Julian Wright, Okafor), and a plethora of backcourt and frontcourt minutes should go to Collison and Diogu.

2. What are the team’s biggest strengths?

The point guard position. Obviously, that's been the strength since 2005; however, the Hornets seem to have the backup PG position locked down for the first time in a while. The organization has shown continual confidence in UCLA's Darren Collison. On draft night, they took him over a variety of front court options. They unloaded incumbent 2nd string PG Daniels relatively early in the offseason. And instead of bringing in a veteran 3rd string standby, they decided to roll the dice on Minnesota's Bobby Brown. If things go according to plan, not only will Chris Paul be awesome, his backup will allow him a couple more minutes of rest a game.

3. What are the team’s biggest weaknesses?

One of New Orleans' biggest issues last year was an utter lack of offensive rebounding ability. Only 5 teams went one and done more often last year (now, granted 2 of those were Orlando and San Antonio... but they made up for it in many other areas). Granted, a lot of the problems had to do with severe injury issues. However, neither Okafor nor Ike Diogu is an o-rebounder in the ilk of a healthy Chandler, so that weakness could persist.

On that same note, front court depth was another huge issue. While the addition of Diogu should help, Sean Marks and Hilton Armstrong still figure to get decent minutes off the bench. That shouldn't need much elaboration. The bench sucked in general last year, but more on that under Question 5.

Finally, the team still lacks a creative scorer outside of West and Paul. Obviously, having three marquee scorers on one team might be a little too much to ask for, but having a creative wing would help snap the stagnant stretches the offense is prone to fall into. Some have hyped Thornton into the role. I'm not saying a 6'0" shooting guard can't get that job done; there are a few examples across the league. But I'll believe it when I see it.

4. What are the goals for this team?

Hard to say. From a media perspective, the Hornets certainly won't have too much expected of them after last year's disastrous ending. From a player perspective, I'm sure a few guys are feeling some pressure. David West will be 29 next year. Chris Paul's only 24, but his chances at a title have taken a step back from 2007. From a fan perspective, I feel like a first round series win would satiate the majority of New Orleans appetites. Realistic goals will only become clear at least a couple weeks into November. Between Okafor, Wright's starting job, Collison, and Diogu, there are simply too many new pieces to say for sure.

5. Will the bench suck as badly this year?

The second unit was arguably the Hornets' biggest shortcoming last year. Antonio Daniels is the only guy I can possibly defend. Julian Wright, serious step back. James Posey, mediocre. Morris Peterson, invisible. Sean Marks, eh. Melvin Ely, bleh. And that's without even getting to the unmentionables, Hilton and Devin. Speaking of which, we should combine them into one player this year. Delton Browstrong. Okay, that sounds way cooler than this combo player possibly deserves to. Helvin Brownarms. There we go. Helvin Brownarms.

The overall point is that the bench can't possibly be this bad again. I mean... it could. But it can't.

Darren Collison is a respectable player by all accounts. Ike Diogu can be rock solid if healthy. Peja Stojakovic could have a rebound year and keep his back healthy, coming off the pine. Of course, Marks, Armstrong, and the rest are going to pick up some minutes. But a second unit of Collison/Thornton/Peja/Posey/Diogu with light servings of Bobby Brown and some Kiwi sprinkles should easily outperform last year's. It simply has to.

So to answer the question, no the bench will not suck as badly.

Projected Finish: 53 wins
Projected Finish Rationale: None whatsoever

Previews, Previews, and More Previews

2009-10-07T18:37:28Z

The season's about three weeks away... so it's time to get back into the swing of things.

So this will be a preview of the previews of sorts. This season, I want to try something new: individual previews of each of the players. I'll try and go over at least the key players, and what sort of production we can expect from them, given age, talent, role, and other factors.

We'll also be doing the standard CelticsBlog preview (Saturday), a preview of the division, a preview of the conference, and a preview of how specific parts of offense and defense should look like.

Any other preview ideas, leave 'em in the comments.

Preview's a weird word after you say it five thousand times.