The Quest For the Ring: 2008-10-05

Saturday, October 11, 2008

Ultimate Game Breakdown: Players For Nuggets 118 Timberwolves 95 in Denver, Preseason Game

This is much of what an Ultimate Game Breakdown-Players is going to look like for the new season. There will be some commentary included for a regular season game, but most of the game and team commentary will be in the separate "Game and Team Reports."

With an Ultimate Game Breakdown-Players, you can see very rapidly who was most responsible for the winning or the losing of the game. Then someone like me can easily write a separate game report which explains how things might have worked out better for a team, or why things worked out just about as well as possible, as the case may be.

The Real Player Ratings formula has been very carefully and accurately tweaked again and is currently as follows:

POSITIVE FACTORS
Points 1.00 (at par)
Number of 3-Pt FGs Made 1.00
Number of 2-Pt FGs Made 0.60
Number of FTs Made 0.00

Assists 1.75

Offensive Rebounds 1.15
Defensive Rebounds 1.25
Blocks 1.60
Steals 2.10

NEGATIVE FACTORS
3-Pt FGs Missed -1.00
2-Pt FGs Missed -0.85
FTs Missed -0.85

Turnovers -2.00
Personal Fouls -0.80

ACTUAL COMBINED AWARD OR PENALTY BY TYPE OF SHOT
3-Pointer Made 4.00
2-Pointer Made 2.60
Free Throw Made 1.00
3-Pointer Missed -1.00
2-Pointer Missed -0.85
Free Throw Missed -0.85

ZERO POINTS: PERCENTAGES BELOW WHICH THERE IS A NEGATIVE NET RESULT
3-Pointer 0 score % 0.200
2-Pointer 0 score % 0.246
1-Pointer 0 score % 0.459

ASSISTS VERSUS TURNOVERS ZERO POINT
Assists vs Turnovers 0.533
Assist/Turnover Ratio 1.143

NOTES ON HOW TO USE ULTIMATE GAME BREAKDOWN RPR/RPP REPORTS
RPR game reports show for each player the RPR (Real Player Rating) which tells you how good a player did (the good things minus the bad things) out on the court per unit of time. The RPP (Real Player Production) report tells you how much in total (the sum of the of the good things minus the sum of the bad things) a player did out on the court.

Many and maybe most sports watchers and an unknown but probably disturbingly large number of sports managers make the mistakes of exaggerating the importance of quantity and overlooking to some extent quality. These reports allow you to expand your horizons. These reports put quantity and quality side by side, which is extremely valuable, because both are roughly equally important in explaining accurately why and how the game turned out the way it did.

Players who over many games consistently have higher RPR (quality) but lower RPP (quantity) results are in many cases not getting enough playing time. Players that over many games consistently have lower RPR (quality) but higher RPP (quantity) results are in many cases getting too much playing time.

The exceptional cases are very often going to be players who are either truly outstanding defenders or truly bad defenders. This is because the one and only thing that is not counted, because it is impossible to calculate it, is the number of shots that a player prevents from being scores. Investigation has to date revealed that, apparently, no one has even attempted, for the NBA, rough estimates of the actual value of each player's defending, in terms of number or percentage of scores prevented, or in terms of number or percentage of possessions made worthless.

Another exception. where it is really alright when it looks like a player is playing too much, will be if a team has a point guard who has many more turnovers than the average point guard has. Because the point guard is so important, a good coach has to play his best guard who can make plays at the position for a full set of minutes every game, pretty much regardless of how many turnovers that player makes. If you take out your designated point guard due to "too many turnovers," it's most often going to be sort of like cutting your foot off because you have a bad case of athletes foot!

Over the coming year, I am going to be working to see if it is possible to use some combination of advanced statistics that are tracked on certain internet sites as an accurate proxy for the number of shots and/or for the number of possessions ruined by a defender.

REAL PLAYER RATINGS
RPR 2.0B NUGGETS 118 TIMBERWOLVES 95 (Preseason Game Oct 9 2008)
MINNESOTA QUALITY
Corey Brewer, SF 1.003
Al Jefferson, PF 0.782
Mike Miller, SG 0.675
Blake Ahearn, PG 0.596
Sebastian Telfair, PG 0.558
Randy Foye, PG 0.508
Kevin Love, F 0.438
Ryan Gomes, PF 0.372
Chris Richard, PF 0.175
Mark Madsen, PF 0.137
Rodney Carney, SF -0.083

DENVER QUALITY
Renaldo Balkman, SF 2.600
Chris Andersen, PF 1.550
Ruben Patterson, SF 1.504
Steven Hunter, PF 1.167
Smush Parker, PG 1.092
Kenyon Martin, PF 0.979
J.R. Smith, SG 0.908
Nene Hilario, PF 0.852
Dahntay Jones, SG 0.743
Linas Kleiza, SF 0.633
Allen Iverson, SG 0.598
Juwan Howard, PF 0.521
Anthony Carter, PG 0.319

SCALE FOR RPR (QUALITY) RATINGS FOR A SINGLE GAME
Historic Superstar for this game 1.400 and more
Superstar 1.050 1.399
Star 0.800 1.049
Outstanding 0.625 0.799
Major Role Player 0.525 0.624
Role Player 0.450 0.524
Minor Role Player 0.400 0.449
Very Minor Role Player or Very Important Defender 0.350 0.399
Poor Game or Extremely Important Defender 0.275 0.349
Very Poor Game Regardless of Defending 0.200 0.274
Disaster Game Regardless of Defending and less 0.199

REAL PLAYER PRODUCTION
MINNESOTA QUANTITY
Al Jefferson, PF 25.80
Sebastian Telfair, PG 18.40
Corey Brewer, SF 16.05
Randy Foye, PG 15.75
Blake Ahearn, PG 13.70
Kevin Love, F 10.95
Ryan Gomes, PF 8.55
Mike Miller, SG 6.75
Chris Richard, PF 2.45
Mark Madsen, PF 2.05
Rodney Carney, SF -1.00

DENVER QUANTITY
Chris Andersen, PF 27.90
J.R. Smith, SG 23.60
Renaldo Balkman, SF 23.40
Ruben Patterson, SF 21.05
Kenyon Martin, PF 20.55
Nene Hilario, PF 18.75
Dahntay Jones, SG 16.35
Smush Parker, PG 14.20
Allen Iverson, SG 13.75
Linas Kleiza, SF 13.30
Steven Hunter, PF 10.50
Anthony Carter, PG 6.70
Juwan Howard, PF 6.25

SCALE FOR RPP (QUANTITY) RATINGS FOR A SINGLE GAME
STARTERS
Happens only a few times a year in the NBA 45.0 and more
Massive and Memorable Game 40.0 44.9
Huge Game 35.0 39.9
Very Big Game 30.0 34.9
Big Game 25.0 29.9
Typical Average Game 20.0 24.9
Somewhat Below Average Game 16.0 19.9
Way Below Average Game 12.0 15.9
Bad Game 9.0 11.9
Really Bad Game 5.0 8.9
Total Disaster and less 4.9

NON-STARTERS
Massive and Memorable Game 35.0 and more
Huge Game 30.0 34.9
Very Big Game 25.0 29.9
Big Game 20.0 24.9
Typical Non-Starter Game 14.0 19.9
Below Average Even For a Non-Starter 9.0 13.9
Way Below Average Even For a Non-Starter 5.0 8.9
Bad Game Even For a Non-Starter 2.0 4.9
Disaster: Nothing Much to Report and less 1.9

THE HIGH QUALITY PLAYERS IN THIS GAME
OUTSTANDING QUALITY GAMES FOR THE NUGGETS

Historic Superstar Level During Minutes on the Court: Renaldo Balkman

Historic Superstar Level During Minutes on the Court: Chris Andersen

Historic Superstar Level During Minutes on the Court Ruben Patterson

Superstar Level During Minutes on the Court: Steven Hunter

Superstar Level During Minutes on the Court: Smush Parker

Superstar Level During Minutes on the Court: Kenyon Martin

Star Level During Minutes on the Court: JR Smith

Star Level During Minutes on the Court: Nene

OUTSTANDING QUALITY GAMES FOR THE T-WOLVES

Superstar Level During Minutes on the Court: Corey Brewer

Star Level During Minutes on the Court: Al Jefferson

POWER PERFORMERS

NUGGETS STARTERS POWER PERFORMERS
NONE, because it was a preseason game and minutes were limited.

NUGGETS NON-STARTERS POWER PERFORMERS
Very Big Game: Chris Andersen

Big Game: JR Smith

Big Game: Renaldo Balkman

Big Game: Ruben Patterson

T-WOLVES STARTERS POWER PERFORMERS
NONE, because it was a preseason game and minutes were limited.

T-WOLVES NON-STARTERS POWER PERFORMERS
NONE, mostly because it was a preseason game and minutes were limited.

Note: For the rundown of the best players and the power performers, I bump up or bump down, by one category, certain players, due to adjustments for defending, wherever such adjustments are obvious.

Wednesday, October 8, 2008

Return of Nuggets 1: Forum #2 Comments From July 2008, Part 5

Okay answer my question

So you're saying TJ Ford is better than Chauncey Billups, Jason Kidd, Tony Parker, and Jose Calderon (who he couldn't even start over last season)?

My response to him was:

You don't think the per time measure has any value, so for you the answer is no, TJ Ford was not better than those players in 2007-08, because (a) he didn't do anywhere near as much as they did and (b) there must have been a valid reason why his playing time was what it was, which is one reason why no per time measure is needed.

So for you the answer is no and for me (and the Indiana Pacers, laugh out loud, it is yes. Both you and I get to go on with our business with no changes in our thinking necessary, because I am out there on the horizon looking at things that have seldom if ever been looked at in basketball before, and you choose not to go there.
__________________________________________
When I went to APBR, all of my nerd alert warning bells were going off at once, and I quickly said to myself: most of the people here don't ultimately give a damn about whether what they do is a close reflection of reality or not. Believe me, I know all too much about the academic mindset, and how the elegance of the proof is more important than whether the product is useful and reflects reality well or not. Academic payrolls are determined much more by style than by reality based substance. The distinction reminds me of Karl, for whom style is more important than result or reality. No, I am definitely not an APBR type of guy.

But if I did go there and was trashed, I would be flattered.
___________________________________________
There is someone here trying to confuse things regarding ESPN and Hollinger. Is he doing it for the hell of it? I don't know exactly why.

ESPN to my knowledge does NOT have the Hollinger formulas on their site, whether you are an insider or not, so no one who goes to ESPN, which is a whole, hell of a lot of people, can find out how Hollinger comes up with his numbers. Only a tiny minority will ever find where the formulas are squirreled away on the net, which is the way ESPN likes it. Because if you actually start looking at the formulas, you say to yourself, if you are me anyway, "My God, how could a sports game justify all of this mathematical razzmatazz, which would take at least an 8 hour work day to evaluate and determine whether it is valid or not, and maybe much more than 8 hours."
_____________________________________________
The guy who was really upset about the high T.J. Ford rating raised the peace pipe and I responded as follows:

You don't have to believe the Real Player Ratings are worth anything to potentially still be reading my other stuff. Look in my Nuggets game breakdowns, I put in both the basic ratings, which is total production in the game not adjusted for time, and the Real Player Ratings, which are the basic ratings adjusted for time. You can ignore one or both of them as you want.

All I am saying is that both are potentially useful to different kinds of people, both for games and for the season as a whole. If you want the actual production, you sure as hell don't need me. You can go to ESPN or, if you don't like their public formula (or the secret Hollinger formula) then you can go somewhere else. Or you can say the hell with all the formulas, because every big time basketball watcher knows, very roughly at least, how the players rank, without checking any stats at all anywhere anyway. And you may decide it just doesn't matter who is slightly better than who, because in the playoffs these slight differences don't amount to much. (Maybe TJ Ford is going to be a playoff flop, laugh out loud.

Does it really matter much where TJ Ford or Leon Powe or JR Smith ranked in the Real Player Ratings? They matter to me, because I have a way of thinking that makes these ratings important to me. It matters to some of my readers, who were too timid to appear here, or who don't know I have this habit of posting here. They should matter to front offices, such as those of the Pacers and the Nuggets.

But for many fans, it can't matter too much, because it is a hard reality that neither TJ Ford nor JR Smith played for major minutes last year, and neither started much. Therefore, since they didn't play much, they were not all that good. It's indisputable. And that is about as true as saying that, per minute, they were much better than most know. Each is equally true.

In fact, different ways of thinking don't usually mean that one is right and one is wrong, unless you are talking about obvious things like inflicting bodily harm and stuff like that.
_____________________________________________
At APBR, they spend most of their time trying to figure out why their formulas don't work, laugh out loud. The ones running the forum and presenting the models and formulas are academics, who are paid for the correctness of their mathematics and their scientific reasoning, not for whether their formulas can be used in a real world setting or not.

I went their once and it was a joke. There were basketball models on parade that were like the Hindenburg blimp, doomed to blow up in the real world.
_____________________________________________
Instead of being like a blimp, the straightforward but comprehensive ESPN/Miggets 1 model is more like a bicycle. It's only slightly complicated, it generally works reliably, it does most of the time get you where you want to go, and it saves you a lot of time that you would otherwise spend going through other statistics (or it saves you a lot of gas money, laugh out loud.)
____________________________________________
Only needed once, about an hour, and that was enough for me to decide to NOT highlight the APBR site in my bookmarks. Sorry, academics and sports do not directly mix.

The kind of academics you see there is intended to teach people how to think. I already know how to mathematically and scientifically think and reason, so I don't need to be taught what they are teaching. My job is to allow people who themselves know how to scientifically think consider new ways of looking at and evaluating basketball, managements, teams, and players. I don't need complicated models and formulas to do that; relatively simple models and formulas are all that is needed for the job.
____________________________________________
Only needed once, about an hour, and that was enough for me to decide to NOT highlight the APBR site in my bookmarks. Sorry, academics and sports do not directly mix.

The kind of academics you see there is intended to teach people how to think. I already know how to mathematically and scientifically think and reason, so I don't need to be taught what they are teaching. My job is to allow people who themselves know how to scientifically think to consider new ways of looking at and evaluating basketball, managements, teams, and players. I don't need complicated models and formulas to do that.

Return of Nuggets 1: Forum #2 Comments From July 2008, Part 4

Ah yes, the ever important truth. So do you think the Celtics would be just as good if they only played Paul Pierce 14 minutes? What if they then gave Leon Powe 36?

If Powe had the stamina to play 36 instead of 14 and be just as good, which is probably true, and if Powe is just as good or better than Pierce as a made them miss defender, which I think is probably true also, and if they played the same position, than the Celtics would very likely be just as good with either of them playing 36 and the other 14.

However, although they are both forwards, Pierce is a 3 and Powe is a 4, which means if you switched the minutes, you would probably be screwing things up to some degree. Specifically, you might start to look more like the Nuggets, with very good interior defense, but very poor outside defense.

Powe turned out to be one hell of a backup for Garnett, and he was crucial for the Celtics during when Garnett was having injury problems, absolutely critical. since obviously Garnett was so important himself. Whoever would have thought that Kevin Garnett's backup would himself be one of the best PFs in the NBA?

What about Powe in the future? Powe comes from a very poor background, and players such as this have a steeper hill to climb if they are ever to be regarded as starters, a road which can on occasion be a very twisted one as well as being steep, such as Allen Iverson's road was, where he ended up having his position changed so that the coaches could be comfortable in their skin starting him. But that's another story.
________________________________________
Someone attempted to trash the idea that Leon Powe was at least as good as Paul Pierce and my response was:

Yes sir, Leon Powe was just as good as Paul Pierce was, in the 2007-08 regular season, per any unit of time you want to pick, assuming Powe is at least as good as Pierce is at making shooters miss. Really and truly, regardless of how shocked you or I or Coach Rivers or anyone else is.

This statistic is in the ballpark of showing the real world in its entirety, my friend, so to claim that the real world is different is not on point. But you are correct for about 99.99 % or more of statistics, which do not reflect the complexity of the real world. Aside from single measurements like ppg and rpg, which obviously are very limited, most combination or "advanced" statistics are only partial glimpses of the real world, because they don't give the result on a per unit of time basis. Whereas, my measure takes a solid combination statistic and adjusts for time, which is as close as you are going to get to seeing the real basketball world, in full and all at once.

Since there is stuff in the real world that no one knows about, it is natural when being shocked by something like the Leon Powe performance, to assume that the measurement in question is just like the rest: a faulty, or at least insufficient view of reality. But this measure is like the real wolf at the door my friend, its not part of another boy who cried wolf story.

But if you want to just go with the actual production, then go ahead and do it. The per time views of players and teams are extremely useful for people who are looking for flaws in coaches, teams, and the entire League, not as useful for the average fan who wants to focus mostly on the specific pros and cons of players, while assuming that it is impossible to add the pros and cons of a player together to come up with the net. I think you can add the pros and cons together and come up with the ultimate net. Leon Powe is glad I did so. lol.

If all you want to do is look for bad things and good things about individual players, than do so, just don't ever click on the per 48 mins. link at ESPN lol. I don't think that even existed last year, by the way, so ESPN is moving in my direction.

As for watching games, another reason I did the Real Player Rating was precisely so I could cut way, way back on looking at statistics, which would free up a lot of game watching time. Since the Real Player Rating summarizes almost everything in one measure, it often saves me a lot of time hunting around for evidence regarding who is more productive/talented, which team is more productive/talented, and so forth.
________________________________________
Pace is an important concept, and the Real Player Rating only partially adjusts for pace, by penalizing missed shots. (Fast pace teams miss more shots, by definition.) I say partially, because I think the missed shot weights should be higher, at least 1.0. But consider that most "advanced" statistics do not have any penalty at all for missed shots, and thus no adjustment whatsoever for pace. So if there is no adjustment for pace at all, they are not very "advanced" at all, are they?

The pace adjustment here is relatively crude and not in my opinion enough, but at least there is a pace adjustment, whereas it is no where to be found in the vast majority of other comparable measures. So once again, the root of the Real Player Rating is shown to be surprisingly effective and, well, real.

ESPN may possibly not even have realized that they were actually adjusting for pace when they included the missed shot items!
_______________________________________
Someone noticed:

TJ Ford > Vince Carter, Paul Pierce, Tmac

I responded:

Yes, and this shows you that Indiana made a good trade with Toronto recently. How do you think small market teams like Indiana maneuver to become contenders, despite being a place few top players really want to play? One way they do it is by making trades that the average person thinks is a bad trade, but is actually a good trade.

Whereas Indiana made this shrewd trade for a very talented PG with a long career ahead, the Nuggets made a trade for a very talented PG/SG with a not so long career ahead, and made no changes from how the 76'ers ran things. This is just a little snapshot of how the tradition of Indiana having FO and coaching personnel who are more shrewd than the Denver FO and coaching personnel is continuing on.
_________________________________________
Someone was very upset that Chris Mihm was higher than Daniel Gibson, and this is what I said to him:

Daniel Gibson is only 22 years old, he is a PG, and to be on the list at all means you are an extremely good bball player. So give him a chance lol. Chris Mihm played 275 minutes in 23 games. So why worry that Mihm, who is 28 years old, was slightly better than the up and coming PG? It doesn't really mean squat that Mihm was a little better. Who cares, when the vast majority of players who are 22 years old are going to get better when they are 23, 24, 25, and so forth.

Usually but I guess not always, you should steer away from directly comparing players who are very different in age, or who play very different positions.
_______________________________________
You can't simply take the five players on your team with the highest Real Player Ratings and make them all starters! If you did that, you would be putting as much faith in how positions organize an offense and a defense as George Karl does, and I wouldn't want to see anyone go down that road, lol. No, the Real Player Ratings alone can not determine who should play more and who should play less between players who play different positions, assuming that the players in question can not play a different position as well as they are playing their current position. You can to a large extent use it to figure out about how many minutes different players who play the same position should be getting.

Lol at the use of the term "credit reports", which is telling in itself. When credit reports were first invented, which was not so long ago, the inventors promised that they could and would never be used as an overall evaluation of someone's economic and social stature. But to many actual users of reports, that is exactly what they have become. In other words, many credit report users use credit reports for a lot more than seeing whether someone pays his bills or not. And so here in 2008, on SportsTwo, someone has just used the credit report term as shorthand for someone's economic and social stature!

And just about everyone important on a basketball team knows who on the roster had a particularly rough childhood, high school career, and/or college career, with no "credit report" necessary. There is most likely not a GM in the League who doesn't know that Allen Iverson would be a felon were it not for a pardon by the Governor of Virginia. And there are some GMs, and some coaches also, who would not want Iverson on their teams for that reason alone.
____________________________________________
Someone was upset about T.J. Ford's surprisingly high rating, and he was a little confused about what I had said earlier about how to judge a player's rating in the context of his age. Here is how I responded:

Yes, TJ Ford was slightly better than them. So I say Indiana made a good trade with Toronto and you most likely are saying they made a bad trade. So let's see if Indiana becomes as good or better a team than is Toronto in the next few years.

No, the younger the player, the lower his rating is going to be, everything else held constant. So if a young player has a very high ranking, than he is likely to be one of the best players in the world, looking at the next five years or so. So Howard's advantage over O'Neal is all the more impressive when you look at the ages. If the ratings were reversed, O'Neal's lead over Howard would not be all that impressive.
_________________________________________
Laugh out loud, I think Hollinger may be a little off his rocker too because, for one thing, his player efficiency rating is almost insanely complicated and, for another thing, you can't even find out what his formulas are that make up the player efficiency rating on ESPN itself! Whereas, the Real Player Rating is hardly too complicated. It's at about the 11th or 12th grade level in terms of math.

In rating the players, I didn't make up a damn thing. The scorekeepers watch the games and keep track of who does what. They turn in their counts to the NBA, which makes them available to ESPN. ESPN has programmers, who are paid a whole lot of money, who construct and maintain their NBA statistics database, which is sitting on the internet for anyone to view. ESPN Sports personnel had a meetng and decided to use a summary or combination statistic called by them the "ESPN Player Rating."

I came along and said "Wait a minute, the ESPN statistic is surprisingly good, but what about Leon Powe, TJ Ford, JR Smith, and so forth? No one seems to know how good they are. What can I do to alert the public that these are great up and coming players who, some months or years from now, will almost certainly be starters, and who most everyone will agree are good players? Can I give my readers advance knowledge that they can not get elsewhere? Why yes, I can do that! So I took the ESPN summary measure and divided by minutes.

And then I am accused of making everything up, laugh out loud. No seriously, I hope you understand now, there is no conspiracy here. I had no idea until I did this how good Leon Powe and TJ Ford are, so it wasn't just me trying to prove something I had claimed in advance.

And isn't it true that TJ Ford is going to be a PG starter in the NBA this coming season? Aren't most starters considered better than most non-starters by most fans? It looks like the Real Player Rating accomplished its mission with respect to TJ Ford. Now if only I had done the 2007-08 before the Indiana trade, laugh out loud.
__________________________________________
Someone was still really, really upset about the surprisingly high T.J. Ford rating. I answered him:

Well obviously, you are in the majority that ESPN identified when they decided not to do this themselves, the majority that either doesn't understand or that refuses to put any stock in any per time measure. So be it. Do what you want and go about your business.

I'm not the kind of guy who writes for the average, run of the mill fan, in case you haven't noticed, although I will do so if the price is right, laugh out loud. I am most definitely not writing for the average Joe: I am discovering things and writing for people who want to see new and better ways of looking at basketball, who plays it, and how it could be played better.

I really like the fact that ESPN made a major nod in my direction by recently installing the per 48 minute stats in their huge and sophisticated database. But Brian, don't you ever click the "per 48 mins." link on any ESPN team stats page, I wouldn't want to see you get all upset and going on their forum and saying its BS and all.

If you don't like what's on TV, change the channel. If you don't like what's on the Nuggets 1 channel, click something else.

Return of Nuggets 1: Forum #2 Comments From July 2008, Part 3

_______________________________________
WHY CARMELO ANTHONY PLAYS BETTER INTERNATIONALLY

Anthony said the Nuggets "quit" in game 3 of the Lakers series, but didn't know why. The answer is that the Nuggets knew they had no chance of defeating the Lakers with the approach and setup for basketball they were running. Unlike what too many think, there is almost no such thing as pro NBA players "quitting" just because they decide to quit out of laziness or some other stupid reason. They quit if and when it is rational to quit, when it is obvious they have no chance. This is entirely normal and actually reasonable, though neither you nor I might like it.

This same reality largely explains why Carmelo Anthony is considered one of the top half dozen players in the world in basketball when playing internationally, such as at the Olympics, but can not crack the top dozen in the NBA. He doesn't really think the Nuggets can win a playoff series, or at least not more than one series, so his whole effort from season tip-off to season buzzer is ramped down a little from what it would be if he truly thought the Nuggets could win it all.

For the most part, this kind of thinking is not something C Anthony realizes is happening, or realizes is slightly affecting what he does on the court. It is mostly a subconscious thing, except in rare moments such as that game 3 of the series, when it became obvious to Carmelo that neither he nor the Nuggets were trying as hard as they could anymore.

In the NBA, the man is coasting and blaming his coasting subconsciously on the perceived shortcomings of the Nuggets franchise. He probably rationalizes that he is too young and lacking in managerial experience to be able to do much fixing of those complicated problems with the franchise.

But all players including C Anthony know that the USA can win the Olympics, so you are likely to see a 100% effort from all players there.

So Anthony plays better in international because he tries a little bit harder, because he is completely confident the USA can win. The other main reason he is better in international is that he is part of a system that makes more sense than any system he has played under in Denver.

Editorial Note:
This was another preview of an upcoming full report topic, seen here first.

I'm not sure about doing these "spoilers". On the plus side, this is a great way to make important notes on days I get some ideas, but I am not doing much writing. Also, not everyone here reads my full reports, or is it hardly anyone reads the full reports, word for word, lol? (I'll get more readers with the new editing plan.) Those who can't read a lengthy report will see some of my important stuff here instead of never.

On the other hand, anyone who reads complete reports will be getting a little repetition later on. I promise though, that there will be more evidence, more flavor, and more context in the full report than you see in any short post like this.
__________________________________________
And when C Anthony just before the 2007-08 season said that the Nuggets had a very good chance of winning 60 games, there were two main reactions. Most of the Nuggets' brain trust, the Charles Barkley types who don't like Allen Iverson, and anyone down on the Nuggets in general, simply dismissed it and claimed Anthony was exaggerating and not fully realistic. Meanwhile, the most enthusiastic fans of the Nuggets and of Anthony welcomed the prediction and more or less believed it to be realistic.

The thing is, whether subconsciously, or consciously and on purpose, Anthony revealed what he really thought about how the season would go by what he did not say, not by what he said. He didn't say anything about the playoffs! Here you had a team that had for 4 straight years won just one playoff game each year, the ultimate lack of movement and improvement, and yet one of the most important players of that team said nothing about doing better than that in the 2008 playoffs. And with one of the most expensive and talented teams no less.

Anthony was really saying, whether knowingly or not, and probably not, that no matter how well the Nuggets would do in the regular season, it was not safe to predict even winning just one playoff series. Which means he had little if any confidence that the Nuggets could actually win a series. But this revealing assessment by him blew right by everyone during the start of the season festivities.

In other words, Anthony faked everyone out with his deceptively optimistic preseason statement, maybe himself included. Until now.
_________________________________________
The following comments are related to the 2007-08 Season NBA Real Player Ratings:

How good each player is is on each player. How good the players are form the building blocks for a team, and which building blocks are available is the responsibility of the front office and, to some degree, the owner. What is built or not built with the building blocks is entirely the responsibility of the coaching staff.

So if the Nuggets are chock loaded with talented players, thanks to those players efforts, and thanks to the front office and owner getting them, it is a total scandal that they can not win a playoff series, and a humiliation that they could not win a single playoff game. Scandal and humiliation against who now? The coaches, because they had as good or better a set of building blocks than any other coaches did, yet could not do anything with them other than get their full share of obvious regular season wins against lessor and middle level teams.

I don't have the time to do it now, but I would wager I could easily prove the same with any reasonable combination player measurement: that the Nuggets are chock loaded with high performing players.

The more I have worked with this measure, the more I have realized that, even though it is no where near as complicated as the Hollinger per, it is somewhere between slightly and substantially better than it is. I am particularly impressed with the 1.4 factors installed for assists and blocks, which adjusts these critical things so that they are closer in value to a 2-point score than if you just counted them straight up.
______________________________________
A couple of good questions about the Real Player Ratings:

Where is your mathematical proof that this is the, in your words, holy grail of player ratings?

What is the statistical basis for using the multipliers that you have used?

My answers were:

The reason its the holy grail is that there is nothing better I have seen. Most statistics, whether or not weighted, are just counts without giving you the per time measure. The statistics that do give you per time measures are generally one variable, as if everyone is embarrassed to combine items when doing per time. What is there to be afraid of?

The statistical basis is that these are the ESPN factors, and I don't yet believe I have the computer wherewithal to tweak the factors and make my own underlying measure. Right now, my technological capability is such that it would take me 40-100 hours of work to produce this if I tweaked the numbers and made my own statistic, whereas I can do the whole thing, lock, stock, and barrel, in about 5 hours while starting with ESPN. Yet my tweaks would only be moving players up or down, by at the very most, 10 ranks or so.

But I could be grossly underestimating what I could do database wise, since I have never made a full scale effort as of yet, only partial efforts. If only there was a place on the internet where you could simply operate a database without being a veteran database programmer. There probably is, but I have not found it yet!

If and when I get "full database capability," which is one of a few major computer things I am still green on, I would tweak as follows.

The main remaining shortcoming with the Real Player Rating is that it underweights defense to some extent, and it underweights made them miss defending severely, because it does not count it at all. Since made them miss defending can not be exactly measured statistically, and so is left out by literally everyone, the last thing you should do is have relatively small weights on any defensive factors that you can count, so one of the most important tweaks I would do would be to upgrade steals to 1.5. I would also upgrade blocks and assists very slightly to 1.5.

I would bump up turnovers from .7 to between 1.0 and 1.2, because they so often lead to easy scores, and so they are a defensive liabilty. And I would bump up the miss shot subtractions from .8 to 1.0.

As it stand now, the total points awarded for a field goal is 3: the points plus 1.0 per made shot. The points awarded for a three is 3.5: the three points plus .5 for the made three. I see the rationale for the bonuses, but I don't see the rationale for the different bonus amounts, so I would make both of them .7 or .8.

All of these tweaks, as I said, would change player ranks by, at the most, about 10 positions. You can tweak to your heart's content, but you are not going to change your view of reality very much, as long as your initial, basic approach is comprehensive and smart.

Finally, if I was really on a perfection binge, I would attempt to do the near impossible, by installing some kind of adjustment for made them miss defending. One approach I could take would be to start with the pace adjusted defensive efficiency of each team, and normalize that so that the resulting impact on the Real Player Ratings would be up or down by, at the most 10%, relative to the median Real Player Rating, which is about .700. For example, all of the Nuggets would immediately suffer a 4-8% hit on their ratings, lol.

After I did that, I could then profit from putting players into just one of 3 categories: above average made them miss defender, average, and below average. Then the players would get both the team adjustment and the adjustment for their category, which would be about another 8% up, zero, and 8% down.

But if I could ever find any assistance at all on the internet on rating made them miss defending, I could increase the number of categories in which players could go, increasing the accuracy.

I am already using a 38% total adjustment range when I adjust the ratings for the Nuggets, up to 19% up and up to 19% down.

Another approach to tackling the near impossible, if I was attempting to do the entire NBA, while ignoring the team defense measure, would be to simply divide players into 5 categories. The highest adjustments I could confidently do, with no assistance from anywhere, would be: up 10%, up 5%, no change, down 5%, and down 10%.

So in summary, there are two long term projects planned for the Real Player Rating:

1. Conversion to use of my database and custom formula. (Target: 2009-2010)
2. Addition of carefully estimated made them miss defending adjustments. (Target: 2010-2011)

Right now, it's as good or better than anything out there. These two projects would make it close to perfect.
________________________________________
Someone asked about how Leon Powe, an underrated Celtics player, could be rated so high. My answer was:

As long as he stops his share of shots from going in, he was in fact a top 30 NBA player in 2007-08.

There ended up being a lot more forwards than guards with very high ratings, but low minutes. There were 7 forwards and 1 guard among the top 100 players, who did not play at least 20 minutes per game.

This is a strong clue that the guard positions are tougher to excel in than are the forward positions, and/or that there are currently more really good forwards in the NBA than really good guards. It's really two sides of the same coin.

Among the top 100 players, there was a grand total of one guard who did not get to play at least 20 minutes per game: JR Smith. This makes Karl's decision making even more wrong, and it was already just about as wrong as you can get! Thanks though, for getting me to check this, because when it comes to criticizing this coach, I will never be finished until he is gone, or until I switch to the Raptors or something.
_____________________________________________
If a player has coaches who don't really know what they are doing, there is no chance for him or anyone on his team to become an optimized team player, so if that player ends up, in effect, concentrating as much or more on his personal production than on optimizing his team's offense or defense, whether unconsciously or consciously, than how much can you blame him? What else is there for him to do?

Players are payed to play, and coaches are payed to coach. Coaching is more complicated than playing, but being able to play at the NBA level is more rare than being smart enough to coach a team correctly. There are many thousands of people who are smart enough to coach the Nuggets better than they are coached, but no where near as many who can play as well as Anthony, Iverson, Smith, Camby, and Martin.

Players can not be expected to coach themselves, though smart, veteran players can do it to some extent. But it is almost ridiculous to say: "Carmelo Anthony and J.R. Smith, you did not have a clue as to making sure the Nuggets optimized and played like a team, so you are not really good basketball players." No, they are still great players who, by the way, never graduated from college, so they probably could not if they wanted to figure out how to coach the Nuggets.

On the other hand, as I said, great players with a huge amount of experience, such as the Celtics big three this year, are able to instinctively coach themselves to some extent, which reduced the Laker's coaching advantage over the Celtics, which in turn allowed the Celtics to win the series in just 6 games.
____________________________________________
The Nuggets are lacking only perimeter defense, they have interior defense down. They are the worst perimeter defense team in the NBA! It's time for the Nuggets to overcompensate: they need to gamble a little more on defense, go for steals and get right in the face of the 3-point shooters, even at the risk of a few 3-point fouls. How can you lose from gambling when you are the worst perimeter defense team in the NBA? You can't lose. George Karl should be encouraging AI and JR to gamble, within reason, not cringing and biting his nails over violations of his style book.

The Nuggets need to spend damn near half of their practice time on how to defend the outside in general and the perimeter in particular, including, obviously, how to cover and rotate out to the perimeter, to cut down on open threes.

If Marcus Camby is hell bent on getting 20 rebounds, then let him do it, and don't be afraid of Kenyon Martin and/or Carmelo Anthony going way out to contest a three.

The three point shot was instituted not only to award the extra skill needed to make a longer shot, but also to penalize teams who try to play defense on the cheap, by loading up the interior defense. The Nuggets need to realize this obvious reality, and refocus their defense, or continue to be burned by outside shooting.

The Nuggets need to surrender a few more points on the inside, so that they can cut down on what they give up, by a greater number of points, what they surrender on the outside. The defense is badly unbalanced, so job one is to refocus it. Putting in more defensive effort without refocusing it isn't going to work.
________________________________________________
Stoudemire and LeBron James were essentially tied as the best players in the NBA. Why Steve Kerr thought the Suns had to have O'Neal to win it all, over Shawn Marion, is beyond me. They already had enough on that team to win it all. And they had a coach who could do it, too.

Powe was essentially tied with Pierce; the .005 difference is miniscule. Of course, Pierce played more than twice as much as Powe, so he was much more important to the Celtics than Powe was. And if you know that Powe would have fallen off if given more burn, then you know that Pierce is really better. But this tells you that Powe was virtually a star in his role as a reserve. He deserves to be where he is at.

I think my base formula tweaks would put Pierce ahead of Powe by a little, but I simply don't know who is the better made them miss defender. If Powe is a slightly better made them miss defender than Pierce is, then they could be tied again.

Now if you want to determine who is really better between closely ranked players, simply ask yourself, who is the better made them miss defender? Because the tweaks are small potatoes compared to the made them miss defending adjustment that you can make. How many shots did each player prevent from going in the hoop per 12 minutes (or whatever period of time you want)? And how good are these players at being in position to try to prevent a shot from going in in the first place?
_____________________________________________
Consider how stupid it was for Karl to have pressured, over the past couple of seasons, C Anthony to get more rebounds, calling it one of the most important things he must do to be a full success. You have on the Nuggets Marcus Camby, the ultmate rebounding machine, and Kenyon Martin, no rebounding slouch either. You also had, at the time Karl concocted his orders to Melo, Nene, an excellent rebounder, and you also had (until now) Najera, who everyone keeps emphasizing is a defensive oriented player, with defensive rebounding a part of being a good defensive player. You also had and still do have Linas Kleiza, a surprisingly good forward who is certainly good enough to get some rebounds. Why in the hell would anyone think that it would be good for the Nuggets if Carmelo Anthony hangs close to the hoop to get more defensive rebounds?

Remember the spectacle of Camby and Melo fighting over rebounds? What was that all about? It was Camby in effect saying, what the hell are you doing in here, buddy?

By telling Anthony to do this, you are indirectly excusing him in advance for relatively open and wide open midrange and longer twos, and of course threes. How can he learn how to get where he needs to be to be able to contest shots when he is honing in on rebounds? So is it any wonder that the Nuggets became the worst outside defensive team in the NBA, easily victimized by good passing, good assisting, and good outside shooting? You had guards who desperately needed defensive help and you told Carmelo Anthony to go for more rebounds instead of telling him to help out the guards!

I'm not saying he shouldn't go for more rebounds if Nene is out, or if Camby is off, or whatever, but for the Coach to make it a seasons long project for Anthony to get more rebounds was stupid from the Nuggets point of view. If Karl was coaching a bad rebounding team, it would be another story, but he was not. At the time he ordered Melo to get more rebounds or be considered a partial failure as a player, Nene and several other great rebounders were fully available. So it was a coaching error, pure and simple.

But Melo's next team, if it is not that good of a rebounding team, will be very thankful for Melo being able to rebound more, even though it actually hurt the Nuggets for him to learn how to do that.
___________________________________________
Maybe Karl was just trying to get Carmelo into the top 10 in the Real Player Ratings, which was accomplished by him getting more rebounds. Remember that made them miss defending gets you nothing in this or any other rating. Laugh out loud.

Return of Nuggets 1: Forum #2 Comments From July 2008, Part 2

Forum commentary I did from March 2008 through July 2008, when I didn't have time to do the detailed and extensive reports that I like to do, is being posted in early October, 2008. The primary themes are how the Nuggets are blowing a great (and expensive!) opportunity to play the game of basketball in such a way that respects the sport and that takes as much advantage as possible of who they have on the roster. The 2006-09 Nuggets have turned out to be an excellent case study of how not to run a basketball team; many things you should not do if you are a basketball manager or coach can be identified from what the Nuggets actually did during these years.

In these comments, do not look for the usual huge amount of detail and proof that you see in the ordinary releases here at Nuggets 1. Some of this is more like everyday conversation than like top quality sports writing. On the other hand, some of the comments do include some detailed reasoning and proof that I pride myself on in the full reports.
______________________________________________
JULY 2008 FORUM COMMENTARY ON THE NUGGETS, ESPECIALLY ABOUT THEIR MISTAKES

BEST CAREER 3-PT ACCURACY % AMONG CURRENT NBA PLAYERS
1 Jason Kapono 0.4637
2 Steve Nash 0.4314
3 Anthony Parker 0.4250
4 Ben Gordon 0.4163
5 Matt Carroll 0.4109
6 Leandro Barbosa 0.4093
7 Raja Bell 0.4092
8 Brent Barry 0.4065
9 Kyle Korver 0.4064
10 Wally Szczerbiak 0.4054
11 Peja Stojakovic 0.4051
12 Mike Miller 0.4028
13 Eric Piatkowski 0.3990
14 James Jones 0.3987
15 Pat Garrity 0.3976
16 Ray Allen 0.3969
17 Luther Head 0.3930
18 Bruce Bowen 0.3911
19 Hedo Turkoglu 0.3906
20 Rashard Lewis 0.3903
21 Damon Jones 0.3898
22 Tyronn Lue 0.3890
23 Shane Battier 0.3888
24 Michael Redd 0.3877
25 Danny Granger 0.3868
26 Jason Terry 0.3860
27 Chauncey Billups 0.3854
28 Eddie House 0.3833
29 Vladimir Radmanovic 0.3818
30 Manu Ginobili 0.3816
31 Sasha Vujacic 0.3814
32 Steve Blake 0.3807
33 Kevin Martin 0.3798
34 Dirk Nowitzki 0.3794
35 Cuttino Mobley 0.3789
36 Mike James 0.3783
37 Joe Johnson 0.3770
38 Kurt Hinrich 0.3770
39 Vince Carter 0.3750
40 Bostjan Nachbar 0.3749
41 Deron Williams 0.3743
42 Morris Peterson 0.3738
43 Eddie Jones 0.3728
44 Derek Fisher 0.3727
45 Martell Webster 0.3725
46 Troy Murphy 0.3723
47 Michael Finley 0.3711
48 Mike Bibby 0.3710
49 Chucky Atkins 0.3684
50 J.R. Smith 0.3680
51 Gordan Giricek 0.3677
52 Tayshaun Prince 0.3655
53 Tim Thomas 0.3652
54 Rasual Butler 0.3650
55 Mehmet Okur 0.3643
56 Ricky Davis 0.3641
57 Andres Nocioni 0.3640
58 Raef LaFrentz 0.3635
59 Paul Pierce 0.3634
60 Jason Richardson 0.3628
61 Lindsey Hunter 0.3620
62 Mike Dunleavy 0.3619
63 Charlie Bell 0.3617
64 Kareem Rush 0.3602
65 Bobby Jackson 0.3594
66 Maurice Williams 0.3591
67 Gilbert Arenas 0.3583
68 DeShawn Stevenson 0.3571
69 Al Harrington 0.3571
70 Damon Stoudamire 0.3568
71 Rafer Alston 0.3566
72 Chris Duhon 0.3563
73 Mickael Pietrus 0.3530
74 Keith Bogans 0.3529
75 Quentin Richardson 0.3519
76 Fred Jones 0.3510
77 Anthony Johnson 0.3509
78 James Posey 0.3506
79 Earl Boykins 0.3485
80 Donyell Marshall 0.3476
81 Antawn Jamison 0.3469
82 Earl Watson 0.3456
83 Jamal Crawford 0.3451
84 Smush Parker 0.3449
85 Richard Hamilton 0.3448
86 Marko Jaric 0.3424
87 Steve Francis 0.3414
88 Robert Horry 0.3413
89 Stephen Jackson 0.3413
90 Juan Dixon 0.3411
91 Derek Anderson 0.3411
92 Devean George 0.3410
93 Shawn Marion 0.3409
94 Rasheed Wallace 0.3408
95 Kobe Bryant 0.3402
96 Austin Croshere 0.3400
97 Darrick Martin 0.3398
98 Troy Hudson 0.3391
99 Richard Jefferson 0.3377
100 Tracy McGrady 0.3370
101 Jason Kidd 0.3366
102 DerMarr Johnson 0.3362
103 Darrell Armstrong 0.3341
104 Sam Cassell 0.3312
105 Andre Iguodala 0.3307
106 Corey Maggette 0.3292
107 Ron Artest 0.3292
108 Jeff McInnis 0.3283
109 Raymond Felton 0.3269
110 Stephon Marbury 0.3258
111 Baron Davis 0.3251
112 Antoine Walker 0.3250
113 Jason Williams 0.3245
114 LeBron James 0.3242
115 Anfernee Hardaway 0.3162
116 Lamar Odom 0.3140
117 Tony Parker 0.3139
118 Allen Iverson 0.3136

George, say hello to the 50th best 3-point shooter in the NBA. You know him, it's that guy whose style you think is a black mark on basketball, and whose hometown is in Fantasy Land. You know, that guy you will never start unless hell freezes over, and who has to be benched from time to time because of the principle of the thing.

Why, it's none other than JR Smith, sitting comfortably ahead of players such as Rasheed Wallace, Richard Hamilton, Tracy McGrady, LeBron James, and Kobe Bryant in accuracy from way out on the outer perimeter, where defense doesn't matter very much and it's mostly a question of who has real shooting skills and who doesn't. Fantasy doesn't come into play out there actually, George.

Notice that almost all of the 49 players ahead of Smith are much older and more experienced, meaning that Smith has achieved this very high ranking at an incredibly young age.

If he does come from Fantasy Land, I want to get some more players from out of there.
_________________________________________
Well Chucky Atkins was supposed to address the problem, but he turned out to have the mother of all hernias. I personally think he will never be a serious 3-point threat again, should he return to any degree at all.

Even if Atkins had worked out, the Nuggets still would have been extremely handicapped in 3-point shooting, not only because Smith plays only about 2/3 of the minutes he should play, but also because the Nuggets' best 3-point shooting forward/center is Najera, who doesn't start, is never in the heart of the offense, and often is timid to shoot when he does get the ball.

Kleiza is inconsistent but is great from long range sometimes.

If you have no existing forwards, other than Kleiza on occasion, who are spreading the floor and making some threes, then why would you not have C Anthony, who rains threes in international, spend 1/3 or more of his practice time learning how to make more threes in the NBA? Why would you be harping on him to make a few more rebounds and say nothing about the need for making lightly defended threes, as he does so easily in international?

You would not bother to get Anthony to make more threes only if you didn't know how to manage the team. Nuggets coaching is horrendous, pure and simple.
_______________________________________
Technically, Chucky Atkins would be the 3rd Nugget, but between his major hernia his coming up on 34 years old, and the fact that he hasn't earned the confidence of Karl, which if you don't do that quickly you may never succeed, he is going to be out of the picture in 2008-09 to one extent or another.

I'd say you could count Atkins as 1/2 at the most. Since there are just shy of 120 players, and there are 30 teams, the average team should have 4 players on the list. The Nuggets have only 2 or 2 1/2, with Iverson just barely qualifying. So the Nuggets are deep in the hole, even though they don't seem to realize it.

The Nuggets needed to do at least two of the following and they didn't do any one of them:

1. Get Carmelo Anthony to attempt and make more threes--get more diversity in his scoring.
2. Start J.R. Smith and play him at least 30 min. per game.
3. Start Linas Kleiza and play him at least 30 min. per game.
4. Stop looking at Najera as a defense only player, give him a few more minutes, and get him into the heart of the offense much more often.
5. Play Yakhouba Diawara for at least 20 min. per game and get him into the heart of the offense much more often.

#1 and #2 were the most likely and effective solutions to the problem. #3 worked by accident on a few occasions. #4 and #5 would give you both better defending and better 3-point shooting.
___________________________________________
It would be good if it were true that Anthony spent a lot of practice time making defended threes. And it may be true, as I will admit below.

On the other hand, it would be at least as bad from a management perspective if he did, because the Nuggets, due to being poor defensively, needed to be better than the middle of the pack in attempted threes per game, which is what they were adjusted for pace. In percentage of threes made, they were only #19.

Actually, the history of Anthony's 3-point shot in the NBA is mysterious. In his rookie year, 2003-04, Anthony made 69/214 threes or 32.2%, which would just qualify him to be in the top NBA group. So far so good. Then something really bad and unknown to me at this writing happened. (You can bet I will let everyone know if and when I discover what happened.) In the next three years, which were the years 2004-07, his three-point shooting was just an afterthought, and was uncompetitive. He made only 42, 37, and 40 threes in those years, and his accuracy was only slightly over 25%,

Then in 2007-08 all of a sudden, he made 58/164 threes, for a career high accuracy of 35.4%. He was a threat from long range again. It was an accuracy increase of almost 10% from the three prior years, which strongly suggests he did practice threes big time following the 2006-07 season. But if the practice coaches and/or his personal coach had him practice threes more, the game coaches did not make sure he sought out and took more threes, because the percentage of his shots that were threes in 2007-08 was not substantially higher than it was during the three years that Carmelo Anthony was failing at and largely ignoring the 3-point shot.

Nor were his 2007-08 threes any where near what they were in his rookie year. In his rookie year, 214 of his 1465 shots were threes and, as already mentioned, he made a solid 32.2% of them. In 2007-08, following the three bad years, 164 of his 1481 shots were threes. So the coaches clearly failed to reestablish his three point shot in actual games, whether or not they helped to reestablish the accuracy in practice.

It has been hard for me to think that the coaches made sure that Anthony got his accuracy back in practice but did not use it much in real games. I would rather think that Anthony got his long range shot back with no help from any coaches. But when you realize that we may be talking about totally different coaches when we are talking about who coaches Melo and about who coaches Nuggets games, then maybe I should start suspecting that the Nuggets did help get Melo's 3-point shot back, but then got almost no payoff from that. Or, the right hand didn't know or recognize what the left hand was doing.
__________________________________________
Your right about the roster Chutney. Every contender has to have at least one and usually two veteran G-Fs who are money from long range and decent defensively.

But the Nuggets, once they had Camby, Martin, and Nene on the same roster, none of whom has a prayer from 3-point range, were left with the short end of the stick with respect to the three. For this type of needed player, the Nuggets start with the young Linas Kleiza, who gets only 20 minutes a game and who is not such a great defender despite being qualified theoretically to play either forward position. Then they have Najera, who has been considered mostly defense only since the stone age. Yakhouba Diawara is mostly a guard and was mostly useless offensively despite being able to make threes, simply because the lack of any point guard system prevented him from getting the ball much. All of the other potential players of this type, such as DerMarr Johnson and Bobby Jones, have been fiercely resisted by and left untapped by Karl.

Given how he shows no sign that he thinks it is important, and given how badly he treats most of his better 3-point shooters, I strongly suspect that if it were up for a vote and Karl had a vote, he would vote to abolish the 3-point shot.
__________________________________________
Career 3-Pt. shooting Among Key Nuggets Forwards/Centers:

Nene 0/9
Camby 13/71
Martin 39/192

So none of the three defensively most important Nuggets front court players are any threat at all as far as scoring the ball from outside is concerned. And many fans bitterly complain that Camby is not that great of a threat from point blank range, either!

The moral, if you are a general manager, is that you should never have three key front court players who can not make threes on your roster at the same time, unless you have at least four or five quality veteran G-Fs and guards who can reliably make threes and who can play some defense, and unless you have a coaching staff that will recognize the problem and that can and will make full use of those G-Fs and guards.

Otherwise, teams will stack the paint against you and you can run, fast pace, drive right into a traffic jam, jab step, and alley-oop all you want, but you won't be a top offense in the NBA and you will be toast in the playoffs.
____________________________________________
A comment when there was talk of Anthony Johnson becoming the point guard of the Nuggets:

Oh great, now the Nuggets are going to get a point guard who is even less of a scoring threat than was Anthony Carter. That's a strategy I never heard of: to pick a point guard using defensive reasons only.

Oh well, I guess I am reduced to hoping that all the point guards bruise their little fingers so that Iverson can be PG and so that the Nuggets can make the best of a really rotten situation.

This is just one big shame: a team with a massive payroll, a huge talent bank, and a hefty luxury tax, and yet it can not come up with a point guard solution that makes any sense.

You see why I predicted that the Nuggets will not make the playoffs in 2008-09, a prediction I am standing by at the moment because although the Warriors may be out, the Clippers may be back in?
_______________________________________
Laugh out loud, I did the same thing you did this past season, I just as you did pointed out how each contending team had a greater number of dependable 3-point shooters than the Nuggets do, and I named them.

But see, if you and I can start to manage the Nuggets, than why is it the actual managers can't? Is it simply that they are chumps, or is there more than that to it? Aside from not knowing or at least not recognizing some basketball factors hurting the Nuggets, I think there may be a substantial number of false beliefs held by Nuggets coaches and managers that are facilitating their failure to manage the team in a good way. I know for a fact that many Colorado fans of the Nuggets do believe some or many of the following:

1. We were one of the worst teams in the League for many years before Melo came, and now we are very respectable, so we have done our jobs, and to try to go for more than one and done every year is risky.
2. Denver is not really a basketball town, so most fans are content with just being respectable; they don't think advancing far in the playoffs is all that important. One playoff series is enough for our fans, so it is enough for us.
3. The fast pace offense is very valuable, is sort of a tradition in high altitude Denver, and is a good substitute for a more planned, controlled offense.
4. The character and playing style of basketball players (and the playing style of a player reveals that player's character to some extent) is more important than either their actual production/performance or their actual net contributions (positives less minuses) to the team winning the game. In other words, characters, personalities, and "mental toughness" are at least a little more important than are skills, energy, and strategies, for winning games.
5. Allen Iverson can not play PG (Laugh out loud, I'm sorry, but this one always brings visions of mountain hicks into my head; but I don't think there is any such thing as mountain hicks anymore; they went the way of the dinosaur at least 25 years ago.)
6. Carmelo Anthony is a very good player, but it is impossible that he will ever become one of the best 10 players in the NBA, whether or not he gets markedly different coaching. (Laugh out loud at "impossible".)
______________________________________________
This comment was made just before Marcus Camby was given away for nothing to the Clippers:

Yes, they spent so much money that they have one of the highest payrolls and one of the highest luxury taxes in the League. If they were going to do that, they needed to be able to manage that investment properly. But they have a coaching staff that can not handle playoff basketball in particular and squeezing performance out of a roster in general, they have an owner for whom basketball is just a small part of his vast business empire, and they have a front office that seems to think that simply by building up the huge payroll with famous veterans, they ought to get some kind of a medal.

If you are going to spend big money, you need to know for sure how to manage your investment, but the Nuggets organization broke that rule of economics and finance. Can you succeed at anything that is complicated and large scale, simply by spending money, but not doing very much else than that? No, and even if you could, it would be a worthless exercise.

If you fail to manage a large investment correctly, you are subject to being penalized by losing some percentage of it. In basketball terms, the Nuggets are now subject to dropping back down close to or back into the basement of the NBA. You already see fans alluding to this in discussions about this team, although few if any are going to be as blunt about it as I am. Other fans like to use the term "blowing up" to describe the probable fate that awaits the Nuggets. Blowing up means that most or even all of the big names depart or retire. Financially it means that the team finally gets free of many, most, or possibly all of the huge contracts. In basketball performance terms, blowing up usually entails having to start from the basement, because the team didn't have the money to get the "next generation" of players in place before the blowing up.

Always remember that only badly managed franchises are subject to an actual "blowing up." Well managed franchises such as the Lakers and the Celtics may be in the cellar every once in a great while, even for a few years, but it will be in their cases due to the normal ebb and flow of a roster, and will in effect be an accident due to retirements, draft picks not working out, injuries, and other things that are bad luck more than anything else.

Getting back to the Nuggets, when money is invested and then the investment is not managed well, the investment turns into an expense. Now all of a sudden, you have spent too much money, not invested a lot of money, and the implications are totally different. As everyone knows, when you spend too much money, you are going to have to pay some kind of a penalty for that, which in the case of the Nuggets, may be a return to the basement.

They have spent the big bucks and have demonstrated that they do not know how to put the expensive pieces together to make their team work. And by work, I don't mean simply winning a few playoff games. I mean that the Nuggets are still not on the map as a desirable place to play among good free agents and players around the League who want to be traded. Normally, a team that spends big bucks becomes attractive to those good free agents and tradable assets, but the Nuggets failed to become very enticing.

And how can the Nuggets build a good franchise long term if few good players want to play in Denver? They can't. Between that and the lack of money, the Nuggets may find themselves in the basement in a few short years.

Aside from having needed to be able to manage their huge investment well, the Nuggets needed someone in the front office who understands the laws of economics and the laws of finance as they work out in pro basketball. I mean that literally; if you ever spend a huge amount of money and you do not understand the economics and finance that are involved, you are cruising for a bruising.
_____________________________________
The NBA is not a free market business; it is a monopolistic gang of suits who basically cater to a few billionaire and near billionaire owners. When Carmelo Anthony is given a 15 game suspension for a little punch that some swore was more like a slap, why would anyone think that the NBA cares about fans, who are the next level down from players?

And who is competing with the NBA? No one, really, unless you want to get interested in European basketball. For example, does anyone to speak of care about what is happening with the Montana Golden Nuggets? But as someone in this topic alluded to, this kind of heavy handed business monopoly is normal in America, and governments are supposed to bow down to it or be robbed blind. (He certainly didn't put it that way, lol.)

But Seattle metro has over 3.3 million people and Oklahoma metro has about 1.2 million people. And the central area of Seattle metro is much more densely packed with people than is the central area of Oklahoma metro. Also, Seattle has far better public transit, which will be critical now that gas is going to be about $5 a gallon or, gulp, even more. So factoring in total population, central area density and the gas situation, the potential long term basketball market in Seattle must be somewhere between 4 and 6 times the potential long term basketball market in Oklahoma.

So for how many years do you think there will be bigger potential crowds and merchandise sales in Oklahoma instead of in Seattle? Would you think it would be one, two, or three years before the law of numbers asserts itself and bigger crowds and merchandise sales are available in Seattle? But monopolistic gangs of suits catering to a few billionaires and near billionaires don't look at obvious free enterprise business factors like that.

You or I would make more money in Seattle than Oklahoma, but Bennett is so rich that he doesn't care if he makes a few million less long term in Oklahoma than in Seattle. He's just a "Look maw, I dun bought me a basketball team and dragged it back here to the farm" type of billionaire.
____________________________________________
One way to stop franchise stealing, sponsored by the elitist, monopolistic gang that Stern and company are, is to have another League to compete with the NBA, which would force the NBA to give up its life of crime. Were there an ABA type League, Stern would change his tune and not allow franchise stealing, in order to avoid abandoned markets such as Seattle being taken over by a rival League.

The ABA years were the best basketball ever saw.

However, due to the much wider wealth and income disparities of today, most economists will tell you that there could not be a new ABA today, because the sports money needed to make a League work and prosper is already pretty much tied up in the NBA. There are only so many billionaires who want a basketball team to go around.

Return of Nuggets 1: Forum #2 Comments From July 2008, Part 1

Return of Nuggets 1: Forum #2 Comments From June 2008, Part 1

The Suns' pace isn't that far behind Denver's, and you said yourself that they were even better before they traded for Shaq and slowed the pace down. Why have they managed to stay at the top so long, even coming within bad luck with injuries and suspensions at the wrong time of winning at least one or two championships, when teams like Denver and Golden State can't get past the bottom of the playoff seeding? It seems to me that while it might be harder to win at that pace, it is still quite possible if you have the right mix of coaching and players.

My answer was:

You answered yourself: the Suns had a dream mix of coaches and players. I guess Suns management concluded that Coach D'Antoni is too much of a geek or something, because they should have kept him. Now the Suns future is not very bright it seems to me.

As you can see above, the Suns were by a good margin the best offense in the NBA. I say were because that will no longer be true now that the older Shaq is on this team. They didn't know that they were about the 9th best defense in the NBA; they thought before they did the trade that they were about the 15th best defense or something. They underestimated how good their defense was, so they made a bad trade for a bad reason.

I think that the Suns would have won the title in 2006-07 were it not for the Horry-Stearns incident, and they could have won the title this year were it not for the trade. It probably would have been a 7 game series between the Lakers and the Suns for the West crown.

Neither the Warriors nor the Nuggets have top 6 offenses (Nuggets are #8 and Warriors are #11) While the Suns are 9th in defense, the Warriors are 16th and the Nuggets are 19th. So neither the Warriors nor the Nuggets were ever at the level of the Suns.

What upsets me is that the Nuggets should be about 3rd or 4th on offense if they just recognized the importance of the PG position, which is Basketball 101. They could even be 1st now that Shaq is on the Suns. If they were the 3rd or 4th best offense, they would have more to show for their fast pace and for their lazy and inept defense.
_____________________________________________
I hate to say it, but I personally think hell will freeze over before Karl wins a playoff series again. I think in the 1990's he used to be sharper than he is now; he's not as good as he used to be, probably due to health reasons.

He makes too many decisions as if he is a scared rabbit these days. For example, he grossly exaggerated the shortcomings and unusual style of little old J.R. Smith, and thereby put a stranglehold on the Nuggets chances both in 2006-07 and this past season by, among other things, not playing him enough and by assuming Smith can hardly play defense at all. So the Nuggets were left with a midget backcourt for way too many minutes and just about the worst guard defending in the NBA, with inadequate 3-point shooting and so forth.

Poor Mr. Karl ended up paying a big price for his faulty evaluation of J.R. Smith because, even though he will apparently not be fired by the Nuggets, he still goes down in history now as one of the worst playoff coaches among all coaches with long head coach careers. All because Smith was too odd for Karl to deal with! Had Karl been able to win at least 8 playoff games in 4 years instead of just 3, which he could have done if he had gotten Smith and the backcourt overall right, he could have just barely avoided the label "One of the Worst Playoff Coaches Ever."
___________________________________________
Someone was on point with respect to why George Karl was not fired in May 2008:

Karl is just tight with the owners, and knows what to say. He will probably be gone after his contract is up. Denver has stuck with him this long, they will probably just wait it out. I honestly don't think there is one person in the front office or on the team who is dedicated to winning. They have the most talented team in the league, but lack the personnel and dedication to play the right way. Hopefully AI opts out and signs with a contender.

I added:

Yeah, maybe they were dedicated only to getting the Nuggets out of last place and to keeping the seats filled up and the merchandise selling. So big deal, they achieved those things. Whoo hoo. The average man on the street could probably achieve those things, actually. As a fan, I need more than those things to be impressed with a front office/owner.
___________________________________________
A joke during the 2008 Championship where Karl is the Coach of the Lakers instead of Phil Jackson:

"Lakers Coach" George Karl's reaction to Kobe Bryant's last ditch end of the game steal in Boston:

That was a foul and not a clean steal. He basically disrespected the game with that play. Kobe Bryant is living in fantasyland and if I were coaching the Lakers, I would bench him for game 6 of the finals.
____________________________________________
Someone got a little confused and thought it was me instead of a mock George Karl making the statement in the previous comment:

I find the criticism of Kobe hilarious coming from a fan of a team whose leader has never been out of the 1st round.

That's not me; I thought the steal was great. I was mocking George "Worst Playoff Coach There Will Ever Be" Karl with a mock quote. He thinks J.R. Smith (of the Nuggets) lives in fantasyland due to his 3-point shooting and due to his sometimes gambling style of defense. He benched Smith for the 2007 playoffs and then religiously refused to start Smith or give him just 24 mpg during the entire 2007-08 season, despite Smith by January 2008 having achieved the status of being one of the best 2-guards in the NBA.

For his next act, Mr. Karl will very, very likely fail to get any playoff spot at all in 2008-09.
____________________________________________
I think the Rockets are almost sure to get out of the 1st round next year, if Yao is back and they have no new major injuries.

I guess my team is led by someone who can't get out of the first round too: C Anthony.

Oh wait, Iverson is considered the sole captain and leader by Karl now.

Oh wait, Karl's management is so wack, that Iverson is not really responsible either.

But having said that, it's time for Melo Anthony to just say no to Karl and to start demanding that the Nuggets have a real PG be that Iverson or anyone else who is qualified. (It can't be a PG who is only real to Mr. Karl.) And its time for him to make sure he is officially and unofficially at least the co-captain of the Nuggets. And it's time for him to not listen to every little micromanagement demand that Karl throws at him. How much benefit did the Nuggets get, for example, from him following instructions to rebound more and shoot a little less. They got nothing to speak of from that.

It's time for Anthony to declare his childhood over and to start to figure out what needs to be done and do it and not listen to Karl's incorrect (and inadequate if they were correct) micromanagement gambits. The Nuggets need more 3-point shooting including from Melo himself. They need J.R. Smith to start for both offense and defense reasons. They need a real PG. They need Nene and K-Mart to play at all costs. They need to learn how to defend the pick and roll and how to rotate much better in general. They need to stop leaving a gazillion 3-point shooters per game undefended.

If Melo does not start working on these things, he's just spinning his wheels and wasting his time, something which (and how ironic is this Holmes?) Karl himself mentioned Melo might be doing these days.
___________________________________________
I think the Lakers and the old wise one (P Jackson) will pull out a game 6 squeaker, in regulation or OT, assuming Rondo's ankle is still a problem. Jackson is a far more experienced playoff coach than is Doc Rivers, and I have a hunch he will figure out a way to pull #6 out.

Anyone have any details on Rondo's ankle?

Then the Celtics will probably win game 7 by about 10 points; the Celtics machine is awesome even without Rondo at full. But the Rondo factor does give the Lakers a small possibility of shockingly taking the series.

I'm definitely not going to miss game 6.

Post your response to anything on Quest HERE

GIVE US THE JUICE TO PRODUCE REPORTS MORE QUICKLY
Although there is a guaranteed minimum rate of Report production regardless of traffic, IT IS IN YOUR POWER to help double or triple the number of and frequency of Reports. Simply take two or three minutes as often as you can to recommend Quest and post links to Quest on your favorite sports and other sites. The resulting automatic increase of traffic will in turn increase the resources that go in to producing Quest, which in turn speeds up reporting. If you want, e-mail how you helped (include the url of where you posted a link to Quest) and we will throw some Internet love back to where you tell us on the Internet. Thank you.

Here are some quick links that you can use to find a place where you might post a link to Quest and/or to Quest content.

HOLD MOUSE HERE TO EXPAND THIS MENU OF PLACES ON WHICH YOU CAN POST A LINK TO QUEST:

BASKETBALL SITES THAT ARE OPEN FOR CONTENT FROM ANYONE
Note: Beware of "layered" sites. None of the following are layered sites, which are sites that allow contributions from the public only in hard to find, low traffic areas, while the main areas are off limits for public input and are only for a chosen few. All of the following have at least some notable traffic, and all of them allow relatively equal and open participation. The order is from most recommended to least recommended, based on about half a dozen factors.

Bleacher Report Open Posting Site
Inside Hoops NBA Forum
Real GM NBA and Team Forums
Pro Sports Daily NBA Forum
Basketball Forum NBA Forum
Sporting News NBA Forum
Hoops Hype NBA Forum
Armchair GM Open Posting Site
SportsTwo NBA Forum
NBA Dimensions NBA Forum
OTR Basketball Forums NBA Forum
NBA Boards NBA Forum
NBA Wire NBA Forum
KFFL NBA Forum

Note: there are other forums, but they are all very low traffic and activity compared to the ones above.

MESSAGE BOARDS AT HUGE COROPORATIONS
The Fox NBA board is very low traffic, and the MSNBC NBA board doesn't exist anymore. The CBS Sports NBA Message Board is a layered site; you can NOT post topics nor expect to be considered seriously there until you have spent a few years posting there. We do not recommend CBS Sports. So the only real, fully open NBA forum hosted by a big corporation is the ESPN message board. Be forewarned though that the ESPN board is dominated by very young fans who make very short comments. On the other hand, it is a high traffic site, so we won't stop you from posting a Quest link at ESPN if you want to.

ESPN NBA Message Board

>>>I WANT TO STICK WITH THE WAY OTHER SITES PRESENT POSTS
Due to the number of, uniqueness of, and importance of the many other home page features we have, only one Report loads at a time, currently the one just above. To see the next Report (which would be the one that came out just before the one above) on this home page, click "Older Posts" that is at the very bottom of the Report showing above, just above the section header "Your Ball: Take Your Best Shot".

>>ALTERNATIVE HOME PAGES
There are three home pages, all of which have all of the Reports but which have completely different features appearing on the sidebar and below the one Report that is shown at a time. These pages have been designed so that they fully load in about 10 seconds (no more super long load times we used to be known for.)

HOME PAGE A: ALL REPORTS, READERS CONTAINING REPORTS 1-100, AND UNIQUE FEATURES
HOME PAGE B: ALL REPORTS, READERS CONTAINING REPORTS 1-100, AND UNIQUE FEATURES
HOME PAGE C: ALL REPORTS, READERS CONTAINING REPORTS 1-100, AND UNIQUE FEATURES

>>REPORT READERS: Complete freedom to rapidly choose and read what you need or want to read. The latest 40 Reports are found near the top of all three of the primary home pages (linked to just above) while Reports #41-#100 are found in three separate readers placed at various points down the page on all three primary home pages.

>>EXPRESS VERSION: Every Single Report but no Features: a Fast Loading Page: Click Here

>>FAST BREAK VERSION: The Latest 100 Reports via Report Readers Only; no Features, a Fast Loading Page: Click Here

>>QUEST ARCHIVE HOME PAGES--REPORT ARCHIVES AND A SMALL NUMBER OF CLASSIC FEATURES THAT WON'T FIT ON OTHER HOME PAGES
QUEST 4: REPORTS 101-200
QUEST 5: REPORTS 201-300
QUEST 6: REPORTS 301-400
QUEST 7: REPORTS 401-500
QUEST 8: REPORTS 501-600
QUEST 9: REPORTS 601-700
QUEST 10: REPORTS 701-800

>>FEATURES ONLY HOME PAGES: NO REPORTS, JUST FEATURES THAT WE CAN'T FIT ANYWHERE ELSE
QUEST OVERTIME
QUEST CLASSIC

>>COMPLETE TITLE INDEX: : A Complete Report Title Index, with Express Version Links to all Reports

>>LATEST 25 Reports: Direct links to the latest 25 Reports (with no truncated titles as you find with the poorly designed Google archive). This is located near the very bottom of this page.

>>GOOGLE ARCHIVE you will find this, with Reports shown by week not very far below.

>>I'M NEW AND I DON'T KNOW WHERE I WANT TO GO: Welcome to the Real Zone. Simply browse the page and see for yourself what is here. You will not be disappointed.

>>OR YOU CAN DO A CUSTOM GOOGLE SEARCH OF THE 13 BOOKS AND COUNTING CONTAINED ON THIS SITE>>>>>

TWO WAYS TO LOOK AT HOW LONG QUEST FOR THE RING HAS BEEN KEEPING IT REAL

The above shows you in two different ways the exact amount of time since The Quest for the Ring began to completely explain how the Quest is won, while having as much fun as possible at the expense of basketball pretenders and player haters. The first panel shows how long it has been in each of seven units. The second panel shows how long it has been in the more usual "remainder" way.

QUEST FOR THE RING SOMETIMES GOES INTO HIATUS
Regardless of any temporary unavoidable absences, the Quest is in this project to explain in detail for the very long term--indefinitely, for many, many, many years ahead. At this writing we have the equivalent of 15 basketball books under our belt and we plan on doing dozens more. Count on us being right where basketball is at, which is here, actually.

QUEST IS FREE BUT ABOUT 3 MINUTES OF YOUR TIME CAN GET YOU MORE OF IT

Although there is a guaranteed minimum rate of Report production regardless of traffic, it is in your power to help increase the number of and frequency of Quest Reports. All Quest sites are developed and produced according to both superseding criteria and site traffic. Like all sites started in recent years, Quest receives very little help from Google and other search engines. The search engines mostly serve to keep the older, popular sites popular; they preserve the same old, same old status quo.

The amount of reporting and the frequency of Quest Reports could easily be double what it is were site traffic higher. If Quest obtained the traffic we know it deserves, than production would go from the equivalent of roughly three books about basketball a year to at least five and to as many as six books a year!

WE NEED A GRAND TOTAL OF ABOUT 3 MINUTES OF YOUR TIME
Please take three or four minutes every now and then to recommend Quest and post links to Quest on your favorite sports and other sites. In other words, wherever possible use us to back up what you are posting and writing. The resulting automatic increase of traffic will in turn increase the resources that go in to producing Quest home page Reports. After helping us, feel free to e-mail how you helped and we will throw some Internet love back to your Internet hangout. The email address is thequestforthering1. This is a gmail address, so you use @gmail.com after that address.

WELCOME TO THE QUEST--THINGS ARE VERY DIFFERENT HERE

WELCOME TO THE QUEST FOR THE RING, ALSO KNOWN AS THE REAL ZONE
This is one of the most serious basketball sites on the internet, focusing on how and why playoff games and NBA Championships are won. We also love to take comedy and music breaks, but not every day.

WELCOME TO THE QUEST FOR THE RING. YOU HAVE LEFT THE HYPE ZONE AND HAVE ARRIVED IN THE REAL ZONE. Please check any rose colored glasses at the door. The Hype Zone is where you can find out about the personalities and the styles and how popular they are and what they are up to lately. The Real Zone is where we DO NOT think personalities and styles and how popular or unpopular they are things to waste time on just for ratings or traffic.

Instead of hype, here we post as much truth about how NBA playoff games and Championships are won as we can 365 days a year and at at any hour of the day or night. Please have a productive visit, and a nice trip back to the Hype Zone when your visit is over.

A SMALL SAMPLE OF CURRENT AND SOON TO COME QUEST FOR THE RING REAL ZONE TOPICS
--How and Why the 2010 Los Angeles Lakers, the 2010 Cleveland Cavaliers, and the 2010 Boston Celtics Win or Lose in the 2010 Playoffs
--The right "amount of" LeBron James
--How players we know deserve to win a first or second Ring can get one, highly talented players such as Chris Paul, Chris Bosh, Rajon Rondo, and Dwyane Wade.
--How and why the Denver Nuggets Franchise has repeatedly fooled the public, and possibly themselves for that matter. (No, we still have not completely finished with the Nuggets, thanks to how successful they were in 2008-09, albeit there was no chance of a Championship; Continuing, much done already)
--How and why much of what you may think you know about Allen Iverson is dead wrong (Continuing, much done already)
--How and why the playoffs are something completely different from the regular season, and why your team may be simply not prepared for them despite a lot of regular season wins

A SMALL SAMPLE OF ALREADY COMPLETED QUEST FOR THE RING REAL ZONE TOPICS
--How and why Carmelo Anthony has been downsized due to a quest for "well-roundedness," and why this is really bad
--How and why the owner of the Nuggets shortchanged and cheated his team out of a possible Championship
--How and why being physical alone can not win you a Championship
--How and why the Nuggets' high fouling defense will take them only so far
--How and why George Karl is doing more harm than good with respect to J.R. Smith
--How and why George Karl's obsession with personalities is wrong and bad for any team
--How and why George Karl and the Nuggets can not win in the playoffs (2007, 2008) or a West final (2009). If Quest commits a foul, we own up to it, as we do right here: we thought the Nuggets could not win in the playoffs in 2009. They did win 10 games before being eliminated by the Lakers in the West final, so in response we corrected our evaluation of what you can do with the Nuggets' unique 2009 approach to basketball without, however, going overboard.
--How and why George Karl cheats the fans and the franchise out of performance and development of "reserve" players
--How and why playmaking is so important, probably more than you think, and how you manage playmakers correctly.
--How and why you have probably been fooled regarding the Nuggets' 2008 off-season and their 2008-09 defense

UNIQUE SITE DESIGN
The Quest is organized in a completely different way from what you are used to on the internet. We have combined the best features of the blog and the conventional web site formats, the latter being the norm for large organizations. However, since we do not like the idea of using flash to "wow" visitors, we do not use flash except within video and other discrete components. So we are state of the art in terms of expanding the power of visitors to get exactly what they want very quickly, but we do not have the latest flash gadgetry just to "keep up with the Joneses". More broadly, you will find that Quest for the Ring never seeks to keep up with the Joneses, simply because the Joneses never had the nerve and the intelligence to do what we do.

2009: A PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATION COMES TO QUEST
Just before the 2009-10 season tipped, the very large number of features and links to important resources were strategically reorganized and placed within an easy to use and clearly labelled section system. So ended the era of the rapidly developed, sprawling and slightly disorganized Quest, and so began the era of the big but under careful control and extremely well organized and professional Quest for the Ring.

The Quest Home Page consists of numerous types of content, organized carefully into the new sections as of November 2009. Features can be any educational and / or entertaining thing you can think of, including everything from music players to videos to photos to breaking NBA news readers to top teams performance breakdown pages.

Quest for the Ring has a world class link system for those who know what they are looking for and wish to find and engage the appropriate link, But the Quest visitor does not HAVE to hunt for links to have an intelligent and entertaining experience. The Quest home page is big enough and chock loaded enough that link hunting is not absolutely necessary the way it normally is at many other basketball sites.

THERE MUST BE TEN WAYS TO READ REPORTS [PAUL SIMON LOL]
There are close to ten ways to find out about, select, and read Quest Reports! The standard, traditional blog presentation is available as one of the many ways to choose, access, and read reports. On the Home Page, only one report loads in the traditional format in order to keep this page as quick loading as possible.
See the "Total Freedom of Navigation" section for complete details about how to find, choose, and read reports.

One key place to find Older Reports is on sequentially numbered url's thequestforthering2.blogspot.com, thequestforthering3.blogspot.com, and so forth.

THE QUEST USER GUIDE VERSUS an about page
Other sites most often have undeveloped and limited in scope "about pages" which is usually all they have for what we call a "User Guide". Our User Guide material is a vast improvement, quantitatively and qualitatively, over a mere "about page" While many other sites don't help their visitors to make the best use of the content, we do. Also, the User Guide is chock loaded with invitations to visitors to participate in all kinds of ways, including for example advertising for free, link exchange, and getting a team site supported by Quest.

MOST RECENT LEAGUE WIDE REAL PLAYER RATINGS

Note: This is generally a once a year, end of season Report. For many teams and players, more recent ratings are often available.

NBA REAL PLAYER RATINGS
2009-10 REGULAR SEASON

POSITION AND TEAM CODES
In the Real Player and related ratings shown for the League, two codes follow each players' name (and before his rating). The first code tells you the players' team and the second one tells you his position.

TEAM CODES
ATLA Atlanta Hawks
BOST Boston Celtics
CHAR Charlotte Bobcats
CHIC Chicago Bulls
CLEV Cleveland Cavaliers
DALL Dallas Mavericks
DENV Denver Nuggets
DETR Detroit Pistons
GOLS Golden State Warriors
HOUS Houston Rockets
INDI Indiana Pacers
LACL Los Angeles Clippers
LALK Los Angeles Lakers
MEMP Memphis Grizzlies
MIAM Miami Heat
MILW Milwaukee Bucks
MINN Minnesota Timberwolves
NJRS New Jersey Nets
NORL New Orleans Hornets
NWYR New York Knicks
OKLA Oklahoma Thunder
ORLA Orlando Magic
PHIL Philadelphia 76'ers
PHNX Phoenix Suns
PORT Portland Trailblazers
SACR Sacramento Kings
SANA San Antonio Spurs
TORO Toronto Raptors
UTAH Utah Jazz
WASH Washington Wizards

POSITION CODES
PG Point Guard
SG Shooting Guard
SF Small Forward
PF Power Forward
C Center

SCALE FOR REGULAR SEASON REAL PLAYER RATINGS
Perfect for all Practical Purposes / Major Historic Super Star 1.100 and more
Historic Super Star 1.000 1.099
Super Star 0.900 0.999
A Star Player / A well above normal starter 0.820 0.899
Very Good Player / A solid starter 0.760 0.819
Major Role Player / Good enough to start 0.700 0.759
Good Role Player / Often a good 6th man 0.640 0.699
Satisfactory Role Player / Preferably should not start 0.580 0.639
Marginal Role Player / Generally should not start 0.520 0.579
Poor Player / Should never start 0.460 0.519
Very Poor Player 0.400 0.459
Extremely Poor Player .399 and less

NBA REAL PLAYER RATINGS
2009-10 REGULAR SEASON
--Shows the real quality of players
--Includes all tracked actions and also includes untracked or hidden defending
--The average Real Player Rating for all players who play 300 minutes or more is about .700.
--All players who have played at least 300 minutes are included here and in all other ratings to follow in coming days

MAJOR HISTORIC SUPERSTARS
1 LeBron James CLEV SF 1.382
2 Tim Duncan SANA PF 1.254
3 Chris Paul NORL PG 1.202
4 Dwight Howard ORLA C 1.121
5 Andrew Bogut MILW C 1.112

HISTORIC SUPERSTARS
6 Steve Nash PHNX PG 1.095
7 Jason Kidd DALL PG 1.092
8 Rajon Rondo BOST PG 1.084
9 Deron Williams UTAH PG 1.076
10 Dwyane Wade MIAM SG 1.075
11 Marcus Camby LACL C 1.071
12 Pau Gasol LALK PF 1.065
13 Greg Oden PORT C 1.060
14 Kevin Durant OKLA SF 1.051
15 Dirk Nowitzki DALL PF 1.034
16 Josh Smith ATLA SF 1.033
17 Kevin Garnett BOST PF 1.033
18 Manu Ginobili SANA SG 1.023
19 Kobe Bryant LALK SG 1.005

SUPERSTARS
20 Carlos Boozer UTAH PF 0.994
21 Lamar Odom LALK PF 0.982
22 Andrei Kirilenko UTAH SF 0.976
23 Chris Bosh TORO PF 0.972
24 David Lee NWYR C 0.971
25 Al Horford ATLA C 0.970
26 Marcus Camby PORT C 0.967
27 Jameer Nelson ORLA PG 0.959
28 Joakim Noah CHIC C 0.955
29 John Salmons MILW SF 0.937
30 Andrew Bynum LALK C 0.936
31 Troy Murphy INDI PF 0.934
32 Kevin Love MINN PF 0.934
33 Anderson Varejao CLEV C 0.933
34 Brendan Haywood DALL C 0.929
35 Vince Carter ORLA SG 0.928
36 Gerald Wallace CHAR SF 0.918
37 Sergio Rodriguez SACR PG 0.908
38 Tyrus Thomas CHIC PF 0.904
39 Derrick Rose CHIC PG 0.903

STARS
40 Baron Davis LACL PG 0.899
41 Russell Westbrook OKLA PG 0.897
42 Zach Randolph MEMP PF 0.885
43 Danny Granger INDI SF 0.885
44 Marc Gasol MEMP C 0.885
45 Joe Johnson ATLA SG 0.883
46 Chauncey Billups DENV PG 0.883
47 Roy Hibbert INDI C 0.880
48 Ben Wallace DETR C 0.877
49 Andre Miller PORT PG 0.874
50 Carmelo Anthony DENV SF 0.874
51 Brandon Jennings MILW PG 0.870
52 Tyrus Thomas CHAR PF 0.870
53 A.J. Price INDI PG 0.868
54 Paul Millsap UTAH PF 0.866
55 Craig Smith LACL PF 0.865
56 Samuel Dalembert PHIL C 0.864
57 Andre Iguodala PHIL SG 0.858
58 Raymond Felton CHAR PG 0.857
59 Delonte West CLEV SG 0.856
60 Al Jefferson MINN C 0.856
61 Eric Maynor OKLA PG 0.856
62 Serge Ibaka OKLA PF 0.855
63 Nene Hilario DENV C 0.852
64 Chris Andersen DENV PF 0.849
65 Shaquille O'Neal CLEV C 0.842
66 Brandon Roy PORT SG 0.842
67 Ryan Anderson ORLA PF 0.840
68 Antonio McDyess SANA PF 0.839
69 Tony Parker SANA PG 0.837
70 Paul Pierce BOST SF 0.836
71 Mo Williams CLEV PG 0.835
72 Kyle Lowry HOUS PG 0.835
73 Ersan Ilyasova MILW SF 0.828
74 Amare Stoudemire PHNX PF 0.828
75 Luke Ridnour MILW PG 0.827
76 Erick Dampier DALL C 0.826
77 Tyreke Evans SACR PG 0.825
78 Andris Biedrins GOLS C 0.825
79 Kyle Korver UTAH SG 0.824
80 Anthony Randolph GOLS PF 0.820

VERY GOOD PLAYERS / SOLID STARTERS
81 Eric Maynor UTAH PG 0.819
82 Carlos Arroyo MIAM PG 0.819
83 Antawn Jamison CLEV PF 0.819
84 Nazr Mohammed CHAR C 0.818
85 Luol Deng CHIC SF 0.817
86 Dorell Wright MIAM SG 0.817
87 LaMarcus Aldridge PORT PF 0.817
88 Carl Landry HOUS PF 0.816
89 Luis Scola HOUS PF 0.816
90 Nick Collison OKLA PF 0.812
91 Carlos Delfino MILW SG 0.809
92 Kendrick Perkins BOST C 0.807
93 Jermaine O'Neal MIAM C 0.805
94 Nate Robinson NWYR PG 0.804
95 Goran Dragic PHNX PG 0.803
96 Mike Bibby ATLA PG 0.803
97 Stephen Curry GOLS PG 0.803
98 Mehmet Okur UTAH C 0.800
99 Jose Calderon TORO PG 0.797
100 Jason Terry DALL SG 0.791
101 Ronnie Price UTAH PG 0.784
102 DeJuan Blair SANA PF 0.784
103 Chris Kaman LACL C 0.783
104 Shaun Livingston WASH PG 0.783
105 Joel Przybilla PORT C 0.782
106 David West NORL PF 0.781
107 John Salmons CHIC SF 0.776
108 Matt Barnes ORLA SF 0.775
109 Darren Collison NORL PG 0.775
110 Ronny Turiaf GOLS C 0.774
111 Udonis Haslem MIAM PF 0.774
112 Shawn Marion DALL SF 0.772
113 Jason Williams ORLA PG 0.771
114 Keyon Dooling NJRS PG 0.771
115 Andray Blatche WASH C 0.770
116 James Harden OKLA SG 0.770
117 Brook Lopez NJRS C 0.770
118 Ray Allen BOST SG 0.770
119 Amir Johnson TORO SF 0.769
120 Ty Lawson DENV PG 0.768
121 Beno Udrih SACR PG 0.768
122 Chuck Hayes HOUS PF 0.765
123 Matt Bonner SANA PF 0.763
124 Reggie Evans TORO PF 0.763
125 Gilbert Arenas WASH PG 0.760

MAJOR ROLE PLAYERS / GOOD ENOUGH TO START
126 Zydrunas Ilgauskas CLEV C 0.758
127 Rasheed Wallace BOST PF 0.757
128 Lou Williams PHIL SG 0.756
129 Stephen Jackson CHAR SF 0.754
130 Dan Gadzuric MILW C 0.754
131 Jamario Moon CLEV SF 0.754
132 Ron Artest LALK SF 0.752
133 Rodney Stuckey DETR PG 0.749
134 Shelden Williams BOST PF 0.748
135 Oleksiy Pecherov MINN C 0.748
136 Aaron Brooks HOUS PG 0.747
137 Boris Diaw CHAR PF 0.746
138 C.J. Watson GOLS PG 0.746
139 Brendan Haywood WASH C 0.744
140 Emeka Okafor NORL C 0.742
141 Taj Gibson CHIC PF 0.741
142 J.R. Smith DENV SG 0.738
143 Mike Miller WASH SF 0.732
144 Channing Frye PHNX C 0.731
145 Louis Amundson PHNX PF 0.731
146 Elton Brand PHIL PF 0.726
147 D.J. Mbenga LALK C 0.725
148 Tayshaun Prince DETR SF 0.724
149 Francisco Garcia SACR SG 0.724
150 Tyler Hansbrough INDI PF 0.724
151 Trevor Ariza HOUS SG 0.723
152 Allen Iverson PHIL SG 0.722
153 Rashard Lewis ORLA PF 0.721
154 Richard Jefferson SANA SF 0.721
155 Luc Richard Mbah a Moute MILW SF 0.721
156 Jamal Crawford ATLA SG 0.721
157 Brad Miller CHIC C 0.720
158 Josh Boone NJRS C 0.718
159 Jason Richardson PHNX SG 0.718
160 Sebastian Telfair LACL PG 0.717
161 Marvin Williams ATLA PF 0.716
162 David Andersen HOUS C 0.715
163 Caron Butler DALL SF 0.715
164 Michael Beasley MIAM PF 0.714
165 George Hill SANA PG 0.713
166 Ronnie Brewer UTAH SG 0.712
167 D.J. Augustin CHAR PG 0.712
168 Monta Ellis GOLS PG 0.711
169 Sean May SACR PF 0.710
170 Anthony Tolliver GOLS PF 0.709
171 Kenyon Martin DENV PF 0.709
172 Tyson Chandler CHAR C 0.709
173 Rodrigue Beaubois DALL PG 0.707
174 Stephen Jackson GOLS SF 0.704
175 Shane Battier HOUS SF 0.703
176 Stephen Graham CHAR SF 0.702
177 Mike Conley MEMP PG 0.702
178 Earl Watson INDI PG 0.701
179 T.J. Ford INDI PG 0.700

GOOD ROLE PLAYERS / OFTEN GOOD 6TH MAN PLAYERS
180 Ramon Sessions MINN PG 0.699
181 Corey Maggette GOLS SF 0.699
182 Marcin Gortat ORLA PF 0.698
183 Terrence Williams NJRS SG 0.698
184 Jarrett Jack TORO PG 0.698
185 James Singleton WASH SF 0.696
186 JaVale McGee WASH C 0.694
187 Jose Juan Barea DALL PG 0.694
188 Marcus Thornton NORL SG 0.693
189 Daequan Cook MIAM SG 0.691
190 Jordan Farmar LALK PG 0.689
191 Kirk Hinrich CHIC PG 0.689
192 Carl Landry SACR PF 0.689
193 Shannon Brown LALK PG 0.687
194 Anthony Carter DENV PG 0.686
195 Jason Thompson SACR PF 0.686
196 Mike Dunleavy INDI SF 0.686
197 Robin Lopez PHNX C 0.684
198 Spencer Hawes SACR C 0.680
199 Rudy Fernandez PORT SG 0.678
200 Drew Gooden LACL PF 0.678
201 Steve Blake LACL PG 0.677
202 Bobby Simmons NJRS SF 0.676
203 Larry Hughes NWYR SG 0.675
204 Jerry Stackhouse MILW SF 0.675
205 Quentin Richardson MIAM SG 0.675
206 Rudy Gay MEMP SF 0.675
207 Darko Milicic MINN C 0.674
208 Drew Gooden DALL PF 0.674
209 Reggie Williams GOLS SF 0.673
210 Ronald Murray CHAR SG 0.671
211 Grant Hill PHNX SF 0.669
212 Nate Robinson BOST PG 0.668
213 Travis Outlaw LACL SF 0.668
214 Steve Blake PORT PG 0.667
215 Devin Harris NJRS PG 0.665
216 Antawn Jamison WASH PF 0.665
217 Danilo Gallinari NWYR SF 0.664
218 Wilson Chandler NWYR SF 0.664
219 Gerald Henderson CHAR SG 0.664
220 Tony Allen BOST SG 0.663
221 Kyrylo Fesenko UTAH C 0.662
222 Anthony Morrow GOLS SG 0.661
223 Jordan Hill HOUS PF 0.661
224 Jared Dudley PHNX SF 0.660
225 Daniel Gibson CLEV PG 0.660
226 Jeff Green OKLA PF 0.659
227 Josh McRoberts INDI PF 0.659
228 Anthony Johnson ORLA PG 0.658
229 J.J. Redick ORLA SG 0.658
230 Al Harrington NWYR PF 0.655
231 Luther Head INDI PG 0.654
232 Nicolas Batum PORT SF 0.653
233 Theo Ratliff CHAR C 0.650
234 Mario Chalmers MIAM PG 0.648
235 Brandon Bass ORLA PF 0.648
236 Kris Humphries NJRS PF 0.646
237 Chris Duhon NWYR PG 0.643
238 Nenad Krstic OKLA C 0.642
239 Kris Humphries DALL PF 0.642

SATISFACTORY ROLE PLAYERS / USUALLY DO NOT START
240 Rasho Nesterovic TORO C 0.637
241 Hedo Turkoglu TORO SF 0.635
242 Johan Petro DENV C 0.635
243 Randy Foye WASH PG 0.634
244 Jrue Holiday PHIL PG 0.633
245 Mickael Pietrus ORLA SG 0.631
246 Jared Jeffries NWYR PF 0.627
247 Leandro Barbosa PHNX SG 0.626
248 Joel Anthony MIAM C 0.624
249 O.J. Mayo MEMP SG 0.622
250 Chase Budinger HOUS SF 0.621
251 Roger Mason SANA SG 0.619
252 Caron Butler WASH SF 0.617
253 Peja Stojakovic NORL SF 0.615
254 Marreese Speights PHIL PF 0.613
255 Jamaal Tinsley MEMP PG 0.613
256 Bobby Brown NORL PG 0.611
257 Jonas Jerebko DETR SF 0.610
258 Omri Casspi SACR SF 0.609
259 Kurt Thomas MILW PF 0.608
260 Thaddeus Young PHIL SF 0.607
261 Brandon Rush INDI SG 0.606
262 Hasheem Thabeet MEMP C 0.605
263 Damien Wilkins MINN SG 0.601
264 Rodney Carney PHIL SF 0.601
265 Earl Boykins WASH PG 0.599
266 J.J. Hickson CLEV PF 0.599
267 Willie Green PHIL SG 0.598
268 Anthony Parker CLEV SG 0.596
269 Jamaal Magloire MIAM C 0.594
270 Wesley Matthews UTAH SG 0.592
271 Devean George GOLS SG 0.592
272 Richard Hamilton DETR SG 0.592
273 Kevin Martin SACR SG 0.591
274 Andrea Bargnani TORO C 0.591
275 Ryan Gomes MINN SF 0.589
276 Thabo Sefolosha OKLA SF 0.589
277 Rafer Alston NJRS PG 0.589
278 Tracy McGrady NWYR SG 0.588
279 Marco Belinelli TORO SG 0.587
280 Michael Finley BOST SF 0.585
281 Marcus Williams MEMP PG 0.583
282 Martell Webster PORT SG 0.583
283 Charlie Villanueva DETR PF 0.582

MARGINAL ROLE PLAYERS / RARELY START
284 Derek Fisher LALK PG 0.578
285 Jannero Pargo CHIC PG 0.577
286 Toney Douglas NWYR PG 0.577
287 Chris Hunter GOLS PF 0.576
288 Derrick Brown CHAR SF 0.575
289 Yi Jianlian NJRS PF 0.575
290 Nathan Jawai MINN PF 0.575
291 Ime Udoka SACR SG 0.574
292 Sergio Rodriguez NWYR PG 0.574
293 Arron Afflalo DENV SG 0.573
294 Kevin Martin HOUS SG 0.572
295 Hakim Warrick MILW PF 0.571
296 Al Thornton WASH SF 0.569
297 Will Bynum DETR PG 0.568
298 Jonny Flynn MINN PG 0.568
299 James Posey NORL SF 0.564
300 Mikki Moore GOLS C 0.561
301 Darius Songaila NORL PF 0.561
302 Jerryd Bayless PORT PG 0.556
303 Jon Brockman SACR PF 0.554
304 Sasha Vujacic LALK SG 0.554
305 Dante Cunningham PORT SF 0.551
306 Michael Redd MILW SG 0.551
307 Eric Gordon LACL SG 0.550
308 C.J. Miles UTAH SF 0.549
309 Al Thornton LACL SF 0.547
310 Julian Wright NORL SF 0.545
311 Jeff Teague ATLA PG 0.544
312 Marquis Daniels BOST SG 0.543
313 Dahntay Jones INDI SG 0.542
314 Chris Douglas-Roberts NJRS SG 0.541
315 Zaza Pachulia ATLA C 0.538
316 Etan Thomas OKLA C 0.538
317 Sonny Weems TORO SG 0.537
318 Devin Brown NORL SG 0.533
319 Jason Maxiell DETR PF 0.532
320 Bill Walker NWYR SG 0.532
321 Courtney Lee NJRS SG 0.528
322 James Jones MIAM SF 0.525
323 Donte Greene SACR SF 0.524
324 Kenny Thomas SACR PF 0.523
325 Wayne Ellington MINN SG 0.521
326 Juwan Howard PORT PF 0.520

POOR PLAYERS / SHOULD NEVER START
327 Charlie Bell MILW SG 0.518
328 Corey Brewer MINN SF 0.518
329 Hakim Warrick CHIC PF 0.514
330 DeAndre Jordan LACL C 0.512
331 Rasual Butler LACL SG 0.509
332 Glen Davis BOST PF 0.508
333 Sam Young MEMP SF 0.508
334 Austin Daye DETR SF 0.507
335 Ronald Murray CHIC SG 0.504
336 Vladimir Radmanovic GOLS SF 0.494
337 Solomon Jones INDI PF 0.493
338 Ben Gordon DETR SG 0.491
339 James Johnson CHIC PF 0.487
340 Rafer Alston MIAM PG 0.482
341 Eduardo Najera DALL PF 0.482
342 Chucky Atkins DETR PG 0.477
343 Earl Clark PHNX SF 0.474
344 Joey Graham DENV SF 0.473
345 Fabricio Oberto WASH C 0.468
346 Jason Smith PHIL PF 0.466
347 Andres Nocioni SACR SF 0.464
348 Jared Jeffries HOUS PF 0.462
349 Nick Young WASH SG 0.462
350 Maurice Evans ATLA SF 0.462
351 Keith Bogans SANA SG 0.462
352 Josh Howard DALL SF 0.460

VERY POOR PLAYERS
353 Eddie House NWYR SG 0.454
354 Joe Smith ATLA PF 0.453
355 Kwame Brown DETR C 0.452
356 Antoine Wright TORO SF 0.451
357 Darrell Arthur MEMP PF 0.443
358 Jarvis Hayes NJRS SF 0.438
359 Ricky Davis LACL SF 0.437
360 Mardy Collins LACL PG 0.436
361 Malik Hairston SANA SG 0.433
362 Jeff Pendergraph PORT PF 0.432
363 Jermaine Taylor HOUS SG 0.428
364 Chris Wilcox DETR C 0.417
365 DeMar DeRozan TORO SG 0.414
366 Jodie Meeks MILW SG 0.413
367 Quinton Ross DALL SF 0.406

EXTREMELY POOR PLAYERS
368 Morris Peterson NORL SG 0.394
369 Josh Powell LALK PF 0.386
370 Jason Kapono PHIL SG 0.383
371 Jawad Williams CLEV SF 0.369
372 DeMarre Carroll MEMP SF 0.357
373 Ryan Hollins MINN C 0.351
374 Steve Novak LACL SF 0.345
375 Trenton Hassell NJRS SF 0.342
376 Brian Scalabrine BOST C 0.329
377 Michael Finley SANA SF 0.321
378 Sasha Pavlovic MINN SG 0.314
379 DeShawn Stevenson WASH SG 0.287
380 Malik Allen DENV PF 0.282
381 DaJuan Summers DETR SF 0.266

SCALE FOR REGULAR SEASON REAL PLAYER RATINGS
Perfect for all Practical Purposes / Major Historic Super Star 1.100 and more
Historic Super Star 1.000 1.099
Super Star 0.900 0.999
A Star Player / A well above normal starter 0.820 0.899
Very Good Player / A solid starter 0.760 0.819
Major Role Player / Good enough to start 0.700 0.759
Good Role Player / Often a good 6th man 0.640 0.699
Satisfactory Role Player / Usually do not start 0.580 0.639
Marginal Role Player / Rarely start 0.520 0.579
Poor Player / Should never start 0.460 0.519
Very Poor Player 0.400 0.459
Extremely Poor Player .399 and less

AVERAGE RATINGS BY POSITION
Not all positions are created equal. These are the average ratings by position among all NBA players who play 300 minutes or more. There are very few small forwards and shooting guards who are superstars. Most (but definitely not all) superstars are players who can play point guard, power forward, or center.

Point Guard .750
Shooting Guard .640
Small Forward .640
Power Forward .720
Center .750
All Positions / All Players (NBA Overall Average) .700

PLAYOFF GRADE PLAYERS
Playoff Grade Players have ratings of .560 and higher. Players with ratings below .560 should not play in the playoffs unless the team is forced to play them so that they have two players at a position and/or so that the team has at least eight players playing in the playoffs and/or because the coach is absolutely certain the low rating player will play better in the playoffs than he did in the regular season.

REGULAR SEASON STARTING PLAYERS
All starters on all teams should have ratings of .575 and higher. If a team has no player at a postion with at least a .575 rating, then it is extremely deficient at that position due to injuries or due to management incompetence.

THE ALL IMPORTANT, AWARD WINNING REAL PLAYER RATINGS USER GUIDE
The above are a few hightlights from the User Guide for Real Player Ratings. For complete details regarding how the Real Player Ratings are designed, how and why they work, and how exactly you can use them, see the User Guide. The User Guide for Real Player Ratings is a necessary reference for anyone who wants to truly understand the value of, the validity of, and the ways you can use the Real Player Rating performance measures.

Also, you should become a regular visitor to Quest for the Ring if you want to get the full advantage of reading and using Real Player Ratings Series performance measures. The more you visit and check out ratings, the more quickly and easily you will be able to evaluate what you are seeing.

THE QUEST FOR THE RING IS COPYRIGHTED. ALL RIGHTS ARE RESERVED. Original content is copyrighted. All reports (postings) and certain features are original content and are copyrighted. No original content appearing on either the main home page or on any other page operated by the owner, Basketball Winning, a non-profit organization, may be reproduced without prior approval. All copyright law rights are reserved.

PERMITTED USES
Since we want to increase knowledge about this website, we are likely to grant certain reproduction rights upon written request, provided that you agree to give attribution and to exchange links. If you operate a website and want some of our content for your site, simply get approval and instructions by emailing your request to: thequestforthering1. This is a gmail address, so add "@gmail" at the end.

No permission is needed for widgets that (using RSS) contain titles of our Reports that link to this Site; permission is needed only when the Reports themselves are to be shown on another Site.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY HOME PAGES

BOOKMARK OR THERE WON'T BE A LATER

PRIMARY FEATURE PAGES

REPORTS--#21 THROUGH #40

Saturday, October 11, 2008

Ultimate Game Breakdown: Players For Nuggets 118 Timberwolves 95 in Denver, Preseason Game

Wednesday, October 8, 2008

Return of Nuggets 1: Forum #2 Comments From July 2008, Part 5

Return of Nuggets 1: Forum #2 Comments From July 2008, Part 4

Return of Nuggets 1: Forum #2 Comments From July 2008, Part 3

Return of Nuggets 1: Forum #2 Comments From July 2008, Part 2

Return of Nuggets 1: Forum #2 Comments From July 2008, Part 1

Return of Nuggets 1: Forum #2 Comments From June 2008, Part 1

LAKERS SIGN IN HOLLYWOOD

SEARCH THE QUEST FOR THE RING--THE EQUIVALENT OF MORE THAN 15 BOOKS ABOUT BASKETBALL

COMPLETE AND ALWAYS UPDATED DIRECTORY OF ALL QUEST FOR THE RING REPORTS ON ONE PAGE >>>

TWO WAYS TO LOOK AT HOW LONG QUEST FOR THE RING HAS BEEN KEEPING IT REAL

Blog Archive

QUEST REPORTS #41 TO #60, GOING BACK IN TIME

QUEST IS FREE BUT ABOUT 3 MINUTES OF YOUR TIME CAN GET YOU MORE OF IT

QUEST FOR THE RING USER GUIDE

LATEST 25 REPORTS THREE AT A TIME -- TO LOAD THE NEXT THREE, CLICK ">" AT THE TOP ON THE RIGHT

QUEST REPORTS #61 TO #80, GOING BACK IN TIME

WORD IS BOND

WELCOME TO THE QUEST--THINGS ARE VERY DIFFERENT HERE

SEARCH THE QUEST FOR THE RING, THE EQUIVALENT OF MORE THAN 15 BOOKS ABOUT BASKETBALL

QUEST REPORTS #81 TO #100 GOING BACK IN TIME

RECOMMENDED SCHOOL--CLICK FOR DETAILS

VIDEOS

MOST RECENT LEAGUE WIDE REAL PLAYER RATINGS

25 MOST RECENT REPORTS: CLICK TO READ (THIS HOME PAGE WILL RELOAD)

COPYRIGHT 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011

SEARCH THE QUEST FOR THE RING--THE EQUIVALENT OF MORE THAN 15 BOOKS ABOUT BASKETBALL

.

STAT COUNTER IS THE PRIMARY QUEST TRAFFIC COUNTER SINCE IT IS TRULY EXCELLENT

BACKUP COUNTERS

THE QUEST FOR THE RING FEED

Don't get snookered by mere opinions. Check the Reality.

PRODUCTION METRICS FOR QUEST FOR THE RING

QUICK LINKS TO CRUCIAL RESOURCES

PRIMARY FEATURE SITES BY CATEGORY

OTHER FEATURE SITES BY CATEGORY

MUSIC SITES

PLAYER PAGES MENU--ALPHABETICAL

LAUGH OUT LOUD, GEORGE KARL!

TAKE QUEST FOR THE RING WITH YOU ON YOUR INTERNET JOURNEYS

TRANSLATE QUEST FOR THE RING INTO YOUR LANGUAGE

GET QUEST BY EMAIL HERE

MAKE SURE YOU GET THE QUEST RIGHT WHERE YOU NEED IT

TRAFFIC METRICS