Bleacher Report - Articles by Max Fischer

Does Dana White Signing Fedor Mean Brock Can't Be Beat?

Max Fischer — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 14:38:47 -0400

I have been trying to read the tea leaves on this supposed "Fedor to the UFC" deal that is rumored to come about finally.

I really have a hard time understanding why this deal is happening now (if it really is). It's difficult for me to understand WHY either party would want to make a deal now.

Does Fedor really want a piece of Brock Lesnar?! If he does he must have finally started believing his own press clippings. Because NO ONE in their right mind should want a piece of Brock Lesnar.

The Man is fusion of an albino razorback gorilla and the sociopathic mind of Hannibal Lecter.

If Fedor loses to Brock...which I strongly think he will...then he puts his entire career in jeopardy. Not only his, but the legitimacy of MMA in general. Though I don't think it should, because Brock is just a freak of nature. A human being perfectly suited for his job. He's a true throwback to the gladiator days. And he has true competitive greatness on top of everything else.

Then on the other side we have Dana White and his dilemma. On one hand if he signs Fedor at all cost it could be the move that raises the MMA to an unprecedented level. It seems to me ESPN could be poised to join forces with Dana White giving the sport true legitimacy because of the financial implications of Fedor and Brock meeting in the Octagon.

But supposedly to get the deal done Dana White would likely have to make some concessions. The two biggest ones seem to be deal breakers to me.

One is that White would have to let Fedor compete in his beloved Sambo competitions and the other is that unlike other champions in the UFC, Fedor wants the option to leave the UFC even if he doesn't lose the heavyweight crown.

The implications of this is that Fedor could come into the UFC and prove his dominance once and for all then promptly jump ship and take that legitimacy somewhere else and create some serious competition for the UFC.

So, this is what the deal comes down to: indentured bondage on King Fedor's part OR Dana White potentially creating its own UFC nemesis.

This is why I believe this deal can't get done unless there is something major I am missing.

So if my view of the situation is accurate, there can be only one way this deal gets done. Both Dana White and Fedor Emilianenko must BOTH believe, without a doubt, they will come out on top of the Brock Lesner-Fedor match-up.

Now, I guess I can understand Fedor having supreme confidence in his abilities. Fighters must have to be wired like this just to get into the Octagon. Fedor has a 30-1 record to support that kind of self belief.

But, where is Dana White getting that kind of SUPREME confidence in Brock? Does White have that much belief in his own ability to pick winners? Or are other experts in the MMA giving White this kind of confidence in Brock?

As it stands now I don't see this fight as Brock versus Fedor. I see it as Fedor's ego versus Dana White's in one big game of chicken.

Definitive NBA Officiating Fix

Max Fischer — Sun, 10 May 2009 17:58:41 -0400

In the wake of another officiating debacle in Dallas, Mavs fans are left with an even more bleak view of the NBA system. How can one team possibly be subjected to so much "bad luck"?

To add insult to injury, this time the league even admitted its error a couple hours after last night's Game Three home loss in Dallas against the Denver Nuggets.

But along with this admission of error there was no means of restitution offered. No fine for the official. No suspension for the official. No "re-do" of those final moments of the game.

Something isn't right here. Something is horribly wrong with NBA officiating and there must be some way to fix it. The way NBA officiating works is really incomprehensible when you think about it.

I can't think of any other sport with such a history of ineptitude... except Professional Wrestling.. I will let you draw your own conclusions there. Actually I think the NBA might be worse than wrestling.

Just look at all the weirdness we accept from NBA officials:"Make-up call", "star call","letting them play", "let the players decide it", "tightening it up", "regular season calls", "playoff calls", " jump shooters don't get calls", " aggressive teams get calls", "physical teams get calls", "home game calls", "you aren't getting that call on the road".

Well, I think I might actually have a solution that would fix NBA officiating for good. At least this would be the first domino to that end.

See, my original thinking was that the only way to prevent this was to fine or suspend the official. But that won't really solve the problem.

It might be a small deterrent, but if anything this might even make the refs more disgruntled. Then we will have to worry about "disgruntled ref calls."

No, the way to fix officiating is to hit the LEAGUE where it hurts...not the officials.

This is why you never see superstars like the Lakers and Kobe, Michael Jordan, Dwyane Wade or LeBron James getting hosed the way other less-fortunate NBA types do—the league's second class citizens, like Dirk and the Mavs.

See, the league benefits when calls go in favor of the league's superstars and their darling teams.

This is why the calls always go in their favor. The refs and league are protecting their golden geese, whether they know it or not.

So how does the league pay?

Well, how about all those fans who had to pay for that refs bungle job?

They paid top dollar to see that game and have the refs incompetence ruin that experience and in turn made that money spent a waste, so why not have the league pay these fans back for the NBA's incompetence?

Isn't that what would happen in any other business? If any other business makes an error and costs you—the customer—money, they pay you back.

If the league won't replay the game or even part of the game, then the LEAST they could do is pay all these fans back for the money wasted, no?

If that happened—if the league had to pay for their mistakes the way they benefit from their star calls—you would see NBA officiating completely revolutionized.

If the league had the incentive to do it, it would happen yesterday. You would see all this inconsistency and favoritism completely disappear overnight.

David Stern To Allow "Re-Do" after Spurs' Game Three Abomination (Humor)

Max Fischer — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 14:48:38 -0400

Mea Culpa

In an unprecedented move by NBA commish David Stern, the league will be allowing a "re-do" of Game Three between the San Antonio Spurs and the Dallas Mavericks.

In a conference call with commissioner Stern, Tim Duncan, and Greg Popovich, Stern was asked why the league was making this mea culpa: "Simply put, the NBA officials refereeing this game and the San Antonio Spurs were not ready at the time of play.

"Give some credit to the Mavs and coach Rick Carlisle, but we feel we could have controlled this game in a fashion NBA fans are more accustomed to had our referees been more prepared."

Duncan and Popovich agree. "The Spurs organization totally supports this move..this isn't the same Mavs team we played with Avery coaching. I don't think that's right. You can't just raise your level of play like that so dramatically without any kind of warning. We feel like the Mavericks coach Rick Carlisle played a trick on us...laying low all season and then springing them on us."

"Our officials were not ready for this level of play. Coaches and teams around the league were well aware of Avery Johnson's complete incompetence, but they had no idea how incompetent, apparently," Stern opines.

"We thought we had put this Mavs team to rest in 2006, and their performance this season was in line with that. If we had known the Mavs were capable of this, we would have put some of our more veteran officials in the game to prevent this kind of mismatch."

TNT Knows Drama

"Our fans are used to a certain level of competitiveness in these playoff games, especially our Spurs fans, who have more than paid their dues, have seniority, and whom are extremely loyal," Stern explains.

"We also like to keep the Spurs in an elevated position to give hope to other small market teams. And Duncan is a great ambassador for the game," Stern confesses, "he appeals to both white and black fans, unlike a Nowitzki, who has a limited market appeal. Dirk does not poll well in our young street market share."

NBA official Joey Crawford says he takes full responsibility for the Game Three debacle. "It was a weird situation, I gotta admit. Normally, as a veteran official in these playoff games, you feel like you are in full control.

"I've never personally been a part of a playoff game I couldn't impact. We, as veteran officials, pride ourselves on being able to keep any type of game in the playoffs close. You should have seen some of those Bulls games when Jordan was on some terrible teams.

"Normally, in this type of situation with the Mavs, we like to give an unwarranted flagrant when the game is getting out of control, or kick the coach out of the game, like we did Don Nelson a few years back. We still laugh about that one—one of my personal favorite highlights at officials gatherings," Crawford says laughing.

"Had we known the Mavs were capable of this kind of play, we likely would have suspended Dampier for his comments about putting Parker on his back or suspended Terry and Howard for bumping into Parker in Game Two. We gave him the flagrant, but I think we could have pushed that farther. Fans love crazy stuff like that. It's almost a WWE approach to the game, really."

Dirk and Cuban Are a Perfect Storm of Shadenfruede Appeal

"We spend millions of dollars looking for ways to job that Mavs team," NBA officials explain, "We feel it is one of the finest achievements of our league.

"We call it the 'shadenfeude scenario'. Our analysis has shown NBA fans love to see a team have their hearts torn apart on the biggest stage repeatedly, just as much as they enjoy watching a team and superstar win championships repeatedly."

"Another recent example was the Sacramento Kings. We did heavy test screening previous to some stuff we did in that Kings-Lakers series. We feel we revolutionized pro sports scripting there. Then we raised the bar even more in the Mavs-Heat series," Stern beams.

Well, this time the Mavs aren't cooperating apparently.

Dirk Nowitzki Needs His "Robert Horry"

Max Fischer — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 17:15:49 -0500

Many people don't realize it, but Robert Horry is one of the most unique and valuable players in NBA history. I don't believe people understand what makes Horry so valuable and why he has been so "lucky" his whole career.

Most people would probably point to Horry's clutch shooting and solid defense and call him a role player. But I believe there is something about Horry that not only makes him successful, but also makes the stars he has played with successful.

Horry won two rings in Houston with Hakeem Olajuwan, three rings in Los Angeles with Shaq, and two rings in San Antonio with Tim Duncan.

So what makes Horry different, and what makes him the perfect complementary player to dominant big men?

It's his ability to shoot the three-point shot at the power forward position, which spreads the floor, allowing his centers to operate with the lane cleared.

Having a power forward that can stretch the floor in this way is invaluable. The only way to match it is to have your own dominant low-post player and your own Horry.

But there's only one "Big-Shot Bob". This gives Horry's teams an advantage that can't be matched.

Horry pulls a big out of the paint, allowing his team's post player unfettered access to the rim, as the opposing power forward is forced to move to the three-point line. It's either that, or Horry is wide open to shoot threes. And he loves game-winning threes.

Would those aforementioned big men be considered so great without Horry?

The simple answer is "no." Post players like Hakeem, Shaq and Duncan could never have been near as dominant as they were if they hadn't had Horry.

And what about Robert; would he appear as great without those big men?

I don't think he'd even be close.

What we have with Horry and these pivots is a symbiotic relationship. They both need each other to be their best.

I would contend that Horry was far more valuable to Shaq as a role player than Kobe was as a co-star. Horry's unique skills at the power forward position are more rare than Kobe's as a scorer.

Dirk takes Horry's unique game and takes it to a superstar level. To put it in an analogy: Dirk is to Horry as Shaq is to your average post playing center, or Dirk is to Horry as Jordan is to your average shooting guard.

It's as if you took Horry's skills and made a franchise player out of him.

So who would optimize Dirk's skills the way Horry did Shaq's?

Dirk's "Robert Horry"—his perfect complementary player—needs to be the role-playing version of Shaq. Dirk needs the "Robert Horry" of centers: a guy who can play enough of a post game to pull the defense inside, opening up the perimeter for Dirk.

If Horry, a poor man's Dirk, if you will, can make guys like Hakeem, Shaq and Duncan look so great, imagine what Dirk could do with a "Hakeem-lite."

If Horry could win seven championships with those dominant centers, imagine what Dirk could do with his own complement.

At the same time, Dirk would turn that post player into a star (the way Horry has transcended via his role-playing). It's that "symbiotic" thing at work again.

Too bad Nowitzki hasn't had anything close his entire career. No one even really understands how dominant he could be because he is so rare and such a unique talent.

Dirk has redefined the power forward position with his shooting ability and his ability to take guys his size off the dribble. If only he had the right kind of player playing with him.

Dirk does what Horry does so well, he can sometimes suffice with just a guard posting up. He pulls a man out of the paint, allowing even smaller Mavs to dominate inside.

Guards like Nick Van Exel, Steve Nash, Jerry Stackhouse, Devin Harris, and Jason Terry have been able to attack the rim while in Dallas because Dirk pulls the defense out to the three-point line even more than Horry.

Dirk needs his "Robert Horry" at the center positon: a role-playing post-up man who can block some shots and protect the paint.

Of course, it doesn't have to be a role player. Dirk could do this with a star center, as well, as long as he is the type who keeps defenses honest on the block. If you had a center as dominant as O'Neal playing with Nowitzki, their team could be more dominant than probably any team ever.

Dirk has struggled his whole careeer because he's rarely had a center at all. And the ones he's had have been terrible: Shawn Bradley and Erick Dampier? Neither of these guys has an offensive game, let alone a post game.

Think of Shaq playing with no jumpshooters: It would allow the defense to completely collapse on him. That is what defenses have done with Dirk: taken the ball out of his hands completely. He has no opening to even attack the basket. He is just taken out of the game completely.

Just like Duncan would be triple-teamed on every play if he didn't have Manu and Parker to spread the floor for him.

The saddest thing is that it should be very easy to build around Dirk. All Mark Cuban and the Mavericks have to get is a decent, well-rounded center.

But instead, Cuban has been wasting time. He has never gone to the draft for a big guy, and this is the only way you can get quality centers. They are too valuable to trade for and Dallas has yet to entice any through free agency.

Dirk is a unique and misunderstood talent. Robert Horry, even with less raw skill, has been so successful because he plays with the same style at the power forward position.

Mavs Trade: Three Way: Big Z and Amare

Max Fischer — Sat, 14 Feb 2009 02:45:10 -0500

This is a trade I propose to get the Mavs over the hump and finally win a championship. This trade is important for the Mavs because it finally puts a true center with Dirk which will allow him to lead like he has never lead before.

Dirk is an offensive player and needs to be in a position to play his game...which is a dominant offensive player. He has never had the personnel around him to do this though—a center that complements him offensively.

The closest Dirk has ever had was Raef LaFrentz. LaFrentz was the closest thing Dirk ever had to a center with an offensive game. But Raef was really more of a forward, like Dirk. Big Z is ideal to play with Dirk because Z is just as versatile offensively as Dirk but at the center position. Both Dirk and Big Z will make each other better perimeter players than they have ever been and better post players than they have ever been. Having a player of Z's quality at the center position will force teams to defend Dirk in such a way that they have never had to in the past.

Having a center forces teams to keep 2 bigs in the game which forces one big to be on Dirk, this puts Dirk in his comfrot zone, which is taking bigmen off the dribble. But Dirk has never been able to play this game in his career. Because the Mavs have never had a true offensive threat at center. So teams could go small on Dirk and take him out of his comfort zone. Which is a big reaosn he hasn't been as dominant as he could be. And a big reason why he has struggled to be a leader.. because it forces the ball out of Dirk's hands to his subpar teammates.

The majors of the deal involve sending Josh Howard, Brandon Bass and Jerry Stackhouses expiring contract to Phoenix.

Phoenix would be sending Amare to Cleveland and Grant Hill to Dallas.

Cleveland would be sending Big Z and Eric Snow to Dallas. The deal works out on RealGM's trade checker.

http://www.realgm.com/src_tradechecker/3/

June Jones Was Right: Tim Tebow is a System Quarterback

Max Fischer — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 18:13:36 -0400

June Jones was right.

I didn't think so at the time he said it. But, the more I think about it. The more I see Tim Tebow and the things he does.

The more I hear the word "legend" thrown around when describing Tebow's athletic feats or even his inhuman training regimen or his unmatched competitiveness. The more I realize that June Jones was right.

Although, I don't know if Jones even realizes he was right, considering he himself didn't believe what he was saying when he said it!

The reality is Tebow is the only true "system" quarterback to ever play the game. You see, Tebow is in fact a system unto himself.

Every other QB in the past relied on a system to allow them to function. Pocket passers rely on a pocket passing system.

We don't even realize what a contrived system it is because it's been in vogue for so long. Pocket passers rely on great receivers and incredibly complex and contrived passing routes and cuts, misdirection and guile.

Pocket passers rely on their running backs to pound the ball up the middle to open the passing lanes and take pressure off their receivers.

Pocket passers rely on their linemen to create the pocket for them to operate in a sea of tranquility.

The reality is that all of this is a system. Pocket passers are system players.

This is where Tebow is different. He relies less on a system than any other QB before him. Tebow himself is the system. His linemen create no pocket. His line is like a sieve.

Defenders are pouring through, hitting Tebow or pressuring him on every play before he even has a chance to catch the ball, yet Tebow uses his running ability to elude these defenders and get a pass off with a 6-foot-7 defensive lineman in his face.

Tebow uses his Pro Bowl linebacker's body to absorb monster hits while he is getting his passes off under immense pressure or to throw off would-be tacklers.

He uses his running back's speed that is the equal of Dennis Dixon and Vince Young to run both inside and outside of the tackles. This in turn opens his receivers' passing game and opens up lanes for his running backs rather than the other way around.

He uses his elite arm to take pressure of his own running game and his running backs.

No QB in history has had as many options as Tebow. Critics said Tebow amassed 55 touchdowns last season because he was running them in from two to five yards out.

But they ignore the fact that Tebow's running was what got his team to within a couple yards of the end zone in the first place.

Tebow wasn't filling the role of a finesse runner last season like other running QBs. He was the one pounding the ball up the middle, opening the perimeter for his receivers.

People don't realize it, but last season Tebow was filling the two toughest positions in football by himself: that of the prime running back, running the ball between the tackles; and the quarterback.

This is different than any other QB in the past. No other running QB has been as adept at both running and passing as Tebow, nor as durable on top of it.

Tebow is able to pound out the tough yards up the middle, as well as the finesse yards outside the tackles. Though people haven't seen his finesse running game enough, because he hasn't had a between-the-tackles running back to complement him. And he doesn't need them to function either.

Tebow is the low post player of running QB's. He is the Tim Duncan or Shaq of running QBs, where Mike Vick and Vince Young were the Kobe's and AI's of running QBs. Volume shooters. Perimeter players.

It's the low post players who win championships. Although Tebow can pass the ball like a true pocket passer, too, making him a Tim Duncan who can hit his free throws and three pointers as well.

Tebow doesn't run because he can't pass. He runs because if Tom Brady or Peyton Manning could run like Tebow they would do it, too. And they would be far better for it.

Defenses are too fast nowadays. Peyton Manning is as good a pure passer as we have ever seen, yet he only has one championship. Why is that?

The league has a dirty secret. One they don't even realize they have. One that is smacking them in the face, yet they refuse to accept it.

The pure pocket passer is dead. And he's been dead for awhile.

But the NFL is too slow to adapt, too uncreative to build the right kinds of systems around the more athletic QBs that could be cultivated.

The college game is like a looking glass to the NFL future. They can experiment like the NFL can't.. they don't have to worry about 10-year veterans being unable to fit into their system if traded for or signed.

This is why the spread is propagating so rapidly in the college game. There is too much athletic parity in college. In the pros, offenses don't have the advantage they did in recent years. Defenses are too big, fast and strong across the board.

Pocket passers can't be protected like they were in the past. Look at Brady in the Super Bowl. Even with his stellar offensive line, he was pounded savagely. Look at Peyton Manning: the best pocket passer of this era, yet he only has one championship.

In the 70s or 80s, he would probably have three or four championships, at least. Just the other day, Brady and the opposing QB both went down in the same game, Brady for the season. Both are pure pocket passers.

I saw the same thing in a game last season. Two NFL pocket passers went down in the same game with serious injuries.

Other offensive systems of the past relied on all different elements of the offense working together to allow the QB to be successful and all kinds of contrived offensive maneuvers to make them work or dominant players at other positions like Randy Moss or TO as a receiver or Brandon Jacobs as a running back.

Tebow is the prime mover of his offense unlike any QB before. The Tebow system relies on making the game as simple as imaginable, rather than as complex as imaginable. This illustrates why it in fact is a system devoid of a system.

This is what separates Tebow. This is why if Tebow is a system QB it is a system unlike any we have ever seen. It is the Tim Tebow system.

The only question is...will the NFL be smart enough to let him use it? I think they will.

I think Tebow will force the league to realize that running athletic QB's are superior if used properly. It took someone like Tebow, who is way ahead of his time, who spontaneously developed, to act as the impetus for change.

Tiger Woods' Tale: Deep Thoughts and Quick Hits

Max Fischer — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 12:43:25 -0400

Ok, let me get this straight; Tiger is called the greatest athlete of our day.

He is being revered for his heroics by playing on a severely injured leg to win golf's toughest tournament.

This is supposed to be his finest hour, topping all his other incredible athletic achievements.

Yet what did Tiger really do?

He beat a 45-year-old Rocco Mediate.

What other sport could a 45-year-old compete at the highest level of that sport?

Well, Michael Jordan did compete very well at the age of 40 in basketball, a sport that truly requires athleticism.

I hate to be a party pooper, but if you ask me, as nice of a story as it was for both Rocco and Tiger, this really just affirms what I have always believed about Tiger, he's not an athlete.

Tiger might as well have won darts competition with carpal tunnel or a billiards tournament with a bad back or the gout.

Tiger might be a great winner, and extremely talented at what he does.

But in my mind he will never be near Roger Federer as an athlete.

People have claimed Federer isn't in Wood's league because of his recent troubles, but what Fed has to do athletically is so far and above Tiger Woods it is a complete joke, which is why his dominance in tennis has been so much more impressive.

John Daly and Rocco Mediate would be dead after one opening round match of a Grand Slam in tennis.

Mavericks Talk: Josh Howard For Baron Davis

Max Fischer — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 09:04:24 -0400

I know I know... I've been saying it over and over... the last thing the Mavs need in the Dirk Nowitzki era is another scoring guard. All Dirk has had around him are scoring guards, guards that do the same things he does, only not as well. Then the opposing defense just takes the ball out of Dirk's hands and allows these guys to shoot the Mavs out of games.

This is different, I tell you!

Baron Davis would fall under the Nick Van Exel, Jason Kidd clause. That states, that if the little guard plays like a big man (unlike all the other guards who have played with Dirk), then this type of guard will actually complement Dirk perfectly—if the coach will actually use the player to their strengths (Avery).

With Baron and Kidd, you have two guards who can post up and pass out to Dirk to hit clutch threes like a super Robert Horry at the power forward position.

If you think about it, Dirk, Kidd, and Baron would be like a play on KG, Pierce, and Allen—only an incredibly unconventional one because your guards are playing like bigs and your big, Dirk, is playing more like a guard.

And always remember kids, when building around Dirk, unconventional is the key! When you have the most unique and unconventional power forward to ever play the game, the last thing you want to do is build a conventional team around him.

Cuban lost site of this completely for a couple years. Let's hope he's come to his senses...

The deal makes sense for the Warriors because Baron is at a stage in his career where he wants to compete for a championship. Baron has been the man; he's had to carry the load all by himself for years.

Josh Howard wants that opportunity. Josh wants to be the guy in that position at this point in his career. He's had to play the lesser role since he came into the league.

Mavericks Talk: The Deal That Would Lift Dallas Back to the NBA Finals

Max Fischer — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 14:08:51 -0400

This deal couldn't be more simple. But the effect on both teams couldn't be more significant. As I see it, this move will get both the Mavs and Cavs back to the Finals—and let the best team win!

The deal would be a straight up swap of Erick Dampier for the Cavs' big man in the middle, Zydrunas Ilgauskas.

The deal checks out on the Real GM Trade Checker (Trade ID #466083).

Why the Mavs do it

I see this deal as a straight-up trade of offense for defense. For Dirk to be his best, he needs a big man with an offensive game. Big Z has both a low post game and a perimeter jumper, which would match-up perfectly with Dirk, who also has a low post game and perimeter jumper.

An offensive center would prevent opposing teams from being able to take the ball out of Dirk's hands. Right now, defenses can allow Dampier's defender to wait in the paint or sag off of Dampier.

This trade would allow Dirk to be the leader everyone wants him to be. Big Z's offensive game would also mesh better with Jason Kidd as well.

Why the Cavs do it

Dampier is a big, physical bruiser. He would be ideal for banging on the Celtics' and Pistons' physical big men.

I could see Dampier and LeBron combining to become a more physical and defensive-orientated tandem than Big Z and Bron. This would be ideal for the Eastern Conference.

Debunking NBA Myths: The Boston Celtics Aren't a Great Defensive Team

Max Fischer — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 22:21:12 -0400

I keep hearing how great the Celtics defense is. I have been hearing it all season. Just like I keep hearing how great of a defender Garnett is, and how Paul Pierce shut Kobe down in the Finals.

But are the Celtics really a great defensive team?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't Ray Allen and Paul Pierce considered great offensive players before last season? Are we to believe that Garnett is such an incredible defender that he made these guys into All-World defensive players? Or that Doc Rivers turned them into great defensive players?

If Garnett was so incredible defensively, then why did he need to leave Minnesota? Why did Dirk Nowitzki torch Garnett repeatedly in the playoffs, and sweep him in a playoff series? If KG is so great defensively, then why did Pau dominate him one-on-one many possessions, forcing Doc Rivers to have other players defend Pau throughout the Finals?

You take three players that were known as great offensive players in the past, put them together, and all of a sudden, voila! They are the best defensive team in NBA history.

Something doesn't add up here.

To see what is really happening here, let's go back in time—to the playoffs before these, when the Mavericks faced the Golden State Warriors in a series that is now called "The Debacle" by Mavs fans.

The Mavericks won 67 games in the regular season, and were one of the higher ranked defensive teams in the league. The Warriors were a scrappy offensive team, that just made the playoffs due to a midseason trade and had one of the worst defenses in the league—if not the worst.

Yet that Warriors team knocked off the Mavs in the first round of the playoffs, despite the Mavs' home-court advantage and superior defense.

How could the Warriors, who were one of the supposed worst defensive teams, and one of the best offensive teams in the NBA, beat such a solid defensive team? Especially when defense wins in the playoffs? How could offense-first coach Don Nelson so thoroughly beat down defensive genius Avery Johnson? Maybe numbers don't really tell the story.

Let's look at the Warriors. The Warriors are considered one of the best offensive teams in the league, simply because they put up a lot of points per game.

But does that mean the Warriors are really a great offensive team just because they score a lot of points? Doesn't scoring a lot of points per game just mean you play at a high tempo? Couldn't that work the same for a defensive team, too?

Couldn't you have a team that played a slow pace look like a better defensive team just because they play a more methodical style?

But what if you had some great offensive players on that slow tempo team—some tremendously efficient offensive players. But you still played a slow, methodical style. Couldn't you be a great offensive team even though you don't score a ton of points?

So my theory is that the Celtics play that slowdown pace. They have three excellent offensive players in Garnett, Pierce, and Allen, who complement each other very well. They are a lot like Duncan, Manu and Parker—only better versions of Parker and Ginobli, really.

But how can being a great offensive team make you look like a great defensive team? The same way the Golden State Warriors, who played poor defense, could beat the Mavs.

Great offense is a form of defense. When you have a great offense it puts so much pressure on the opposing team to score that your great offense becomes defense—especially when the opposing team is always taking the ball out of the net rather than rebounding and running back on your defense.

If you look back in history there are many teams like this. Look at Shaq—he has been known to be a huge defensive liability, because he never comes out to the three-point line to defend players. So opposing teams would get wide open three after wide open three.

How could the Championship Lakers be one of the best defensive teams if Shaq was so terrible on defense? Because, as I see it, Shaq was so dominant on offense, he was scoring at will in the paint while opponents were forced to shoot jumpers. That put too much pressure on the opposing offense.

Shaq's Lakers teams had a wealth of offensive players—just like this Celtics team. And interestingly, if you look at the Spurs and Celtics this season, their field-goal percentage was nearly identical—and their points per game was close, too.

If the Spurs had home court advantage in their series with the Lakers, things might have gone the same way for the Spurs that they did for the Celtics.

Maybe having a super efficient offense is the key to having a great defense. Maybe Tim Duncan's great defensive reputation is really more about his offense than his defense.

After the Celtics' experiment in this bizarre season, that's how I will always see it.

The NBA Coaching Carousel: Don Nelson to the Phoenix Suns?

Max Fischer — Sat, 10 May 2008 09:45:24 -0400

Doug Collins ?

Tom Thibodeau????!!!

Dan Majerle????!!

Eddie Johnson????!!!

These are the names being bandied about as potential replacements for Mike D'Antoni, the apparent new coach of the New York Knicks.

These are the guys being considered to coach Steve Nash, Amare Stoudemire and Shaquille O'Neal.

Are you kidding me?

It has made me truly ill to see Don Nelson kicked to the curb by the Mavs organization and then forced to toil as the coach of the downtrodden Golden State Warriors the past few years.

Talentless hacks like Avery Johnson and D'Antoni have won Coach of the Year, thanks to what Nellie has accomplished over the past several years

Nellie built Nash and Dirk, and then he was forced to watch those players be split up by Cuban's ignorance and then run into the ground by Avery Johnson and Mike D'Antoni. These two coaches are doing pathetic imitations of Gregg Popovich and Don Nelson.

Nellie never in his career had a team as talented as D'Antoni's Suns team, nor has he had a team so perfectly built to win a championship.

It was bad enough seeing Nellie suffer on the Warriors' bench to coach them to the biggest upset in NBA history over the Dallas Mavericks, while D'Antoni mismanaged that stellar team in Phoenix. That's a team I have no doubt in my mind Nellie could have coached to a championship.

Then we have to see a team with Nash, Amare and Shaq coached by one of these coaches with no experience and even less talent. Truly disturbing.

If there is some kind of justice in this world, some kind of basketball god, Nellie will find himself released of his Golden State Warriors contract and on the bench of the Phoenix Suns. He can counter the Hack-a Shaq he himself invented and Popovich used to knock the Suns out of the playoffs.

Nellie could do it, too. D'Antoni and the rest of these halfwits certainly won't.

NBA Consensus: Dirk Nowitzki Isn't a Leader?

Max Fischer — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 09:06:27 -0500

Like the old saying goes, if everyone believes something it must be wrong.

Come to think of it, does someone actually say that? Or is it just me.

Either way, I believe it. Now more than ever—especially in the NBA.

Case in point—I have been hearing over and over since the NBA Finals when the Miami Heat beat the Dallas Mavericks how Dirk isn't a leader, and this is why the Mavs can't win a championship.

I find this opinion incredibly ridiculous. Where does this come from? What is the logic behind it?

How can anyone try to diminish what Dirk has accomplished, even without winning a championship? Not only is he the first European player to lead his team to the finals in NBA history. He is also the first white player to truly lead his team to the NBA Finals since Larry Bird, 20 years ago! Think about that.

And Dirk did it through an incredibly tough conference and through

the NBA champion San Antonio Spurs. And he did it without getting the respect other

NBA superstars get, because Dirk has always been treated like a second class citizen in the NBA.

I am sure Phoenix Suns fans can understand how this feels. They saw Bruce Bowen and the entire San Antonio defense get away with the same "bear hug" defense Bowen and company employed against Dirk. Because with players like Nash and Dirk it pays to foul them. Because the ratio of fouls committed, to fouls called, will always be lower than other, more preferred, superstars. Especially guys with a lot of highlight dunks that fit the standardized mold of NBA superstar.

Yet Dirk got through his "bear hug defense" and went to the NBA Finals and Nash didn't.

And Nash had two other superstars playing around him and a team full of talent and a team built perfectly to complement his skills—while Dirk had no other All-Star caliber player and a team built to actually hurt Dirk's game rather than complement it.

Dirk was even lambasted for not being able to beat Shaq and Dwyane Wade—two mega-superstars who are given carte blanche in the NBA.

Dirk supposedly choked because he couldn't beat a team with two superstars without another superstar on his team other than himself?

Even now, because of this Kidd trade to Dallas, you have people saying the Mavs didn't believe in Dirk as a leader. It's not Dirk people don't believe in—it's Dirk's second banana that is in question. That's why what Dirk has done is so incredible, because he is truly carrying that team entirely.

And this is why Kidd was brought in. No team wins with only one leader. You need multiple leaders to win championship. The Mavs have a great one in Dirk, but that's all they have. And that's why Kidd's experience is so important on the Mavs. Because if anything killed the Mavs in the NBA finals, it was his supporting cast's total lack of experience. Even Avery was completely inexperienced. There wasn't an assistant coach in the NBA with less coaching experience than Avery and he was coaching in the NBA Finals.

I have heard people say bringing Kidd in is an indictment of Dirk's leadership abilities by the Mavs brass. Again, this is completely backwards. It is an indictment of Dirk's supporting cast. It's Josh Howard, Jason Terry and Devin Harris who have come up short in their roles as Robin to Dirk's Batman. Avery has said this repeatedly since he became coach.

The most comical part of this though is that people continue to say this yet two superstars and perennial all-stars and MVP candidates need to bring Shaq in to help them win a championship. These are supposedly two superstars. And yet Dirk doesn't even have a second all-star.

This is the same thing as in LA, where Kobe has Odom, Bynum and Phil Jackson.

And yet, Kobe hasn't led his team to the NBA finals without Shaq, and Dirk did. And it was Kobe whining in the media, demanding to be traded from LA and begging for help, not Dirk.

So how can people explain the constant attack on Dirk? He is the one least deserving of criticism.

And to top all this off: Not only does Dirk carry his team the most. Not only is he the BEST leader of all the elite teams, but Dirk carries his national team every single summer as well.

Other NBA stars can't even handle playing for team USA once every three years. And they are just another superstar on team USA. They aren't carrying a bad team on their backs entirely with little glory and the same kind of brutal defenses allowed on Dirk in the NBA as well.

The reality is that Dirk isn't a bad leader—in fact, it's the complete opposite.

He's the best in the business.

Jason Kidd Complements Dirk Nowitzki Better Than Steve Nash

Max Fischer — Sun, 17 Feb 2008 18:18:10 -0500

With the new Jason Kidd to Dallas trade finally resurrected, and seemingly imminent, we can finally start analyzing the deal and try to predict how this new team will function.

Many people seem to believe that Dirk and Kidd won't be able to get it done because Dirk and Nash were never able to. There are a couple errors in this thinking, though.

First of all, Dirk isn't the same player he was with Nash. Dirk hadn't reached his prime with Nash and Nash hadn't reached his prime with Dirk either. These guys were both late bloomers who are still developing even right now.

Case in point—Dirk just had his first triple-double a few days ago. With the poor shooters on the Mavs, that is especially impressive. Especially because he can't pass to himself.

But the most important thing that differentiates Kidd from Nash is that Kidd's game has the potential to complement Dirk much more than Nash's game ever did.

Nash was, and is, your prototypical point guard. Ideally you want to pair a player like Nash with a prototypical power forward or center.

I am sure this was Kerr's thinking in Phoenix as well—Nash and Shaq have the potential to complement each other as well as any tandem to ever play the game and could add a decade to each others careers.

But the problem with Nash and Dirk in Dallas is that Dirk is about as far from your prototypical post playing power forward as is imaginable.

Teams don't just put small defenders on Dirk in the playoffs to create mismatches all over the court for themselves defensively and to make Dirk a better post player, forcing them to double and triple him there.

They put small defenders on Dirk because he can take seven footers off the dribble at will.

Dirk plays the power forward position like a shooting guard —that's what makes him so special.

Then you have Jason Kidd, who is just as unique at his position. Unlike Nash, Kidd has the ability to post up most point guards.

This is what could make Dirk an entirely different player in the playoffs. Even though it's in an unusual package, Dirk finally has the kind of player he always needed—a post player that will finally take some pressure off him on the perimter and finally give the Mavs a post player other than himself.

And this should allow Dirk to actually play his game and be the leader he has always had the potential to be, because all through his career he never once had that kind of player.

So now we have two unconventional superstars that could make each other better than they have ever been before.

The only question: Is Avery Johnson too conventional to coach them?