I know we're supposed to be all Blake Griffin all the time around here, but a quick meta-post, blogging about blogging...

The SBNation Colts blogger, BigBlueShoe from Stampede Blue, was recently called out by Indy Star columnist Bob Kravitz.  Kravitz' point, such as it was, was that BigBlueShoe has no credibility because it's impossible to hold BigBlueShoe accountable for what he writes without knowing his real name.

The debate went from the newspaper, to the blog, and eventually to the airwaves, where BigBlueShoe was a guest on Kravitz' show. The timing of this incident, a couple of months after I made the decision to stop using a pseudonym for Clips Nation, is very interesting.

Let me just say, that listening to Bob Kravitz' inanely simplistic arguments makes me wish in a way that I was still ClipperSteve.  The feeling that I have somehow acquiesced to his banal position is quite distasteful to me.  But at the same time, it's one more roadblock to credibility that bloggers don't really need in the end - it's a battle I'm choosing not to fight.

I'm not going to get into the larger philosophical questions at this time.  If you're interested and you've got the time, read about it and listen to the discussion.

In 1988, the Clippers won the draft lottery and selected first in the draft.  A decade later, in 1998, they won it again.  This time it took a little longer, but 11 years after the last time they received the number 1 pick, the Clippers have won the NBA's draft lottery.

It's particularly fortuitous this year, because there is a clear consensus for the number 1 overall pick:  barring a shocking turn of events Blake Griffin of Oklahoma is going to be the pick.  He's been the consensus pick for the best player available essentially since he withdrew his from last year's draft, and he's done nothing but solidify that impression all along.

There's plenty to think about.  Let's go with the 10 Questions format:

Is Blake Griffin definitely going to be the first pick?  In a word, yes.  During the conference call after the lottery, Andy Roeser stopped short of saying he was definitely the pick.  But he raved about the guy's athleticism and talent, and said that the organization expects to make a decision very quickly.  Roeser hadn't spoken to Sterling or Dunleavy or anyone within the organization yet, so he's certainly not going to announce the Clippers' pick: but unless the kid fails a drug test or does something else similarly bizarre, he's the guy.

Is Blake Griffin a franchise player?  That's a much, much tougher question, and of course the real crux of the matter.  The short answer is we don't know.  Number 1 overall picks go on to have disappointed careers all the time:  Kwame Brown, Kenyon Martin, Joe Smith, Andrea Bargnani and of course Michael Olowokandi were all first overal picks within the last 15 years.  However, none of those guys were considered can't miss pros the way Griffin is.  They were picked number one because no one else seemed better at the time.  That's not the case with Griffin.  He's not first by default.  He's the consensus pick and consensus numbers ones have a damn good record in the NBA - we're talking Tim Duncan, LeBron James, Shaquille O'Neal, David Robinson. 

So, how good is this guy?  He's good.  Really, really good.  His athleticism is off the charts, certainly for a guy his size.  He's Amare Stoudemire with a work ethic.  But here's what I really love about Blake Griffin:  in the NCAA tournament, as the one guy on the Sooners that defenses simply had to stop, facing constant double and triple teams, he averaged 28.5 points and 15 rebounds per game while shooting 78% from the field.  Great players play great in big situations.  And remember, Oklahoma only lost to eventual champion North Carolina, and happened to give them their closest game of the tournament.  Compare Griffin's NCAA tournament numbers to James Harden's (a guy who will likely be a top 5 pick).  For that matter, compare Griffin's NCAA tournament numbers to any big man of the past 20 years.  He's not the number one pick because this is a down year.  He's the number one pick because he's a great, great basketball player.

So what could we find out that could kill the buzz?  Well, we could find out he's really 6'6".  He's listed at 6'10", but college heights turn out to be exaggerated all the time.  Of course, it doesn't change his productivity in college.  But if he's actually undersized to play power forward in the NBA, it changes his prospects.  The good news is, at least one person who should know insists that he's 6'10" in his shoes, meaning he'll likely measure 6'9" barefoot, which is great.  We'll get all of this physical data (height, wing span, vertical jump, etc.) from the NBA combine in Chicago which starts on May 27th, a week from now.  You may recall that Kevin Durant turned out to be less athletic than people thought when they measured him - but that hasn't hurt him as a pro.  I think Griffin's going to measure off the charts, but we'll just have to wait and see.

Will the Clippers try to move a big to make room for him?  I think they will.  Roeser didn't have much to say when asked the question tonight.  But the issues remain what they have been for awhile.  Chris Kaman's trade value is likely depressed by his recent injury issues.  Kaman's the true center of the group, and probably a better post scorer than Griffin at this point, so he would seem to be the best fit on paper.  Zach Randolph, the biggest overlap with Griffin, is virtually untradeable right now, given the size of his contract and his off court problems.  Maybe the team will go ahead and move Marcus Camby now, as his productivity and expiring deal may be of interest to teams - but they may hold onto him as well for the coming cap relief.  But on this subject I'll leave you with what Roeser said: "It's not a good problem - it's a great problem."

Any chance they trade the pick?  No.  I mean, I guess Oklahoma City could decide to overpay for him, and Roeser says they'll listen to offers.  But it's not happening.

What, if anything, does this mean for Baron Davis?  It's hard to say.  My belief (or is it simply my hope?) is that the energy and interest and enthusiasm surrounding the number one pick will motivate Baron to get in great shape, to play hard, to be a leader.  Let's face it - the team is loaded with talent at this point, and if the Baron Davis from Oakland in 2007 plays point guard for them, they could be very, very good.  If last season's Baron Davis is the point guard, it's a very different team.

Does this have any bearing on Mike Dunleavy's status as the coach?  It doesn't seem like it will.  First of all, it's very unusual to wait this long into the off-season before making a change.  It almost never happens.  Secondly, if you believe that Sterling is looking for an excuse to keep Dunleavy to save money because he's already under contract for two more seasons, this is probably it.  We know from comments on Clips Nation that Griffin by himself will bring many season ticket holders back, and will likely bring some new ones in as well.  I asked the question of Roeser during the conference call, and he said he expects Dunleavy to be the coach:  "We have every intention of opening camp with Mike Dunleavy this year."

How good will the Clippers' summer league team be?  If all their guys play, I'd say pretty good.  They need a small forward, but it figures that DeAndre Jordan, Blake Griffin, Eric Gordon and Mike Taylor could win some summer league games with my aunt Nancy playing the three.  With those four guys and Al Thornton the Clippers could easily play significant regular season minutes with players acquired in the last three drafts - an impressive string.

So does this make the Clippers a playoff team?  Maybe.  But not just because of the talent infusion of Blake Griffin.  The bigger impact Griffin can have is by reversing the negative feedback loop that's been plaguing the Clippers since last October.  We've said it over and over, but from conditioning before camp, to injuries, to chemistry, to irrelevance, the Clippers 08-09 season went from bad to worse at every turn.  If the team, which everyone agrees has talent, is going to turn it around, it will have more to do with the enthusiasm a high visibility pick can bring.  Baron Davis (and of course team health) will be the keys.  Eric Gordon will do his part, the bigs certainly have enough talent to hold up their end if they stay healthy and small forward isn't a big enough problem to scuttle the whole deal.  If Baron plays well, the team can make the playoffs next year.  But they can easily miss the playoffs as well.  More importantly, with Eric Gordon and Blake Griffin, two 20 year old studs, the Clippers may have a core for the future to stack up with any pair in the NBA.

The bad news in all of this is that we won't have nearly as much to talk about over the next month or so.  We know who the Clippers are picking.  We don't even have a second round pick to talk about. So what are we going to do around here?

Vegas, baby.  Vegas.

Here we go. 

If you want to see what other lottery team fans are talking about, check out the threads on other sites.

• Sacramento Kings - Sactown Royalty
• Washington Wizards - Bullets Forever
• Oklahoma City Thunder - Welcome to Loud City
• Minnesota Timberwolves - Canis Hoopus
• Memphis Grizzlies - 3 Shades of Blue
• Golden State Warriors - Golden State of Mind
• New York Knicks - Posting and Toasting
• Toronto Raptors - Raptors Republic
• Milwaukee Bucks - BrewHoop
• New Jersey Nets - NetsDaily
• Charlotte Bobcats - Rufus on Fire
• Indiana Pacers - Indy Cornrows
• Phoenix Suns - Bright Side of the Sun

(I've listed the SBNation blog where available.  Does that make me a homer?  I dunno.  In each case, it's the blog I reference.  There are other blogs of course.  But it's easier to join in the conversation on the SBNation blogs since you can register easily, etc.)

Here are the complete odds for the 14 lottery teams:

via cdn3.sbnation.com

I haven't checked to see how often this happens, but this year every team has their own pick in the lottery.  That's an indication that teams are getting more savvy with lottery protection of traded picks, not too mention more reluctant to trade first round picks in general.  Of course the Clippers still own a future first rounder from the Wolves, but it remains top 10 protected through 2011.  Jeremy Tyler in 2011?

Usually the Clippers send either their general manager or their coach to represent the team in the lottery.  That means, for years it's been either Elgin Baylor or Mike Dunleavy Sr.  Given that MDsr wears both the hats currently, you might expect that he would be representing the team in Secaucus.  Not so.  This year, it's club president Andy Roeser.  Why?  Who knows?  MDsr has been in Spain checking out Ricky Rubio, so maybe that's the only reason.  Or maybe they're trying to change up their luck.  Or maybe there's a more sinister reason.  But it probably means nothing.

As we discussed, this looks like a two player draft at this point, and the Clippers odds of getting one of the first two picks is 35%.  So get out your rabbit's foot, take the shoe off the horse, and handle all of your mirrors with extra care.  We need a little luck in this one.

If they get the first pick, they'll draft Oklahoma power forward Blake Griffin, as will any other team that picks first.  Chad Ford calls it Griffin's worst nightmare, but I don't see why it's any better or worse.  I think he's a good fit for the Clippers, though it makes it pretty important to try to move Zach Randolph, which won't be easy.

If they get the second pick, they'll draft Ricky Rubio, the teenage Spanish point guard.  The rumor making the rounds is that to make room for Rubio the Clippers will immediately try to ship Baron Davis to Golden State for Corey Maggette if this happens, but I'm not buying that.  Rubio's still a kid and whereas he would certainly be the point guard of the future, it's hard to imagine him starting 18 games next season.  With Baron's trade value at rock bottom, better to keep both for awhile and hope that Baron rehabs his reputation some.

Any thing other than first or second, and there's not much point in predicting who the Clippers will take at this point.  With the draft still a month away, lots will change.  Ford has them taking Hasheem Thabeet.  Whatev.  It's way too early to say.

My feeling is that there won't be much difference between picking third and picking sixth, so if LA doesn't come away with one of the top two picks, it's pretty much the same from there.  As of now, I'm not excited about anyone else in this draft after Griffin and Rubio.  Undoubtedly, we'll talk ourselves into someone between now and the draft - that's how it works - and to be certain there will be very good NBA players in this draft beyond the top two picks.  But whether those few solid pros, maybe even all star level players, are picked third, or sixth, or 27th, no one really knows.

The NBA Draft Lottery takes place today at 5 PM Pacific Time.  Not only is it an important event in the history of at least one if not fourteen NBA franchises, it's also the best real-world example of probability that any basketball fan is likely to come across.  So given that I, for some unknown reason, tend to enjoy delving into the minutiae of various subjects, let's talk probability.

(By the way - in case you haven't figured it out, I'm a generalist.  Other than the Clippers, I don't consider myself an expert on anything.  But I know a little bit about a lot of subjects.  As such, if there are any real probability experts out there, please use the comments to add any salient information and/or correct any mistakes I make.)

First, a fun example that I've always found useful in understanding the big picture in probability.  Imagine you are a contestant on "Let's Make a Deal" (by the way, you're in a gorilla suit).  Behind one of three doors is a fabulous prize, let's say it's a car.  Monte Hall tells you to pick a door.  You pick door number 2.  Monte now shows you what is behind door number 1 - it's a year's supply of Spam.  And here's the big question - Monte asks if you would like to change your choice - do you want to stick with door number 2, or change to door number 3?

What should you do?  What is the probability that the car is behind door number 2?  What is the probability that it is behind door number 3?

Most people intuitively think that the odds are the same - that there's a 1 in 3 chance that the car is behind each of the doors.  Believing that, they feel a loyalty to their first choice, and they stick with it.  WRONG!

If you are ever on "Let's Make a Deal" and you find yourself in this situation, ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS switch your choice.  Here's why.  The important factor to bear in mind is not the odds that you made the CORRECT choice originally, but the odds that you made the INCORRECT choice originally.  There's a 2 in 3 chance that you made the incorrect choice.  When Monte showed you the Spam, it now became a 2 in 3 chance that the car is behind door number 3, while there's still only a 1 in 3 chance that it's behind your original door, door number 1. 

What does this have to do with the NBA lottery?  Well, nothing, really.  David Stern is not going to move any further down the game show path than he already has.  But I find that this example helps me understand the subject of probability.  Plus, it has a gorilla suit in it.

We discuss the ping pong balls a lot, and jokingly say that each loss represents more ping pong balls.  But that's not actually true.  In fact, there are only 14 ping pong balls, each with a number from 1 to 14.  Each non-playoff team is then, according to their order of finish on the regular season, assigned a certain number of combinations of those numbers.

There are 1001 possible combinations of 14 ping pong balls, without replacement and without regard to the order.  OK, what does that mean?  Without replacement means that the ping pong ball with the number 7 on it can only appear once - 7-7-7-7 is not a valid combination.  With replacement, the numerator of your equation would be 14 to the fourth power - 14 times 14 times 14 times 14.  Without replacement, the value goes down by one each time - 14 times 13 times 12 times 11.  Makes sense.

But that's a really big number - it comes out to 24,024 in fact.  That's how many combinations there would be if the order mattered: if 1-2-3-4 were considered a different possibility than 1-2-4-3.  But order does not matter in the case of the NBA lottery.  When order does not matter, you divide the numerator by 4 factorial [notated (4!)], or 4 times 3 times 2 times 1 (4 being the number of balls that will be chosen).  This combinatorics problem would commonly be called 14 choose 4.

So, the NBA draft lottery is really a case of 14 choose 4, which gives us:

14*13*12*11/4*3*2*1

24024/24 = 1001

(I think the real equation is actually (14!)/(4!)*((14-4)!) but the (10!) in the numerator and in the denominator cancel out, leaving the above equation.)

The NBA takes those 1001 combinations and assigns 1000 of them to the 14 lottery teams.  The last one is unassigned, and in the 0.1% chance that that combination comes up, they'll just redraw. 

The Clippers have 177 combinations assigned to them.  Remember that LA lost a coin flip to the Wizards, who consequently got one extra chance, or 178.  That gives LA a 17.7% chance of winning the first pick when the four ping pong balls are drawn.  That one's pretty straightforward - 177 chances in 1000 makes 17.7%.

The math for the second and third picks gets more complex.  I don't know all of the details, but I know in general how it works out.  The Clippers odds of getting the second pick is 17.29%, and for the third pick they have a 16.41% chance.  You may be wondering, if their 177 combinations are all still available (which makes sense, given that they must not have gotten the first pick), why are their odds going down?  Here's where the "Let's Make a Deal" example is useful.

Remember to consider the odds that they DIDN'T win the first pick just like you have to remember the odds that you didn't pick the right door when Monte asked.  If they have a 17.7% chance of winning the first pick, they have an 82.3% chance of NOT winning it.  You have to multiply that 82.3% by their odds of winning the second pick, since that's the situation in which they would be eligible for the second pick.  So 82.3% of 17.7% is 14.5671%.  Ooops.  Wait a minute.  Now the odds went down too much, since the NBA tells us that the Clippers have a 17.29% chance at the second pick. 

Here's where it gets complex.  The Clippers still have 177 combinations in play - but it's not longer out of 1000.  Whoever won the first pick is now out of contention, taking all of their combinations with them (those combination become just like the 1001st combo, a do over if they happen).  But the math gets nasty, because we don't know which team will win the first pick.  If the Kings win, then 250 combinations go away, and the Clippers have 177 chances in 750 (23.6%) - but if the Suns win, then only 5 go away, and the Clippers have 177 chances in 995 (17.8%).  The NBA super computers in Secaucus calculated all of the possibilities, and came up with that 17.29% chance the Clippers get the second pick.  I'm just going to believe them on that one.

So there you have it.  17.7% chance they get Blake Griffin, and 17.29% chance they get Ricky Rubio.  Not bad, right?

This is a cruel, cruel year to be in the lottery.  Because that 35% chance of winding up with one of the two consensus prizes in this draft, is up against the 65% chance that they DON'T get a top two pick.  They can't drop below 6, but in this draft, who cares if you're picking third or sixth?  Hell, in some ways third is worse - sure, you get your pick of everyone not named Griffin or Rubio, but that just adds to the pressure, not to mention making the disappointment that much greater if the pick doesn't pan out, which let's face it, could definitely happen.

Will a player from this draft other than Griffin and Rubio turn into a great pro?  Undoutedly.  There is always hidden talent in every draft; the trick is finding it.  The last two "Two player" drafts were 2004 (Dwight Howard and Emeka Okafor) and 2002 (Yao Ming and Jay Williams).  Obviously, in retrospect, those weren't even the right two players (although in Williams' case it was unforeseeable that his career would end in a motorcycle accident).  Howard and Yao are now the two best centers in the NBA, but Amare Stoudamire (9th in 2002), Tayshaun Prince (23rd in 2002), Carlos Boozer (34th in 2002), Devin Harris (5th in 2004), Andre Iguodala (9th in 2004), Al Jefferson (15th in 2004), Jameer Nelson (20th in 2004) and Kevin Martin (26th in 2004) are among the players to come out of those "two player" drafts.  But there were also a lot of bad lottery picks those years. 

At any rate, this is an important lottery.  I'll have an open thread up at 4 PM dedicated to the lottery.  And of course you discuss your thoughts on this thread until then.  If the Clippers are picking first or second in June, the prospects for the near future improve markedly.  There's a 35% chance that will happen.  The other 65%?  Odds are, it doesn't change much.

In the waning moments of Game 7 between the Magic and the Celtics, when it was clear that Boston's season was over, TNT displayed the obligatory "Off-season priorities" graphic.  On it, they listed both Glen Davis and Leon Powe as unrestricted free agents.  This is simply not true.  Both Davis and Powe are RESTRICTED free agents.

It's a common mistake, one we've made on Clips Nation regarding Steve Novak's status.  As Vizzini might say, we fell victim to one of the classic blunders.  "The most famous is never get involved in a land war in Asia, but only slightly less well-known is this: never go in against a Sicilian when death is on the line!"  Slightly less well-known still is, never assume that second round picks are not restricted free agents.  From time to time we like to get into the nitty gritty of the CBA in order to understand better what's going on, so let's look at what appears to be causing so much confusion.

The issue seems to center around second round picks, as Davis and Powe and Novak all are.  This is because first round draft picks have their own set of of very, very specific rules under the CBA, and those rules tend to be better understood (mainly because those players have such high visibility).  For first round draft picks, the first two years are guaranteed at a salary determined by their draft position, years three and four are team options, and the pick USUALLY can become a restricted free agent after four years in the league.  So the high visibility RFA's, the ones that are most likely to sign for big money, fall into that category.  Even so, the team has to make a qualifying offer (again, for a specific amount determined by their draft position) in order to secure the right of first refusal, the essence of the 'restriction' on a restricted free agent.

Many of the first rounders from the draft class of 2005 will be RFA's on July 1.  The best of the best have already signed big money extensions - Chris Paul, Deron Williams, Andrew Bogut, Andrew Bynum, Danny Granger - and Portland locked up Martell Webster on the cheap.  But Marvin Williams and Charlie Villanueva lead a group of intriguing if not overwhelming four year vets into RESTRICTED free agency this year. 

Of course there are lots and lots of exceptions.  Yaroslav Korolev was drafted in 2005, but the Clippers declined their third year option on him.  Likewise, Luther Head was waived by the Rockets this season, and finished the year in Miami.  He is no longer governed by his first round draft pick contract, but rather by his one year deal in Miami.  And Utah did not exercise their third year option on Morris Almond, a first round pick in 2007, making him an UNrestricted free agent this summer.

Second round picks (or more to the point, everyone other than first round picks) are governed by a different set of rules - but it does not mean they are never restricted free agents.  Why does TNT think they are?  Well, I'm guessing it's mostly slothfulness.  There are a handful of very popular web sites that most everyone, whether they are fans or bloggers or graphics guys at TNT, tend to turn to for salary and contract information: HoopsHype is the de facto standard, although ShamSports is probably a little more thorough and accurate.  On HoopsHype, the first round picks are listed with their option years and even the amount of the qualifying offer.  What happens is that many, many people look at the qualifying offer Ilisted in green type) and incorrectly correlate it directly to RFA's.  Unfortunately, whereas it is true that all green qualifying offers on HoopsHype are Restricted Free Agents (assuming the team actually extends the offer), the converse is NOT true - not all RFA's have green qualifying offers on HoopsHype. 

So take a quick look at Boston's page on the site.  Look at Rajon Rondo - a first round draft pick in 2006, the team has already exercised their fourth year option on him for next season, and his QO of almost $3.8M is listed for the following season.  If Boston does not extend him before summer 2010 (which they probably will), he will be an RFA at that point.  Simple:  Green = RFA.  Now look at Davis and Powe.  Davis was a second round pick in 2007, Powe a 2006 second rounder.  Neither is signed for next season, and as such HoopsHype lists a zero for them.  For most people, that zero has come to mean UNrestricted free agent.

Unfortunately, the wealth of information available on the web has made everyone lazy, and very few people actually understand the underlying rules (and I'm not suggesting that I'm one of them, but I do try.) 

The fact is, restricted free agency is not limited to first round draft picks.  Here is the relevant sentence from Larry Coon's Salary Cap FAQ (but you really should read the whole thing on RFA's):

Restricted free agency exists only on a limited basis. It is allowed following the fourth year of rookie "scale" contracts for first round draft picks.... It is also allowed for all veteran free agents who have been in the league three or fewer seasons.

(Emphasis added.)

Glen Davis, Leon Powe, Steve Novak, Paul Millsap - they all fall into that second category.  They have been in the league three or fewer seasons. 

As it happens, the team still has to make a qualifying offer in order to secure their right of first refusal - but given that second round picks usually sign rookie minimum contracts, the QO is invariably so small as to be insignificant.  Again, from Coon's faq:

The qualifying offer for all other players [i.e. other than first round picks] must be for 125% of the player's previous salary, or the player's minimum salary plus $175,000, whichever is greater.

That puts the QO for all of these guys (Davis, Powe, Novak, Millsap, etc.) right around $1M - HoopsHype and ShamSports could list them (and probably should, I guess), but they tend not to impact the team's future cap situation significantly, so that's likely why they don't.

So, as Inigo said to Wesley, "Let me 'splain. [pause] No, there is too much. Let me sum up."

• First round picks become restricted free agents after their fourth season, provided the team has exercised all of their contract options on the player and then extend a qualifying offer;
• All other NBA players are restricted free agents provided they have been in the league three or fewer seasons and the team extends a qualifying offer.
  

There are many other things that get confusing surrounding these second round picks.  One issue that often gets conflated with RFAs is the question of Bird rights.  Back when Gilbert Arenas signed with Washington, the Warriors were unable to match the Wizards offer.  However, that was NOT because Arenas was unrestricted - it was because the Warriors did not have full Bird right's and were therefore not allowed to go over the salary cap to retain him. (That loophole has since been closed, but the solution is incredibly complex, even by NBA CBA standards - feel free to read about it if you like.)

Here are two key things you need to remember about Bird rights:

• As we learned in Schoolhouse Rock, three is the Magic number.  A player qualifies as a Larry Bird free agent if they have been in the NBA at least three consecutive years without being waived or without signing as a free agent. 
• Bird rights are tradeable.  So the Clippers have the right to go over the salary cap to sign Steve Novak, even though he has not played for LA for three seasons, because he has played under his current contract for three years and Houston traded him to LA.  (By contrast, Luther Head was waived and signed with Miami as a free agent - Miami does not have Head's Bird rights.)

Because three is a 'sweet spot' here (RFA's have been in the league three or fewer seasons, Bird free agents have been under contract three or more seasons), three year vets like Novak and Powe and Millsap have a set of circumstances making them much like first round picks:

1. they can sign for any amount of money;
2. their current team can choose to match any offer (i.e. they are restricted free agents);
3. their current team can go over the salary cap to do so (i.e. the team holds the player's Bird rights).

Of course, this is most applicable to Millsap, as he is the only one of the three who is going to sign for more than the mid-level exception.

Glen Davis, on the other hand, being a two year veteran, is an 'early Bird' free agent - Boston can go over the cap to re-sign him, but only up to the mid-level exception.  Fortunately for them, in the wake of the Arenas situation, other teams are only allowed to sign him for the mid-level, so Boston can definitely keep him if they really want to.

So there you go.  A quick primer on RFA's and Bird rights.  If you don't get it all, don't feel bad.  Neither do the guys at TNT.

Getting back to the point of the graphic, Boston does have some difficult decisions this summer.  All of their starters are already signed, the big three to truly massive contracts.  They are already over the luxury tax threshold, without any significant salary coming off their books at this time.  Moverover, two key reserves in Davis and Powe are restricted free agents.  The fact that TNT reported them as unrestricted is sloppy, but not significant - they'll play for Boston if they can get paid.  But they both made major contributions to the team while playing for the league minimum.  They are clearly in line for decent pay days, which will push the team's payroll to new heights.  (Of course, Powe's situation is further complicated by his ACL injury.)  It's Boston, so they'll likely continue to be over the tax threshold (way over the threshold) through the end of next season when Ray Allen's deal expires.  But even the Celtics are going to have to think long and hard about signing Big Baby for $5M when it's really going to cost the $10M.

On a related note, if you want a late first round pick in this draft, get on the phone with Danny Ainge.  The last thing he wants right now is a guaranteed salary for a player unlikely to hlep next season.

The soothsayer warned Julius Caesar to "Beware the Ides of March."  T.S. Eliot's masterpiece The Wasteland begins with the observation that "April is the cruellest month" (though he was probably not referring to mathematical elimination from NBA playoff contention).  But for a Clipper blogger, it doesn't get much worse than May.

With the exception of one glorious year, May is when the Clippers (and yours truly) are sitting around watching other teams in the playoffs.  And invariably, one of those other teams is the Lakers, playing for what seems like an almost annual trip to the NBA Finals.  Meanwhile, given that it's LA and that the Clippers are essentially ignored even when the Lakers AREN'T in the playoffs, there is no news about the team.  None.  Nada.  Zip.  At least in Sacramento there's a coaching search.  Hell, the best thing I've written this month was on Sactown Royalty.  There's just nothing much to talk about here in Clipperville.

Thank goodness that Citizen Mikey P cowboyed up and wrote his Kobe piece.  Nothing like a little Kobe bashing to drive some blog traffic.  I learned a long time ago that if I needed some page views, Kobe bashing was the way to go.  But I always feel a little guilty doing it - sort of like going with the fart joke and getting a cheap laugh.  I thought Mikey's post was great - well reasoned, articulate; not a fart joke at all.  Yes, it attracted a little vehemence from some of Kobe's fans who happened upon it, but that's to be expected (fyi, I deleted that lame FanPost if you're wondering what happened).  It's interesting: you'd think from the reaction of some that Mikey was saying that Kobe was terrible.  He wasn't - he was saying that Kobe is likely the third best wing player in the NBA, something that is an amazing accomplishment in and of itself.  Long time readers of Clips Nation know that Kobe's annual spot on the All Defense team is a major pet peeve of mine.  But I can't write that same post every year (can I?)  So I'm thankful to Mikey for stepping forward.

I went back through the archives, just to see what I wrote about in past Mays.  Last year, there was a lot of canyoneering - and a few playoff observations, and of course something about the myth of Kobe's defense.  Oh, this was interesting - after the Nuggets were swept by the Spurs, I posted about what terrible shape that franchise was in.  How their cap situation was dire and they'd have to dump a big salary (I was right about that) and how the likes of Allen Iverson, Carmelo Anthony, Kenyon Martin and J.R. Smith left them with a bunch of classless thugs, no leadership, and a glaring weakness at point guard.  Amazingly, I don't think I was wrong about any of that, but Chauncey Billups single-handedly fixed it all and now Denver's in the Conference Finals for the first time since the middle of Reagan's presidency. 

The year before that, there were 10 posts on Clips Nation the entire month of May.  Ten posts in a month!  I thought I was being a slacker this year, but we're on pace to double that.

The good news is that it should change in about a week.  The draft lottery is next Tuesday, and obviously we'll have something to focus on there.  More importantly, the draft talk can begin in earnest at that point.  I find it difficult to get too worked up about this prospect or that prospect when the Clippers could be picking anywhere from first to sixth.  After we know where they really are, we can start obsessing.  Not to mention that things will be happening, like draft workouts and the like.

Things could really heat up in July.  In fact, last July was by far the biggest month in the history of Clips Nation.  Of course, we're unlikely to see anything quite like that this year - Elton Brand, Baron Davis, Corey Maggette, Marcus Camby....  There will never be another whirlwind of Clipper activity to match that crazy month.  But there will be SOME roster changes nonetheless, and there will likely be trade rumors at least, maybe even actual trades.  And there will also be Summer League, where the Clippers are likely to have a very high lottery pick playing alongside Eric Gordon, Mike Taylor and DeAndre Jordan.

So hang in there.  I wish I was writing a whole slew of 'coaching search' posts like they are on StR, believe me.  But that just doesn't seem to be happening.  Sure, I could write another 'Baron had a bad year' post or another 'Eric Gordon is really good' post, but I just don't think I have a lot to add to what has already been said. 

Oh, and I have a canyoneering trip coming up in June, so you've got that to look forward to as well.

When the Denver Nuggets put away the Dallas Mavericks last night, Chauncey Billups accomplished something that very few other players have in NBA history.  He led his team to the conference finals of the NBA playoffs for the the seventh consecutive season.  Michael Jordan never did that.  Tim Duncan never did that.  Larry Bird never did that.  The last players to make it to seven straight conference finals were Magic Johnson, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar and Michael Cooper of the Showtime Lakers, who made it eight straight seasons.  Before that, you have to go back to Bill Russell and the Celtics.  That's some pretty elite company.

But what makes Billups' accomplishment even more amazing is that he's a twelve year veteran who wasn't a full time starter until his sixth season in the league.  He spent his first three seasons in the NBA as a full-blown draft bust - what else do you call a guy who was drafted third overall and then traded three times during his rookie contract?  The last trade, in 2000, he was cap-filler - Orlando acquired him in February and renounced their rights to him in August, and he never played a game for them (he had a separated shoulder at the time of the trade).  (The irony here is that Orlando jumped through numerous hoops to clear enough cap space to acquire Tracy McGrady and Grant Hill.  One of those hoops was renouncing their rights to Billups.  Another was including Ben Wallace in the trade for Hill.  Billups and Wallace became two key members of the Pistons' championship team, while Hill was literally never healthy six seasons in Orlando.)  The next two seasons, Billups played well as a backup in Minnesota, and filled in when Terrell Brandon was hurt. 

So five seasons into his NBA career, he was at worst a bust, and at best a backup.  Then he signed with Detroit, and immediately he became a hall-of-famer.  Since signing with the Pistons, he has never once come off the bench.  He has never lost a first round playoff series.  He has never lost a second round playoff series.  He has been to the NBA Finals twice, winning one championship and the Finals MVP award for good measure.  He has played in four all star games.  He has made three All-NBA teams (including his inclusion on the third team this season, announced yesterday).  And he's on his way to his seventh consecutive conference final.  I cannot think of another NBA player who has had such a complete transformation mid-career.

This season has provided the NBA world with a unique opportunity to witness exactly how valuable Billups is.  It's not often you get to conduct a chemistry experiment with an NBA team - remove one ingredient, add another, see what happens.  But that's exactly what happened when the Nuggets traded Allen Iverson.  Billups has completely transformed the team - tying the franchise record with 54 wins.

But it's not the regular season where his ultimate impact will be felt.  The Nuggets, after all, won 50 games last season, so 54 wins is not that big a deal.  But last season, as they have for so many years, the Nuggets bowed out of the playoffs in the first round in embarrassing fashion - 0-4 losers to the Lakers.  This year, they're 8-2 in the playoffs, winning the majority of their games convincingly and losing by narrow margins twice.  Before Billups, the Nuggets lacked maturity - when things got tougher in the playoffs, they couldn't handle it.  They shut down, or they lost their cool.  This year, it's the Nuggets who have executed while the Hornets and the Mavs melted down.  That's no accident - that's Billups' influence. 

They'll likely see the Lakers again next round, and you can rest assured that Billups won't let them be swept.  Billups is a terrific player in the regular season - but he's absolutely other-worldly in the playoffs.  In 10 games this season, he's increased his scoring average from 18 to 22 per game, and he's shooting 54% from three point range.  They don't call him Mr. Big Shot for nothing.   

For an excellent in depth look at Billups career, check out this OTL article.

That's playoff basketball (I really hate that cliche).

It's amazing how quickly things have heated up in this round, particularly between the Rockets and the Lakers.  In a seven game series, seeing the same guys night after night, knowing all too well what brand of deodorant they use (assuming they use one, <cough>Luis Scola</cough>), you can certain understand why tensions mount.  But this is game two people!  At this rate of escalation, it's going to be the Crips and the Bloods by game 6 (would you believe Jets and Sharks by game 7?)  

But I just don't get the suspense over the potential suspensions.  Or rather, I get it, because the NBA is so bloody inconsistent on this subject, who knows what they'll do.  But isn't it pretty obvious what should happen?

Kobe Bryant - no suspension.  Seriously folks, I dislike Kobe as much as the next guy, but that was a pretty run of the mill elbow from what we can infer given that there's no clean camera angle on it.  (That's part of the issue of course - there's simply no way you can suspend a guy based on what we've been shown on that play.  If Stu Jackson has a better angle on it, that could change things.)  And the whole "Dwight Howard was suspended so Kobe has to be suspended" logic doesn't wash for me.  Not that I necessarily agreed with Howard's suspension, but he lined up Dalembert after a made bucket.  Kobe was trying to get Artest off his back, and it was in the context of the play.  Did the refs on the court miss it?  Did they blow the call?  Of course they did.  Is it a suspendable offense.  No way.

Derek Fisher - obvious suspension, at least one game if not two.  Look, I'm telling you guys what I would do.  I have no idea what Stu Jackson is going to do - he constantly surprises me.  But Fisher's hockey forecheck was absolutely ridiculous.  Again, taking into consideration the context of the game, he absolutely leveled Scola, without disguising his intent in the least.  Part of the problem here is the NBA's slavish devotion to literal interpretations of the rulebook.  So, there wasn't a punch, there wasn't an elbow, oh dear, what do we do?  What are we really looking for though?  Non basketball plays that are dangerous.  That's it, right?  Now, you can argue whether there was any real danger to Scola - rugby players take that hit all day long without any pads, so no, Fisher's not going to actually injure Scola.  But that's not the point - the point is if Fisher hits Scola that hard, with intent, outside the context of the game, and doesn't get a significant punishment, then the next guy is going to hit even harder.  By the way, I'd consider fining Phil Jackson for making a mockery of his press conference with the whole "We had a foul to give, he was fighting through the screen" thing.  Give me a break, PJ.  We're not idiots, and neither are you.  Don't insult our intelligence.

(That reminds me of the incident between Raja Bell and Kobe a couple of years ago.  Bell hit Kobe, got ejected.  They asked him why.  He didn't make up some story.  He didn't re-invent reality, saying "I didn't hit him, it was an accident."  He told the truth.  "I'm tired of eating his elbows and the refs aren't helping me.  I got pissed off and I hit him, because I don't like the pompous ass."  That's how you handle it.  Don't lie to us Phil.)

Ron Artest - no suspension.  I actually don't think anyone believes he will be suspended, but just for good measure I thought I'd include him in the discussion.  He didn't make contact with anything other than his chest, and he's already the aggrieved party in all of this, getting a personal foul, a technical foul and an ejection while Kobe got nothing.  There obviously should be no suspension for Artest.  Continuing the above aside, I thought he handled himself surprisingly well in the post-game interview about the incident.  I dislike Ron-Ron, but he came out of this incident looking like a reasonable fellow.

Rafer Alston - no suspension.  Switching games, I wouldn't suspend Alston either.  This is where people are going to say I'm being inconsistent, but Alston's slap was, to me, much like Artest getting in Kobe's face.  It was an attention getter.  He didn't even swing hard.  Artest was saying to Kobe "You're pissing me off and I want you to stop."  That's what Skip was saying to House.  The actual contact reminded me of something I would do to a friend who's being annoying.  It was a Three Stooges slap.  "Why, I oughta...."  Someone on the game thread last night said Alston shouldn't be suspended, but instead he should be mocked mercilessly.  That sounds about right to me.

There you go.  Those are my common sense suspensions.  No "open fist versus closed fist", "above the neck versus below the neck" literalistic wrangling.  Just common sense, this is what needs to happen.  Derek Fisher needs to be punished to send a message - for all the others, let's lace 'em up Friday. 

I realize of course that one man's common sense is another man's idiocy.  So let the debate begin.  What would you do?

I don't know who is hosting the traveling game thread for Cavs-Hawks tonight.  The game is on ESPN at 5 PM Pacific, and there should be a game thread somewhere.  I'm getting on a plane in a couple of hours, so I won't be able to provide any update, but Basketball John will probably have an update about the game thread on SLC Dunk before tip off, so you can always check there.