PSYOPBall, Not Basketball: Mark Jackson and Doc Rivers

After an exhausting seven-game Clippers-Warriors series, the focus has shifted to the next round for the Clippers and to the firing of Mark Jackson. But before we move on, can we talk about how crazy and extensive the psychological operations of both coaches were?

Pre-series:
During the regular season, the Clippers-Warriors rivalry was well-known. Doc forbid his players to join Warriors players for chapel. Mark Jackson was so into the Clippers rivalry that he trash-talked Doc before a Cleveland Cavs game in March, of all things:
-Q: How do things change with Klay out?

-JACKSON: Obviously Klay’s ability to shoot the basketball; probably as important if not more important, his ability to defend. In a game like tonight he would start naturally on Kyrie Irving.

Contrary to Doc Rivers’ comments, it’s not because I’m hiding Steph Curry. It’s just a smart thing to do as a coach. Take that, Doc. (Smiles.)

-Q: What did Doc say?

-JACKSON: He said he doesn’t hide Chris Paul. So nice subliminal shot.

Both Doc and Mark willingly gave each other bulletin board material before the series even started. They went after potential weak links like Redick and Thompson, already trying to sow some doubt in the minds of shooters.

Race:
Mark Jackson called for Clippers fans to boycott pivotal Game 5 to protest Sterling. Of course, such a move favors the Warriors in that pivotal matchup. What you may not have known was just how strong Jackson's comments were:
“If it was me, I wouldn't come to the game. I believe as fans, the loudest statement they could make as far as fans is to not show up to the game,” Jackson said. “As an African-American man that's a fan of the game of basketball and knows its history and knows what's right and what's wrong, I would not come to the game tomorrow, whether I was a Clipper fan or a Warrior fan.”
Tying in the boycott to being black, to what's right and wrong? No, Mark Jackson never said Clippers players should boycott Game 5. But can't you see hints of that idea in his comments and word choices? It's a wonderful bit of psychology. In addition, by the Warriors claimed they were ready to boycott the game had Sterling not been suspended, again, the Warriors seem to be taking the high road while subtly increasing the pressure on the Clippers. Is it ethical? Not so sure. Is it psyops at a high level? Yes.

Religion:
Sam Amick wrote a fascinating story on religion and NBA coaches that I may spin into a separate article. But let's focus on how Rivers is so available during a supposed tight, busy playoff series to give Sam Amick quotes:
"If it's 75% (who believe one way), that's to me 25% that (don't)," Rivers said. "To me, if it's 95%, the 5% deserve the same treatment as everybody else. And I just think that's what we need to do. If it was church, then that's different. This is not church. This is our jobs. So our jobs come first, respect comes second, and I think that's the way it should be."

Jackson is, of course, the pastor of a church in the off-season. Rivers already banned his players from fraternizing with the Warriors in a religious context. We have Draymond Green, Warrior player, saying "because without (God) we are not who we are and we are not the team that we are and we all know that. We like to give him credit for what he's doing for this team." In the same article, what does Rivers do? He intentionally attacks the idea that the Warriors have any special favor from God. He says "I don't think there's any God cheering for one team over another. I know that." It's no accident Rivers is choosing these words. Again, is it ethical? Not so sure. Is it psy ops at a high level? Yes.

After-series:
So the series is over, and the two coaches are friendly again, right? Not so fast.
When Jackson gets fired, he brings up that it's ok that he doesn't live in the Bay Area during the offseason. Why?
"But Doc Rivers coached in Boston living in Orlando. The coaches that I played for lived other places."
Oh, and Doc is disappointed at Mark's firing, sure. But wait, how does he say it?
"Mark Jackson gets a team to multiple playoffs for the first time in a thousand years and gets fired."
Yeah, a thousand years, almost as long as it took Vinny Del Negro to take Clippers to back to back playoff appearances. Worry not, psyops fans. I'm pretty sure Doc Rivers will renew the rivalry with whoever the Golden State Warriors next coach is. And we'll be here to appreciate how slyly the psychology of each statement is used to demoralize the other team.

Mark Jackson and the Value of a Name

Rocky Widner/NBAE via Getty Images

When I heard that Mark Jackson was hired by the Warriors, I had to hide my disbelief. The point guard who ran some of the slowest offenses in the league would be now in charge of the fun-and-gun Warriors? The folks at ESPN agreed with me, as writer after writer tore into the Warriors for choosing Mark Jackson.

However, looking back at the records of star ex-players who became coaches, and TV analysts who became coaches, I'm surprised by how good those coaches became. The optimistic example for Mark is Doc Rivers, who only three years after his retirement was coaching the Magic. Kevin McHale and Larry Bird had zero assistant coach experience and still stepped in and did a halfway decent job. Also, analysts such as Hubie Brown and Doug Collins stepped in and got instant respect from their players. Honestly, I couldn't think of one analyst or player that was truly poor except for Magic Johnson. (I would have liked to see how Isiah Thomas would have done if Eddy Curry was healthy instead of hungry.)

The average NBA player would rather be coached by some guy that he's seen on TV rather than a guy who has been a no-name assistant for 20 years. The head coach doesn't need to be a star X's and O's guy himself. Being able to demand instant respect from the players the moment you walk in the door makes it much easier to wait out the inevitable player conflicts early on. It's why the NBA rarely works out for college coaches; they can't demand the same level of credibility. If Mark Jackson could handle the demands of Reggie Miller and Patrick Ewing, I think he'll be able to keep Monta Ellis under control. With a guard-heavy offense in Golden State and a strong compliment of assistants, I think Mark Jackson will be a shrewd hire.

Making the Playoffs in the NBA West...Without Trades

In the ultra-competitive Western Conference, a few games can make difference between having home-court advantage and being out of the play-offs. GM's will be jockeying to collect that needed backup point guard that will hopefully make a two to three win difference. Most NBA analysts tend to overvalue the effect of trading deadline deals in helping a team. (This is why I think the Magic's decision to make moves far ahead of time will eventually pay dividends in the playoffs). But what about players who may make a substantial leap before the play-offs?

Let's take a closer look at West teams who are at .500 or above but who do not seem to be locks to make the play-offs. What young player's improvement could fuel a second-half surge?
1. Marcin Gortat, Suns.
Key Game: Boston, January 28. 19 points, 17 rebounds in a Phoenix win.
Signs of Life: As detailed by Valley of the Suns, Marcin went on a recent tear where he scored in double figures in 8 of 9 games. While Phoenix is still hanging around .500, if Gortat can average a double-double nightly (10.3 ppg and 7.9 rebounds at present), Phoenix could make the play-offs again.
2. Sam Young, Grizzlies.
Key Game: Los Angeles Lakers, February 7. 22 points in a 9-point Grizzlies loss.
Signs of Life: Like Gortat, Sam put together a recent string of good games, scoring 10 or more points in seven of the eight Grizzlies games from January 28 to February 8. The Grizzlies have not coincidentally gone 7-3 in their last 10 games to climb above .500. While the Thabeet Experience may yet hang over the franchise, perhaps it's time to re-evaluate Memphis' grade on drafting and developing young talent.
3. Wesley Matthews, Blazers.
Key Game: None.
Signs of Life: Have a friend who considers himself or herself a die-hard NBA fan? Ask him/her how many 30-point games Wesley Matthews has had this season. It's four, surprisingly. Once supposedly signed for defense, Matthews has had some impressive games. However, the problem for the Blazers is that Matthews has yet to show an ability to take over against good teams. Of course, it's a small sample size so far. If Matthews can find a way to have some great games against the best in the West, Portland may yet avoid the Spurs in Round 1.
4. No one, Jazz.
Key Game: The one in which the Jazz trailed after the first quarter.
Signs of Death: I went through the Utah Jazz roster in hopes of finding some hidden gem or prospects for improvement for this season. I see why Jerry Sloan retired. CJ Miles and Ronnie Price have been around the league for too long to be still considered works in progress, and Gordon Hayward is still a rookie getting used to the league. I would hate to see it, as I grew up loving Stockton and Malone. But don't be surprised if Utah falls out of the play-offs. Even the vaunted home-court advantage is nearly gone, as Utah has already lost 11 games at home this year (17-11).
5. Arron Affalo, Denver.
Key Game: Dallas Mavericks, February 10, 24 points and game-winning shot.
Signs of Life: After not even averaging double-figures last season, Arron went on a tear throughout the pre-season and first few games. Since then, Arron has seemingly cooled off. He reminds me a lot of Wesley Matthews in that before this season, he was considered as more of a defender than scorer. But as Ball Don't Lie pointed out, Affalo has been consistently improving over time. I doubt Carmelo will give this team a second chance. But the future backcourt of Affalo and Lawson makes me think that this Denver team may have a larger window to contend than previously thought.

Mike Miller, NBA Superfriend

Yes, this guy:

Just the other day I was rereading the Free Darko book's excellent section on the 2000 Draft. I'm enough of a draft nerd that this may be my favorite section of the book (sad, I know). Anyway, it said that Mike Miller's friendship with Tracy McGrady was so close that the Magic were concerned about trading away Miller for needed talent because of the effect it would have on Tracy!

Today, I was reading about the Udonis Haslem signing. The article had this fascinating quote from Udonis, who called Miller

“My boy from day one. That’s my college roommate. He’s like Dwyane is to me, just a different color.”

Then finally, I looked up Lebron's reaction to the Mike Miller acquisition:

"Happy to have sharpshooter and good friend Mike Miller join us. Looking forward to this. Congrats Mike"

I understand that Mike Miller apparently is a pleasant fellow. (To be kinder to him after that first photo, here's a photo of him and his wife after giving $200,000 to a hospital).

But how in the world does a guy who was born in a South Dakota town of 13,000, who had no NBA stars as his relatives (unless you count the scoring records his uncle held at the mighty Dakota Wesleyan, of all places), who loves hunting and fishing, of all things, become such good friends with so many NBA stars? I'm beyond intrigued at this. Someone set up a 6 Degrees of Mike Miller game, or launch a special I-Team investigation. What's his secret? This guy seems to be the definition of who wouldn't fit in an NBA locker room, a small-town boy from nowhere, and he's adored by some of the greatest players. I'm honestly impressed. How does he do it? Guesses are welcome below.

Stephen Jackson and the NBA's Quiet Desperation

Stephen Jackson or "S-Jax" was fined $25000 for conduct "detrimental to the NBA." Several hoops sites already profiled this fine, such as Warrior blogger Tim Kawakami and Henry Abbott. They pointed out the hypocrisy of Stephen getting fined for making a trade demand while Kobe was not. But there was another point that I want to highlight.

Simply put, the fine shows you how desperate the NBA's economic situation truly is. The Golden State Warriors are at least in the top half of season ticket sales and attendance by most metrics I looked up. Just a few years ago, their fans had the most passionate play-off performance seen in the NBA since perhaps the heyday of the Jazz or Kings. And yet, they're coming off a bad year, in a state plagued by poor economic management. Stephen's trade demand is a sort of economic blackmail. He's their only marquee star right now that they can market for ticket renewals. (No, the casual fan can't appreciate that Randolph, Curry, and Ellis all may be future All-Stars). In my mind, the NBA fined him because they realized just how great an effect a trade demand can have on a team's ticket sales in this weak economy. And if that is truly why--that one average star in a passionate sports town can have that much effect on ticket renewals--the NBA is in a much more precarious position than they have admitted so far.

Dwight Howard and the League of (T)Hugs

This year's All-Star weekend seemed to mark a new era in the NBA. It seems as if every decade, the game reinvents itself. You had the Bird/Johnson era in the 80's; Jordan in the 90's; and then, well, whatever it was in the 00's. Players like Iverson and Marbury were recognized as the face of the NBA. Fairly or not, the NBA was perceived as the home of thugs and gangsters parading around the court with their big tattoos and poor fundamentals. But at the ASG, Iverson shaved off his cornrows, and Stephon Marbury wasn't even playing. Instead, the stage belonged to smiling, goofy Dwight Howard and his little buddy Nate Robinson. Dwyane Wade was busily trying to market his new band-aid (or whatever that monstrosity under his eye was). Chris Bosh was trying to establish an account on every Web 2.0 site known to man. The NBA had transitioned from surly thugs trying to keep it real and "street" to hugable, loveable stars who knew how to work the media and connect to an audience, right? Three cheers for the League of Hugs!


Not so fast! Just as the perception of the NBA as a shelter for thugs was wildly overblown (and racist, ahem), so today's perception of Lebron, Dwight, and Company as friendly giants is terribly mistaken. By any standard, Dwight Howard had a great play-off performance last night. He scored 24 points, grabbed 24 rebounds...and dished out one elbow right to the head of Samuel Dalembert, early in the game when the refs would be too intimidated by his star power to throw him out. Just look at this beauty:



A star has the right to dish out punishment as well as take it, and that's exactly what Dwight did. Dalembert was trying to send a physical message by pushing Dwight out of his established position. Dwight knew he could get away with an elbow, and did. It's not the type of footage that wins endorsements. It won't be used in the NBA Cares campaign, and the League of Hugs isn't proud of that moment. But as a fan, I'm frankly happy to see that some things never change, and that the play-offs still matter no matter how many marketing opportunities are available for a smile and a little camera showboating. I don't condone injuring other players, and quite honestly, if it was Dalembert doing it to Howard, he would have been ejected. But as a Cavs fan, I hope another friendly giant in Northeast Ohio was watching the game...

What if Greg Oden Breaks Out Now?

Trying something new:

It's a pretentious-sounding voice in very unpretentious surroundings, ha. Just having some fun with the new camera.

Love Is a Game: Does She Look Better in Your Favorite Team's Jersey?

I'd talk about the play-offs, but last night was a bit of a yawn-fest. It's not surprising that Utah got their league-ordained win at home, or that the Celtics pounded the Bulls after Bill Simmons' column tried to tell us that Rose, Noah, and Thomas were all peaking at once. I do have to admit, I'm surprised by the way the Mavs have pounded the Spurs, but it's a classic Spurs move to lose games big that they were going to have a tough time winning anyway. The Spurs will be back for Game 4, and are not done. That is a smart team.

So over at my Twitter account, I asked the men if they would want their girl to get dressed up wearing the outfit/jersey of their favorite team. I also asked the ladies if they felt they got more attention wearing their favorite team's outfit. When mentioning women in sports outfits, most people probably think of Mariah Carey's serenading of MJ in an NBA jersey dress:

On the one hand, it sounds like a dream come true for a guy, right? Sports and women combined, what could be better?! And it's better than them cheering for a rival team right?! (SFW, it's a commercial).

But on the other hand, isn't it kind of creepy to have her wearing the jersey of your favorite player? I like Lebron James because he's a great player for my favorite team. The last thing I want to think about when he's soaring to the hoop is "Ooh, Kelly looked SO amazing wearing his jersey last night!" Wouldn't it mess with your head after a while? And it seems the NBA agrees with me, to a certain extent. Looking at the Cavs Women's store, it looks like most of the clothes are rather sensible, like this:

On the other hand, the first three words of the ad are "You'll look cute", so perhaps sexiness and being desirable really is the goal for women wearing outfits representing their favorite team. What do you think? Men, would you want your girlfriend/wife wearing the outfits of your favorite team, or do you keep your sports and women separate? Women, do you feel you get more favorable attention when the shirt says "Cavs" instead of "Hollister"? Let me know.

Who's the Next Play-off Surprise Star?

Every year, some bench players suddenly explode in a series for several games in a row. Sometimes, this is a young player who has a good match-up in the series; other times, we get to watch the true unveiling of a star. Some of my favorites over the years are how rookies Tayshaun Prince and Raja Bell turned out to be the keys to vital play-off wins for their teams.

This year, we have Glen Davis averaging 22 ppg (?!) in two games and Courtney Lee averaging 21 ppg to keep the Magic in the series against the surging Sixers. It's probable that those numbers will go down as both teams go on the road, but I think that those two players do indeed have match-up advantages in this series.

So who else do you think might make the jump? I have my eye on three players:
1. Roger Mason. He's hit some key shots this year already, and is averaging slightly higher than his regular season average in the play-offs. Look for him to become a weapon as Tony Parker's drives to the basket free him up for shots.
2. Rudy Fernandez. He closed the regular season on a hot streak, shooting over 50% from the field in 5 of his last 6 games and benefiting from extended minutes as Coach Nate rested his starters. After an awful Game 1 (3 points in 20 minutes), he had 11 points and 2 steals in Game 2. If he has a good series, I think the Blazers win.
3. Daequan Cook. After a hideous Game 1 (along with the rest of the Heat), he earned 34 minutes off the bench, and responded with 20 points, going 6-9 from 3-point land. The Hawks do not have good guards coming off the bench: Cook can take full advantage of this match-up if he stays patient and works to open spots on the floor.

Anyone I missed?

Glen Davis and Tyrus Thomas: Unlikely Keys to Victory?

There's an interesting subplot to the Bulls-Celtics series I haven't heard discussed yet. Namely, former LSU teammates Glen Davis and Tyrus Thomas are matched up against each other. And both players, who have been much maligned throughout their NBA careers, may actually be their team's key to victory.

First, let's talk about Glen Davis. Here's a guy who got lots of attention in college but seemed destined to flop in the pros. Most people most remember him for the nickname "Big Baby" or his crying on the bench when KG yelled at him. Type "Glen Davis" into Google Image Search, and the FIRST result you get is crying! What a terrible legacy to have. He also leads the league in awkward photos, like this one:

Not much of a legacy, right? But would you believe his scoring numbers in this series so far? 18 points in Game 1, 26 points in Game 2. Yes, I expect those numbers to fall once he leaves Boston, but I'm not so sure that 26 points in Game 2 was a complete coincidence. Be careful: it may not be over in Boston until the fat man sings.


Next, let's talk about Tyrus Thomas:

He'll forever be known as the guy who was traded for LaMarcus Aldridge. LaMarcus is a star in Portland, and Tyrus is...um...not a star, to say the least. But his 16 points in Game 1 were crucial in stealing a game in Boston. His athleticism could give Davis and Perkins fits, and the penetration of Derek Rose should leave him open for some easy lay-ups and jams. But is he up to the challenge? The Bulls are not very well-equipped to take advantage of the absence of KG unless Tyrus has a big series. There'll be no nets to cut down without him.

LEFT HAND, Hedo, LEFT HAND!

Andre Igoudala's game-winning shot reminded me of one of my biggest pro basketball peeves. It's true that most of us block shots better with our dominant hand, our right. But when a baller is driving to his LEFT and is RIGHT-handed, it's very unlikely that he will fade to his left while shooting. So why, why does Hedo start by putting up his right hand to defend Iggy's shot? By the time he realizes he should be reaching with his left, it's too late. I see this happen at least once every year in the play-offs. Match your hand to the guy's dominant shooting hand already! You may lose some length, but you will be properly lined up to affect the shot.

NBA Playoffs: Would Allen Iverson Make a Difference?

I unfortunately did not get to watch all of yesterday's Cavs-Pistons game. But I have to ask the obvious question to start things off. Would the presence of a healthy, motivated Allen Iverson matter in this series?

During last year's play-offs, Detroit finally appeared to have compensated for a major weakness. I've stated for a long time that Detroit was most hampered by their lack of guards. Chauncey and Rip used to get worn down late in the play-offs, and this cost the Pistons several times. Finally, last year they had Rodney Stuckey starting to blossom in the play-offs.

However, Dumars saw fit to trade Chauncey away in the hopes of...well, I'm not sure, but I would guess salary cap flexibility and better developing Stuckey. Now, with AI's mysterious "back" ailment (or, perhaps more likely, lack of gastronomical fortitude and acute absence of his much ballyhooed heart, ahem), the Pistons are right back where they were in the last 5 years.

I look at that Pistons bench, and wonder where the scoring is going to come from now. Bynum, perhaps, but otherwise most of those bench players need help creating their shot. However, I'm not counting these Pistons out yet. Allen Iverson is a great player, but it seems like he disturbed that close-knit Pistons locker room. Sometimes teams will rally when they have fewer resources or have something to prove.

One more comment; WHAT HAPPENED TO TAYSHAUN?! Last year, he fell apart in the Boston series after two great series. He appears to be ready to repeat this year. He seems to have problems with physical scorers like James and Wade...that's to be expected when he's defending, but if he can't score either, the Pistons are in serious trouble.

Is Orlando Flying to the Finals?

Back when I was still writing for Sports on My Mind, I did several NBA preview columns. I picked Orlando as my dark horse to reach the Eastern Conference Finals. However, I was much more optimistic about Phoenix at the time.

(Photos of Orlando's frontcourt (Rashard, Hedo, and Dwight) with fans is today's theme).
However, the last few weeks have changed my mind. I now believe Orlando can WIN the NBA championship, this year. What changed my mind?
(Quick FYI: these guys met Dwight Howard at the bowling alley.)
The deceiving effect of Jameer Nelson's injury on Orlando's record. For the seven games during which Jameer was injured, Orlando was only 3-4. They lost to Dallas, Denver, Indiana, and New Orleans. I think a Magic team at full strength loses two of those games, at worst. If they went 6-1, they would be tied with Cleveland right now for the #1 seed in the East.

Orlando's excellent road record They are a small-market team with no built-in fan base on the road ala Los Angeles or Boston. They are located in one of the corners of the country, which results in many annoying road trips. Yet the Magic are 22-9 on the road, only slightly behind Boston (23-9) and Los Angeles (21-8). That statistic surprised me. I thought a team built on perimeter shooting should struggle on the road at times because of the way each arena's rims and lighting are slightly different and fatigue. But it makes no difference to the Magic. Even if Jameer's injury costs them the #1 seed in the East, they could still have a chance at winning in Boston or Cleveland. I don't buy the logic anymore that the Magic aren't playoff-tested enough to make an impact in June. Which leads me to...

The 2007 Cleveland Cavaliers. Much like Orlando, most considered the 2007 Cavaliers to be inferior in comparison to the previous champion (Miami) and the playoff-tested veterans (Detroit). But when Miami faltered due to injuries, fatigue, and lethargy, and Detroit proved weaker than anticipated, the Cavaliers took full advantage. Losing in the second round the year before to Detroit was enough preparation for the Cavaliers to get to the Finals in 2007. I see no reason why Orlando can't duplicate that success.

Injuries to the best low-post defenders of other top squads. Bynum? Ben Wallace? Garnett? All of them could give Orlando's talented frontcourt problems in the play-offs--and all are now injured. Sure, Garnett and Wallace will be back for the play-offs, but both are older and may not be at full strength. I think Orlando's play-off chances have improved significantly due to all its main competitors having frontcourt injuries.

Acquisition of Alston
The Magic are 7-2 since acquiring Alston. He isn't a full replacement for Jameer, but it's rare for any team to do so well after changing their starting point guard via trade in the middle of the year. Meanwhile, Boston, Cleveland, and Los Angeles did next to nothing at the trade deadline, although I do think Marbury helps the Celtics match up better in the play-offs.

Struggles of Detroit. Ian Thomsenpointed out that the Magic are 3-16 against the Pistons since 2006. Unfortunately, Orlando is now slotted to play Detroit in Round 1 of the play-offs, and plays them again today. But if Detroit keeps struggling, or improves, Orlando will be able to dodge that matchup and beat nearly anyone else. And I've saved my best evidence for last...

Orlando's dominance against the other Top 4 teams.
Go ahead, guess Orlando's record against the Lakers, Boston, Cleveland, and San Antonio in the 8 games they've played them this season. 2-6? 4-4? No, Orlando is 6-2 against the other 4 teams, losing only to Boston! That's right, they've swept both LA and SA this year. Still don't think Orlando can win a championship this year?

NBA H-O-R-S-E: Free Bubbles Hawkins!

I can't believe they're bringing back H-O-R-S-E for All-Star Weekend. Yes, I said bringing back. The funny part is, the NBA has tried this before, during the 1977-1978 season. They held a tournament which included such stars as "Pistol" Pete Maravich, Bob McAdoo, and George Gervin. Videos are still up on Youtube. But there's a reason you haven't heard of it--it was boring! For example, here's Pistol Pete pitted against Bubbles Hawkins, who really deserved a chewing gum endorsement deal:



Does that excite you? Did you actually watch the whole thing without fast-forwarding? It's Pete Maravich, one of the most exciting players of all time, and it's still boring. In fact, just to prove I'm not picking on just one bad game, here's Pete's highlight reel from the event:



It's not bad--the shots at the :30 mark and the end are decent--but it's the highlight reel for a Hall of Famer, and it's still mediocre. Let's hope it's another 30 years before the NBA tries H-O-R-S-E again, because based on these 1970's videos, it's not going to be that interesting.