|
One of the reasons it cracks me up when mainstream sportswriters shit on bloggers like me is that most of the amateur (meaning non-professional) bloggers that I read and respect seem to have a better understanding of the sports they write about than the so-called "experts". For example, SI.com's Ian Thomsen wrote on Friday that, in trading for Jamal Crawford, the Atlanta Hawks "now have one of the best clutch shooters in the league to pair with their All-Star in (Joe) Johnson." Even if you believe in the whole concept of "clutch shooting" — and I don't put a lot of stock in it myself — who in their right mind would think Jamal Crawford is a great clutch shooter?
First of all, Crawford rarely plays in games that actually mean anything, so these co-called "clutch shooting opportunities" arguably don't even exist. The dude has played in 597 regular season games and exactly zero playoff games. That's the longest streak of its kind among active players in the NBA. Ignoring all that, just because Crawford apparently fancies himself a clutch shooter, that doesn't make it so.
82games.com defines "clutch time" as 4th quarter or overtime, less than 5 minutes left, with neither team ahead by more than 5 points. While Crawford was second on the Warriors (after Stephen Jackson) in field goal attempts per 48 minutes of clutch time, he had a .333 FG% and .200 3P% during that time. He's not a great clutch shooter at all — he's actually quite shitty.
82games.com is not, by any means, an obscure site by this point. If you're a basketball writer that doesn't use 82games.com and basketball-reference.com, and if you still aren't considering fairly uncomplicated stats like Team Offensive and Defensive Efficiency (points scored and allowed per 100 possessions) and per-36-minutes measurements in your analysis, then you're frankly unqualified to portray yourself as any more of an "expert" than the average, casual fan.
That ludicrously inaccurate assertion by Thomsen is just one of two ridiculous statements I read by professional basketball writers today. The other was this one by Toronto's own Doug Smith about what Bryan Colangelo should offer Anthony Parker: "I would think a two-year deal at somewhere around $9 or $10 million – the same salary he made last year – with perhaps a third year option would be logical jumping off point."
I've made an effort to avoid picking on Doug recently but I simply can't let this one go. Anthony Parker is a 34-year-old, back-up quality shooting guard who suffered a steep decline this past season. Any GM who thinks a team in the Raptors' position should offer Parker that kind of contract is grossly incompetent and should be immediately relieved of his duties — and yes, I will label Colangelo thusly if he's crazy enough to follow Smith's advice.
Colangelo should not offer Parker a penny more than $5 million over two years. I don't care how good of a "locker room presence" he is — helluva lot of good it did the Raptors last season. I care even less if another team makes him a better offer and he ends up signing elsewhere. He's a great guy but I won't shed a single tear if we've seen the last of him in a Raptors uniform.
Does Doug Smith think that Parker is still capable of playing starter's minutes on a winning team? You would think he watched the Raptors last season, seeing as how it's his job and all. Surely, most of you agree with me that Parker is really only good for 15-20 minutes as a backup at both guard positions. And if you're paying $5 million per season to a backup (not including a "sixth man"), he'd better be a center.
I've always enjoyed Smith as a beat writer, but his blogging continues to make me shake my head — both from his constant assertions that he has "inside knowledge" (he should have dropped that act after he got burned on the Smitch firing) and from his obvious inability to accurately judge NBA players and their worth. I have to assume that Colangelo is smarter than this — and that he'll cringe if he reads that blog post. How many impressionable readers of Smith's blog are going to be angry and confused if — and probably when — Parker signs somewhere else for considerably less than $5 million per season?
Edited to add: Here's Doug's response to my post (assuming he even read it): "Blogger's note: Yawn, flicks lint off shoulder, considers source, goes on with life." You know, Doug, you might be more well-respected by knowledgeable NBA fans if you didn't come off like such a condescending douchebag to people who dare to question your wisdom. I have a journalism degree (Ryerson - 1999) just like you, I've been blogging about the Raptors for longer than you have, and The Score apparently considers me reputable enough to employ me. Considering how often you're wrong, you really should get off your high horse because most intelligent basketball fans I talk to just feel embarrassed for you. 
|
