Tag:Ty Lawson
Posted on: April 19, 2011 10:19 am
 

Arron Afflalo out for the Nuggets Wednesday

Posted by Royce Young

The Nuggets will still be missing one of their key parts Wednesday night in Game 2 versus the Thunder as guard Arron Afflalo will miss another game because of a pulled hamstring.

"Zero (percent chance)," he told The Denver Post. "It hasn't even been 10 days yet (of rest). I've made a mistake three times (by coming back). It's not even being cautious, it's just not healed. I've tried to come back in the regular season. I'm trying to get past that marker."

Afflalo not only is a good offensive weapon for Denver, but he's another body and long defender to throw at Kevin Durant. Durant of course lit the Nuggets up for 41 in Game 1.

Game 3 is still a question mark and for Afflalo to say zero percent makes me think he's in serious doubt for this series entirely. Hamstring injuries aren't something to mess with and they are extremely easy to set yourself back on. Afflalo, like he said, has already had that happen.

George Karl will likely stick with his starting five of Wilson Chandler at shooting guard, but he hinted a bit at starting both Raymond Felton and Ty Lawson together in the backcourt. Karl likes to play those two down the stretch in games anyway, so maybe with the way things went in Game 1, he'll think about making that change.
Posted on: April 18, 2011 4:22 pm
Edited on: April 18, 2011 4:28 pm
 

League: Perkins' tip shouldn't have counted

Posted by Royce Young



The league issued a statement telling us something we all already knew: Kendrick Perkins' basket with 1:05 remaining should not have counted. The statement reads:

"Kendrick Perkins was improperly credited with a basket that should have been ruled offensive basket interference with 1:05 remaining in last night’s game.  Although a player is permitted to touch the net while the ball is in the cylinder above the rim, Perkins also touched the ball while it was still in the cylinder which is a violation and constitutes goaltending.”

I love when these type of things happen. Yes, it's better that the league acknowledges the gaffe, but it doesn't mean Denver gets its two points back. The tip came at an extremely critical time in the game with the Nuggets leading by one. The basket put the Thunder on top, eventually helping OKC to go on to win a hard fought Game 1 107-103.

George Karl said of the tip, "It very obviously should not have counted."

Matt Moore gave a terrific explanation of the rule and a breakdown of the play last night after it happened. He wrote, "Half the ball is in the cylinder. So it's in the cylinder. But the NBA rulebook does not  define "in the cylinder." It's a judgment call, likely left open to protect the officials, like a lot of rule interpretations. But without that, you can make the argument it was in, and out, of the cylinder."

It's very easy to point out how it was a blown call, but basket inference calls have always been one of the very most difficult ones to judge for officials. Not only does it happen in a couple tenths of a second, but the refs almost never have a good angle on it. Perkins' tip though did look a bit more awkward than most because his hand got tangled in the net as he went for it.

From my perspective in the arena, I actually thought Russell Westbrook's shot had dropped through. Most of the other writers around me thought the same thing. So you can imagine the position the officials were in during that situation. They got it wrong. They know and the league knows it. We all figured out what happened on the tip after watching the replay three or four times. The officials didn't have that luxury. Maybe that's the real question though: Why didn't the officials have that luxury?
Posted on: April 18, 2011 1:48 am
Edited on: April 18, 2011 2:33 am
 

Thunder-Nuggets: Interference call costs Nuggets?

No-call on basket interference call may have cost the Nuggets dearly late in a close game vs. the Thunder
Posted by Matt Moore

In the Thunder's epic Game 1 against the Denver Nuggets, there were an incredible amount of seemingly big moments. Every time one team would land a haymaker, the other would respond. Just when Denver thought it had buried the Thunder, Kevin Durant would land another three. Just when OKC thought it had finally cemented the comeback with a six-point lead late, Nene charged back. And then, this play happened to give the the Thunder a one-point lead late. 



It's a close call, but...
Here's the definition from the NBA's rulebook. The one most will look at is Rule 11, Section 1-A, b.:

b. Touch the ball when it is above the basket ring and within the imaginary cylinder


But it's not that simple. Nowhere in Rule 11. is the definition of "in the cylinder" defined. The ball is clearly in the cylinder... partly. Take a look. 




So it seems easy, right? Half the ball is in the cylinder. So it's in the cylinder. But the NBA rulebook does not define "in the cylinder." It's a judgment call, likely left open to protect the officials, like a lot of rule interpretations. But without that, you can make the argument it was in, and out, of the cylinder. 

But what about the net? That's the obvious thing, right? Funny thing. Here's the only place the net is mentioned in the interference/goaltending section outside of coming up from inside it, from the full rulebook:

h. Vibrate the rim, net or backboard so as to cause the ball to make an unnatural bounce, or bend or move the rim to an off-center position when the ball is touching the ring or passing through.



Okay, so grabbing the net obviously will vibrate it. But a. the ball is neither touching the ring nor passing through, and b. he did not cause the ball to make an unnatural bounce nor c. move the rim. Unless you want to get into chaos theory, which is a slippery freaking slope. 

So. The ball was both in and out of the cylinder. And Perkins did touch the net but did not create an unnatural bounce, nor move the rim. But wait, there's more! How about G.? 

g. Touch any live ball from within the playing area that is on its downward flight with an opportunity to touch the basket ring. This is considered to be a "field goal attempt" or trying for a goal.



Okay, so it's a live ball. It's in the playing area. And it's on its downward flight with an opportunity to touch the basket ring (the ball winds up hitting the rim as Perkins guides it down). so it's the equivalent of a defensive player swatting a ball on the way down. Except the ball has already hit rim. So it's not really applicable here. Plus, if this was taken literally, the alley-oop would be illegal off a missed shot. 

So we're back to b. and h.. Is the ball in the cylinder? Is using the net causing an unnatural bounce? 

Then there's this video. It walks you through a similar situation, and the determination is that the call is interference because the base of the ball is on the rim. As the ball's path leads it to bounce off the rim and out,  you could argue that's not the case here. And since Perkins touches it just before it hits rim, it also gets out of that. 

At its heart, this comes down to the cylinder. The most widely accepted terminology is that if any part of the ball is in the cylinder, it's a violation. But since the NBA rulebook doesn't define that, it leads to situations like this. Which is going to make tomorrow tons of fun for Stu Jackson. 

The reason the play was important was because it gave the Thunder a one-point lead. A Westbrook jumper would give the Thunder a three-point lead, and the Nuggets faced a three-point deficit instead of a one-point deficit. 

Now, from there, Raymond Felton blew a possesion in a terrible way, which is on him. The Nuggets missed a ton of free throws, which is on them. The Nuggets had every opportunity to win this game and did fail to close the deal. But it does create a really bizarre situation. 

We'll update you with the league's explanation for how this play was correctly, or should have been called. 

Update from a Twitter follower, from an NBA explanation post:
Once the ball is on or directly above the rim, no player can not touch the ball.



Of course whether the ball is directly above the rim...
Posted on: April 15, 2011 3:02 pm
 

Thunder-Nuggets Preview: There will be blood

Posted by Royce Young



I. Intro:  No. 5 seed Denver Nuggets (50-32) vs. No. 4 seed Oklahoma City Thunder (55-27)

It's already being looked at as the "fun series" to watch. The young, athletic Thunder versus the young, athletic Nuggets. Some seem to be torn on the outcome which says one thing -- it should be a fun series.

Both teams underwent pretty serious transformations near the trade deadline. One was shipping out its star and replacing him with a gaggle of above average players. The other was shipping off one of its young pieces and replacing him with a championship tested big man.

At the time, it looked like the two franchises were headed in opposite directions. It looked like the Thunder were setting up to contend in the now, while the Nuggets were attempting to restructure for the future.

Except Denver kept winner and actually probably became a better team. In the end, we settled in on a unexpected series pitting division rivals against one another. Already the two teams are talking a little smack and already they've tussled. I get the feeling they don't like each other one bit. Did I say it should be fun?

II. What Happened: A look at the season series

Throw out the first two meetings because they don't count at all (Denver and OKC split 1-1 anyway). The teams that faced off in those first two games aren't the ones you see now. A lot changed.

And more than really any other series, we got the best taste of what to expect over the last couple weeks with this one. Not only did the Thunder and Nuggets play each other -- home and home, too -- but the games were important at the time. The Northwest Division title was still on the line.

OKC took the game in Denver 101-94, handing the Nuggets their first loss at home since the Melo trade and snapping a seven-game win streak. Then back in Oklahoma City a week later, the Thunder dropped the Nuggets 104-89 with a relentless defensive effort.

III. The Easy Stuff: Denver has no one to guard Kevin Durant

In the two recent games, Durant averaged 30.0 points per game on 45 percent shooting and really didn't get much of a challenge from Denver defenders. Wilson Chandler and Danilo Gallinari shared the assignment, but the Nuggets tried switching on every screen Durant ran off of.

What result was a bunch of mismatches with Durant catching Nene or Kenyon Martin one-on-one. That wouldn't be a problem, except Durant is taller than both and can shoot over anyone on top of driving past them.

OKC is 22-1 this season when Durant shoots better than 50 percent from the floor. Read that last sentence again. Really, without Ron Artest last year holding Durant down against the Lakers, that series might've been very different. The Nuggets have to find a way to check Durant, otherwise they'll have a hard time checking the Thunder.

IV. Secret of the Series: The three P's: Pace, Perk and perimeter defense

The Nuggets play at the second fastest pace in the league (95.6). They want to run. They want to get Ty Lawson, Chandler, Martin and everyone else out in the open floor.

Oklahoma City isn't opposed to running by any means, but the Thunder definitely want to keep the Nuggets off the highway. In the last game in OKC, the game was played at a pace of just 90.0, something that definitely favored the Thunder. In the halfcourt, the Nuggets struggled scoring against OKC's man-to-man defense.

To go with that, inside Kendrick Perkins gives OKC the ability to leave single coverage on Nene. That means the Thunder's perimeter defenders can hang on Denver's list of good shooters. The Nuggets want you collapsing and rotating everywhere so they can find a marksman open on the outside. OKC didn't afford Denver that, holding the Nuggets to just 10-30 from 3 in the last two games.

V. The Dinosaur Narrative : "He who scores most will win"

Why is everyone acting like this will be a high scoring, up and down series? The two games these teams played in the last couple weeks were won by the Thunder by an average score of 102.5 to 91.5. Oklahoma City plays some serious defense now. Since Perkins joined the starting lineup, the Thunder are only second to Chicago in defensive efficiency.

Obviously the Nuggets like to run and the Thunder aren't shy about it, but if these games are 120-117 like everyone is acting, Scott Brooks might throw up. Kendrick Perkins most definitely will. (You know, from the running.)

This series will be more about stops and rebounding than anything else. Denver struggled in the halfcourt against the Thunder the last two games and OKC excelled, especially late. It's not about outscoring or outgunning each other. It's about out-stopping each other.

VI. The Line-Item Veto: Who wins each match-up?

PG: This will be fun. Speed on speed. I'm not sure anyone is faster than Russell Westbrook end-to-end with the ball in his hands. Except Ty Lawson (and maybe Derrick Rose). Westbrook is bigger and stronger though, which gives him the edge. But Lawson is the most important part to the Denver offense. He scored a then career-high 28 points against OKC in Denver two weeks ago.

SG: Assuming Arron Afflalo is healthy, this is a big edge for the Nuggets. Thabo Sefolosha doesn't add much on the offensive side and his defensive skills aren't needed that much on Afflalo. But OKC does use James Harden off the bench much in the same way Dallas uses Jason Terry. Then again, Denver has J.R. Smith who is maybe this series' overall X-Factor...

SF: I already went over it, but Denver just doesn't have a good defender for Durant. Both Gallinari and Chandler will have their chances, as well as Afflalo, but we're talking about maybe the most gifted offensive player in the game.

PF: Really this is a push because both Kenyon Martin and Serge Ibaka, while good players, aren't going to do a ton more than block, rebound and score occasionally on put-backs.

C: Other than the point guard matchup, all eyes will be here. Perkins and Nene already tussled once and there's no doubt that they'll likely go at each other again. Perkins did a really good job on Nene in the first meeting holding him to just 3-10 shooting, but Nene came back with a solid 6-9 effort in the last meeting.

Bench: Both teams have very strong benches. As mentioned, Harden is more of a bench starter for OKC. Eric Maynor is a terrific backup point guard. Daequan Cook a nice specialist. Nick Collison and Nazr Mohammed good veteran big men. Denver has excellent weapons too with Raymond Felton, Chander, Smith and Chris Andersen. The benches will be big and both are very good.

Coaches: George Karl and Scott Brooks know each other well. Brooks was an assistant under Karl for three years. Karl is the more experienced one and has been both the favorite and the underdog before. This is Brooks first rodeo as a playoff favorite. But this series is more about the players than the coaches, so I don't really think this matchup matters a whole lot.

VII. Conclusion

This will be a terrific series, no matter the number of games it takes. Some are feeling the Nuggets in an upset as that's what a lot of the numbers suggest. But I don't see it. I think everyone agrees that the Nuggets may have actually become a better team trading Melo, but against the Thunder, it hurt them. Kevin Durant gets an easier job, the Nuggets don't have a good halfcourt option late in games and OKC actually matches up really well with Denver now.

The Nuggets are dangerous, especially when a couple guys get hot. But that's what it'll take. They'll have to have big games from J.R. Smith (good luck relying on him), Gallinari, Lawson and Chandler to move on past OKC. The Thunder know what they're getting from Durant and Westbrook. They know they can play defense. I like this Nuggets team a lot. Just not against Oklahoma City. Prediction: Thunder in five.

Posted on: April 10, 2011 9:58 am
 

Mythbusters: Lawson puts the hot hand to the test

Posted by Royce Young



Ty Lawson went 10-11 from 3 Saturday night against Minnesota. He started the game 10-10, with the lone miss coming on a wild 30-foot runner to end the third quarter.

Think about that one for a second. Ten straight... from 3-point range. Incredible.

The 10 straight makes is an NBA record. Had Lawson not missed his final heave, he would've set the NBA record held by Latrell Sprewell who went 9-9 from deep in 2003. Lawson sat the entire fourth despite being just two makes away from the all-time NBA record of 12.

Anyway, any time a guy makes 10 consecutive shots from anywhere much less downtown, there's always a seemingly logical, simple basketball explanation. He was hot.

That's what backcourt buddy Raymond Felton said. "A guy's hot like that, you've got to feed him the ball," he said after the game. When somebody is cooking -- and hitting 10 straight from 3 is pretty much surface of the sun hot -- there's no way to explain the outbreak of sharpshooting other than just saying he was "hot."

But there's actually been extensive studies done on this exact topic. The great Henry Abbott of TrueHoop has sort of championed this topic, contending -- behind actual scientific evidence -- that the hot hand does not, in fact, exist. When someone heats up in a game and drops a number of jumpers it's more about the simple laws of percentages sorting themselves out rather than the old basketball explanation of being hot.

There has been a ton of research on this. And most every researcher/scientist comes to the same conclusion: The hot hand doesn't exist.

A recent book "Scorecasting" by Tobias J. Moskowitz and L. Jon Wertheim tackled exactly this in a chapter entitled "The Myth of the Hot Hand." A review by the New York Times summed it up well:
For example, in a chapter titled “The Myth of the Hot Hand,” the authors declare that in sports, momentum, a k a “Old Mo,” doesn’t really exist, that no matter how many home runs a slugger belts in a week, no matter how many games in a row a team wins, the likelihood of success in the next at-bat or the next game is no different than it is when no hot streak exists. Statistics prove this is so; the numbers say that a streak of any sort is simply an expected variation in an extended, observable pattern of events, the way a coin is likely to come up heads 10 times in a row at some point if you toss it 10,000 times.

For this reason and a few others, the authors say, the basketball strategy of passing to a shooter on a hot streak is more often than not a loser. They argue interestingly (and sensibly) that one thing that happens to shooters on a streak is that they succumb to hubris and begin taking more difficult shots.

It's hard to argue with things like, you know, facts. The logic behind busting the myth of the hot hand is almost rock solid. Even explaining away Ray Allen's epic shooting gallery from Game 2 of the NBA Finals last season wasn't all that challenging. Allen wasn't hot -- he's just a great shooter.

But bring it back to Lawson's incredible 10-10 start Saturday night. Lawson is far from a great shooter, especially in terms of the great Ray Allen. Lawson is a career 38.5 percent shooter from 3 and that comes on just 239 career attempts to date. He's never hit more than three in a game before Saturday. He's much more of a slasher with an incredible ability to finish in traffic around the rim despite his small stature. He's not known as a marksman.

So for him to hit 10 consecutive 3s, something no one else in NBA history has done, that defies the law of percentages theory, right? Or at the very least, makes us at least rethink declaring the hot hand a myth.

I never really bought into the claims that there was no such thing as a hot hand but couldn't find a way to argue against it that was worthwhile. I played basketball. I've been in shooting grooves before. Not to brag -- well to kind of brag, but I'm trying to make a point -- I once hit seven 3-pointers in the first half of a high school game. Was I a good shooter? Sort of, but I'm definitely no Ray Allen. But I can tell you, I felt good that night. I felt the hot hand.

I still play a decent amount of pick-up and there are times guys hit two, three or four straight from deep. Inevitably, everyone nods in agreement and says, "He's hot." If you've shot a basketball and watched it go through the hoop a couple straight times, you know the feeling. Stats may say it doesn't exist, but I can you one thing that absolutely does: confidence.

Watch highlights from the game. Notice Lawson's shot selection. Not a single forced 3 or bad look in the bunch. Well, you could call the 10th one a bit of a Heat check, but still, no hand in his face. Point is, it's not like he was just chucking them up after he hit a few. But also notice Lawson's release. It gets quicker and quicker with each attempt and he even starts kicking his legs out a bit as he shoots. An obvious sign of confidence in his jumper.

Confidence is an amazing thing. And that's really what the hot hand is. It's a sincere belief that every time you raise that ball and fire it up at the basket that it's going through the bottom of the net. You increase your chances of it happening by repetition of course, by practice. It's like a golfer that perfects his swing so that he can repeat it every time on command. It's impossible to actually do, but explain how a guy on the golf course out of nowhere fires up a 61 with seven birdies on the back nine. It's because he was confident in his game. It's because he got hot.

But that's why the hot hand is fun to talk about. Players will tell you it absolutely exists, that it's a real thing. The numbers and data however, tell you differently. What do you trust?

Posted on: April 3, 2011 2:50 pm
Edited on: April 3, 2011 6:37 pm
 

So wait, how far can these Nuggets actually go?

Posted by Royce Young



Nobody expected to be asking this question. I don't think even in his heart of hearts George Karl thought the Nuggets would be in the position for someone to ask it. More than a month after trading away the apparent franchise player, the Nuggets didn't dip. In fact, they did the complete opposite.

They rose.

You've heard the number a ton already, but I'll say it again: Since trading Anthony, Denver is an astonishing 15-4 and winners of seven straight, most recently with a terrific road win against the red hot Lakers. Again, I don't even the most optimistic people saw this streak coming. The feeling was the Nuggets made 50 cents on the dollar with the trade, getting quality pieces back but nothing comparable to Anthony. That's sort of the situation you face when trading a star. No matter the return, it's not as good as what you're sending out.

But the Nuggets clearly found something. They found a unit that works together, understands a philosophy entirely and has settled into roles and bought into a culture. There isn't a crunch time star to run things through. But there are a number of really solid players that are flourishing under Karl.

Not only are the Nuggets winning, but they've played every game well. They haven't really had a bad night. Their four losses were by a combined 15 points. And they came against the Magic, Heat, Blazers and Clippers. Yeah they Clipper loss isn't great, but it was at Staples where the Clips are 22-18 and have beat a lot of good teams. Not really a bad loss.

So the Nuggets have already accomplished the first goal, the one that appeared to be a longshot when general manager Masai Ujiri decided to finally cut ties with the Melodrama. They are going to go to the playoffs. Currently, the magic number is at one. A lone win or a Houston loss puts Denver in. And they are still in the rearview of the Oklahoma City Thunder for the Northwest Division title and the four-seed in the playoffs.

Because that's where things have advanced to -- playoffs. No longer is it just about getting there, but now it's a new mission and a new question: Can the Nuggets actually make some noise?

It almost seems like we've all dismissed that as an option because of the lack of starpower. It's like people are saying, "Yeah the way they've played the last month is cute, but they aren't built for the postseason." But here's what wins in the playoffs: good basketball. And what do the Nuggets play? Good basketball.

On both ends, they've become a fundamentally sound unit that defends, moves the ball, cuts, runs and finishes. They are still scoring but instead if 60 percent coming from two players, it's now evenly distributed out among a number of guys. I think the toughest type of team to defend is one that have five, not one, players on the floor at a time capable of scoring. And not scoring as in making a bucket here or there. I mean capable of putting up double-digits consistently. George Karl deserves Coach of the Year consideration just for getting J.R. Smith to buy in to playing well with others. That honestly says it all.

Is this a team just built to contend for the Western Conference Finals? I mean, really? Well look at it this way: Most everyone the Nuggets play talk about how good they're playing and how scary they are. Put this group in a series where they need four wins and I don't think many teams would want to play them. They match up just about everywhere, have shooters, have two good point guards, have a big man that can rebound and score, have a really good bench and have an enforcer in the middle that adds toughness. They're built for anything.

One thing that makes a team more dangerous than anything is confidence. A belief in self, along with the 11 other guys on your team and the system you play in makes a team scary. It's how you see runs like what Butler has put together two straight years in the NCAA tournament. They believe in one another. They trust each other. And they just feel unbeatable, no matter what. Establishing that mentally was the top priority for Karl once the trade went through and he's absolutely succeeded.

The concern for them heading into the postseason is how they perform on the road where they're just 17-22. But Sunday's win in Los Angeles is a pretty good example of how they might be able to get over that. The Nuggets absolutely grinded one out versus the Lakers, playing hard nosed defense, by grabbing a couple key offensive rebounds and by moving the ball for good looks in crunch time. The Western Conference was already very aware of this Nugget team, but Sunday's win against the defending champs certainly raised a few more eyebrows.

But let's not get too carried away though. Winning in the playoffs isn't easy, no matter who you are or how well you're playing. You've got to beat a good team four times. That's tough, no matter how good you feel. And it will likely start versus the Thunder, a team that features a two-headed monster in Kevin Durant and Russell Westbrook plus ample size and toughness inside. Certainly, it will be a fun, but very difficult series.

The Nuggets are definitely capable of moving on though, but it's not like they're a favorite. It's not like most will give them much of a shot. Which means they'll be flying exactly where they want to be -- under the radar.
Posted on: December 14, 2010 3:37 pm
Edited on: August 14, 2011 9:35 pm
 

Nuggets' Billups out a week with wrist

Denver Nuggets point guard Chauncey Billups is reportedly out a week with a wrist injury. Posted by Ben Golliverchauncey-billups

Veteran Denver Nuggets point guard Chauncey Billups has been bothered by a wrist injury for the better part of a month, after falling on it during a Nov. 20 game against the New Jersey Nets. The Denver Post reports today that Billups' pain continues and, after receiving an MRI on Monday, it was decided that he will "miss a week to rest ligament damage to his right wrist." The 14-9 Nuggets are at home this week, hosting the Orlando Magic on Tuesday, the San Antonio Spurs on Thursday and the Minnesota Timberwolves on Saturday.  The timing of the news is tough for Denver, who has lost three of their last four games and will face two title contenders in Billups' absence. Stepping up to replace Billups will be backup point guard Ty Lawson.  Lawson, a productive second-year guard out of North Carolina, is one of the league's top backup point guards when it comes to player efficiency and figures to be Denver's starting point guard of the future.   When that future comes is anyone's guess, as the Nuggets are tied up in a tangle of Carmelo Anthony trade rumors. But Billups' playing time is slightly down (from 34.1 MPG last season to 32.6 MPG this year) and Lawson's is up (from 20.2 MPG last season to 23.7 MPG this season). Those two numbers will converge in Billups' absence, and when you look at their respective salaries -- Billups is on the books for $14.2 next season, Lawson will make just $1.6 million on his rookie deal -- one continues to wonder whether the point guard regime change should happen sooner rather than later. 
 
 
 
 
The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or CBSSports.com