Falling on your damn head doesn't counttoward suck differential. But it should.
suck differential (suhk dif'-uh-rehn-shul) noun. A descriptor similar to the trillion that not only describes a player's statistical insignificance, but also quantifies the player's net negative effect for their team. Can be abbreviated as "suck."

Usage example: In Wednesday's Bobcats-Knicks game, Nazr Mohammed's +1 suck differential was upstaged by Malik Rose's +2 suck. How much money do they make again?

Word history: The term was coined and defined by basketbawful reader AnacondaHL in the comments section of a recent Worst of the Night post. AnacondaHL wrote most of this post. However, I did make the following change: A one trillion is still awarded only if a player has zeroes in all categories. Thus a suck differential score has some attributes that are similar to the trillion, only they have racked up some stats...all of which are negative.

Word details: In order to obtain the suck differential descriptor, a player must first earn a trillion in the standard "positive" categories: (0 points, rebounds, assists, steals, blocks, FGM, 3PTM, FTM). In addition, each FGA, FTA, TOV, and PF increases the suck differential by +1. (Hence, a standard trillion has a suck differential of +0).

Note that +/- points differential is distinctly NOT used in the suck differential. We can't have better teammates covering for sucky teammates now, can we?

One problem with suck differential is that each suck category is given equal weight. Does 2 missed free throws equal 2 turnovers on the suck scale? What if one personal foul was intentional for clock management? A more complex formula could attempt to describe "team points/possessions lost because of what you did", and could adjust FGA by +2 (+3 for missed 3PTA), TOV's by +1.1, etc.

But quite frankly, if your only opportunity to make a game and statistical impact was two free throws and you miss both, you deserve the +2 to your suck differential. And if your only job in the game was to be used for your personal fouls, that's a pretty solid +1 earned.

Making this post created even more questions in my head. What was the largest single game suck differential last year? Who leads the league with the highest suck-to--minutes played ratio? Could suck differential, applied properly to +/-, actually make a meaningful stat independent of teammate performance? Let's get 82games.com on this pronto.

Labels: fan submissions, gratuitous Ostertag reference, measurements for craptasticness, one trillion, sucking

Something's wrong in the Valley ofthe Sun. And Nash is pissed about it.
The Suns suck. Relatively speaking, of course. I mean, they're still one of the league's elite teams. At 24-10, they have the best record in the Western Conference, and the third best record in the NBA, behind only Boston (29-3) and Detroit (26-8). In truth, they're only a couple victories off last season's 61-win pace; after 34 games last year, the Suns were 26-8, en route to the league's second-best record. But there's something wrong, something off about the team. I really believe that.

I'm no John Hollinger, but I decided to do a basic statistical comparison, determined to find the smoking gun:


Well, okay. Wow. No smoking guns there. The Suns' scoring and shooting numbers are nearly identical to last season. Their assist and rebounding numbers are up slightly, as are their steals and blocked shots. Alrighty then, let's look at what the Suns' opponents are doing this season:


Now we have something to go on. Teams are scoring and (especially) rebounding better against the Suns this season. Just for the hell of it, let's look at the Suns' differentials:

So the Suns' biggest problem (and I'm not the first person to mention this) seems to be rebounding, where their negative differential has dropped from -2.3 to -5.6. And in case you were wondering -- and even if you weren't -- the answer is yes: The Suns have the worst rebounding differential in the league. Only the Golden State Warriors (-5.3) are nearly as bad on the boards; the next closest team is the Clippers (-2.8).

The Suns really miss Kurt Thomas. And not just his numbers. They have rebounders; Shawn Marion is pulling down 10.1 rebounds per game, and Amare Stoudemire is grabbing 9.1 per. What they miss is a big man who plays solid interior defense, who's willing to put a body on people and mix it up in the paint. Stoudemire may be averaging 2.3 blocked shots per game, but he's a paratrooper; he likes to fly through the air and send shots into the crowd. He's not a physical player. Every team needs at least one big man who likes the rough stuff, even if that player doesn't contribute in obvious ways. Take Portland's Joel Przybilla. His 4.6 PPG and 6.9 RPG aren't going to get him onto the All-Star team, but his toughness inside the paint is a game-changing element for the Blazers.

The Suns don't have that toughness inside. Physically or emotionally. We all know Shawn "I think it's time for me to move on" Marion wants more money and more acclaim, preferably elsewhere. It's as if his $16,440,000 salary (good for 12th in the league and 1st on his team) isn't real, and his four All-Star appearances and two All-NBA Third Team honors never happened.

Stoudemire, as everybody knows, wants to be The Man in Phoenix. He leads the team in PPG (22.0) and FGA (14.0), but he also gets visibly frustrated when he isn't getting his shots. Amare claimed that he missed the Suns' 45-minute practice on Sunday because his kids were ill, but the reality seems to be that Stoudemire himself was sick about only getting 11 shots in Saturday's tough 118-113 loss to the New Orleans Hornets. In that game, Stoudemire went shotless in the third quarter, and then went shotless again for the final six minutes of the game until a last-second three-point attempt. After the game, he punched his palm and told reporters, "We've got to all get on the same page!"

Steve Nash is still Steve Nash, the best point guard in basketball (although Jason Kidd is still a triple-double machine, and young guys like Chris Paul and Deron Williams are hot on Nash's heels). But he doesn't command the respect, or fear, of other great players have. Scottie Pippen might have secretly hated Jordon, and envied his position as the Bulls' Alpha Dog, but he never seriously tried (or expected) to supplant him, just as Kevin McHale and James Worthy had no misconceptions about their respective places in the pecking order behind Larry Bird and Magic Johnson. For whatever reason, Nash's teammates -- Marion and Stoudemire at least -- don't have the same level of reverence for their two-time MVP. After Stoudemire's missed practice, Nash said, "If that stuff is going on, it needs to be stopped or else we can kiss it goodbye, because you can't win at this level if you don't have great chemistry and you don't pull for each other. If you're worried about your shots or about yourself or making excuses and pointing fingers at other players, that's for losers."

Bird, Jordan, and Magic used to say stuff like that, and their teams (usually) responded. After the Celtics lost to the Lakers by 33 points in Game 3 of the 1984 NBA Finals, Bird called his teammates (and himself) "a bunch of sissies." The next game, Kevin McHale clotheslined Kurt Rambis, Bird hip-checked Michael Cooper into the stands, and the Celtics beat the Lakers in overtime (after which Bird, assessing his team's improved performance, said, "Yeah, we [only] played like a bunch of women tonight."). I just don't see the Suns reacting the same way to Nash's sometimes frequent critiques.

I don't know. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe the Suns did respond to Nash's tough love. After all, they came out on Monday and dropped 137 points on the Nuggets. Marion hit five three-pointers on his way to a season-high 27 points. Stoudemire got 13 shots and had 20 points and 10 rebounds. Even the much-maligned Marcus Banks got into the game, and into the act, scoring 23 points (7-for-8) in almost 20 minutes of action.

The question is: Will it last? Are the Suns chemistry issues over? I doubt it. Marion will become a free agent at the end of this season. The Suns clearly haven't decided what they want to do with him, and he knows that. Marion doesn't know whether he wants to remain loyal to the Suns or seek more money and glory somewhere else, and the Suns know that. Stoudemire wants to be The Man on his team and one of the best centers in the league, but he doesn't want to to the dirty work (blocking out, getting physical inside, laying the wood on the opposing team's big men) that centers are supposed to do. And Nash, well, no one really knows how long he's going to hold up. Meanwhile, Raja Bell's health has been spotty and his numbers are down. Leandro Barbosa has taken a small step back this season, and Boris Diaw has taken a huge leap back. Nobody knows how long Grant Hill's body is going to hold up (although the Suns are no doubt praying for a miracle "Bill Walton in 1986" season from him). And nobody knows whether D'Antoni will ever feel completely comfortable utilizing his bench.

I know I might be overreacting. The Suns are still good. Really good. Maybe my expectations are too high. Maybe seeing them get mandhandled twice by the Lakers got me too worked up. And maybe seeing the chemistry and joy in Portland reminds me of how much fun the Suns were having during their big winning streaks last season, and the season before that, and the season before that. I guess, in the end, I just want a little more fun in the Suns. Is that too much to ask?

Quick fixes: Personally, I think Kerr should trade Marion (before he bolts in the off-season) for a sturdy, defense-oriented big man, and move Stoudemire to the power forward position (which is his natural position). Then you can slide Grant Hill to the small forward (as long as his body holds up), and play Nash and Bell at the guard spots. Play Brian Skinner as much as you can, even if he isn't putting up big numbers. And D'Antoni needs to develop a set rotation.

Update: Is Shawn Marion just too good for the Suns? The gentlemen at Hardwood Paroxysm think so. And you know what? They may be right.

Labels: Amare Stoudemire, Boris Diaw, Leandro Barbosa, Mike D'Antoni, Phoenix Suns, Raja Bell, Shawn Marion, Steve Nash, sucking

"Mud lun yeah?!" Translation: "What the f***?!"

Lenovo Stat is a new plus/minus statistic that compares the point differential when players are both in and out of the game to determine how a team performs with various combinations, thus demonstrating [dramatic drum roll here] "the power of teamwork." According to this new measure, the Houston Rockets featured the most effective five man player combination during the 2006-07 NBA season. The Rockets' line-up of Yao Ming, Tracy McGrady, Rafer Alston, Shane Battier, and Chuck Hayes led the Lenovo Stat rankings (+269), enjoying a significant lead over the second-best five man unit comprised of Dallas' Dirk Nowitzki, Jason Terry, Josh Howard, Erick Dampier, and Devin Harris (+215). The Phoenix Suns combination of Steve Nash, Shawn Marion, Amare Stoudemire, Raja Bell, and Leandro Barbosa came in a distant third (+165).

Something must be seriously wrong with this statistic, though, because only four of those five Rocket players managed to score in Houston's horrifying 81-67 Game 3 loss to the Utah Jazz. In fact, only four Houston players scored, period. Let me repeat that for dramatic effect: only four Rockets scored in last night's game. Yao Ming (26), Tracy McGrady (24), Shane Battier (11), and Rafer Alston (6) did all the "scoring" while their teammates did all the sucking. Although, maybe that's not a fair statement since only three other Rockets even attempted a shot: Juwan Howard (0-5), Luther Head (0-5), and Chuck Hayes (0-2). No, on second thought, they all sucked about equally. Only the ancient corpse of Dikembe Mutumbo -- who played only five minutes and couldn't score by himself in an empty gym full of 5-foot baskets -- is off the hook.

Overall, the Rockets shot 32 percent from the field and had 19 turnovers. The Rockets' bench went 0-for-10 and didn't score a single point (to go along with six rebounds and zero assists). The team's 67 points were the fewest in Rockets playoff history. And it was the only time in NBA playoff history that a mere four players on one team scored. It was a performance so spectacularly bad, so truly vomit-inducing, that David Stern should retroactively take away one or both of the Rockets' victories in this series. Look, I'm not trying to say that scoring is the only meaningful statistic, but last time I checked, the NBA was still using points to determine who wins and loses.

Now that something this sucktastic has finally happened, is anybody surprised that it was presided over by Jeff Van Gundy, the doleful mastermind of many a joyless "75-71"-type victory while coaching the Knicks in the late 90s? Somehow, despite the fact that it's 2007, despite the fact that David Stern has changed the very rules of the game to increase scoring, Van Gundy still manages to preside over 1990s basketball, which was actually just 1950s basketball in a taller, faster, more muscular package. I know Jeff has won a lot of games that way, but then again, barbarians used to win a lot of battles by chopping off the heads of their enemies and then hanging them from trees to induce a sense of fear and awe. I guess what I'm trying to say is that sometimes the ends don't really justify the means.

"What the f***?! No, really. What the f***??"

Labels: Houston Rockets, Jeff Van Gundy, NBA playoffs, Shane Battier, sucking, Tracy McGrady, Utah Jazz, Yao Ming