NBA post season winners

from ESPN Insider:
The free-agent feeding frenzy is off to an unusually quick start this summer, perhaps propelled by the near-total lack of anyone even remotely resembling a superstar. With so little quality on the market, teams with cap space jumped in early and drove up the bidding on the few players worth more than the midlevel exception.

Some teams play this game better than others, however, so it's time to begin sorting out the winners and losers. While this may seem mildly insane given that we've had less than a week of dealing and contracts can't be signed until next Wednesday, enough activity has already gone down that there's plenty of material with which to work.



Gregory Shamus/Getty Images
Wallace will add defense and rebounding ... but scoring plays like this are rare.
Let's start with the winners, or rather The Winner. Actually, there are two other teams that qualify as winners, but the Chicago Bulls are the runaway winner from early July on my scorecard.

I have them in that spot not only because of the signing of Ben Wallace, but for the ancillary moves they've made (and are still making) that has them positioned to be a major player in the East for years to come.

The story begins with Wallace, though, since he's the main piece around which the others will revolve.

The Bulls have become a pretty decent team even without an All-Star caliber player -- they won 41 games in 2005-06 and took Miami to six games in the first round. If they were able to do that with a frontcourt in which Malik Allen, Mike Sweetney, Darius Songaila and Othello Harrington played major roles (starting 94 games between them), one has to think their odds of joining the 50-win elite in the East improve significantly with Big Ben in the middle.

Moreover, they didn't overpay as grossly as some might fear. They gave Wallace some serious wampum at $15 million a year, but for an All-Star center that's not horribly extravagant. A year earlier, for instance, Zydrunas Ilgauskas got five years and $55 million from the Cavs, and his health concerns were more serious than those for Wallace.

I won't even talk about what Erick Dampier, Samuel Dalembert, Eddy Curry and Tyson Chandler got in the last two offseasons. Even Wallace's former team, who presumably would be able to gauge his value the best, offered an average of $13 million a year. Chicago overpaid, but it wasn't by a lot.

Additionally, the Bulls gave Wallace a four-year deal, not the standard five or six-year fare, which means if he turns out to be a bust they won't spend the next five years trying to dump his contract.

That may seem like a minor point now, but it's an important consideration when you look at some of the recent big free-agent contracts.

Over the past two years, 34 different players signed free-agent deals worth at least $35 million. Of those, by my count, there are at least 15 whose teams would gladly give them away if they could. I mean literally give them away, just to be rid of the contract.

(Those lucky souls would be Dampier, Dalembert, Chandler, Darius Miles, Kenyon Martin, Brian Cardinal, Marquis Daniels, Adonal Foyle, Marko Jaric, Troy Hudson, Mark Blount, Quentin Richardson, Etan Thomas and Derek Fisher, whom in fact the Warriors did just hand over to the Jazz.)

Beyond those, there are at least another five whose teams deeply regret signing them (or should) -- Curry, Carlos Boozer, Larry Hughes, Stephen Jackson, and Bobby Simmons.

So basically, out of 34 players, at least 20 have worked out absolutely terribly for the team that signed them. Even that list leaves out a few deals that don't seem so fragrant now and could eventually make the list (Cuttino Mobley in L.A., for instance, or Dan Gadzuric in Milwaukee).

Twenty busts out of 34 contracts. Isn't that amazing, considering these teams are the supposed "winners" of free agency? And shouldn't that be a huge signal that teams ought to be more careful in taking risks like this in the free agent market?

Thus, teams need to factor in the possibility of needing to dump the contract at some point, and the risk of being stuck with a cap-killer like K-Mart's deal in Denver. By limiting the years on Wallace's deal, Chicago did that. Yes, they still overpaid, but in this market you have to. The Bulls at least limited their risk as much as they could.



Jonathan Daniel/Getty Images
Chandler disappeared in the playoffs for the Bulls (1.8 points per game).
Additionally, the fit couldn't be more perfect. The Bulls are hardcore about defense, so Wallace should be right at home at that end of the floor. He'll take over the role previously filled by Tyson Chandler, only he'll do it much, much more effectively. And because the Bulls like to push the pace offensively, he should be able to benefit from more easy transition baskets than he got in Detroit's plodding system.

But I like the Bulls' moves for more than just the Wallace signing. As I mentioned above, they've done yeoman work in getting the proper surrounding pieces in place. Most notable is the deal the Bulls have made that will send Chandler to the Hornets for forward P.J. Brown and guard J.R. Smith.

If and when this trade is consummated on July 12, as expected, it will be a huge win for the Bulls on several levels.

In terms of the talent acquired, it's exactly what Chicago needs. Smith is a 6-6 shooting guard with massive potential as a scorer, and the two things the Bulls need most desperately are scoring and big guards. And in terms of the talent departed, it's exactly what the Bulls don't need -- in Wallace, they already have a center who defends and rebounds but can't score, and he's better than Chandler.

Second, there's the salary angle. Brown's contract expires after the season, while Chandler still has five years left on his deal. This is hugely important for the Bulls because it will pull them far enough away from the luxury tax that they can keep adding to their core next year -- even after they extend the contracts of Kirk Hinrich and Andres Nocioni, who are both eligible for deals this fall.

Finally, there's the big fish they're still trying to catch. The one thing the Bulls lack is a genuine superstar, and there's a certain fellow in Minnesota who has Chicago roots and could fill that niche nicely. Even if they can't obtain Kevin Garnett this summer, the Chandler deal keeps the Bulls in position to make a run at him in the next 12 months by adding an enticing young trade pawn in Smith and maintaining enough luxury-tax room to absorb Garnett's behemoth salary.

Besides, it's tough not to like Paxson's trades when he chooses his partners so well. His trading strategy of the past few years can neatly be summarized as "find the biggest sucker at the table and take all his chips before everyone else does."

Just look at what happened when Isiah Thomas took over in New York. Right away, there was Pax-man on the phone, happily dishing out a Jamal Crawford appetizer before serving up the Curry main course.

In the 2006 draft, Paxson expanded his trading universe only slightly, keeping his dealings limited to the lost-at-sea, GM-less Blazers and the Sixers' embattled Billy King and ending up with high-flying forward Tyrus Thomas and Swiss swingman Thabo Sefolosha.

So now I have to wonder -- is the Hornets' Jeff Bower Paxson's next target? Bower hasn't seemed a fool in his brief stewardship, but perhaps Paxson knows something we don't. Certainly the Hornets' moves this summer leave a lot to be desired as I discuss in my rundown of July's losers.

Regardless, it's hard not to like these revamped Bulls. It's not just that they added a cornerstone in Big Ben, it's that they did it while keeping their risk somewhat limited and staying in position to strike if Kevin Garnett becomes available. They seem ready to make the leap to the Eastern Conference's elite, and for that reason I'm crowning them the big winner of the first week of free agency.

Other winners:




Los Angeles Clippers
Beyond the shocking fact that they actually spent some money was the nearly equally shocking fact that they spent it fairly intelligently. Sam Cassell's 2-year, $13 million deal is completely, utterly reasonable, which is almost unheard of in an offseason that's already seen several goofball contracts thrown around.

I was less thrilled with Tim Thomas's four-year, $24 million deal, but if the choice is between that and paying $31 million to Vladimir Radmanovic, I'll take Thomas, thanks. Not only will he do the same things Vlad did for less money, but adding him also takes a bite out of the Clippers' key rival for Pacific Division supremacy.

You could almost picture a faux-apologetic Elgin Baylor calling Mike D'Antoni and saying, "Sorry we took your player. By the way, enjoy the Eric Piatkowski era. He's a legend here."




Milwaukee Bucks
I've always felt Larry Harris was an underrated GM, and he made a great deal trading T.J. Ford for Charlie V. A great deal.

There's much more on this in my July losers column, in which I talk about the Toronto Raptors, so I won't repeat myself here, but suffice to say that between Chicago and Milwaukee the Central Division just got even tougher.

 

NBA Post Season Losers

Again from ESPN Insider:

New Orleans/Oklahoma City Hornets
When it comes to personnel decisions, the single biggest mistake teams make is not being honest with themselves about where they stand. Examples abound, but one that sticks out came two years ago. That's when the 76ers imagined themselves to be a player away from contention and pulled the trigger on a deal for Chris Webber, a trade that only put them further away from the promised land and will probably result in Allen Iverson's departure this summer.

This year's better-take-another-look-in-the-mirror award goes to the Hornets, who apparently think they're on the cusp of something big. How else to explain the free-agent acquisitions of Peja Stojakovic and Bobby Jackson, or the trade for Tyson Chandler?

The Jackson addition can at least be written off as a wash. The man he replaces, Speedy Claxton, was an energizing, shoot-first backup point guard who will spend 30 games on the injured list next year -- just like Jackson, in other words. No harm, no foul on that one.

The Peja deal is harder to stomach. I talked in the winners column about teams signing players to big free-agent deals and then feverishly trying to unload them just a year or two later. This contract seems like a mortal lock to fall in that category.

Stojakovic will be making $13 million a year for the next five years, even though he's barely been worth half of that over the past two seasons. He's also had injuries to virtually every square inch of his legs in that time -- plantar fasciitis, sprained ankles, pulled hamstrings, sore knees -- which should be a giant red flag for any team about to sign him to a long-term deal that runs into his 30s.

When the Hornets are trying to unload Stojakovic in the summer of 2008, they'll also be desperately seeking takers for the final three years of Tyson Chandler's six-year, $60 million deal. (And unfortunately for the Hornets, Isiah Thomas probably will be out of a job by then.)

The Stojakovic and Chandler acquisitions might be acceptable if the Hornets were a veteran, 50-win team trying to make one last push for the ring. This team desperately needed shooting, and Stojakovic certainly can shoot the ball as well as anyone in the game.

It also lacked size in the middle, so adding Chandler to the mix should put the Hornets ahead on that front, too. Of course, cynics will point out that the Hornets already drafted not one but two big men that can't score (Hilton Armstrong and Cedric Simmons), so adding Chandler to the mix seems like a Department of Redundancy Department special.

Let's get back to that pesky mirror, though.

Stojakovic and Chandler will probably help, but will it really matter if they do? The Hornets won 38 games a year ago, and were significantly worse than their record indicated -- based on points scored and points allowed, they could have expected to go 31-51. Thus, even with Stojakovic and Chandler, they could easily end up south of .500.

Moreover, the two contracts they took on mean the Hornets' rebuilding effort is essentially over already. Even after signing Stojakovic, they were looking at having significant cap space again next summer because the contracts of Brown, Marc Jackson, Desmond Mason and Moochie Norris were coming off the books. Instead, they've essentially opted to have Chandler be their free-agent signing for 2007. That is, unless they don't plan on extending David West this fall, which would be an odd move considering he's twice the player Chandler is.

(Incidentally, this is why we shouldn't be too quick to pat Hornets owners George Shinn on the back for spending money. Even after all this action, the team is under the luxury tax and will barely be over the cap next year.)

The Hornets should have gone in an opposite direction from the one they took.

Rather than trade a 20-year-old with Smith's potential, they should be exploring ways to mend his relationship with Byron Scott.

Rather than targeting Stojakovic, Jackson and Chandler, they should be focused on adding less expensive players with greater upside -- Jackie Butler instead of Chandler, Eddie House instead of Jackson. And, if they were really that desperate for a shooter, Vladimir Radmanovic instead of Stojakovic.

They'd be slightly worse in 2006-07, but have much more room to maneuver in the future.

Instead, because they weren't honest with themselves, the Hornets may have inadvertently made themselves the new 76ers -- a capped-out 38-win team that has itself painted into a corner with untradable contracts.




Toronto Raptors
Between the draft and free agency, a little deal between Toronto and Milwaukee got lost in the shuffle. It shouldn't have, because it's potentially one of the most one-sided trades of the decade.

Just before free agency opened, the Raptors dealt forward Charlie Villanueva to the Bucks in return for guard T.J. Ford. There were no draft picks, cash or deadweight contracts thrown in -- it was just Ford for Villanueva, straight up. As such, it was one of the more baffling deals I've ever seen.

As with most one-sided deals, it came about because a team had a need at a position and decided to overpay to meet it. With Mike James's impending free agency, Toronto found itself needing a point guard, and in Villanueva had a surplus forward to use as the bait.

The problem is that now the Raptors don't have Villanueva . . . and they still need a point guard. Ford is a fine energizer as a 20-minute guy off the bench, but as the Bucks learned last season, he leaves much to be desired as a starter.

Ford's inability to shoot makes it easy to defend him in pick-and-roll situations and encourages opponents to play zones -- especially since the Raptors don't have a Michael Redd to keep opponents honest. And on defense, his 5-10 frame (or 6-0, if you believe the official listing) makes him ripe for abuse by all but the smallest opposing point guards.

Ford is also a major injury risk, missing the entire 2004-05 season after bruising his spinal cord -- the result of a condition called spinal stenosis that makes him vulnerable to this sort of injury. Plus, at 165 pounds, it's not like his neck is the only body part that's at risk.

Then there's the salary angle. Ford is eligible for an extension this summer, while Villanueva will be playing for peanuts for three more seasons.

Since the Raptors just traded for Ford, from a face-saving perspective it will be very difficult for them not to extend his deal -- otherwise, why trade a popular rookie for a guy who leaves after one season as a free agent? And since Ford's agent undoubtedly knows this, the price is likely to be much higher than it ought to be.

Even if they made the same money, or had the same injury risk, or were the same age (Villanueva is more than a year younger), this deal is a tough one to fathom.

Villanueva finished second in the Rookie of the Year voting after a stellar 2005-06 season which include a 48-point explosion against the Bucks in March. He is 6-11, rebounds well, can handle the ball and has 3-point range. Basically, he's the prototypical modern power forward. Yes, he sometimes loses concentration and his defense needs a lot of work, but the talent disparity in this trade is simply enormous.

The thing that really puzzles me about this deal is that Bryan Colangelo was the one pulling the trigger for Toronto. Nearly everything he touched turned to gold in Phoenix, and his first move with the Raptors seemed just as astute -- swinging the little-discussed Rafael Araujo-Kris Humphries deal that bought him some extra cap space this summer and, if he gets lucky, a real basketball player instead of Araujo.

But trading Villanueva for Ford? Sorry folks, I have to call 'em like I see 'em, and I see this one as being just astoundingly stupid. Even if they'd decided to get rid of Villanueva -- a defensible position, considering the Raptors' surplus of big forwards -- they had to be able to get much more than this in return. And if this was really all the market would bear, they should have waited till the trade deadline.

But most of all, they shouldn't have done this deal. Villanueva is a rising star. Ford is a backup-quality point guard who will cost more and has much greater odds of getting hurt.

By swapping the two, Toronto took a major step backward, and Milwaukee an equally big step ahead.




Detroit Pistons
They fall in this category not because they failed to match the Bulls' offer to Ben Wallace, but because of the poor planning that preceded it. All of Detroit's moves of the past 12 months were predicated on the idea that they would re-sign Ben Wallace and go on merrily winning. So how did they end up failing to keep Wallace and having Nazr Mohammed as the fallback position?

When Joe Dumars traded Darko Milicic and Carlos Arroyo to the Magic at midseason, his logic was that Milicic wasn't ever going to get a chance to play in Detroit with Wallace around, and that his team needed space under the luxury tax in order to keep Big Ben. That would have been fine and dandy if he had read the market for Wallace correctly, but he didn't.

In a market where five teams had max-contract cap space but Wallace was the only All-Star caliber free-agent, Dumars had to know that somebody was going to step forward with an over-the-top offer to try to lure Wallace away. So at the time he dealt Milicic, he should have been looking at only two alternatives -- matching the inevitable insane offer for Wallace, or making contingency plans.

Instead, he went halfway -- dumping just enough salary to make a halfway decent offer for Wallace and counting on Wallace's loyalty to prevail over the dollar signs. That's not the way to bet, my friends.

 

Losers continued

As a result, instead of being able to plug Darko in at center, having Arroyo around to back up the point and keeping enough assets to make a run at Al Harrington, Dumars is trying to plug several holes at once while his team is over the salary cap.

(And while we're talking about Detroit salary dumps, what about inexplicably giving away Maurice Evans last week to the Lakers for a second-round draft pick? His $1.5 million is one of the league's biggest bargains, and they just donate him to L.A. for no reason? Huh?)

I'll give Detroit a mulligan if they somehow entice the Hawks to sign-and-trade Harrington, but considering the Hawks' needs at point guard and center and Detroit's inability to meet them, I can't see it happening.

And while I like Mohammed -- an intelligent, underrated, low-key guy who will fit perfectly in Detroit -- it's going to be tough for Detroit to keep contending for titles with such a drop-off at the center spot.

Until or unless Dumars can make a follow-up move that radically alters the picture, the Pistons join the Raptors and Hornets as the summer's biggest losers.