Dwight Howard, Marc Gasol, Mike Conley, Wayne Ellington

Dwight Howard: Serge Ibaka should have won Defensive Player of the Year over Tyson Chandler last year, Marc Gasol this year


Told Marc Gasol won Defensive Player of the Year and that he finished 14th, Dwight Howard didn’t sound thrilled with the result. Mark Medina of inside the lakers:

The news caused Dwight Howard to say “it’s funny,” but he wasn’t offering his signature smile.

“It’s just funny,” Howard said. “That’s okay. We got next year and I got a long time. This year’s funny.”

Howard averaged more defensive rebounds, blocks and steals – both per minute and per game – than Gasol.

Like when LeBron James lost MVP to Derrick Rose, nothing held Howard back more than voters’ irritation with how he changed teams. Howard probably could have handled his departure from Orlando better, but that doesn’t affect how well he defends.

The second-biggest factor working against Howard was his drop in production relative to previous years, but he shouldn’t have been competing with previous versions of himself. He should have been competing with other players in 2012-13.

However, unlike the LeBron-Rose situation, Howard didn’t deserve the award. Gasol did.

With Gasol on the court, the Grizzlies’ defensive rating was 95.4. With Howard on the court, the Lakers’ defensive rating was 101.7. Gasol played with better defensive teammates, but they didn’t account for such a large gap. Besides, Memphis’ defense improved more when Gasol played than Los Angeles’ did when Howard played.

But don’t bother Howard with those advanced stats. Via Medina:

“Serge Ibaka with all the stuff he did this year, he should’ve been the guy to win it this year and last year,” said Howard, though the award went last season to New York’s Tyson Chandler. “With the stuff he’s done on the defensive end. I thought he was the clear cut winner. But people saw it otherwise.”

“He led the league in blocks. That’s what defense is all about,” Howard said of Ibaka. “He led the team and was number one in blocks this year. You can’t play defense without having any shot blockers. He was the No. 1 shot blocker the last two years. That’s great defense right there.”

I don’t hear Howard saying he shouldn’t have won Defensive Player of the Year in 2010-11, when Ibaka led the league in total blocks and Andrew Bogut led the league in blockers per game. But here is a summary of what Howard did say:

1. Blocks = defense

2. Every Defensive Player of the Year since he won has been incorrectly assigned.

Report: Rockets will try to sign Alessandro Gentile next summer

Alessandro Gentile, Paulius Jankunas
1 Comment

The Rockets tried signing Sergio Llull this summer, but he opted for a long-term extension with Real Madrid.

So, they’ll just turn to another player in their large chest of stashed draft picks – Alessandro Gentile.

Marc Stein of ESPN:

Gentile, who was selected No. 53 in the 2014, is a 22-year-old wing for Armani Milano. He’s a good scorer, but he primarily works from mid-range – an area the Rockets eschew. He can get to the rim in Europe, but his subpar athleticism might hinder him in the NBA.

If Gentile comes stateside, he’ll face a steep learning curve. But he’s young enough and talented enough that he could develop into a rotation player.

Report: Hawks co-owner made more money by exposing Danny Ferry’s Luol Deng comments

Michael Gearon, Bruce Levenson
Leave a comment

A terribly kept secret: Hawks co-owner Michael Gearon Jr. wanted to get rid of general manager Danny Ferry.

Many believe that’s why Gearon made such a big deal about Ferry’s pejorative “African” comment about Luol Deng – that Gearon was more concerned about ousting Ferry than showing real concern over racism.

Gearon had another, no less sinister, reason to raise concern over Ferry’s remarks.

Kevin Arnovitz and Brian Windhorst of ESPN:

While Gearon felt that Ferry, as he wrote in the June 2014 email to Levenson, “put the entire franchise in jeopardy,” Gearon also figured to benefit financially from a Sterling-esque fallout.

In the spring of 2014, Gearon was in the process of selling more of his interest in the team to Levenson and the partners he had sold to in September. The agreed-upon price for roughly a third of Gearon’s remaining shares valued the Hawks at approximately $450 million, according to reports from sources.

“We accept your offer to buy the remaining 31 million,” Gearon wrote in an email to Levenson on April 17, 2014. “Let me know next steps so we can keep this simple as you suggested without a bunch of lawyers and bankers.”

Approximately five weeks later — just a little more than a week before the fateful conference call — Steve Ballmer agreed to pay $2 billion for the Clippers, a record-smashing price that completely changed the assessed value of NBA franchises. Gearon firmly maintains he was acting out of the sincerity of his convictions to safeguard the franchise from the Sterling stench, but such a spectacle also allowed him to wiggle out of selling his shares at far below market value.

Gearon and his legal team later challenged the notion that the sell-down was bound by any sort of contractual obligation and that any papers were signed. Once the organization became involved in the investigation, the sale of the shares was postponed.

Arnovitz and Windhorst did an incredible amount of reporting here. I suggest you read the full piece, which includes much more background on the Gearon-Ferry rift.

Considering the Hawks sold for $850 million, Gearon definitely made more money than if he’d sold his shares at a $450 million valuation.

Did that motivate him? Probably, though it doesn’t have to be one or the other. Most likely, his actions were derived from at least three desires – making more money, ousting Ferry and combating racism. Parsing how much each contributed is much more difficult.

What Ferry said was racist, whether or not he was looking at more racism on the sheet of paper in front of him. His comments deserved punishment.

But if Gearon didn’t have incentive to use them for his own benefit, would we even know about them? How many other teams, with more functional front offices, would have kept similar remarks under wraps or just ignored them?