Vivek Ranadive interview on ESPN

[Bricklayer]

This interview was actually referenced in our Perception is Reality thread, but its the owner, it deserves its own thread.

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/67010/qa-kings-owner-vivek-ranadive

Love the relationship with Cuz stuff -- huge issue in making sure the franchise is of one mind is that merger wit the franchise player.

Like his "V-Plan" for fixing the tanking issue. It combines two proposals others have made, but the overall result would be fun and should really make a difference.

And I agree with him too on letting up on the little girly technicals for taunting/celebrating too.

Now the computer geek side trying to entirely quantify a human activity like basketball...well hopefully there is some cushion there between geekdom and the decisionmaking. History is littered with smart guys outsmarting themselves.

 

[Padrino]

This interview was actually reference in our Turth or Perception thread, but its the owner, it deserves its own thread.

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/67010/qa-kings-owner-vivek-ranadive

Love the relationship with Cuz stuff -- huge issue in making sure the franchise is of one mind is that merger wit the franchise player.

Like his "V-Plan" for fixing the tanking issue. It combines too proposals others have made, but the overall result would be fun and should really make a difference.

And I agree with him too on letting up on the little girly technicals for taunting/celebrating too.

Now the computer geek side trying to entirely quantify a human activity like basketball...well hopefully there is some cushion there between geekdom and the decisionmaking. History is littered with smart guys outsmarting themselves.

indeed. i've heard a few variations of this idea elsewhere, but i love the notion of injecting some randomness into the nba postseason by creating a tournament for the final playoff spot in each conference. of course, in all likelihood, that eighth seed will get stomped in the first round, but it's still a good way to keep fans of losing teams engaged in the latter half of the season, when all hope has ordinarily dissipated for those at the bottom...

 

[HighFlyingMonkey]

I love the idea of the "V Plan" and I think some tweaks can really iron out some of its flaws.

Problem #1: What if a team suffers major injuries at the time of position "freezing" but turns it on for the rest of the season and makes it to the playoffs, thus getting a lottery pick AND playoffs?

Solution: You determine the draft order backwards. Start with the guaranteed playoff teams, 16-30, and determine that order based on end-of-season record. Then you go with "tournament" teams, 1-15, and base their lottery odds and order on All-Star break record. That way the highest pick a playoff team can have is #16, which makes sense.

Problem #2: Why would a lowly team try to win the tournament if winning would knock them into the playoffs and thus outside of the lottery?

Solution: Actually, same solution as above, you make the winner of the tournament still subject to the "frozen" order of tournament teams for lottery odds. Teams have literally nothing to lose by winning the tournament and everything to gain.

Problem #3: Wouldn't teams just tank at the beginning of the season?

Solution: Well, nothing you can do about a team that has put a garbage product on the floor in spite of incentives to improve the team with a randomized tournament at the end. At the same time, tanking is always at its worst at the end of the season when teams have no hope of making it to the playoffs. At the beginning of the season there is always rainbows and unicorns of hope for all teams, so the tanking is less pronounced.

 

[LPKingsFan]

indeed. i've heard a few variations of this idea elsewhere, but i love the notion of injecting some randomness into the nba postseason by creating a tournament for the final playoff spot in each conference. of course, in all likelihood, that eighth seed will get stomped in the first round, but it's still a good way to keep fans of losing teams engaged in the latter half of the season, when all hope has ordinarily dissipated for those at the bottom...

I wonder if the league (really, the sponsors) would be willing to go back to a five-game first round if you add this "tournament for the 8 seed." The Tournament would recover the lost TV revenue, and you'd actually want to give the team that won the tournament a break since they would have just played additional games (although this would only apply to the 1-8 series). Plus, the five game playoff round provides a much smaller sample and potential for upset, increasing interest and excitement and actually giving the teams to emerge from the Tournament scrum some hope.

 

[Bricklayer]

I wonder if the league (really, the sponsors) would be willing to go back to a five-game first round if you add this "tournament for the 8 seed." The Tournament would recover the lost TV revenue, and you'd actually want to give the team that won the tournament a break since they would have just played additional games (although this would only apply to the 1-8 series). Plus, the five game playoff round provides a much smaller sample and potential for upset, increasing interest and excitement and actually giving the teams to emerge from the Tournament scrum some hope.

That could be a nice extra bonus as well.

 

[pshn80]

Very interesting interview. Encouraging for me. Thanks for posting.

 

[VF21]

I continue to be amazed at just how much I like Vivek Ranadive. This man has done his homework and more... There's a reason he was able to buy the Kings.

 

[Padrino]

I wonder if the league (really, the sponsors) would be willing to go back to a five-game first round if you add this "tournament for the 8 seed." The Tournament would recover the lost TV revenue, and you'd actually want to give the team that won the tournament a break since they would have just played additional games (although this would only apply to the 1-8 series). Plus, the five game playoff round provides a much smaller sample and potential for upset, increasing interest and excitement and actually giving the teams to emerge from the Tournament scrum some hope.

interesting. i rather like this idea, combining the tournament style battle for the 8th seed with a return to the five-game first round series. the nba is a league where a single superstar makes all the difference, but it also makes the road to the championship fairly predictable. i think some of these adjustments to the playoff format would manage to increase excitement/randomness while still retaining the sense that the cream rises to the top. and though it'll never happen (due to the aforementioned TV revenue), i'd also consider shortening the regular season as a whole. seeing major injuries stack up league-wide these last few seasons has been nothing short of a bummer. given the general predictability of the contemporary, star-driven nba, i think the league could stand to shave at least 10 games off the schedule...

 

[VF21]

interesting. i rather like this idea, combining the tournament style battle for the 8th seed with a return to the five-game first round series. the nba is a league where a single superstar makes all the difference, but it also makes the road to the championship fairly predictable. i think some of these adjustments to the playoff format would manage to increase excitement/randomness while still retaining the sense that the cream rises to the top. and though it'll never happen (due to the aforementioned TV revenue), i'd also consider shortening the regular season as a whole. seeing major injuries stack up league-wide these last few seasons has been nothing short of a bummer. given the general predictability of the contemporary, star-driven nba, i think the league could stand to shave at least 10 games off the schedule...

I've thought about that before. I'd at least like to see a curtailment of the long road trips with two many games in too short a period of time.

 

[Bricklayer]

interesting. i rather like this idea, combining the tournament style battle for the 8th seed with a return to the five-game first round series. the nba is a league where a single superstar makes all the difference, but it also makes the road to the championship fairly predictable. i think some of these adjustments to the playoff format would manage to increase excitement/randomness while still retaining the sense that the cream rises to the top. and though it'll never happen (due to the aforementioned TV revenue), i'd also consider shortening the regular season as a whole. seeing major injuries stack up league-wide these last few seasons has been nothing short of a bummer. given the general predictability of the contemporary, star-driven nba, i think the league could stand to shave at least 10 games off the schedule...

there will be no shaving -- that's money out of the pocket.

And no NBA fans should want any shaving.

I know there is stickball to watch if you are a terminally boring person with a lifetime to waste, but I would rather watch more hoops, thx.

 

[Warhawk]

I love the idea of the "V Plan" and I think some tweaks can really iron out some of its flaws.

Problem #1: What if a team suffers major injuries at the time of position "freezing" but turns it on for the rest of the season and makes it to the playoffs, thus getting a lottery pick AND playoffs?

Solution: You determine the draft order backwards. Start with the guaranteed playoff teams, 16-30, and determine that order based on end-of-season record. Then you go with "tournament" teams, 1-15, and base their lottery odds and order on All-Star break record. That way the highest pick a playoff team can have is #16, which makes sense.

Problem #2: Why would a lowly team try to win the tournament if winning would knock them into the playoffs and thus outside of the lottery?

Solution: Actually, same solution as above, you make the winner of the tournament still subject to the "frozen" order of tournament teams for lottery odds. Teams have literally nothing to lose by winning the tournament and everything to gain.

Problem #3: Wouldn't teams just tank at the beginning of the season?

Solution: Well, nothing you can do about a team that has put a garbage product on the floor in spite of incentives to improve the team with a randomized tournament at the end. At the same time, tanking is always at its worst at the end of the season when teams have no hope of making it to the playoffs. At the beginning of the season there is always rainbows and unicorns of hope for all teams, so the tanking is less pronounced.

Please see my post here to address your first question. I don't want to re-type it all.

http://www.kingsfans.com/threads/lottery-changes-or-spinning-the-wheel.56258/#post-1069794

Here's what I said:

I saw that as well. I think there may be some good stuff in there.

Edit - I noticed a comment from the link that seems to overthink the "locking drafting position in at the ASB" idea. Obviously, if you have, say, the current West standings (because it works for illustration easily and I only have to type half the teams out instead of the entire league):

1. SA
2. OKC
3. LAC
4. Hou
5. Por
6. GS
7. Mem
8. Phx - last team in the PO
9. Dal - team with worst lottery chance
10. Min
11. Den
12. NO
13. Sac
14. LAL
15. Utah - team with best lottery chance

and the drafting order is locked in at the ASB, they are wondering about what happens if a team goes on a tear and makes it into the PO.

Well, the lottery drafting order is locked, but NOT the PO list. For instance, if the order essentially stays the same except Minny goes on a run and makes it to the 6th seed and NO drops a few spots (tanks!) after the ASB, the lottery rankings would look like this (not counting the possibility of a play-in game for the last PO spot):

1. SA
2. OKC
3. LAC
4. Hou
5. Por
6. Min - moved up from lottery, does not get in lottery drawing
7. GS
8. Mem - last team in the PO
9. Phx - team with worst lottery chance - fell out of PO and into lottery
10. Dal
11. Den
12. NO - lost games to drop behind Sac, etc. by the end of the year (tanked), but does NOT move down in lottery pick position - locked at ASB.
13. Sac
14. LAL
15. Utah - team with best lottery chance

Hopefully this makes sense to everyone and I am interpreting the concept correctly!

 

[Kingster]

I LOVE the V Plan. Do it! I also like about him mentioning the Spurs style of play. What I don't track is the following:

"I want to basically play a new brand of position-less basketball. I want to have these super-athletic, young guys that can run and feel out the game. Guys like Rudy Gay, and Derrick Williams, these are guys who can play the 1-2-3-4 positions."

First, I think Gay is a 3; not a 2, or 1, or a 4. A 3. That's it. And Williams doesn't excite me about his ability to play 3 and 4 because he plays neither very well. Note that he is talking about offense in his quote. However, the limiting condition is on defense. That's where the position is defined, much more so than on offense, imo.

 

[VF21]

I LOVE the V Plan. Do it! I also like about him mentioning the Spurs style of play. What I don't track is the following:

"I want to basically play a new brand of position-less basketball. I want to have these super-athletic, young guys that can run and feel out the game. Guys like Rudy Gay, and Derrick Williams, these are guys who can play the 1-2-3-4 positions."

First, I think Gay is a 3; not a 2, or 1, or a 4. A 3. That's it. And Williams doesn't excite me about his ability to play 3 and 4 because he plays neither very well. Note that he is talking about offense in his quote. However, the limiting condition is on defense. That's where the position is defined, much more so than on offense, imo.

You're relying on the traditional definitions of the 1, 2, 3 and 4 positions. I think Vivek is throwing those definitions out, saying we can be freer with match-ups for individual games when we aren't bound by the old position definitions.

 

[hrdboild]

I want to basically play a new brand of position-less basketball. I want to have these super-athletic, young guys that can run and feel out the game. Guys like Rudy Gay, and Derrick Williams, these are guys who can play the 1-2-3-4 positions. There’s work to be done on offense but I think we’ve made progress.

It's an interesting point, and I applaud Ranadive's willingness to think outside the box a bit here. If you follow this through to it's logical conclusion though (individual positions are less important than athleticism and ball skills) someone like Aaron Gordon looks like an ideal target in the draft. How are you going to find playing time now for Gay, Williams, and Gordon? Certainly I think it's a good thing to have elite athletes on your team who can make plays on the break and create easy scoring opportunities in the half court, but there's something to be said for traditional roles as well. Having a dedicated distributor who concentrates on keeping everyone involved is important too and so is a defensive intimidator of some kind in the paint. A team full of super-athletic swing men might be able to overwhelm some teams but can they win consistently against a well-constructed team like Indiana?

 

[Bricklayer]

You're relying on the traditional definitions of the 1, 2, 3 and 4 positions. I think Vivek is throwing those definitions out, saying we can be freer with match-ups for individual games when we aren't bound by the old position definitions.

As I said, that's potentially the sort of newbie thinking where you come in thinking you are going to do it all different and reinvent the wheel when it turns out round is the only way to go. We really don't need that nonsense. We have a centerpiece that any competent traditionalist could turn into a 50win team at the very least.

I'm also hesittant to point this out, but should anyway: if that's their goal than it makes the decision not to bring back Reke even more ridiculous -- they don't even follow their own script.

 

[Glenn]

I generally agree with Vivek but I think you have to have players who accomplish certain tasks. Somebody has to be able to bring the ball up the court. Someone has to lead the offense. Someone if not most have to be good on defense. A few have to hit from outside. A rim protector would be nice. Etc., etc., etc. You have to have people to accomplish the task and what they are called is not important. Generally your better athletes can accomplish more than one of these tasks. I think the players that have been brought in except for Gray satisfy the idea of having great athletes who can multi-task.

I wish I knew what the plan was for the guards.

 

[Glenn]

As I said, that's potentially the sort of newbie thinking where you come in thinking you are going to do it all different and reinvent the wheel when it turns out round is the only way to go. We really don't need that nonsense. We have a centerpiece that any competent traditionalist could turn into a 50win team at the very least.

I'm also hesitant to point this out, but should anyway: if that's their goal than it makes the decision not to bring back Reke even more ridiculous -- they don't even follow their own script.

This where I get confused. I have heard of many goals and the choice in trade, etc. doesn't follow. Maybe they are too new to the game and don't have their FO culture in place.

 

[VF21]

As I said, that's potentially the sort of newbie thinking where you come in thinking you are going to do it all different and reinvent the wheel when it turns out round is the only way to go. We really don't need that nonsense. We have a centerpiece that any competent traditionalist could turn into a 50win team at the very least.

You notice Vivek didn't say 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5. I think he's planning on having Cousins as our anchor for a long time and building whatever he needs around him. I honestly think you just hesitate to give Vivek or PDA any kind of credit at all. I'm not as restricted in my thinking.

 

[Kingster]

You're relying on the traditional definitions of the 1, 2, 3 and 4 positions. I think Vivek is throwing those definitions out, saying we can be freer with match-ups for individual games when we aren't bound by the old position definitions.

What you're missing is my point: A position is defined by who you can guard, regardless of whether you can play the positions on offense well or not. You can say there is no position all you want. But you still have to guard the other guy on the opposite side of the floor who does have a position. That's where you are defined, whether you like it or not.

 

[Kingster]

As I said, that's potentially the sort of newbie thinking where you come in thinking you are going to do it all different and reinvent the wheel when it turns out round is the only way to go. We really don't need that nonsense. We have a centerpiece that any competent traditionalist could turn into a 50win team at the very least.

I'm also hesittant to point this out, but should anyway: if that's their goal than it makes the decision not to bring back Reke even more ridiculous -- they don't even follow their own script.

I think that's a fair point. Of all the players we've had that you could make a legit case for playing three different positions, it was Tyreke. He could adequately guard the 1, 2 or 3.

 

[VF21]

What you're missing is my point: A position is defined by who you can guard, regardless of whether you can play the positions on offense well or not. You can say there is no position all you want. But you still have to guard the other guy on the opposite side of the floor who does have a position. That's where you are defined, whether you like it or not.

Nope. Didn't miss your point at all.

 

[ShastaKingsFan]

What you're missing is my point: A position is defined by who you can guard, regardless of whether you can play the positions on offense well or not. You can say there is no position all you want. But you still have to guard the other guy on the opposite side of the floor who does have a position. That's where you are defined, whether you like it or not.

What if they believe that the other team won't be able to effectively guard them, more often than the vice versa? Playing to your strengths and deciding which benefits outweigh the costs in any potential matchup

 

[sdballer]

What if they believe that the other team won't be able to effectively guard them, more often than the vice versa? Playing to your strengths and deciding which benefits outweigh the costs in any potential matchup

We aren't seriously discussing a strategy that suggests Derrick Williams can run the role of a pg are we? I like Vivek and he's still in the honeymoon phase where everything that comes out of his mouth is covered in chocolate but let's not get silly.

 

[ShastaKingsFan]

We aren't seriously discussing a strategy that suggests Derrick Williams can run the role of a pg are we? I like Vivek and he's still in the honeymoon phase where everything that comes out of his mouth is covered in chocolate but let's not get silly.

You took his quote out of context. He said Gay AND Williams together, not individually, can cover the 1-4 positions. He's correct, Rudy can at times initiate the offense bringing the ball up the floor and also play against smaller "shooting guards". We've seen both this season. Derrick in addition, can play both on the wing and in the post.

He used those two players as an example, not necessarily as an ideal

 

[kingsfan101]

Decent interview, but two things really stuck out to me.

The first was the excessive use of "21st century". Malone, PDA, Boggie, are also "21st century" products, whatever that means.

Well, what he probably means is that DMC is that multi-skilled player, that he wants the team to be stacked with. As for Malone, and DMC, they are more receptive to new technologies, and big data, that he is so committed to.

The second was of course the constant and continued focus on using data and technology. By itself, I'm not against the idea. Long before it became more commonly known, one of my friends worked in a company on a product that used advanced data mining techniques to help coaches and GMs. Lost touch with him after a while, since he returned to India, and don't know the current status of the product. However, at that time at least, he said that the system was used by several teams in NBA, and they had received very positive feedback.

Whether this shall eventually replace (largely) scouting, and analyzing, I don't know. I guess it shall supplement the current process for a long time. However, the passion with which Vivek is focused on it, I fear that he might be stepping on PDA's toes, and that's never a good thing, particularly, with stories about Maloofs meddling with Petrie still fresh.

 

[est.1999]

This is now you fix the nba*:

*the league and sponsors would never allow it, because the revenue would take a hit.

The regular season should only be 50 games, with more rest in between games than they have now. The playoffs are like the nfl, only 6 from each conference make it, with the top 2 teams from each conference getting a bye "round". The first round is best of 3 with the 5 & 6 teams battling the 3 & 4 teams. The winners obviously advance to play the 1 & 2 teams. This ensures that every regular season game is a battle. It'll make the game a hell of a lot more interesting and competitive. Let's be honest here, guys, the nba is falling at an uncomfortable speed. Surveys say that people are more interested in hockey these days. The nba is well behind the nfl and NCAA football at this point. The system for the nba is broken. Becoming a contender through the draft or farm system is extremely difficult and players don't seem very interested in engaging in physical and competitive play. We need to shorten the season. Make every game extremely important. But sadly, this will never happen.

 

[Kingster]

What if they believe that the other team won't be able to effectively guard them, more often than the vice versa? Playing to your strengths and deciding which benefits outweigh the costs in any potential matchup

Hypothetically, yes. However, I don't think that hypothetical comes up enough in the pros to make it worth your time.

 

[Gilles]

You took his quote out of context. He said Gay AND Williams together, not individually, can cover the 1-4 positions. He's correct, Rudy can at times initiate the offense bringing the ball up the floor and also play against smaller "shooting guards". We've seen both this season. Derrick in addition, can play both on the wing and in the post.
He used those two players as an example, not necessarily as an ideal

Thing is everybody should play to their strengths, and when there's an SG defending Rudy, the obvious play is for Rudy to give up the ball as soon as possible and go get that deep post position, from which his turnaround jumper is a very effective weapon. Rudy can't do that against very long defenders like George or Durant though, and that's the source of his struggles against Indiana and OKC: he can't establish his game inside, and go inside out from there offensively, but OTOH he isn't quick enough to take them off the dribble and get to the rim, so all he has is pullup jumper, that is not a reliable weapon against guys with 9' reach anyway. In this situation Rudy needs someone to give him the ball on the move consistently, and I don't think, that player is on Kings' roster right now.
My point is multi-positions might be in vogue because of current champions, but their ability to implement it revolves around greatness of one player and his versatility. You look right behind Heat in championship race, and you see a lot of structure and strictly defined roles. I'm still pretty suspect of PDA, but I really hope, Vivek stays just a fan as far as on-court personnel and philosophy decisions are concerned.