This is our 2nd interview with BasketballProspectus.com writer Kevin Pelton. If you missed our first interview with Kevin, you can read it here.

Q: The Houston Rockets won back-to-back titles in ‘94 and ‘95 and yet cannot seem to get any credit as a legit champion due to the fact that Michael Jordan was in the midst of his first retirement. Please set us straight about what would have been the final outcome of those seasons if Michael wasn't temporarily banned by David Stern due to his gambling problems (cough, cough)... er decided to retire during the apex of his abilities.

KP: I'm probably not the right person to ask about the '94/'95 Rockets as a bitter Sonics fan who believed they were the rightful team to win those championships. If you look at the numbers for the 1993-94 team--leaving aside the next year's squad that didn't play like a champion until the playoffs--I'm not sure it was any better than the West teams that lost to Chicago in the NBA Finals. The grind of the championship runs appeared to wear on the Bulls, who dropped off by 10 wins from 1991-92 to 1992-93 with a similar difference in point differential. They could have taken another hit in 1993-94, though they did add depth by bringing in Toni Kukoc. I think Chicago probably would have won another title, but it was no certainty. By 1994-95 it's more difficult to play out the hypothetical because it depends on whether Horace Grant had still bolted for Orlando, since the Bulls did not really replace him until dealing for Dennis Rodman the next year.

Q: Lamar Odom was recently given a one game suspension when he stepped onto the court during the fracas following Trevor Ariza's flagrant foul on Rudy Fernandez. First, was that really a flagrant if Ariza's intention was to go for the ball and secondly, have we now reached the point where this rule has outgrown its usefulness? I tend to think that if you were to see one of your co-workers (say, the always entertaining Anthony Macri) thumped to the ground you would rush to aid him.

KP: As much as analysts like to bring it up, intent is entirely irrelevant when it comes to whether a foul is flagrant or not. This always came up in preseason meetings with an officiating crew who went over key rules with the media in Seattle (a practice which I'm sure continues elsewhere throughout the league). The criteria are windup, contact, and follow-through. In Ariza's case all three were present, so a Flagrant 2 was the correct call.

I'm a believer in the rule against leaving the bench. The thing about a rule like this is it's impossible to prove what would happen if it didn't exist. As a result, I think it's easy to forget the kind of scary brawls that were once commonplace in the NBA, like the Phoenix-New York melee that precipitated the rule. Apologies to Anthony, but if he gets involved in a fight in rec-league hoops I'm letting the powers that be get things under control.

Q: Staying with the subject of Lamar Odom, I cannot recall the last time an NBA player with so much talent was so mystifyingly inconsistent, he reminds me of a more talented Derrick McKey. I'm no more shocked when he puts up lines like 24/12/5/3 than when he puts up 4/7/4/1. Any idea why Lamar can't seem to deliver a reliable effort?

KP: I think it's just in some players' personalities to play that way. Both Odom and McKey are relatively laid-back guys who don't have the same kind of killer instinct of players with less natural talent. That's not necessarily a horrible thing, and I think Odom is great for this year's Lakers squad, but it does manifest itself in ups and downs.

Q: Kevin, so much is made of General Managers making terrible draft pick selections, but what are they supposed to do when an entire draft class winds up being substandard? Checking out the 2000 NBA draft class, I was shocked to see such an underwhelming mess. Any theories on what happened with this class or was it just the perfect storm of mediocrity?

KP: In The Macrophenomenal Pro Basketball Almanac, the authors argue that it was the NBA's own Y2K curse. That's about as good as I can get to explaining why a single draft class would be so wildly unsuccessful. In fairness, there were a handful of gems late in the first round like Hedo Turkoglu, Desmond Mason, Jamaal Magloire, and Morris Peterson. Some savvy GMs still came out OK.

Q: With the Pacers facing difficult times, the Kings perhaps looking to move, and heck even the Lakers slashing payroll, have we entered into the last stages before contraction takes place? I'd have to imagine that David Stern would rather roast himself on an open flame before this takes place, but wouldn't it improve the overall quality of the game? Imagine seeing a heaping handful of NBA stars redistributed amongst the remaining teams; I'd imagine the talent levels per club would rival the 80's.

KP: I'm not a believer in contraction. Certainly, it's true that the talent level for each team would rise, but--to fall into a slippery-slope fallacy--that will always be an accurate statement, no matter how many teams exist in the league. There's a trade-off between having a number of teams and enough talent for each, and I don't think it's a coincidence that all three major sports leagues have settled in between 30 and 32 teams.

I think people also underestimate just how much talent there is out there. There are about 75 foreign players in the NBA right now. That's nearly six teams' worth of guys who would not have been around as recently as two decades ago. The international growth of the game means there is more than enough talent to go around.

Q: Do you have a favorite NBA team now that the Sonics have been stolen from Seattle? If so, is it difficult to remain objective when writing about them and their players?

KP: I don't have a favorite team in the same sense as the Sonics, no, and I don't think I will until or unless they return. Because I attend games in Portland, Blazers games are televised locally here and the team features a former Sonics legend in Nate McMillan and a University of Washington legend in Brandon Roy, there's a certain natural affinity there. For the most part, however, I'm pretty detached at this point in terms of fandom.

I never considered it exceptionally hard to be objective about Sonics players (though probably even the biggest homers think they're being objective, so that may not mean anything) in terms of supporting them. It is true that fans can sometimes be too close and have a hard time seeing not only players' faults but maybe more often their true value in the case of frustrating players. Vladimir Radmanovic had that effect in Seattle.

Q: How eerily close is Greg Oden getting to "Sam Bowie status"? It feels like this will turn out to be a modern version of the ‘84 draft where Bowie was selected ahead of Jordan (in this case, Oden before Durant).

KP: I know everybody loves the storyline, but both players have a long ways to go until they reach either point. Durant has played well, but he's no Jordan yet. And while it's understandable, I still think the Bowie-Oden comparisons are unfair at the very least because Bowie had recurring problems (more akin to Bill Walton, to name yet another Blazer big man) while Oden has had a wide variety of different injuries that are less likely to linger.

Q: What are some stats often trotted out by the coaches/media that actually have little to do with the final outcome of the game?

KP: I'm not sure there's any that have no impact on the game. There are times where there are now better stats to express the same concept (most notably with per-possession statistics as opposed to points scored or allowed per game). I also think stats like bench scoring or rebound differential get more attention than they deserve because there's a desire to point to a weakness (or a strength). My view of the game is much more holistic. Oftentimes a team is intentionally sacrificing rebounding to get better shooting, for example. The weakness is also a strength, and vice versa.

Q: Who are the 5 NBA players who you'd gladly pay to see and who are 5 that you wouldn't want to watch if even you were paid generously to do so?

KP: 1. LeBron James (whom I'm not going to get to see this year, which saddens me)
2. Kevin Durant
3. Dwyane Wade (ditto James)
4. Kobe Bryant
5. Brandon Roy

I don't think there's anyone I'd put in the latter category.

Q: Last December you predicted the NBA Finals would feature the Lakers toppling the Celtics in 6 games. Based on what you've seen now, would you like a mulligan on that pick?

KP: With home-court advantage, I now like Cleveland's chances to come out of the Eastern Conference. Though the Cavaliers have the superior point differential and defense, I think the numbers do offer evidence that the Lakers have a gear at which they can play which no other team in the league can match. I still like them to win the title.