Boston Versus Miami Preview
Eastern Conference Finals
#3 Boston (48-24) vs. #5 Miami (44-29)
Season series: Boston, 2-1
Miami can win if…Jimmy Butler is dominant--not good, not very good, but dominant. Butler is leading Miami in playoff scoring (21.8 ppg, including a team-best 23.4 ppg as the Heat upset the number one seed Milwaukee Bucks), but he has only scored at least 20 points in four of Miami's nine playoff games. In the other five games, Butler has scored 18 points, 17 points twice, 13 points, and six points. Butler's overall production is good, but there is more value in consistently scoring 20-25 points than in scoring six points in one game (as Butler did in game four of Miami's first round sweep over Indiana) and then 40 points in the next game (as Butler did in game one of Miami's five game second round win over Milwaukee).
Former All-Star Goran Dragic has thrived in this year's playoffs; he has more talent around him than he did in previous seasons, and he is most productive and efficient when he does not have to carry the weight of being the number one option. Opposing defenses focus on Butler and also have to pay attention to All-Star center Bam Adebayo, so Dragic has a lot of room to operate.
One possible advantage for the Heat is that--much like a baseball team that is strong up the middle with All-Stars at catcher, shortstop, and center fielder--Miami is receiving All-Star caliber play at all three levels: guard (Goran Dragic), wing (Jimmy Butler), and big man (Bam Adebayo). The Celtics are a perimeter-oriented team without an All-Star big man, and they may have to go small to win this series, much like they went small for extended stretches versus Toronto; however, going small against the Heat could leave Boston vulnerable in the paint, as Adebayo could punish the Celtics to a greater extent than any of Toronto's big men did.
Boston will win because…Jayson Tatum is emerging as an elite player. Tatum is the Celtics' playoff leader in scoring (25.3 ppg) and rebounding (10.1 rpg) while also averaging 4.3 apg. In Boston's 92-87 game seven victory over Toronto, Tatum led both teams in all three categories (29 points, 12 rebounds, seven assists); he joined Larry Bird and LeBron James as the only players to lead both teams outright in all three categories in a seventh game.
Jaylen Brown is second for the Celtics in playoff scoring (21.0 ppg) and rebounding (7.6 ppg), while Kemba Walker is averaging just a shade under 20 ppg in the playoffs. The Celtics may have acquired Walker to be the number one option, but he is the team's third option behind Tatum and Brown.
If Gordon Hayward can return from injury for Boston then he could provide a lift as a playmaker and as a valuable perimeter defender.
Other things to consider: This is the first time since the NBA went to a 16 team playoff format in 1984 that the Eastern Conference Finals will not include the number one seed or the number two seed, but this is not a shocking circumstance in a "bubble" environment that negates the value of home court advantage. Boston became the first team in NBA history to win four "road" games in one series. Would Boston have won game seven versus Toronto had that game been played in Toronto? We will never know the answer to that question, but regardless of any extenuating circumstances both Boston and Miami deserve respect for earning upset victories by playing great defense supplemented by timely offense.
This is Boston's third appearance in the Eastern Conference Finals in the past four years. That sustained success has flown under the radar to some extent, perhaps because the Celtics have not made it to the NBA Finals since 2010 and because the Celtics have played musical chairs with All-Star point guards (Isaiah Thomas, Kyrie Irving, Kemba Walker) during the past several years. Coach Brad Stevens has been on the bench for all three Eastern Conference Finals appearances, and he has established himself as one of the league's best coaches.
I picked Toronto to beat Boston in seven games, and that series was up for grabs until the final seconds of game seven, so even though my pick was wrong I am not shocked by the outcome. I like Jimmy Butler as a two-way player and as a leader; it is clear how much Philadelphia misses him, and how much he has helped Miami. This evenly matched series may very well be decided by whether Butler or Tatum is the best player. In my
Toronto Versus Boston Preview I wrote,
"If Tatum establishes himself as clearly the best player on the court
during this series, then the Celtics could outlast the Raptors." In game
seven, Tatum became the second youngest player to post at least 25
points, at least 10 rebounds, and at least five assists in a seventh
game. Kobe Bryant, Tatum's mentor, is the youngest player to post such
numbers. For all of the talk about Giannis Antetokounmpo, Kawhi Leonard, LeBron James, Luka Doncic, Damian Lillard, and others, we may look back on the 2020 playoffs as the coming out party for Tatum, much like Bryant elevated his status during the Lakers' run to the 2000 NBA title.
I expect this series to be just as close as the Boston-Toronto series, and I am picking Boston to beat Miami in seven games.
Labels: Bam Adebayo, Boston Celtics, Goran Dragic, Jaylen Brown, Jayson Tatum, Jimmy Butler, Kemba Walker, Miami Heat
posted by David Friedman @ 2:47 AM
Lakers Dominate Paint, Win 110-100 to Take 3-1 Lead Versus Rockets
The L.A. Lakers outrebounded the Houston Rockets 52-26, shot .586
from inside the three point line, outscored the Rockets 62-24 in the
paint, and built a 23 point lead before settling for a 110-100 victory
in game four of the Western Conference semifinals. The Lakers are up
3-1, and can advance to the Western Conference Finals with a win on
Saturday night. Anthony Davis led the Lakers with 29 points on 10-18
field goal shooting, adding 12 rebounds and five assists. LeBron James
contributed 16 points, a game-high 15 rebounds, and a team-high nine
assists.
Russell Westbrook led the Rockets with 25
points on 8-16 field goal
shooting (including 3-8 from three point range), but that was not enough
to overcome James Harden's predictable playoff choking. Harden shot
2-11 from the field (including 1-6 from three point range) en route to
perhaps the least least impactful 21 point game in NBA playoff history;
through a combination of his gimmicks and some careless fouls by the
Lakers, Harden was given 20 free throw attempts, and he converted 16 of
them.
Usually, Harden saves his 2-11 field goal shooting performances
for elimination games. Harden shot 2-11 from the field and scored 14
points when the Rockets lost 104-90 to the Golden State Warriors in game
five of the 2015 Western Conference Finals; Harden also set the
all-time NBA single game playoff record with 12 turnovers in that
contest. Then, he shot 2-11 from the field and scored 10 points when the
Rockets lost 114-75 to the San Antonio Spurs in game six of the 2017
Western Conference semifinals.
There are people who
can keep a straight face while saying that 21 points on 11 field goal
attempts is efficient, but anyone who understands basketball realizes
how ridiculous it is to term this choke job by Harden as "efficient."
Harden shot 1-7 from the field (including 0-3 from three point range) in
the first half as the Lakers built a huge lead that they never
relinquished. Casual fans think that the NBA is a fourth quarter league,
and they focus a lot of attention on fourth quarter statistics, but
those who understand the NBA realize that the NBA is often a first
quarter league; big comebacks are rare but often remembered, while most
games are decided by the team that sets the tone from the start.
Harden
is not capable of consistently being efficient and productive when it
matters most. Every year in the playoffs, he has enough talent around
him to advance--if he were really as great as he is supposed to be--and
every year he fails to step up. If Harden had authored an MVP-level
performance then this series would have been tied 2-2. Harden has had a
few big playoff games in his career, but most of the time when there is a
chance to make a positive difference in the outcome of the series he
disappears.
Unless they are ignorant or willfully
delusional, even the most ardent Harden advocates must admit that Harden
is not an elite player, no matter how many regular season records he
sets, and no matter how many awards he receives. The Daryl Morey
analytics-centric offense that the Rockets have built around Harden is
not a championship caliber offense. There is no denying or excusing the
yawning gap between the gimmicky way that Harden piles up regular season
points and his consistent inability to produce when it matters most
against elite competition in the playoffs.
Morey has
been preaching the same nonsense since 2007, he has had Harden as his
"foundational player" since 2012, and he has nothing tangible to show
for all of his arrogant bleating about how he knows more about
basketball than the rest of us. Rarely, if ever, has a general manager
or executive promised so much, delivered so little, and kept his job for
so long. Morey says
foolish things--such as stating that James Harden is a better scorer than Michael Jordan--and the media gives him a pass instead of calling him out.
The Lakers led 57-41 at halftime, and had held the Rockets to
79 points in the previous four quarters. This is not a fluke or a
coincidence. This lack of production and efficiency is predictable; I
predicted it before this series,
and
I have predicted it before every series in which Harden's Rockets faced
a legitimate championship contender: Harden may have one or two big
games, but when the chips are down he folds and his team's high-variance
offense falls apart. We have eight years of evidence, and yet so many
people still pretend that Harden is an elite player. Harden is a more
durable, physically stronger version of Gilbert Arenas. The scoring
titles and media-given accolades mean that Harden is a lock for the Hall
of Fame, but comparing Harden to elite players like LeBron James and
Kawhi Leonard--let alone Kobe Bryant or Michael Jordan--is ridiculous.
While it is true that Giannis Antetokounmpo has not yet had more playoff
success than Harden,
Antetokounmpo is younger and bigger than Harden, in addition to already being a great two-way player. Antetokounmpo has work to do, but I would take him over Harden any day of the week.
Houston's
collapse during game four versus the Lakers is typical of what we have
seen for years from Harden and the Rockets. During a 16 minute stretch
from near the end of the first quarter into the early portion of the
third quarter, the Rockets shot 4-20 from the field as the Lakers
outscored them 41-23. "There is small ball, and then there is
absurdity," TNT's Kenny Smith said after the game, referring to Houston
trotting out a 6-6 and under lineup versus a Lakers team that has great
players who are big but actually can play small ball better than the
Rockets do: LeBron James and Anthony Davis can beat you in the paint and
outside the paint. As I explained in
Efficiency Versus High Variance, "'Stat gurus' outsmart themselves when they value offensive efficiency
over every other factor. They have determined that three pointers and
free throws are the most efficient NBA shots. While that may be true
mathematically, it is not true in a relevant way in the real world;
there is value in trying to improve offensive efficiency, but there is
also value in improving proficiency in other areas, including defense
and rebounding."
You can predict what Houston Coach
Mike D'Antoni will say after this kind of performance--we need to play
with more energy, we will keep taking the same shots but next game we
will make them--and you can predict what will happen: the Rockets will
go down not with a bang, but with a whimper.
It is worth revisiting my
assessment of James Harden when the Rockets acquired him in 2012.
I asserted that Harden would not be worth a maximum value contract, and
that he is best suited to being an All-Star contributor on a
championship contender as opposed to the number one option: "Harden is a
very good player but all of his weaknesses will be exposed
in Houston if the Rockets expect him to be a franchise player. Harden is
not an All-NBA First or Second Team caliber player. He is not someone
who can draw double teams over the course of an 82 game season and then
carry a team deep into the playoffs as the number one option. He is not
Shaquille O'Neal, Tim Duncan, Kobe Bryant or LeBron James." I added that
Harden is the kind of player who is overrated by "stat gurus" who do
not consider the context in which a player puts up his numbers; there is
a difference between being an "efficient" second or third option as
opposed to being the number one option: there is a qualitative
difference between Kobe Bryant and Pau Gasol, and between Tim Duncan and
Manu Ginobili.
I underestimated Harden's physical
strength and his durability, and I did not anticipate that NBA officials
would so often fall for Harden's flopping and flailing (at least during
the regular season); thus, I was wrong from the standpoint that I did
not expect Harden to win multiple scoring titles and to be selected not
only as an All-NBA First Team player, but also as an MVP candidate and
the 2018 MVP winner.
However, my prediction that Harden
would not be capable of performing at an elite level in the playoffs
was 100% correct, and that is the prediction that matters most: I was
right that Harden "is not Shaquille O'Neal, Tim Duncan, Kobe Bryant or
LeBron James" and I was right that Harden is not the "foundational
player" that Morey declared Harden to be. I was right that Harden gave
up the chance to be part of a potential dynasty alongside Kevin Durant
and Russell Westbrook in exchange for pursuing individual glory. I was
right that Harden would accumulate individual recognition without
achieving team success. The fact that Harden received more individual
recognition than I expected does not invalidate my larger point that
Harden sacrificed an opportunity to win championships had he been
willing to accept the role for which he is best suited.
Labels: Anthony Davis, Houston Rockets, James Harden, Kobe Bryant, L.A. Lakers, LeBron James, Manu Ginobili, Pau Gasol, Russell Westbrook, Tim Duncan
posted by David Friedman @ 12:32 AM
What is Next for the Milwaukee Bucks and Giannis Antetokounmpo?
Giannis Antetokounmpo led the Milwaukee Bucks to the best record in the Eastern Conference each of the past two seasons, collecting the 2019 regular season MVP and the 2020 Defensive Player of the Year award; it will be a surprise if he does not win the 2020 regular season MVP. However, Milwaukee lost 4-2 to Toronto in the 2019 Eastern Conference Finals and then lost 4-1 to Miami in the 2020 Eastern Conference semifinals. In today's society, instant gratification is often elevated above all other considerations, so it is considered natural to assume that Antetokounmpo will leave Milwaukee to team up with another All-Star.
Every NBA title is meaningful and valuable, but some championships resonate more than others, and the ones that resonate the most for me involve a long-term partnership formed by a great player with his first NBA team:
1983: Julius Erving and the Philadelphia 76ers
1989-90: Isiah Thomas and the Detroit Pistons
1991-93, 1996-98: Michael Jordan and the Chicago Bulls
1994-95: Hakeem Olajuwon and the Houston Rockets
1999, 2003, 2005, 2007, 2014: Tim Duncan and the San Antonio Spurs
2000-02, 2009-10: Kobe Bryant and the L.A. Lakers
2011: Dirk Nowitzki and the Dallas Mavericks
Erving won two ABA titles (1974, 1976) with the New York Nets prior to the ABA-NBA merger, and then he spent his entire NBA career with the Philadelphia 76ers. Erving led the 76ers to three NBA Finals (1977, 1980, 1982) before winning the championship in 1983. Erving could have left for greener pastures, or the 76ers could have decided to go in a different direction, but instead the legend and the franchise formed a partnership. Although free agency did not exist during that era in the way that it exists in the modern era, players who wanted to be traded could get traded--and teams have always been able to get rid of players who they do not want, so Erving and the 76ers only stayed together because both sides wanted to stay together. By 1983, Erving was the only 76er on the roster who played for the team during the 1977 NBA Finals. The 76ers put a team around Erving that complemented his talents, and they finally acquired the one essential asset for winning a title during the NBA's first several decades: an All-Star center (Moses Malone). With the exception of the 1975 Golden State Warriors, all of the NBA championship teams from 1951 (the first year that the NBA had an All-Star Game) through 1990 had a current or future All-Star at center (Bill Cartwright, the center for Chicago's 1991-93 championship teams, was a former All-Star and hardly an All-Star caliber player during his championship years). Pantheon level non-centers Oscar Robertson, Jerry West, Magic Johnson, and Larry Bird only won titles when playing alongside Hall of Fame centers.
Isiah Thomas joined the Pistons in 1981 when the Pistons were one of the worst teams in the NBA, and eight years later he led a completely remade roster to the first of back to back titles. So much is said and written about the "Bad Boys"--much of it untrue or exaggerated--that it is easy to forget the deeper story: Thomas joined a dysfunctional organization, and his combination of talent and will power transformed the franchise into a team that could vanquish the legendary Celtics and Lakers squads, not to mention hold Jordan's Bulls at bay for a few years.
Michael Jordan joined the Bulls in 1984 when the Bulls were one of the worst teams in the NBA, and seven years later he led a completely remade roster to the first of three straight titles en route to winning six titles in an eight year span. Jordan embraced the challenge of elevating his game while also lifting his teammates. Jordan's Bulls supplanted Thomas' Pistons, beat Magic Johnson's Lakers, and then established the sport's most successful dynasty since Bill Russell's Celtics won eight straight titles/11 titles in 13 years.
Hakeem Olajuwon joined the Rockets in 1984 when the Rockets were one of the worst teams in the NBA, and 10 years later he led a completely remade roster to back to back titles. Yes, Olajuwon won his first ring during Jordan's baseball hiatus and he won his second ring shortly after Jordan's comeback, but that does not in any way diminish Olajuwon's two-way dominance, nor does it diminish the head to head superiority that he demonstrated versus David Robinson, Patrick Ewing, and a young Shaquille O'Neal.
Tim Duncan joined the Spurs in 1997 after the Spurs had a down year in the midst of a solid run of playoff appearances, and in his second year he led the Spurs to the title. The team changed the roster a lot over the next decade and a half, but Duncan remained the one constant as the Spurs captured four more titles. Duncan became the greatest power forward ever (even if it seemed like he played center at least part of the time), and he played the most important role in building the Spurs' championship culture.
Kobe Bryant joined the Lakers in 1996, the same year that Shaquille O'Neal signed with the team. O'Neal and Bryant led the Lakers to three straight championships in 2000-02, and then after O'Neal left the Lakers rebuilt around Bryant, who took the Lakers to three straight Finals, winning titles in 2009-10. Bryant changed his jersey number midway through his career, and it is remarkable that he had a Hall of Fame career with each jersey number.
Dirk Nowitzki joined the Mavericks in 1998 when the Mavericks were one of the worst teams in the NBA, and he persevered for more than a decade before outdueling Miami's star-studded superteam to lead Dallas to the 2011 NBA title. Early in his career, Nowitzki received unfounded criticism for being soft, but he did not run away to join forces with an established star; he stayed the course in Dallas, and the Mavericks eventually surrounded him with the right supporting cast.
In contrast, LeBron James and Kevin Durant both left the teams that drafted them in order to win titles with teams stacked with multiple All-Stars. Each player won two championships with his new team before maneuvering his way out of town: James returned to Cleveland from Miami and won a championship in Cleveland before leaving again to join the L.A. Lakers, a team that he remade by running off several players to lure Anthony Davis to L.A.; Durant fled Golden State for Brooklyn, where he teamed up with Kyrie Irving (one of James' All-Star teammates during Cleveland's 2016 championship season) but has yet to play due to injury.
Antetokounmpo may follow the path laid out by James and Durant, but it would be great if Antetokounmpo instead takes the route traveled by Erving, Thomas, Jordan, Olajuwon, Duncan, Bryant, and Nowitzki. The pursuit of instant gratification is no guarantee for success, much less enduring happiness; there is value in struggling to earn an accomplishment as opposed to seeking out shortcuts.
Labels: Dirk Nowitzki, Giannis Antetokounmpo, Hakeem Olajuwon, Isiah Thomas, Julius Erving, Kevin Durant, Kobe Bryant, LeBron James, Michael Jordan, Tim Duncan
posted by David Friedman @ 7:37 PM
Numbers and Narratives
In my January 11, 2007 article
Fun With Numbers we saw that the numbers put up by Mark Price in his prime are very similar to the numbers put up by Steve Nash during Nash's two MVP seasons. In my April 27, 2019 article
Player Evaluation, Media Bias and False Narratives we saw that many media members draw vastly different conclusions from similar numbers posted by two different players. Here is another example of similar numbers resulting in different narratives:
Player A: 13 points, 10 rebounds, eight assists, four turnovers, 4-17 field goal shooting (0-3 from three point range), 5-7 free throw shooting, -16 plus/minus number. Player A's team lost by nine points.
Player B: 10 points, 13 rebounds, four assists, seven turnovers, 4-15 field goal shooting (1-7 from three point range), 1-3 free throw shooting, -14 plus/minus number. Player B's team lost by eight points.
Neither player shot well, and both players' teams did better when they were out of the game. Both players rebounded well. Can we draw broad, career-defining conclusions about either player? Player A's poor performance has not received much media coverage, and no one is drawing sweeping conclusions about him--but if you run an internet search for Player B's name you will find many articles blasting this player, calling for his minutes to be reduced or even suggesting that he will be traded (presumably not during the playoffs, which would be against NBA rules).
Player A is Kawhi Leonard, who struggled as his L.A. Clippers lost game two to Denver. That loss tied the series at 1-1. Player B is Russell Westbrook, who struggled as his Houston Rockets lost game two to the L.A. Lakers. That series is tied 1-1. The Clippers are favored to win their series, while the Rockets are the fourth seed facing the number one seed.
Any reasonable person understands that we cannot yet draw broad conclusions about either of these series yet, let alone about the 2020 playoffs or these players' careers. Leonard bounced back with a strong performance as the Clippers won game three; we will see how Westbrook and the Rockets respond in game three of their series.
Game two was just Westbrook's fifth game back after missing six straight games--and eight of the previous nine games--due to injury. Just prior to the NBA season restart, Westbrook tested positive for COVID-19. Suffice it to say, Westbrook is not at 100% physically; that is not an excuse, but just a statement of what should be obvious. Despite those challenges, Westbrook had strong performances in the previous two games, both victories: game seven in round one (20 points, nine rebounds) and game one in round two (24 points, nine rebounds, six assists). The Rockets went 2-1 in round one with Westbrook and 2-2 without him, and he played a critical role in the upset victory over the Lakers in game one. From January through March--when Westbrook was healthy--he was not only Houston's best player but arguably the best player in the league. How can anyone rationally conclude that game two of the second round defines Westbrook in some grand and permanent way?
In general, I disagree with the notion that a great player's career is defined by any one game, but if we are looking for defining games in Westbrook's career up to this point then let's look at his numbers from games when his team faced elimination:
2020 Game Seven, First Round: 20 points, nine rebounds, two assists (won)
2019 Game Five, First Round: 29 points, 11 rebounds, 14 assists (lost)
2018 Game Six, First Round: 46 points, 10 rebounds, five assists (lost)
2018 Game Five, First Round: 45 points, 15 rebounds, seven assists (won)
2017 Game Five, First Round: 47 points, 11 rebounds, nine assists (lost)
2016 Game Seven, Western Conference Finals: 19 points, seven rebounds, 13 assists (lost)
2014 Game Six, Western Conference Finals: 34 points, seven rebounds, eight assists (lost)
2014 Game Seven, First Round: 27 points, 10 rebounds, 16 assists (won)
2012 Game Five, NBA Finals: 19 points, four rebounds, six assists (lost)
2011 Game Five, First Round: 31 points, eight rebounds, five assists (lost)
2011 Game Seven, Second Round: 14 points, 10 rebounds, 14 assists (won)
2010 Game Six, First Round: 21 points, five rebounds, nine assists (lost)
Totals: 352 points (29.3 ppg), 107 rebounds (8.9 rpg), 108 assists (9.0 apg); 4-8 record; three straight 40 point games; three triple doubles.
Westbrook's career is still in progress, and there are
many ways to define/quantify his accomplishments, but if we are going to single out one game or one set of games it makes more sense to look at how Westbrook has performed when his team faced elimination as opposed to how Westbrook performed in game two of a second round series after he played a key role not only in his team winning game seven in round one but also in his team scoring an upset victory in game one in round two. The stakes are the highest in elimination games, and Westbrook has performed very well in such games, including three wins out of four game seven appearances. Even when Westbrook's teams were outmanned and outgunned in series that did not go the distance, he left it all on the court and provided his team with scoring, rebounding, and playmaking.
Regardless of what happens in either series, one bad game--particularly a bad game early in a second round series--is not a career-defining moment. Perhaps Leonard gets more benefit of the doubt from some media members because Leonard has two titles and two Finals MVPs while Westbrook has yet to win a title, but unless Westbrook retires after this season without winning a title his championship legacy remains to be written. Further, if the Clippers lose to the Nuggets that is an upset, while if the Rockets lose to the Lakers that is not an upset.
Long story short, and put more bluntly, we would all be better off if "Screaming A" Smith and other misinformed commentators were not provided with the privilege of shouting nonsense to large audiences.
Labels: Houston Rockets, Kawhi Leonard, L.A. Clippers, Russell Westbrook
posted by David Friedman @ 1:19 AM
