The Rise of Ja Morant and the Memphis Grizzlies
Ja Morant is rising--literally and figuratively. His incredible dunks and spectacular blocked shots have made him a staple feature of NBA highlights via mainstream media and social media. More significantly, his all-around play has elevated the Memphis Grizzlies from being the ninth place team in the West that reached the 2021 playoffs via the Play-In Tournament to the third place team in the West that is fighting with Golden State for second place. I thought that the ceiling for the 2021-22 Grizzlies would be sneaking into the playoffs again via the Play-In Tournament, but the Grizzlies are much better than I expected.
Before examining how Morant has become an All-NBA First Team caliber player, it is important to note that he is not the only reason for Memphis' success. The Grizzlies are 43-20 overall, but that includes a 12-2 record during games that Morant missed; Morant is a great player, but Memphis is demonstrably not just a one man show. The Grizzlies are a physical team that ranks first in the NBA in rebounding, blocked shots, and free throws attempted, but they present more challenges to opponents than just physicality; the Grizzlies also rank first in steals, and they rank second in scoring. Last season, the Grizzlies were an excellent rebounding team (ranking fourth in the league), but they ranked 12th in blocked shots, 15th in scoring, and 17th in free throws attempted. The paint presence provided by Steven Adams and Jaren Jackson Jr. is critically important for Memphis.
In short, the Grizzlies are an old-school type of team that rejects the notion that you have to take and make a lot of three pointers to be successful. The Grizzlies rank near the bottom of the league in three point field goal percentage (24th), three point field goals made (28th), and three point field goals attempted (24th).
The main downside for the Grizzlies is that, other than rebounding, their defensive numbers are mediocre, ranking 14th in points allowed and 18th in three point field goal percentage allowed--but they are close to a top 10 ranking in overall defensive field goal percentage (11th). In order to advance past the second round of the playoffs, the Grizzlies will have to improve defensively.
That being said, Morant is the Grizzlies' best player and the main engine for the team's success. There are many NBA players who are overrated and who are pumped up by their fans in the media, but Morant is without question one of the NBA's top five players this season. He should be a lock for the All-NBA First Team, and he should receive some MVP votes (not first place votes, but top five for sure). In just his third season, the 22 year old first-time All-Star has improved in many skill set areas, but the most notable difference is that he has increased his offensive efficiency while also increasing his offensive production, a combination that is very difficult to achieve. As a rookie, Morant averaged 17.8 ppg while shooting .477 from the field. Last season, Morant slightly increased his scoring to 19.1 ppg, but his field goal percentage dropped to .449--but this season Morant is averaging 27.6 ppg while shooting .498 from the field. Morant is scoring points in the paint at a rate matched or exceeded only by some of the best and most dominant big men of the past two decades.
It will be interesting to see if the 6-3, 174 pound Morant can maintain this kind of production without getting worn down and/or injured, but a guard who attacks the paint, forces the opposing defense to collapse, and then either finishes at the rim or else dishes to a teammate for a high percentage shot in the paint is an MVP-level/championship-level guard. This season, Morant is playing better than James Harden has ever played, and a good argument could be made that Morant is playing at least as well as Stephen Curry at his peak; what many commentators and fans fail to appreciate and understand is that a skill set based evaluation does not rely on "advanced" or "basic box score" numbers. The critical point is that Morant's skills and playing style translate well to playoff basketball. If Morant stays healthy and does not wear down, his playing style will be effective in the playoffs. He has only played in one playoff series/five career playoff games, but his small sample size averages are impressive: 30.2 ppg, 8.2 apg, 4.8 apg, shooting splits of .487/.323/.775. Morant's eighth seeded Grizzlies were outmatched against the Utah Jazz in the first round of the 2021 playoffs, but Morant did everything possible to put Memphis in the best possible position to win, and it is evident that with the right supporting cast Morant can be the best player on a team that makes a deep postseason run.
Championship teams attack the paint offensively and defend the paint defensively, as Milwaukee proved last season while silencing critics who mocked Giannis Antetokounmpo's three point shooting and denounced Coach Mike Budenholzer's defensive coverages that emphasized protecting the paint. The Grizzlies have a championship-style attack the paint offense, but they still must develop a championship level defense, and they must demonstrate that they can perform at a high level at both ends of the court during a long playoff run.
Only time will tell if Morant and Memphis can meet those challenges. Meanwhile, from a skill set standpoint it is interesting to contrast Morant's playing style with Harden's. Harden relies on shooting a large number of three pointers, "flop and flail" antics that the NBA has belatedly begun to remove from the game, and driving not to score but to dish to three point shooters. When everything is clicking, when the pressure is not on, and when the opposition is weak, that style can result in gaudy numbers. In the playoffs, high variance strategies--such as shooting tons of three pointers--do not lead to championship success. Harden is the all-time king of empty calorie regular season statistics that do not translate to playoff success.
Curry is a much better player than Harden, but the myth that the Golden State Warriors won three NBA titles primarily because of Curry's three point shooting must be debunked; the Warriors would not have won those titles without playing elite defense, and Curry's three point shooting would not have been enough if the Warriors had not also been able to attack the paint. Further, the Warriors won two of those three titles after adding Kevin Durant, whose midrange game and ability to score in the paint were essential during those championship runs. It is not a coincidence that Durant won two Finals MVPs while Curry has yet to win a Finals MVP; it is also not a coincidence that Curry has only managed to lead the Warriors to "play out" of the Play-In Tournament since Durant left Golden State, though of course the Warriors will return to the playoffs this season now that Curry is again surrounded by multiple All-Star caliber players. Curry is not and never has been a Pantheon-level player who could carry a subpar team to the playoffs: contrast Curry's failure to reach the playoffs last season with the level that Kobe Bryant reached while leading the talent-depleted Lakers to the playoffs in 2006 and 2007. Curry has never been the dominant force for a championship team the way that recent Pantheon players Shaquille O'Neal, Tim Duncan, Kobe Bryant, and LeBron James were for their championship teams.
Does this mean that Morant has surpassed Curry on the all-time greatest players list? Of course not. Curry has played at a high level throughout his career, and he has been a key member of three championship teams. Curry's body of work is more significant than Morant's. Morant's career accomplishments have not passed Harden's yet, either, though it must always be remembered that Harden has received some awards and accolades that are not justified by his performances.
All we know now is that Morant has shown the ability to play at an MVP/championship level; Morant still has to prove that the can sustain that level of play during a deep postseason run and during a long career. If he does those things, he will easily surpass Harden, and he has a chance to be as impactful as Curry.
Labels: Golden State Warriors, Ja Morant, James Harden, Kevin Durant, Memphis Grizzlies, Stephen Curry
posted by David Friedman @ 8:24 PM
3 Comments:
You're falling into the latest is greatest trap based on only 49 regular season games. Morant has already missed 14 games and is only on pace for 64 games played this season. MEM has played like the best team in the league without Morant going 12-2, which is on pace for 70 wins. He has played great, but the argument for him elevating his team isn't great. He has no other AS teammates, but I don't know too many mediocre or lower teams that could do this. Definitely not a lock for 1st team all-nba even with so many top guys missing games due to injury or covid-related issues. This is a weaker year for MVP, and he's only a fringe MVP candidate at best. Harden easily won MVP when he did, and a good argument could be made that he should have at least 3. Morant is also nowhere as good as Curry's peak. Seems sensible to at least wait until Morant can play near a full season at a high level and/or lead his team to a playoff series win until declaring him better than 2 all-time greats.
Curry is overrated, but he was still the best player on 2 title teams though he gets elevated higher from this from having great teammates even by those who rate him accurately, so can be misleading. We also have to remember the past 2 seasons and even this season have been severely affected by Covid, and the rest of the playoffs would've been likely different had they not been. But, makes no sense to denigrate Curry carrying a bad cast to the 8 seed last year, which is the playoffs under normal rules. And 1 game away from the 5 seed with a good record of 39-33. Don't forget to mention all of this. Curry was also 32 last season, while Kobe was 27 and 28 in 2006 and 2007, big difference. Durant's not doing much last season with GS if he replaced Curry either. Durant has only managed 1 playoff series win since leaving GS.
Anonymous:
If you read my entire article, then you know that I am not "falling into the latest is greatest trap." I pointed out that the Grizzlies went 12-2 without Morant this season, and I made it clear that he is not the only reason for their success. I also documented exactly how much he has improved since his rookie season, and why I believe that his game--and Memphis' game--will translate well in the playoffs. Time will tell if I am right about that, but if you scour what I've written in the past 15-20 years then you will find that I am right more often than I am wrong.
You make a good point regarding how many games that Morant has missed being a valid factor to consider when examining All-NBA and MVP status. I am operating under the assumption that he is young, healthy, and will not miss any more games the rest of the season. I don't have a hard and fast "attendance" requirement for postseason awards, but in general I think that a player should play in at least 85% of the scheduled games to be considered, which works out to 70 games. If Morant does not miss any more games then he would play in 68 this season, so he will miss that threshold--but this season is unusual, with many star players missing a lot of games. I would not give All-NBA honors to a good player who played, say 75 games, over a great player who played 68 games, but I would also say that once a player misses too many games I don't care if he is averaging 40-10-10 he should not receive postseason awards. So, perhaps you are right that I should not call Morant a lock for All-NBA status, but I would say that he is clearly playing at an All-NBA First Team level this season.
Jokic, Giannis, and Embiid--not necessarily in that order--are the top three MVP candidates, with all other players on a lower tier. So in that sense you are right that Morant is a "fringe" MVP candidate, but that is exactly what I said when I suggested that he should receive MVP votes but not first place votes. Embiid has missed almost as many games as Morant, so he is one injury away from being removed from my (unofficial) MVP ballot, and history suggests he is less likely to make it through the rest of the season unscathed than Morant.
Curry at his peak was an elite shooter, solid playmaker, decent rebounder, and average defender (at best). He won when he had a lot of elite talent around him, and otherwise he cannot carry a team to the playoffs (you can make whatever excuses you want about last season, but all he had to do to make the playoffs was win a home game against Morant's Grizzlies, and Morant outplayed Curry when it mattered most). Right now, Morant is obviously a more explosive athlete than Curry ever was, Morant is tougher to guard because he can both explode to the hoop and shoot (not with Curry's range, but Morant has enough range when you take into account his athleticism), Morant is a better passer, at least as good of a rebounder, and at least as good of a defender (I would say better). Morant is likely not close to his peak, but I see no reason to think that if you put the current version of him on the GS teams that went to the Finals he would have less success (but with a different style) than Curry.
Anonymous:
As for Curry versus Kobe, you can compare any version of Curry to any version of Kobe pre-Achilles injury/post his first two seasons, and I am taking Kobe all day, every day: Kobe was bigger, more athletic, a much better defender, had a much better game in the post and midrange, and could shoot well enough that teams could not leave him alone at the three point line. Kobe was dominant, and that is why he is in my Pantheon. Curry was/is great, but he never had the kind of impact Kobe did, regardless of how much Curry's "gravity" is praised.
Harden has been so overrated and incorrectly evaluated for so long for so many reasons that his status will probably always be inflated; no one can take away his MVP, his All-NBA selections, etc., and those accolades will be used as "evidence" of his greatness. I've written more than enough about him to prove my case, but I will just mention a few things here (and then wait for his inevitable playoff collapse, which will provide additional evidence).
You say Harden should have won three MVPs, and I say that is ridiculous. Let's just consider the year that he won, and the years he finished second:
2015: 1 Curry 2 Harden 3 James. No way Harden deserved to win, and I would not have placed him ahead of James even though James missed 13 games.
2017: 1 Westbrook 2 Harden 3 Kawhi 4 James. Westbrook was a deserving winner with the first triple double season since the Big O. Harden was less efficient offensively and much worse defensively than Kawhi and James, so we can immediately slide Harden to fourth before even considering if Curry and Giannis should have finished ahead of him as well.
2018: 1 Harden 2 James 3 Anthony Davis. Your favorite season of all-time, as "Flop and flail" joins the elite group of players who have won an MVP. This was also the season that many people began pretending that averaging a triple double is nothing special, and the start of the process of tearing down Russell Westbrook.
2019: 1 Giannis 2 Harden 3 Paul George. Around this time, Harden said something to the effect that it is easy to just be 7-foot and have no basketball skills (referring to Giannis). Let's just say that quote did not age well, and let's also say that I hope that your MVP analysis did not lead you to conclude that Harden was robbed in 2019. No GM in his right mind would take Harden over Giannis, which means that there is--at most--one NBA GM who might do it (the one who just traded for Harden).
Also, in 2020, Harden was a distant third behind Giannis and LeBron.
If you buy the best player on the team with the best record argument then you can justify the one MVP that Harden won. There is no rational justification for saying that Harden should have won three MVPs. If you want to respond with why you would take Harden over Giannis and LeBron, by all means go ahead and embarrass yourself. Please attach your real name, too, and don't hide behind Anonymous so we all will know exactly who prefers the 6-5 "Flop and flail" king over a 7-0 all-around player who has already won one title, and a 6-8 all-around player who secured Pantheon status a long time ago.
By the way, one player with one MVP who should have won at least three is 2000 MVP Shaq, who should have also won in 2001 and 2005. Another player with one MVP who should have won at least three is 2008 MVP Kobe, who should have won in 2006 and 2007; carrying a team to the playoffs in back to back years with Smush Parker as the starting point guard and Lamar Odom as the second best player is not only MVP-worthy but may be worthy of immediate direct election to the Hall of Fame. Put Curry on those teams in place of Kobe, and you are looking at 28-30 wins per season, tops. Put Harden on that 2006 team, and he pouts, sulks, and quits his way out of town before the All-Star break.
Post a Comment
<< Home