20 Second Timeout

How Good Would the Lakers Have Been With DeMar DeRozan or Buddy Hield?

This is not suspense story, so I will not make you wait to know the answer to the title question. The answer is "Not very good." It is amazing and amusing that so many people take seriously the notion that the Lakers' train wreck 2022 season would have turned out wonderfully if only the Lakers had acquired DeMar DeRozan or Buddy Hield instead of Russell Westbrook.

Forget for a moment that, due to salary cap rules/restrictions, the Lakers probably could have only signed DeRozan by sending Kyle Kuzma and Montrezl Harrell to the San Antonio Spurs, which is not the deal that the Spurs wanted (the DeRozan sign and trade that the Spurs did with the Chicago Bulls yielded two players with expiring contracts, plus three draft picks); also forget for a moment that it seems improbable that Gregg Popovich would be inclined to make any deal that might help a Western Conference rival, let alone a rival that has so much playoff history versus the Spurs. 

Let's assume that the Lakers could have acquired DeRozan. The Eastern Conference playoff picture is very fluid, but right now DeRozan's Chicago Bulls are in sixth place with a 45-35 record: they have had a solid season, but they are probably heading toward a first round exit. DeRozan has had a good impact on the Bulls, but he is hardly a miracle worker, and he made just one playoff appearance in three seasons in San Antonio.

DeRozan is averaging a career-high 28.0 ppg this season while shooting .504 from the field, and he is averaging 5.2 rpg plus 5.0 apg, exceeding his career averages of 4.4 rpg and 3.9 apg. DeRozan is also averaging 20.3 FGA/g this season. Do you know something that has never happened in NBA history? No LeBron James teammate has ever averaged 20 FGA/g--not Kyrie Irving (he came close--once--during his final season alongside James), not Kevin Love, not Dwyane Wade, not Chris Bosh, not Anthony Davis, and not Russell Westbrook, who has averaged at least 20 FGA/g five times during his career. Westbrook averaged 19.0 FGA/g in 2020-21 with the Wizards, and then he averaged 15.8 FGA/g this season with the Lakers. 

A lot of things might have happened had DeRozan joined the Lakers, but one thing that would not have happened is DeRozan attempting 20 shots a night, which means he also would not have averaged even close to 28.0 ppg. Without exception, every star who has played alongside James sublimated his game and his statistics to blend in with James. DeRozan is a high usage player, and that is another thing that would have gone by the wayside if he had joined the Lakers. 

"Stat gurus" believe that all numbers translate from one situation to another. If a player shoots .600 from the field in 25-30 mpg because he has a superstar teammate who draws double teams, "stat gurus" believe that player can shoot .600 from the field in 40 mpg as the best player on the team. Call this the "Andrew Bynum theory," because that is the nonsensical notion "stat gurus" propagated when Bynum played alongside Kobe Bryant. By the way, has anyone seen Bynum since he left the Lakers? I hope that he is doing OK. One thing he is not doing, has not done, and never will do is shoot .600 from the field in 40 mpg as the best player on his team. 

Similarly, "stat gurus" believe that if DeMar DeRozan can score 28.0 ppg on .504 field goal shooting for the Chicago Bulls then he can put up the same numbers for the L.A. Lakers. Unlike the more limited Bynum, it is possible that DeRozan could put up similar numbers on a different team than Chicago--but there is no way he is putting up those numbers while playing alongside LeBron James. When projecting how a player will perform, one has to take into account the overall context, and not just move numbers around on a spreadsheet. 

Further, even if DeRozan had been able to score as prolifically and efficiently with the Lakers as he has with the Bulls, that would not have addressed the Lakers' biggest problem: the Lakers are one of the worst defensive teams in the league, primarily because of their lack of paint presence.

The reality, based on how LeBron James' previous All-Star teammates have fared, is that if DeRozan had joined the Lakers, he likely would have scored--at most--20 ppg while shooting between .460 and .480 from the field, and the Lakers' record would have been no better than it is now. 

This analysis takes nothing away from the excellent season that DeRozan has had. The point is not to denigrate DeRozan, but rather to objectively analyze what would have happened had DeRozan joined the Lakers. 

The notion that Buddy Hield could have saved these Lakers is even more outlandish than the notion that DeRozan could have saved these Lakers. At least DeRozan is a five time All-Star who has played in 58 playoff games. 

Do you remember when Buddy Hield played in the All-Star Game and then had big playoff performances? Of course not--Hield is a six year veteran who has yet to make the All-Star team or play in a single playoff game. Hield has played for three NBA teams and has never been on a squad that posted a .500 record. His career field goal percentage is .430 (the much-maligned Westbrook has a .438 career field goal percentage, including .444 this season). Hield averages less than 2 FTA/g during his career. He is an OK, but not great, rebounder for a shooting guard (4.3 rpg for his career), and he is not a playmaker (2.5 apg for his career). Hield's best skill set attribute is three point shooting, and he has shot .366 from three point range this season. The Lakers' three point shooting percentage this season is .349.

This is not about bashing Buddy Hield. He has had a solid NBA career while playing for bad teams. Maybe he can be a contributor to a winning program, but that has not happened yet. Are we supposed to take seriously the notion that if the Lakers subtracted Westbrook's elite rebounding and playmaking and replaced one of the greatest players of all-time with a one dimensional player who shot .366 from three point range--which ranks 82nd in the league--then the Lakers would have been better? 

Why do so many "stat gurus" and media members create narratives that are absurd? Why is there such a robust market for ideas that are demonstrably nonsensical?

Labels: Buddy Hield, DeMar DeRozan, L.A. Lakers, LeBron James, Russell Westbrook

posted by David Friedman @ 1:25 AM

11 comments

NBA's 75th Anniversary Celebration Game Provided Stirring Trip Down Memory Lane

On Wednesday night, ESPN and ESPN2 did a simulcast of the Brooklyn Nets-New York Knicks game; ESPN did a regular broadcast, while ESPN2 presented an NBA 75th Anniversary Celebration game featuring old-school graphics from the 1960s, 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s, plus guest appearances from legendary players and broadcasters. Dave Pasch and Hubie Brown handled the ESPN duties, while Mike Breen, Mark Jackson, and Jeff Van Gundy--each clad in 1970s-style yellow ABC blazers--hosted the 75th Anniversary Celebration Game. Normally, I would be glued to any broadcast featuring Brown, but I could not resist the stirring trip down memory lane provided by the 75th Anniversary Celebration Game. I have been following pro basketball since I was a young child in the 1970s, and this sport has been a huge part of my life: I love to play basketball, I love to watch basketball, and I love to write about/analyze basketball. The game changes and evolves, but my fascination endures.

Oscar Robertson was the first guest, as the first quarter of the 75th Anniversary Celebration Game focused on the 1960s. He talked about how competitive the NBA was when the league had just eight teams, and he mentioned playing each team 13 times per season. When Robertson was a rookie in 1960-61, his Cincinnati Royals were a Western Division team. The Royals played the other three Western Division teams--the Bob Pettit/Cliff Hagan-led St. Louis Hawks, the Elgin Baylor/Jerry West L.A. Lakers, and the Bailey Howell/Gene Shue-led Detroit Pistons--13 times each, and they faced the four Eastern Division teams--including Bill Russell's dynastic Boston Celtics stacked with future Hall of Famers, Wilt Chamberlain's Philadelphia Warriors, the Dolph Schayes/Hal Greer-led Syracuse Nationals, and the Willie Naulls/Richie Guerin-led New York Knicks--10 times each. 

Robertson also praised the skills of today's players, and he marveled at Kevin Durant's ability to handle the ball so fluidly at seven feet tall. 

Marv Albert was the next guest. He talked about the 1960s--when his career began--but he also discussed covering the 1992 Dream Team (the only real Dream Team; the other teams were Team USA, but not Dream Teams). Albert said that when he first did a Dream Team game at the Tournament of the Americas he got chill bumps as the players came on to the court, and he added that without question this was the greatest set of talent ever assembled on one team in sports history. Albert explained that his trademark "Yesss!" call evolved from the "gyrations" of NBA referee Sid Borgia, channeled through one of Albert's friends who would do play by play while he and others played pick up games. Albert recalled that he first said "Yesss!" during a broadcast after a Dick Barnett jump shot, that fans and players began repeating the line back to him, and he soon incorporated it into his routine--but only for spectacular shots and/or shots that happened at key moments.

The second quarter focused on the 1970s. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar talked about doing the Mikan drill as a fifth grader, and how this practice helped transform him from a gangly, awkward player into a skilled player who wielded the sport's greatest weapon ever: the skyhook. Asked why more players do not shoot the skyhook, Abdul-Jabbar provided a very insightful answer: he said that coaches do not teach the shot properly, because after a player masters the Mikan drill fundamentals he should learn to shoot the skyhook in a way that fits his athletic abilities; Abdul-Jabbar insisted that it would be wrong to try to teach another player to shoot the skyhook with the exact same form that he used, because his form was based on his physical characteristics. 

Abdul-Jabbar said that Wilt Chamberlain was the strongest player he ever faced, but quickly noted that he never played against Shaquille O'Neal. He explained that both big men were physically imposing in a similar way, but with different physiques.

Another guest representing the 1970s, Bill Walton, was in typical form: he talked straight through his whole segment without giving anyone a chance to ask a question. He remembered playing against NBA players as a 14 year old high schooler, and he noted that Marty Glickman (who also influenced Marv Albert) helped him to overcome his speech impediment. Walton praised David Stern and Adam Silver as two NBA commissioners who have helped grow the sport. Stern was certainly a trail blazer, but I am much less impressed by Silver's legacy thus far.

My favorite NBA decade is the 1980s. In 1981, Julius Erving, after winning three ABA regular season MVPs and two ABA Finals MVPs, became the first non-center to win an NBA regular season MVP since Oscar Robertson (1964), and two years later Erving teamed with Moses Malone for a glorious, record-setting championship run. The Bird-Magic rivalry was outstanding, and the Isiah Thomas-led back to back champion Detroit Pistons remain underrated. Michael Jordan's incredible NBA career began in the 1984-85 season, though he did not start winning championships until 1991.

The third quarter guest who discussed the NBA in the 1980s was Dick Stockton, who is one of the most gracious people I have ever had the privilege of interviewing. I have an indelible memory of the first time I met him: "When I approached Stockton face to face--without prior notice--at a Cleveland Cavaliers game and asked him if he could take a few moments to answer some questions for my upcoming Andrew Toney article, he could have politely--or impolitely--declined: he was a big-time national TV star who had no idea who I was. Instead, Stockton warmly agreed to my request and he enthusiastically answered my questions. I bumped into him on a few subsequent occasions at other games and he always gave me a friendly greeting. I can assure you that this is not typical behavior in this business."

Stockton shared his memories of covering the great Celtics-Lakers NBA Finals in the 1980s. He made two interesting points: (1) those series were competitive, but often the individual games were blowouts as first one team asserted its will over the other, and then the situation reversed in the next game; (2) CBS marketed team matchups over individual matchups, which Stockton liked because he firmly believes that basketball is a team game. Breen recalled that Stockton influenced his style by telling him that broadcasting is about reaction and not just preparation; Stockton said that viewers will react a certain way to what happens during a game, and if the broadcaster is not in tune with that then he loses credibility. Stockton deflected some of the praise directed toward him by making a point of lauding Sandy Grossman, Pat O'Brien, and the rest of the NBA on CBS crew, stressing that it was a team effort and not just about the announcers.  

My favorite NBA broadcasting duo of all-time is Dick Stockton doing play by play alongside analyst Hubie Brown; they first teamed up at CBS, and then they later reunited at TNT. Stockton talked about Hubie Brown's meticulous preparation and attention to detail. Stockton has such a great grasp of what it takes to have a top notch NBA game broadcast: he is right that the play by play announcer must have the ability to react to game flow changes, and he is also right that no analyst matches Brown's ability to not only prepare for a game but to then seamlessly weave into the telecast the insights that he gained from his preparation. Stockton noted that Brown talks to the viewer like he would talk to a player who he is coaching. I will always remember Brown telling me that he never talks down to the viewer but rather attempts to help the viewer understand basketball's strategic nuances. 

Several of the guests talked about how blessed and fortunate they feel, so I must say that I feel blessed and fortunate that I have had the opportunity to interview Robertson, Erving, Stockton, Brown, and so many other legends.

In the fourth quarter, guest Bob Costas recalled covering not only Michael Jordan's six NBA titles, but also having a close-up view of the excellence of the other stars of the era--many of whom played on the Dream Team. Costas noted that the standard set by the Dream Team led to the emergence of international players on the NBA stage. Asked to weigh in on the ubiquitous Michael Jordan-LeBron James comparisons, Costas said simply, "Statistically they be may be equal, but Jordan was greater." Costas explained that Jordan has had a greater impact on the game by virtue not only of winning more championships but also having more iconic moments, from winning the 1982 NCAA title at North Carolina all the way to the Dream Team and his six NBA titles. Costas emphasized that taking Jordan over James is not a knock on James, comparing this to a baseball historian taking Willie Mays over other great players.

Breen asked Costas about starting his career not in the NBA but in the ABA. Costas is an ABA guy through and through, and it was great to listen to him add some much needed ABA flavor to the telecast. Costas recalled serving as the play by play announcer for the Spirits of St. Louis from 1974-76, and he talked about the noteworthy "in perpetuity" deal executed by the team's owners, the Silna brothers; in exchange for giving up the right for their team to join the NBA via the ABA-NBA merger, the Silna brothers received a share of NBA TV revenue "in perpetuity," which turned into a windfall worth at least several hundred million dollars.

The NBA has a rich history that has produced indelible memories, and it was tremendous fun to revisit so many of those great moments.

Labels: Bill Walton, Bob Costas, Dick Stockton, Hubie Brown, Jeff Van Gundy, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Mark Jackson, Marv Albert, Mike Breen, Oscar Robertson

posted by David Friedman @ 1:06 AM

0 comments

Requiem for the 2022 L.A. Lakers

The L.A. Lakers' season was pronounced dead on arrival shortly after midnight Eastern time after the Phoenix Suns--who had already clinched the NBA's best regular season record by a large margin--defeated the Lakers 121-110. The Lakers thus played their way out of the Play-In Tournament, and into what will probably be a tumultuous offseason. LeBron James sat on the bench wearing sunglasses, unable to play due to an ankle injury. James has played just 56 games this season with three games remaining on the schedule; he will not be eligible for this season's scoring title unless he plays in at least two of the remaining games. James is 1325 points away from tying Kareem Abdul-Jabbar's regular season career scoring record. If James can keep his body from falling apart, he still has enough skills remaining to easily score 1325 points--but he has played 67 games or less in each of the past four seasons (although it should be noted that two of those seasons did not last the full 82 games due to the COVID-19 schedule changes). 

There will be plenty of time to analyze the Suns--who seem poised for a deep playoff run--so for now it suffices to say that they are superior to the Lakers in terms of coaching, team chemistry, and having a more well-balanced roster. Oh, one other thing: I have been saying for over a decade that Chris Paul will never be the best player on a championship team--and we have not seen anything this season that refutes that notion, because there is no doubt that the Suns' best player is Devin Booker, who is putting up one of the most under the radar MVP-caliber seasons that we have seen in a long time.

All that remains now for the 2022 Lakers is assigning blame, but that is a significant detail to James, who whines and cries about how much "respect" he is given more than any other athlete of his historical status. James established himself as a member of pro basketball's Pantheon a long time ago, and it should be beneath him to proclaim himself to be the greatest basketball player of all-time, but he is laser-focused on how he is described and characterized. There is a big difference between trying to prove that you are the greatest basketball player--something that both Michael Jordan and Kobe Bryant did--and repeatedly declaring that you are the greatest basketball player. Actions mean much more than words in this context.

The assigning of blame is important to James, because he will not allow his legacy to be tainted by the Lakers' train wreck season. It is fascinating to see how much James craves power and recognition while shirking responsibility. I have referred to him this season as the Lakers' General Manager/Coach/Team Captain/P.R. Director/Self-Proclaimed Greatest Player of All-Time; that is obviously a tongue in cheek reference, yet it contains more than a grain of truth: James played a major role in building this roster, he has proven on more than one occasion with more than one team that he prefers to coach himself as opposed to being coached, and he has spent at least as much time this season trying to burnish his legacy/do damage control as he has trying to figure out how to win games. 

All of these things can be (and are) simultaneously true:

1) LeBron James is one of the 10 greatest players of all-time. Nothing that happens as his career winds down will diminish the status that he has already established.

2) LeBron James brings drama with him wherever he plays (we all know who Pat Riley was talking about when he referred to "smiling faces with hidden agendas," and I cannot recall Riley ever using such words to describe any other great player that has played for one of his teams).

3) LeBron James, at 37 years old and in his 19th season, is physically capable of doing things on a basketball court that no other player in history could do at his age and/or years of service (the 38 year old Michael Jordan, in his 14th season after two retirements, averaged 22.9 ppg while shooting .416 from the field in 60 games; James has averaged 30.3 ppg this season while shooting .524 from the field in 56 games).

4) LeBron James' body is breaking down from the standpoint of being able to play a full season; he is not immune to the ravages of time and mileage, and he is now experiencing what previously befell Kobe Bryant, Michael Jordan, and every other great player who tried to sustain heavy minutes/heavy production past the age of 35. 

5) James is still highly productive individually when he is able to play, but the missed games, the lack of consistent defensive effort, and the focus on so many things other than team success combine to limit the effectiveness of his leadership from the standpoint of team success. A player who is conserving his body to break the all-time scoring record cannot convince his teammates that it is important to sacrifice individual goals for team success, or that it is important to do "little things" like playing hard all the time, and focusing on defense.

6) There is no way that James and his friends in the media will permit him to be blamed for the Lakers' problems. The narrative is already set: heroic elder statesman did everything he could to carry a deficient, poorly coached roster to the playoffs, but his body betrayed him--despite the $1 million per year that he spends on maintenance (note that the media will emphasize that James' injuries are despite all of his heroic efforts to preserve his body)--and no one else on the team stepped up to save the day.

Before I assign blame for one of the most disappointing team performances in NBA history, I have to acknowledge that I predicted that the Lakers would be the best team in the West, declaring, "If James, Davis, and Westbrook are healthy during the playoffs then this team will be very difficult to beat. Concerns about chemistry and on-court fit will be proven to be baseless if the Big Three players are healthy...If the Lakers are healthy, they will win the West, and it would be fascinating to see prime Giannis Antetokounmpo versus elder statesman LeBron James in the NBA Finals."

I could correctly note that I clearly based my prediction on the Lakers being healthy, but honesty forces me to admit that I did not conceive of the Lakers being this bad even if I would have known in advance how many games James and Anthony Davis would miss--not to mention that the Lakers were, at best, a .500 team this season even at full strength. 

What did I misevaluate about the Lakers? Let me count the ways:

1) The 2020 "bubble title" fooled me. When James fled Cleveland for L.A., I assumed that he had gone Hollywood, and was more interested in glitz/glamour than in winning more championships, particularly since he kept insisting that the 2016 championship cemented his greatest ever status. Even after acquiring Davis, the Lakers did not look consistently great during the 2020 season, but the COVID-19 pause helped them to regain some energy, and they did just enough to win the "bubble title." I should have realized that a fourth title with a third different team is probably enough to satisfy James, particularly since it is unlikely that he can match Jordan's six titles (never mind that the record is not six, but 11, held by Bill Russell). I expected James to do whatever it takes to help this team win; instead, James did whatever he could do to march toward the magic 38,387 number. 

For the Lakers to be successful with this roster, they needed to defend, control the boards, and push the ball, with Russell Westbrook handling the ball in the middle while James and Davis filled the lanes. If the opposing team stopped the initial fastbreak, then James or Davis could pound away in the paint, the way that they did to win the "bubble title." 

Instead, James relegated Westbrook to standing in the corner spotting up for three pointers. By the way, did you know that Westbrook shot a career-high .438 on corner three pointers this season? Of course you don't know that, because that does not fit the narratives that Westbrook is (1) uncoachable, (2) unwilling to adjust how he plays, and (3) can't shoot. GM/Coach LeBron James decided to turn one of the league's most dangerous open court players into Kyle Korver. Westbrook did not complain; he went to the corner, and became the best corner three point shooter he could be. 

Meanwhile, James attempted a career-high 8.0 three pointers per game this season; instead of attacking the paint the way he did during each of his championship seasons, he jacked up three pointers, hoping to preserve his body while gaining on Abdul-Jabbar three non-contact points at a time. 

2) I knew that Anthony Davis, mentally, is the 2020s version of Pau Gasol--a very talented player who can play inside but prefers to drift outside, and who will only come close to his potential if someone else pushes him (a key difference is that prime Gasol was very durable, while Davis has always been brittle). However, the "bubble title" fooled me into thinking that maybe Davis actually wants to be 1B to James' 1A for another season or two before becoming 1A after James retires. Perhaps the biggest disappointment for the Lakers this season is how lackadaisically Davis--the only member of the "Big Three" who is squarely in his physical prime--played even when he was healthy. This is not about numbers--this is about impact. Davis drifted through games even before he was hurt every other minute. The Lakers needed him to dominate the paint on both offense and defense, and that rarely happened this season.

3) If James averaged 25 ppg, Davis averaged 25 ppg, and Westbrook averaged 20 ppg then the Lakers only needed about 35 ppg from the rest of the roster, assuming that they played good enough defense to hold teams to 105 ppg or less. I did not have outlandish expectations for the rest of the roster, but I thought that they could deliver 35 ppg. Instead, James and Davis did not produce 25 ppg each (when you factor in all of the zero point games--i.e., the games that they missed), Westbrook produced a solid 18.4 ppg despite being misused, and the rest of the roster struggled to score consistently or efficiently. To make things worse, the leaky defense yielded 114.8 ppg (26th worst in a 30 team league). 

Add that all up--James not playing the right way while also forcing Westbrook out of his proper role, Davis playing indifferently in between his frequent injuries, and the team's inefficient offense being incapable of overcoming the team's horrific defense--and you have a 31-48 team that is out of contention even for 10th place in the West with three games left. 

Imagine for a moment that Kobe Bryant presided over this kind of a disaster, never mind if he kept calling himself the greatest player of all-time as his team sank like the Titanic. In that scenario, would the media be latching onto the team's third option as the reason for all of the losing? 

We keep hearing a lot of nonsense about Westbrook being washed up, but he is not the guy who missed major chunks of the season and whose body parts are regularly failing him. Westbrook has played 78 out of 79 games so far. His field goal percentage and rpg average are better than his career norms. He averaged 7.1 apg despite James monopolizing the ball and despite being surrounded by the gang that can't shoot straight (which cost Westbrook a lot of assists). If Westbrook is washed up, then one would expect him to be wearing down now as the season draws to a close. Here are his field goal percentages in the past 10 games: 8-18 (.444), 10-15 (.667), 7-14 (.500), 10-20 (.500) 8-15 (.533), 9-17 (.529), 9-18 (.500), 5-15 (.333), 11-15 (.733), 10-20 (.500). That adds up to 87-167 (.521). The eye test shows that Westbrook can still push the ball up the court with great pace, he can still get into the lane, and finish at the rim, and he even can still make his trademark pull up midrange jumper. Ignorant reporters asked him not too long ago how he can remain confident about his shooting (apparently not realizing that his corner three point field goal percentage is great and his overall field goal percentage is at its normal levels), and Westbrook sensibly replied that he remains confident because he has scored over 23,000 career points. Here are some players who scored fewer career regular season points than Westbrook: Adrian Dantley, Dwyane Wade, Elgin Baylor, Clyde Drexler, Gary Payton, Larry Bird, Hal Greer, Walt Bellamy. Westbrook passed all of those players in the past two seasons; most of those players were at or near the end of the line when they reached the vicinity of 23,000 points, but Westbrook is still going strong. If Westbrook ends up on a team next season that uses him correctly, he could easily average 25 ppg.

Look at Westbrook's body language. Not only is his team suffering through an awful season, he is the only member of the "Big Three" who does not have a ring, and he is the main scapegoat for everything that has gone wrong--but despite that, he plays hard, he does not hang his head, he never throws a teammate or the coach under the bus, and when he speaks to the young players he tries to help/motivate, as opposed to criticize/blame. Go back and look at games when James played, and compare his interactions with his teammates to Westbrook's interactions. Turn the volume off so you don't hear Screamin' A, and you decide who is the better teammate and better leader. Have you ever heard a teammate or a coach say anything negative about Westbrook? 

We all know what is going to happen next. Truth will be the first casualty, as James' media friends activate the "Save LeBron, destroy Westbrook and Vogel" narrative. The Lakers will likely fire Coach Frank Vogel, who won a championship just two years ago. Then, General Manager James will try to figure out who he wants to play with next season so that he can make it through 50-60 games and break Abdul-Jabbar's record before his body completely gives out. If the record is to be broken, the Lakers will want James to be a Laker when he breaks it, so they will cater to James' every whim regarding the coaching staff and the roster.

Labels: Anthony Davis, Devin Booker, L.A. Lakers, LeBron James, Phoenix Suns, Russell Westbrook

posted by David Friedman @ 3:39 AM

27 comments

Gene Shue's Remarkable NBA Career Should Never be Forgotten

Gene Shue, the only person to make five NBA All-Star teams and win two NBA Coach of the Year awards, passed away on April 3 at the age of 90. Shue's multifaceted NBA career began in 1954 when the Philadelphia Warriors made him the third overall selection in the draft, and continued into the early 1990s when he served as the Philadelphia 76ers' General Manager. 

Shue did not immediately become a star NBA player, and he did not even average at least 10 ppg until his third season--but he emerged as a All-Star in his fourth campaign, and then he made the All-Star team five years in a row. In 1960, Shue made the All-NBA First Team alongside Hall of Famers Bob Cousy, Wilt Chamberlain, Elgin Baylor, and Bob Pettit. Shue ranked sixth in the league in scoring (1712 points, 22.8 ppg) and 11th in assists (295, 5.5 apg) that season. He made the All-NBA Second Team in 1961 behind Cousy and Oscar Robertson but ahead of rookie Jerry West, among others.

Shue scored 10,068 points in his 10 season NBA career at a time when the 10,000 point club was considered a "select circle" of great players listed in the annual official NBA Guide. Shue's playing career ended in 1964, and just two years later his coaching career began as he took the reins for the 4-21 Baltimore Bullets. The Bullets, founded in 1961 as the Chicago Packers, had yet to post a single winning season, but in Shue's second full season the team posted the best record in the league, 57-25. That quick turnaround earned Shue the first of his Coach of the Year awards. The Bullets were swept by the rising New York Knicks--who won two of the next four NBA titles--but in 1971 Shue guided the Bullets to the NBA Finals, where they were swept by the Milwaukee Bucks. Hall of Famers Wes Unseld and Earl Monroe had their most productive individual seasons during Shue's run in Baltimore. The team moved to Washington, D.C. in 1973, but Shue resigned because he did not want to move to Washington, D.C. Instead, Shue became the coach of the Philadelphia 76ers, who had just finished the worst season in NBA history up to that time (9-73). In the next four seasons, Philadelphia's win total increased to 25, 34, 46, and 50. The 76ers added a lot of talented players during that time--including Doug Collins, George McGinnis, and Julius Erving. Shue guided that trio to the 1977 NBA Finals, where the 76ers took a 2-0 lead over the Portland Trail Blazers before losing four straight games to Bill Walton and crew. The 76ers fired Shue after the team started 2-4 during the next season.

Shue then took over his third reclamation project, becoming the coach of the San Diego Clippers in 1978; in the previous two seasons, the Clippers--then known as the Buffalo Braves--won 30 games and then won 27 games. The Clippers won 43 and 35 games during Shue's two years with the team, but did not qualify for the playoffs in either season. Shue then returned to the Bullets franchise, now known as the Washington Bullets. He led the team to the playoffs three times in five full seasons, winning his second Coach of the Year award in 1981. The Bullets fired Shue with 13 games remaining in the 1986 season, and he finished his coaching career with a brief, unsuccessful return to the hapless Clippers, who had relocated to L.A.

Shue's .477 career regular season winning percentage (784-861) is not a fair representation of his coaching skills, because he repeatedly took over bad teams, and he generally made those teams better. He was renowned for his ability to connect with players who had been cast off by other teams, and for his innovative coaching strategies; for example, to alleviate pressure against his guards when he coached Philadelphia he sometimes had his centers bring the ball up the court. Also, he was an early adopter of the three point shot: Shue coached the Clippers during the first season that the NBA used the three point shot (1979-80), and his team led the league in three pointers made (177) and three pointers attempted (543) while ranking second in three point field goal percentage (.326). During the 1979-80 season, the Clippers' Brian Taylor ranked first in three pointers made (90--more than all but three teams that season!), first in three pointers attempted (239), and fifth in three point field goal percentage (.377). Those numbers may seem small in light of the NBA's three point revolution during the past few years, but at that time Shue's Clippers were one of the few NBA teams that attempted three pointers in any situation other than as a desperation heave with the shot clock/game clock expiring or down by three points with time running out. 

I am not sure how many people participated in the NBA as a player, coach, or executive in five different decades, but that list must not be very long, and Shue's name is on it.

Labels: Baltimore Bullets, Detroit Pistons, Gene Shue, Julius Erving, Philadelphia 76ers, Washington Bullets, Wes Unseld

posted by David Friedman @ 11:40 PM

2 comments

Rest in Peace Herb Turetzky, the Original Net

I am very saddened by the news that Herb Turetzky, the original Net who served as the team's official scorekeeper for 54 years in two leagues and at multiple home venues, has passed away at the age of 76. 

Mr. Turetzky was a gracious and engaging interview subject for me 10 years ago. Here are the recollections he shared with me about the Nets' two ABA championship teams led by the incomparable Julius Erving:

Friedman: "Before the 1974 season, the Nets acquired Julius Erving from the Virginia Squires. That 1974 New York team is really remarkable because despite being the youngest team in professional basketball the Nets had a very dominant playoff run. They went 12-2, which matched a record set by the 1971 Milwaukee Bucks. That record stood until Dr. J's 1983 Philadelphia 76ers went 12-1 in the playoffs. What stands out for you about that 1974 championship season and some of the players on that New York team, including 'Super' John Williamson and Larry Kenon?"

Turetzky: "'Supe' and Larry were both rookies. 'Supe' was a very dear friend of mine and of Doc's. He was very, very brash, probably the cockiest player I have come across. His nickname of 'Super John' was self-imposed! He gave it to himself. The player I compare him to is Levern Tart, who passed away a few years ago and also wore number 23. Levern was from Bradley, about 6-2, 220. He was a bull. He could have played football. When he went to the basket, he went through you. 'Super John' was that type of player; John went through anybody who was in his way. He just wouldn't let anybody stop him from scoring.

Brian Taylor could really handle the ball. Larry was laid back. He was content to be the second or third fiddle. I don't think that they called him 'Mr. K' in his rookie year; that took a little while. Billy Paultz was very solid. He was big and burly. Julius, obviously, was special. His skills were a combination of Connie Hawkins and Elgin Baylor and he just took over the games. I was thinking about this earlier today; LeBron James is a monster—about 6-8, 260 or so—while Doc is about 6-6, 6-7 and much lighter but he did the same things that LeBron does: he could get the defensive rebound—not by moving people out of the way but by jumping over them—and then just take it the length of the floor for a layup. He was a one man fast break. Kevin (Loughery) was the player's coach. He was a former player, they listened to him and he led them to the ring."

Friedman: "The 1976 New York team that won the championship was significantly different; it was much less talented and deep than the 1974 team because the Nets got rid of Paultz and Kenon. Doc had one of the greatest playoff runs ever, capped off with that phenomenal Finals against Denver when he led both teams in every major statistical category. What do you remember about the 1976 team and specifically about that 1976 Finals against a Denver team that included two Hall of Fame players (Dan Issel, David Thompson) and a Hall of Fame coach (Larry Brown)?"

Turetzky: "It was a great series. Doc was very special. The team was much different. Dave DeBusschere (New York's General Manager) did not like Billy Paultz because Billy was not athletic but he couldn't touch him because we were a championship team. When we lost to St. Louis in the 1975 playoffs, that gave Dave the opportunity to do something without being criticized. He got rid of Billy and Larry. Billy had a great career after that with San Antonio. Dave brought in Rich Jones to play the power forward spot. Rich did a good job. Kim Hughes and Jim Eakins played center. This was more Doc being a one man team, except for the final game against Denver when--as great as Doc was--'Supe' had 24 points in the second half and 16 points in the fourth quarter. We didn't know if that was the ABA's last game; it was something that had been talked about but it wasn't a sure thing. My biggest memory about that game is that afterward in the locker room Brian Taylor and Willie Sojourner threw me into the shower. I was wearing a sports jacket, standing in the shower getting soaking wet, and I looked around and there was Doc in his uniform in front of me, just resting, staying away from the media for a little while. For about three or four minutes Julius just stayed there, talking about what a great experience it was to be a champion again."

Turetzky and I also discussed how scorekeeping has changed over the decades, and he agreed with me that assists are handed out much more generously now than they used to be, or than they should be based on the rule book definition of an assist:

Friedman: "Do you think that--either in terms of the official rules or just the way that the rules are handled from a practical standpoint--the standard for what an assist is changed from 1968 until now?"

Turetzky: "Absolutely. Absolutely."

Friedman: "How has it changed?"

Turetzky: "An assist is supposed to be a pass that leads directly to a basket. If a player catches the ball at the foul line, takes two dribbles, spins and makes a layup then there should not be an assist on that play."

Friedman: "It seems like assists are given on those kinds of plays now."

Turetzky: "There is an awful lot of flexibility now. As the numbers have gotten bigger, I think that they want assists to be given out and so you see players getting 10, 11, 12 assists in a game."

Friedman: "Do you feel pressured either directly or indirectly to give assists to Nets players or do you get pressure from other teams that have top playmakers who they want to receive credit for a lot of assists?"

Turetzky: "See, I don't do that; I oversee the scorekeeping for the game. They have a stat crew who sit behind me, four of them now with their computers. They have discussions and I hear the discussions sometimes and sometimes it is a little troubling. It is almost amusing at times. Many years back, I just had two people working with me at the table and we would just do it between us, before the computer systems came in. I did the scoring on every play and the stats would go from my mouth to a typist who put it down on paper and that was it. The NBA then went to the computer system and it switched out of my hands and into the hands of the computer people. That is how it is all around the league...To me, that's been the problem."

Friedman: "When did that change happen?"

Tutetzky: "Probably about 10 years ago. I don't remember specifically."

Friedman: "Prior to that, you had more input—"

Turetzky: "I did the play by play along with a play by play typist—and I had some great ones, including Jonathan Supranowitz, who is now the Vice President of Public Relations for the Knicks."

Friedman: "I did a study of regarding assists. I watched some games and charted how many assists should be awarded by rule--which, as you said, is a pass leading directly to a basket. What I noticed is that a lot of times someone would get credit for an assist even if the recipient of the pass went through the whole Kevin McHale low post repertoire before making his shot. You think that the change has taken place in the past 10 years or so."

Turetzky: "Yes. I think that some of this is that executives started keeping track of the statistics and the records. You didn't see Bob Cousy setting these kinds of assist records. It's not quite the same."

Turetzky also helped me to contact Ted Green, who was another wonderful interview subject. Green produced outstanding documentaries about Roger Brown and Bobby "Slick Leonard," two legendary figures not just in ABA history, but in basketball history. 

Turetzky crossed paths with many basketball legends, in addition to becoming a basketball legend in his own right. You cannot tell the story of the Nets franchise without mentioning Turetzky's involvement, and I hope that my interview provides a glimpse of what made him so special. Turetzky was beloved by both Nets players and opposing players. Pete Vecsey once said to me that if you haven't made any enemies then either you haven't been in the business long enough or you haven't done the right things, but I would turn that around and say that the fact that Turetzky was in the business for more than five decades while being universally respected and admired shows that Turetzky did his job with class and professionalism.

Labels: Herb Turetzky, Julius Erving, New York Nets

posted by David Friedman @ 4:56 PM

0 comments