20 Second Timeout

Memphis Versus Golden State Preview

Western Conference Second Round

#2 Memphis (56-26) vs. #3 Golden State (53-29)

Season series: Memphis, 3-1

Golden State can win if…the Warriors' three high-scoring guards--Stephen Curry, Klay Thompson, and Jordan Poole--continue to be both prolific and efficient, and if the Warriors can slow down Memphis' powerful offense. In Golden State's five game first round win against the injury-depleted Denver Nuggets, Curry (28.0 ppg, .500 FG%, .404 3FG%), Thompson (22.6 ppg, .506 FG%, .458 3FG%), and Poole (21.0 ppg, .548 FG%, .484 3FG%) each averaged at least 20 ppg while shooting at least .500 from the field and at least .400 from three point range. The Warriors not only hunted and exploited favorable matchups, but their guards did not have to expend much energy on defense. 

However, neither of those advantages will exist versus Memphis. The Memphis guards are much better defensively than Denver's guards, plus Memphis' big men are better able to switch or trap. The Memphis guards are also much better offensively than Denver's guards, which will force Curry, Thompson, and Poole to exert more energy at that end of the court than they did in the first round. 

If both teams play their best games, the Grizzlies will win more often than the Warriors will win. The games will probably be close and the series will probably go the distance, but this matchup is nothing like facing an undermanned Denver team whose best player--reigning regular season MVP Nikola Jokic--could be exploited on defense.

Memphis will win because…the Grizzlies have more collective offensive firepower than the Warriors, they are a better rebounding team, and they are a strong defensive team that can make things difficult for the Warriors' sharpshooters. 

The Warriors have "name brand" offense led by Curry and Thompson, but collectively the Grizzlies play faster, score more, shoot almost as well, and benefit from extra possessions due to superior rebounding/committing fewer turnovers. The rise of Ja Morant has been impressive to watch. Morant won the 2022 Most Improved Player award, becoming the first player to receive that honor after winning Rookie of the Year. Morant scored 21.5 ppg during Memphis' six game first round series win over the Minnesota Timberwolves, but he struggled with his shooting (shooting splits of just .386/.200/.712). He led the Grizzlies with 10.5 apg, and he ranked second on the team with 8.7 rpg. Morant had 10 offensive rebounds in the first round, just one fewer than Minnesota's 6-11 All-Star Karl-Anthony Towns. Morant's regular season shooting splits were .493/.344/.761, and for Memphis to win this series it is important that he shoot better than he did versus Minnesota. Morant has hinted that he is not 100% physically, but the old school rule is if you are injured then you cannot play and if you can play then you are not injured, because by this point of the year every NBA player is hurt to some extent.

Desmond Bane was Memphis' leading scorer versus Minnesota (23.5 ppg, shooting splits of .495/.482/.900). Brandon Clarke and Dillon Brooks tied for third on the team in scoring (16.5 ppg), with Clarke shooting .679 from the field and leading the Grizzlies in rebounding (9.0 rpg). Jaren Jackson (11.8 ppg, 7.2 rpg, team-high 2.7 bpg) is a promising young big man who must learn how to stay out of foul trouble.

Golden State's best chance is if the moment and the stage turn out to be too much for the Grizzlies, resulting in the Grizzlies not playing at the level that they maintained throughout this season and during the first round versus the Timberwolves. I don't think that Morant will let that happen, and we have also seen that this team can maintain its poise and win even without Morant (the Grizzlies went 20-5 this season when Morant did not play).

Other things to consider: There is so much talk about Golden State's championship pedigree and "Death Lineup" that it is forgotten or ignored that Golden State sans Kevin Durant won one championship against a Cleveland team coached by David Blatt and missing injured stars Kyrie Irving and Kevin Love; in 2016, a healthier Cleveland team coached by Tyronn Lue overcame a 3-1 deficit to beat the Warriors in the NBA Finals, sending Draymond Green scurrying to his phone to beg Durant to come to the Bay Area because the Warriors needed him so desperately. Durant led the Warriors to back to back championships, and he may have carried the Warriors to a third title if he had not been slowed by injuries before rupturing his Achilles in game five of the 2019 NBA Finals. So, even when Curry, Thompson, and Green were fully healthy and in their primes they won exactly one title at the expense of a Cleveland team decimated by injuries. Let's not pretend that this version of the Warriors sans Durant is a dynasty like Bill Russell's Celtics (11 titles in 13 seasons), the Magic-Kareem Showtime Lakers (five titles in nine seasons), the Jordan-Pippen Bulls (six titles in eight seasons) or even the Shaq-Kobe Lakers (three straight titles). The Warriors are a very good team that is older, slower, and not as deep as the squad that won the 2015 championship; the Warriors are not nearly as good as the Durant-led powerhouse that won back to back titles in 2017-18. 

The Grizzlies beat the Warriors in last year's NBA Play-In Tournament, and the Grizzlies improved even more this season than the Warriors did. The Grizzlies' biggest weaknesses are youth and inexperience--most evident when they make questionable decisions, including poor shot selection--but they make up for those weaknesses with toughness, physicality, and a commitment to playing hard at both ends of the court that is atypical for a young team that lacks playoff experience. This series is also an opportunity for Morant to make his case for being the league's best point guard by outplaying Curry individually while leading his team to victory.

Memphis will win in seven games.

Labels: Brandon Clarke, Desmond Bane, Draymond Green, Golden State Warriors, Ja Morant, Klay Thompson, Memphis Grizzlies, Stephen Curry

posted by David Friedman @ 12:12 PM

6 comments

Phoenix Versus Dallas Preview

Western Conference Second Round

#1 Phoenix (64-18) vs. #4 Dallas (52-30)

Season series: Phoenix, 3-0

Dallas can win if…the Mavericks continue making a high volume of three pointers while shooting efficiently from beyond the arc. The Mavericks averaged 15.5 3FGM/game in their six game first round win over the Utah Jazz, the highest average in the 2022 playoffs so far, and a significant increase over the 13.1 3FGM/game that they averaged during the regular season. The Mavericks' strategy versus the Jazz was to bomb away from long range to minimize Rudy Gobert's defensive impact, the same approach that helped the L.A. Clippers defeat the Jazz in last year's playoffs. That strategy is unlikely to be effective versus the Suns, who ranked fifth in the league in three point defensive field goal percentage during the regular season. 

Luka Doncic missed the first three games of the first round due to injury, but the Mavericks surprisingly went 2-1 without him before going 2-1 with him. Doncic averaged 29.0 ppg, 10.7 rpg, and 5.7 apg against Utah. He must post even better numbers against Phoenix for Dallas to pull off the upset. Doncic is a special player, and he has the ability to be the best player in this series. He is not a high flyer, nor does he have blazing speed, but he is strong, crafty, and quicker in small spaces than he may look. Defensive players rarely can speed him up or slow him down; Doncic operates at his pace, gets to the spots on the court he wants to get to, and then decides whether to shoot or pass. His game is an interesting combination of Oscar Robertson's all-around skills and Chris Mullin's mastery of change of pace.

Jalen Brunson starred while Doncic sat out--including a 41 point outburst in Dallas' game two win, enabling the Mavericks to seize home court advantage--and Brunson had an outstanding series overall (27.8 ppg, 4.8 rpg, 4.2 apg). 

The Jazz killed the Mavericks on the boards (44.8 rpg to 37.7 rpg) but that did not matter because the Mavericks made so many three pointers and because the Mavericks turned the ball over so infrequently.

Before hiring Jason Kidd as their coach, the Mavericks lacked a defensive identity, and they had not won a playoff series since 2011, when Kidd was the point guard for their championship team. Now, the Mavericks are vastly improved defensively, and it is no coincidence that they just won a playoff series for the first time in 11 years. 

Phoenix will win because…the Suns demonstrated over the course of the 82 game season that they have the best, most well-rounded team in the league. The Suns have no significant weaknesses, ranking among the league leaders in most key offensive and defensive categories. Their lack of size hurt them versus Milwaukee in the 2021 NBA Finals but few teams have big players who are skilled enough to bother the Suns. The Suns hunt advantageous matchups on offense, and they cover for each other on defense. They are very well-prepared by Coach Monty Williams, and they tend to neither get rattled if they fall behind nor complacent if they are ahead. It will take a complete, well-coached team to beat the Suns in a seven game series (assuming that the Suns stay healthy).

The Suns shot .523 from the field in their six game first round win versus the New Orleans Pelicans, and their top four scorers each shot at least .500 from the field. Devin Booker (23.0 ppg) shot .500 from the field, Paul (22.3 ppg, 11.3 apg) shot .567 from the field--including his record-setting 14-14 game six performance--and Deandre Ayton (20.5 ppg, 9.8 rpg) shot .700 from the field. Mikal Bridges, an elite defensive player, scored 17.3 ppg while shooting .551 from the field. The Mavericks' improved defense will be put to the test by a Phoenix team that not only has good shooters but also has great shot selection.

Other things to consider: Booker just came back from a hamstring injury that forced him to miss the second half of game two and all of games three through five in the first round, and he has had hamstring issues off and on in recent years. If he misses significant time during this series, the Suns' margin for error shrinks significantly. Chris Paul was magnificent in the game six clincher versus New Orleans but he had an up and down series, and he has a career-long pattern of wearing down and/or getting injured as the playoffs progress. Booker being out of action and/or Paul being out or ineffective are the main factors that could swing this series in Dallas' favor. Otherwise, I see Dallas getting hot from long range and stealing one of the first two games in Phoenix before the Suns win the series in six games.

Labels: Chris Paul, Dallas Mavericks, Deandre Ayton, Devin Booker, Jalen Brunson, Luka Doncic, Phoenix Suns

posted by David Friedman @ 11:12 PM

2 comments

Miami Versus Philadelphia Preview

Eastern Conference Second Round

#1 Miami (53-29) vs. #4 Philadelphia (51-31)

Season series: Tied, 2-2

Philadelphia can win if…Joel Embiid dominates the paint at both ends of the court. Embiid averaged 26.2 ppg on .520 field goal shooting during Philadelphia's 4-2 first round series win versus Toronto, but those numbers are deceptive. Embiid is often injured and/or not in peak condition during the postseason, and 2022 is no exception: Embiid suffered torn ligaments in his right thumb during game three, and he has not been the same player in his last three games, averaging 24.7 ppg while shooting .467 or worse from the field in two of those three games. The 76ers just announced that Embiid suffered a right orbital fracture and mild concussion after receiving an elbow from Pascal Siakam late in game six. Embiid's current status is "out indefinitely," and without him the 76ers have no chance to win this series.

This season, Embiid won his first scoring title (30.6 ppg). If Embiid had stayed healthy and if he could have averaged at least 30 ppg with .550+ field goal shooting while also protecting the paint defensively, then this could have been a competitive series, but a right orbital fracture is a series-ending injury, which means that it will also be a season-ending injury.

During the first round, Tyrese Maxey emerged as the 76ers' second scoring option, averaging 21.3 ppg with excellent shooting splits (.511/.405/.950). He was the difference in the series, most notably during times when Embiid was not dominant. Maxey benefits from the defensive attention that Embiid attracts, but he is also capable of creating his own shot, particularly in transition. If Maxey had played at his normal level then the series would have at least gone the distance, and quite possibly the final outcome would have been different.

Tobias Harris has struggled a bit since the 76ers acquired James Harden, but he had a very good series versus Toronto (17.8 ppg, 9.5 rpg, shooting splits of .519/.433/.875).

Whether by accident, design, or necessity, the 76ers figured out the truth of what I have said about James Harden for the past decade: he cannot be the best player on a championship contender, and it is not clear if he can be the second best player on a championship contender. Harden ranked third on the 76ers in scoring (19.0 ppg) and minutes (40.5 mpg) in the first round. He led the team in assists (10.2 apg).

The notion that Embiid and Harden form a duo that should be compared with the 76ers' legendary Moses Malone-Julius Erving duo or with the more recent legendary Shaquille O'Neal-Kobe Bryant duo is laughable. Bryant, Erving, and O'Neal are each Pantheon level players, while Malone is not far below Pantheon level (and he played at a Pantheon level in the first year that he partnered with Erving, winning the 1983 season MVP and the 1983 Finals MVP). Embiid is a talented player who has yet to advance past the second round of the playoffs. Harden has been overrated for most of his career, and he has choked in most of his biggest playoff moments. The 2022 76ers lost more games in the first round to an injury-depleted Toronto team than the Malone-Erving 76ers lost during their entire 1983 championship run.

The narrative that is gathering currency now is that Harden is over the hill. Harden is 32 years old and he averaged 37.2 mpg this season. He is not old, and there is no indication that he is injured. The reality is that his game depended to a significant extent on "flop and flail," so the NBA's belated crackdown on that nonsense has rendered much of Harden's game ineffective: he can no longer rely on being bailed out on either his drives or his three pointers, which means (1) he is forced to make shots and (2) defenders can guard him closely without fear of being whistled for phantom fouls. No, Harden has not lost a step--he is who we (or at least I) thought he was! Unless the NBA reinstates "flop and flail," Harden's "concert tour" field goal percentages are not going to improve. What about game six versus Toronto? Harden shot 7-12 (.583) from the field. Does that presage a return of "Houston MVP" Harden? I doubt it. That is just the third time in his past nine playoff games that he shot at least .500 from the field. In 143 career playoff games, his field goal percentage is .427. He shot .405 from the field versus Toronto, and it will be surprising if he shoots much better than that versus a Miami team that is more talented and deeper than Toronto.

It will be revealing to see how Harden performs versus Miami without Embiid. Harden will have every opportunity to prove that he is as great as so many people have proclaimed him to be.

Miami will win because…the Heat's elite defense will stifle Philadelphia's offense. The Heat lack size, but during the regular season they ranked fourth in points allowed and fourth in defensive field goal percentage. The Heat held the Atlanta Hawks to 97.4 ppg on .440 field goal shooting during a 4-1 first round series win, and the Heat limited Trae Young to 15.4 ppg on .319 field goal shooting. During the regular season, Young averaged 28.4 ppg on career-high .460 field goal shooting. Embiid is a much better player than Young, but even in the unlikely event that he comes back from the orbital fracture the Heat will make him work for his points, and the Heat will not concede nearly as many wide open shots to his teammates as short-handed Toronto did.

Miami does not have a great offense, but the Heat will get enough scoring from Jimmy Butler, Tyler Herro, and Bam Adebayo to more than keep pace with the 76ers. Victor Oladipo averaged 14.5 ppg in two games versus Atlanta, and he could provide a big boost if he is healthy enough to become a full-fledged member of the rotation. Kyle Lowry suffered a hamstring injury during game three that caused him to miss the rest of that game plus games four and five. His healthy return to action would help the Heat at both ends of the court, but the Heat have enough talent and depth to beat the 76ers even without him.

The caveat is that this preview is written with the assumption that Butler will return to action when the series begins. Butler sat out game five versus Atlanta due to knee soreness, but there is no indication that he is seriously injured. If he is limited by injury then it will be more difficult for the Heat to win this series, particularly if Lowry is also limited or out of the lineup.

Other things to consider: The Heat may be flying under the radar more than any other number one seeded team in recent memory. The early season championship talk focused on the Brooklyn Nets and L.A. Lakers, and more recent championship conversation has centered on the Phoenix Suns, Golden State Warriors, and Boston Celtics, but the Heat not only finished first in the Eastern Conference but they dismantled an Atlanta team that reached the Eastern Conference Finals last year. 

Butler's leadership style may rub some people the wrong way, but all of the evidence indicates that (1) he is focused on team success and (2) he makes a significant contribution to team success at both ends of the court. His numbers are sometimes not quite as gaudy as the numbers posted by MVP candidates, but he is capable of having a similar impact, as he demonstrated during Miami's 2020 run to the NBA Finals and during the Atlanta series (30.5 ppg, 7.8 rpg, 5.3 apg, 2.8 spg, shooting splits of .543/.438/.794). 

Butler averaged 19.4 ppg for the 76ers in the 2019 playoffs but the 76ers traded him to Miami after he spent just one season with Philadelphia. Butler then led the Heat to the 2020 NBA Finals, while the 76ers have yet to get past the second round during the "Process" era that has most assuredly not resulted in "tanking to the top." Miami and Philadelphia have vastly different roster construction philosophies. The Heat focus on being the best team that they can be each season, while the 76ers spent several years tanking even though the evidence shows that tanking does not work. 

I would have predicted a six game Miami win if Embiid were available for the entire series, and I am tempted to predict a Miami sweep if Embiid misses the entire series, but Miami winning in five games is my pick.

Labels: Bam Adebayo, James Harden, Jimmy Butler, Joel Embiid, Miami Heat, Philadelphia 76ers, Tyler Herro, Tyrese Maxey

posted by David Friedman @ 9:00 PM

2 comments

Milwaukee Versus Boston Preview

Eastern Conference Second Round

#3 Milwaukee (51-31) vs. #2 Boston (51-31)

Season series: Tied, 2-2

Boston can win if…the Celtics' elite defense prevents Giannis Antetokounmpo from dominating in the paint without giving up high percentage shot attempts to Jrue Holiday, Grayson Allen, and Milwaukee's other three point shooters. 

The Celtics swept the Brooklyn Nets with a balanced scoring attack plus a stifling defense that held Kevin Durant to 26.3 ppg on .386 field goal shooting. Jayson Tatum led both teams in scoring (29.5 ppg) and assists (7.3 apg) while also making a significant impact on defense as the primary defender against Durant. The Celtics forced Durant and Kyrie Irving (21.3 ppg on .444 field goal shooting) to play in a crowd and shoot under duress while also making sure that the Nets' supporting cast did not run wild. The Celtics have tremendous size, speed, and versatility. 

Jaylen Brown (22.5 ppg, 5.3 rpg, 4.3 apg) had an excellent all-around series versus the Nets, as did 2022 NBA Defensive Player of the Year Marcus Smart (16.5 ppg, 4.0 rpg, 7.0 apg). Al Horford (13.0 ppg, series-high 7.5 rpg) showed that he still has a lot left in the tank. Horford has defended well against Antetokounmpo.

Milwaukee will win because…the Bucks not only have the NBA's best player--Giannis Antetokounmpo--but they have the necessary size, depth, and versatility to match up with the Celtics. The Bucks' frontcourt of Antetokounmpo, Brook Lopez, and Bobby Portis will not be pushed around by any team. The advantages that the Celtics enjoyed versus the Nets will not work in the Celtics' favor against the Bucks: the Nets have a small team that does not effectively attack the paint or defend the paint, but the Bucks attack the paint not only with Antetokounmpo but also with Lopez and Portis. On defense, the Bucks aggressively defend the paint and force their opponents to make three pointers. The Bucks shut down the Chicago Bulls during the first round. 

Antetokounmpo averaged 28.6 ppg, 13.4 rpg, and 6.2 apg versus the Bulls while shooting .568 from the field. Holiday had subpar shooting splits (.407/.345/.600) but he averaged 6.8 apg and played his usual first-rate defense. He will need to shoot better versus the Celtics for the Bucks to win, particularly because the Bucks will likely be without the services of All-Star Khris Middleton for the entire series. Portis' scoring and rebounding (11.6 ppg, 11.4 rpg versus the Bulls) and Allen's three point shooting (14-24, .583 versus the Bulls) will be very important, particularly with Middleton out of the lineup.

Other things to consider: The Bucks will miss the all-around play that Middleton provides. During game two of the Chicago series, Middleton injured the MCL in his left knee, and he has not played since he got hurt. However, the Bucks have enough talent and depth to survive until Middleton returns. 

This will be an interesting matchup of two well-coached, high-performing teams that flew under the radar for much of this season as media attention focused on other teams, including the Brooklyn Nets and the L.A. Lakers.

Holiday won the Twyman-Stokes Teammate of the Year award for the second time in three years. This honor may not have the same high profile as MVP or Rookie of the Year, but it emphasizes the enduring importance of character, and it was nice that Ernie Johnson mentioned the award during one of TNT's pregame shows. It is interesting that Holiday decided to not have the presentation ceremony right now so that the team stays focused on its playoff goals. Character matters, and character combined with talent is a championship combination. It is not a coincidence that the Bucks won their first championship since 1971 in the first season after Holiday joined the team.

As much as I respect the Bucks, I did not like it when they did not play their normal starting lineup in the final game of the regular season, content to lose that game, drop to the third seed, and face the Bulls in the first round even if that cost them home court advantage in the second round. Neither the Nets nor the Bulls offered much resistance in the first round, but now the Celtics enjoy home court advantage in this series. That could be an important factor if this series goes the distance, but I think that both of these teams can win on the road, and that the Bucks will take the pivotal game five in Boston before winning at home in game six to close out the series.

Labels: Boston Celtics, Giannis Antetokounmpo, Jaylen Brown, Jayson Tatum, Jrue Holiday, Khris Middleton, Marcus Smart, Milwaukee Bucks

posted by David Friedman @ 11:40 PM

2 comments

Chris Paul Pitches Perfect Game as Suns Eliminate Pelicans

Perfect games are associated with baseball, not basketball--and they are very rare in baseball--but Chris Paul authored a basketball version of a perfect game as his Phoenix Suns defeated the New Orleans Pelicans 115-109 to win their first round series, 4-2. Paul shot 14-14 from the field and 4-4 from the free throw line en route to scoring a game-high 33 points. Paul set an NBA single game playoff record for most field goals without a miss, a record previously shared by Nene Hilario and Larry McNeill, who each made 12 field goals without a miss in a playoff game. Wilt Chamberlain once held the single game playoff record for most field goals without a miss (nine), but his record has been surpassed several times. Chamberlain still holds the single game regular season record for most field goals without a miss (18), and the regular season record for most field goals without a miss overall (35, from February 17-February 28, 1967).

With the outcome up for grabs entering the fourth quarter as New Orleans led 85-82, Paul scored 10 points and had three assists to orchestrate the Suns' offense and make sure that the upstart Pelicans did not extend the series to a seventh game. Paul performed inconsistently during this series, alternating great games with subpar games, but his game six perfection may never be matched. Paul's mastery of the midrange game combined with his slick ball handling make him very difficult to cover one on one; he must be trapped, preferably by taller defenders, and the trap must force him to pick up his dribble and give up the ball before he slithers his way into the midrange area, let alone the paint. Permitting Paul to dance with the ball and choose when/where to shoot or pass is basketball suicide.

Deandre Ayton was nearly perfect, shooting 10-12 from the field. He scored 22 points while also grabbing seven rebounds and passing for four assists. Mikal Bridges chipped in 18 points on 7-12 field goal shooting. Devin Booker returned to action after a hamstring injury sidelined him for the second half of game two, plus all of games three through five. He struggled to perform at his usual All-NBA caliber level, finishing with just 13 points on 5-12 field goal shooting, but his three point shot with 1:42 remaining gave the Suns a lead (106-104) that they never relinquished. 

The Pelicans' Brandon Ingram was the best player on the court for significant portions of this series. He led New Orleans with 21 points and 11 assists, but he shot just 8-19 from the field. Ingram had nine points on 4-10 field goal shooting in the fourth quarter, but that was not enough to overcome Paul's perfect game.

Labels: Brandon Ingram, Chris Paul, Devin Booker, New Orleans Pelicans, Phoenix Suns

posted by David Friedman @ 11:28 PM

0 comments

The Ben Simmons Enigma

Who is Ben Simmons? 

We have been told that he is the 21st century Magic Johnson, and we have been told that he will never be great because he is scared to shoot. We have been told that he can be the key to winning a championship, and we have been told that no team can win a championship with him as a point guard.

We have been told many contradictory things about Ben Simmons.

Who is Ben Simmons?

This is my Ben Simmons scouting report: 

"Simmons is an elite defender, rebounder, and passer. He owns a 15.9 ppg career scoring average with a .560 career field goal percentage. His size, length, and athleticism enable him to play multiple positions and have a significant impact at both ends of the court.

Simmons is a notoriously poor and reluctant outside shooter/free throw shooter. He often plays with a low motor and low energy level."

The Magic Johnson comparison never made sense. The great Sparky Anderson said that he would not embarrass any catcher by comparing him to Johnny Bench. A similar thought process should apply to comparing any point guard to Magic Johnson. Lloyd Daniels was once called "Magic Johnson with a jump shot," a description that was later applied to Toni Kukoc. Lloyd Daniels squandered much of his talent, but even if he had maximized his talent he was no Magic Johnson; Toni Kukoc had an excellent FIBA career, he helped the Chicago Bulls win three NBA titles (1996-98), and he was inducted in the Naismith Memorial Basketball Hall of Fame in 2021, but he was no Magic Johnson. 

Magic Johnson's greatness is not captured by just his numbers, though his numbers are impressive: regular season averages of 19.5 ppg, 11.2 apg, and 7.2 rpg, and playoff averages of 19.5 ppg, 12.3 apg, and 7.7 rpg, plus five NBA championships (1980, 1982, 1985, 1987-88), three regular season MVPs (1987, 1989-90), and three Finals MVPs (1980, 1982, 1987). Magic Johnson had special leadership qualities, plus he had the necessary size, skills, and mindset to effectively play all five positions at both ends of the court. More than 25 years after he played his final NBA game, he still belongs on the short list in the greatest basketball player of all-time conversation. 

Magic was a high energy player whose positive attitude transformed his teammates and his teams; after Kareem Abdul-Jabbar hit the game-winning shot in Magic's first regular season game as a rookie, Magic hugged Abdul-Jabbar and celebrated with boundless joy, but Abdul-Jabbar chided Magic that there were 81 more games left in the season--and Magic promptly told Abdul-Jabbar that if he made a shot like that 81 more times then they would celebrate like that 81 more times. That set the tone for the Showtime era: play hard, play smart, but also enjoy the success.  

Simmons has never displayed the leadership qualities that Magic Johnson displayed in high school, college, the NBA, and the Olympics, nor has Simmons demonstrated the ability to lift his team to a championship level. Comparing him to Magic is disrespectful to Magic, and creates unrealistic expectations that Simmons cannot possibly meet.

On the other hand, Simmons' inability and/or reluctance to shoot did not prevent the 76ers from posting the best regular season record in the Eastern Conference in 2020-21. The 76ers promoted him as a Defensive Player of the Year candidate who was a critical part of their championship formula; no one in the organization expressed any questions or concerns about Simmons being the point guard for a championship contender prior to the second round series versus the Atlanta Hawks. 

Simmons did not have a great series, but he played a major role in limiting Trae Young to .392 field goal shooting, and he passed for 60 assists while committing just 16 turnovers (Joel Embiid had 27 assists and 33 turnovers during the series). The 76ers had a team-wide collapse, and the 76ers should not have made Simmons the scapegoat for their game seven home loss to Atlanta last year--but he could have responded to the adversity by embracing the challenge as opposed to fleeing town. Simmons' refusal to play for the 76ers resulted in him being traded to the Brooklyn Nets, and he has yet to play for the Nets, citing a back injury after claiming that he could not play for the 76ers due to mental health issues. As a result, Simmons lost a full season in his prime, and he also lost millions of dollars, though he is pursuing legal action to regain at least some of the money that the 76ers refused to pay after he refused to play.

Only Simmons and his health care providers know what his mental health status is. I am not going to speculate about his mental health, and instead I will just focus on his public behavior. He has been a low energy player with a low motor dating back at least to college. Maybe that is a symptom of mental illness; maybe that is a sign that he plays basketball because he is very talented, and not because he has a burning passion to play the game. I don't know the answer, so I won't speculate.

However, I cannot think of another profession in which an employee would be paid full salary for an entire year during which that employee did not work. Many jobs have provisions for employees to take paid time off, and for employees to receive time off for documented health issues, but past a certain point in time the employee must return to work to continue to be paid.

NBA players receive large salaries because their skills--and the public's desire to watch them display their skills--generate billions of dollars in revenue. A player who is not playing is not generating revenue, and such a player should not be compensated, just like any other employee who is not generating revenue is not compensated.

I don't know why Ben Simmons sat out 82 regular season games and four playoff games, but I know that he generated no revenue for the 76ers, the Nets, or the league while he sat out.

The NBA's Collective Bargaining Agreement with its provisions that player contracts are guaranteed must be revisited, and a system should be put in place that mirrors the real working world inhabited by the rest of us. Specifically, players should be paid by the game, just like regular folks are paid based on going to work each day. I am not suggesting that a player should have to play all 82 games to receive his full salary, but there should be a stipulation that after a player misses X number of games he will not be paid for any additional missed games. Will that result in players playing cautiously to avoid being hurt and missing games? No, because a player who plays tentatively will lose his playing time (and possibly his roster spot) to a more motivated player--and a player who is cut will not be paid unless/until he signs with another team (and plays in games). What about bench players who are available but do not play due to the coach's decision? Such players should be paid if they showed up at the arena, put on a uniform, and were ready to play--in other words, if you show up for work then you get paid. 

This solution cannot legally be applied retroactively to the Ben Simmons situation, but moving forward it would minimize "load management" and the new phenomenon of "I don't like my team so I won't play (or I won't play hard)." If you don't play (or you don't play hard and thus get waived by the team) then you don't get paid--period.

The messaging surrounding Simmons after he joined the Nets was very strange. It is not clear if he wanted to play but the Nets held him back for cautionary reasons, or if the Nets wanted him to gear up but he was unwilling/unable to do so. The breathless announcements that he might soon play, and the leaked footage of him doing limited practicing just led to rampant speculation about why he ended up not playing; the mixed/confusing messages resulted in many media members taking shots at Simmons. I don't know the truth, so I refuse to speculate. I just know that it was a bad look for the team and for him. 

That is all in the past now. Simmons and the Nets must focus on getting his back healed, on resolving any mental health issues that may exist, and making sure that when training camp opens he is a fully committed participant in all team activities.

If Simmons can stabilize his mental health and regain his physical health then his passing, rebounding, defense, and ability to score in the paint provide help in four areas where the Nets desperately need help. It is not difficult to picture the best version of him being the second or third best player on a championship team. He is not Magic Johnson by any stretch of the imagination, nor will he ever become Magic Johnson, but there is a path in front of him that could lead to a successful career both individually and for his team. Hopefully, he will find his way on to that path, because it would be a shame for him to squander his talents. Ultimately, though, the choice is his, because no one can force him to be great: he must decide to be great, and put in the necessary work to be great.

It is time for Ben Simmons to stop listening to other people define who he is; it is time for Ben Simmons to show us who he is.

Labels: Ben Simmons, Brooklyn Nets, Magic Johnson, Philadelphia 76ers

posted by David Friedman @ 12:09 AM

6 comments

From the Archives: Bob Cousy Interview, June 15, 2004

On June 15, 2004, I did a phone interview with Bob Cousy. At that time, I was working on a feature story about Cousy's teammate Sam Jones. During our conversation, Cousy provided insight and background information for not only the Jones article but many other articles as well.

Bob Cousy is a living legend and a basketball pioneer who played collegiately for Holy Cross more than 70 years ago before running the point for the Boston Celtics' first six championship teams (1957, 1959-63). Cousy led the NBA in assists for eight straight seasons (1953-60), a record that stood until John Stockton led the league in assists for nine straight seasons (1988-96).

It is unfortunate that Cousy's greatness is misunderstood by people who lack basic knowledge of basketball history. Cousy was not only inducted in the Naismith Memorial Basketball Hall of Fame in 1971, but he was selected to each of the NBA's special anniversary teams: 25th, 35th, 50th, 75th. The only other players chosen for all four teams are George Mikan, Bob Pettit, and Bill Russell. 

After his playing career, Cousy was a successful college coach at Boston College (114-38, five postseason appearances in six seasons, NIT runner-up in 1969), and he coached briefly in the NBA as well. When Cousy coached the Kansas City-Omaha Kings (now known as the Sacramento Kings), Nate Archibald became the first--and still only--player to lead the NBA in scoring and assists in the same season (1972-73).

Cousy received the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 2019.

It was a privilege to spend so much time talking hoops with Bob Cousy, and I think that now is the perfect time to share the knowledge that he shared with me. Some of the quotes from this interview have appeared in previous articles that I wrote, but the interview has never been published in full before. I have edited it slightly for clarity, and I have embedded links to relevant articles published subsequent to the interview:

Friedman: "The genesis of this article came from an interview that I did with Slick Leonard, the Pacers broadcaster. He mentioned to me that he thought that Sam Jones is possibly the most underrated NBA guard ever. I am interested in your perspective as a teammate of Sam Jones. What was it that made him such a special player?"

Cousy: "A whole lot of God-given physical skills, obviously, with a pretty acute intensity for the game. I'm always a little startled when I hear announcers talk about this jock or that jock on a professional level and how competitive they are and how much they want to win. Hell, it's kind of a basic requirement for all professionals in any field that you have to come to it with a certain passion, but I would agree that some have it to a larger degree than others. But the point is that Sam had a very competitive attitude. I'm not sure that's not more germane to those of us who came out of the ghettoes of those years, and of course if you were black and you came out of the ghettoes that made you even more passionate and urgent about being successful at what you were doing, which in his case was (playing) a sport with a lot of God-given skills. I don't know if I'd go so far as to say that Sam was in fact the most underrated guard who ever played, but I'd vote for the top three, David."

Friedman: "I noticed in researching this article that Sam Jones averaged 27 points per game in game sevens, and that Boston went 9-0 in those games. Obviously, that scoring average was even higher than his regular season average. From your perspective playing alongside him, what enabled him to be even more successful in a high pressure situation--a game seven situation--than he was in the regular season or in other playoff games?"

Cousy: "I was completely unaware of that, as is most of the world I think, and that is an interesting stat, because that is, obviously, I would say astounding really. All of us that played with the Celtics during those years benefited from having played--especially, I guess, myself in terms of being the playmaker--with six or seven other Hall of Famers. So the defenses, whether in game seven or otherwise, were not able to focus on any one individual. These days, when it was Pippen and Michael, or even L.A. now--I mean it's fine to talk about Malone and Payton, but they're almost ignoring them to focus on Shaq and Kobe--but even with two guys it's a hell of a lot easier than trying to carry the load by yourself. But when you're surrounded by six or seven other guys it's a little easier to do your thing. And I guess an explanation--as I said, I was unaware of that stat--where Sam is concerned, the fact that you just told me that Leonard said he was perhaps the most underrated guard. If in fact there is truth to this and if in fact the opponents did not give him his due respect, that also--given his talent level--could be the explanation of why he did so well in game sevens. In other words, if they were busy watching me or Heinsohn or Sharman or whoever in the seventh games, if they were more concerned about some of us than they were with Sam, then obviously they made a mistake. That stat proves it."

Friedman: "In that sense, it would almost be a little like--taking a current example with the Lakers of a couple years ago--if the opponent is keying on Shaq or Kobe then it leaves an opening for Robert Horry. Obviously, Horry is not as good of a player as Sam Jones was, but it leaves an opening for someone else to make shots if the other team is keying on someone else, and that could be a part of it."

Cousy: "I wouldn't use that analogy myself, at least where Horry is concerned, but as a general statement there might be some truth to that. If in preparation for game sevens--but, I'll tell you, I don't know how they could be overlooking Sam. Sam was as pure of a shooter--with the people I played with, he and Sharman were the purest shooters who came through that period. You can talk about Jerry West and Oscar Robertson, but Sam, in my judgment, would outshoot any of those guys. I've said for years that it was a joy playing with people like Sharman and Sam because both of them moved extremely well without the ball, and I don't think that I ever gave it to them when they didn't make the damn shot. Now that's an exaggeration, obviously, but in my mind I felt that way. 

When I was on the floor with either one they were always my first option because as a point guard you are playing percentages all the time out there. Both of them moved very well without the ball. Sharman was a little more relentless, he just kept making circles and he was a bitch to guard. In Sam's case, he was about as quick as any guard that has ever played the game. I read where Sam has said that all we had to do was find the open shot and the ball would be there waiting for us. In Sam's case, as I said, I knew when he made his move all I had to do was put the ball where he was supposed to be and the timing was such that he would get there just in time to catch it and throw the damn thing up and the defender would always be a step behind because of Sam's quickness. He was an extraordinary athlete and from the standpoint of basketball and the point guard's version of it he was a joy to play with because you knew that he could always get free."

Friedman: One of the things that is interesting about the Celtics of your era--and this has been noted by other people before--is that you basically trained your replacement. In a lot of cases you would have a Hall of Fame caliber player playing behind you, like Ramsey preparing Havlicek to be the sixth man or, in your case, as a guard, while you and Sharman were starting you had K.C. Jones and Sam Jones coming off of the bench."

Cousy: "Four Hall of Famers, not a bad lineup."

Friedman: "Right, yeah. I have a two part question: what was your role mentoring Sam Jones when you were a veteran and he came in, and then also, on the flip side of that, how did it help your career when you look at the bench and see a young guy with all this talent to realize that you have to maintain a high level of play to keep your job?'

Cousy: "I wasn't dealing with Sam in terms of how to become the point guard. K.C. became the point guard."

Friedman: "I understand that you played different positions, but just from the standpoint of being a veteran--or would you say your mentoring was more directed toward K.C.?"

Cousy: "Yeah. KC was going to replace me and become the playmaker. It was important that he and Sam be on the same page just as Sharman and I were. Most of this is instinctive, David, especially in basketball. In other sports--I don't know about hockey, but in football, for instance, a lot of people carry out assignments on each play and everything is structured and disciplined. Basketball is more of a free-flowing game of instinct and reaction to an action. It's not so much how long you play with someone--depending on how alert and acute his mental process is, you just develop little hand signals, head signals, eye signals as to what to do in the middle of the action.

In Sam's case, he was even easier to feed in an open court situation than Sharman because of his speed and quickness. Normally people associate basketball players with height, but in my judgment speed and quickness is what separates the men from the boys. In an open court situation, given Sam's ability to back door a player or change his direction or make a quick move, if the defender--if I were out there with him and we had some court to work with--made the slightest mistake, if he didn't respect Sam's quickness every minute, if he tried to overplay and keep the ball from getting to Sam, that in itself--the minute he knew he was being overplayed, the minute I saw it I knew that Sam was going to go backdoor. It was just a matter of waiting. This is not something you learn at that level. You learn this in the schoolyards of the world that we all came through. In that sense, there wasn't any kind of tutoring. 

Arnold (Cousy is one of the few people who always called Red Auerbach by his actual first name, Arnold) made his big speech my first year--'I don't give a shit how Cousy throws the ball as long as it gets to the intended receiver'--because that first year they weren't quite catching all my passes. Well, that was a momentary response. I mean, this is not rocket science. By the time guys get to this level they have a lot of skills, some guys have more than others. In terms of learning to play with myself or any so-called quarterback, you are talking about a matter of weeks, you're not talking about two seasons. With a player like Sam, hell, you can almost do it from day one. So, it wasn't a question of sitting down--self interest motivates what most of us do in sports or otherwise. Sam knew that in order to get the ball from me he had to find that open spot and he knew that I would get the ball to him. I knew that Sam had the quickness to do that. So we're kind of waiting on each other to react to every situation. That's why, in my judgment, in basketball--unlike in other sports--you can't predetermine. Every time down the floor is a different situation. You can't predetermine. Your action is a reaction to what the defender is doing. Both players, after you've played with a guy for--never mind six years--six days you acclimate yourself pretty quickly. Now it's a question of utilizing your particular skills.

Where Sam and I were concerned, it was a matter of him having confidence in my passing skills and my vision to know once he made that move and that cut and got away from his defender even momentarily, as he said, the ball would be there ready to shoot. He didn't have to put it on the floor. Offense in basketball, the criteria in my judgment is to be effective with the least amount of wasted motion. Sam and I could do both. I didn't want to waste a single pass. Sam had the ability to get to that open spot and know that the ball would be there. It was kind of acclimating ourselves to each other and that did not take a long period of time."

Friedman: "What you're saying reminds me of something that Charles Barkley says sometimes on the TNT broadcasts. He says that, in a sense, basketball is an easy game--that great players make it easy, but that bad players make it difficult. What you are saying is that with the Celtics you had a lot of cerebral players, players who picked up the game quickly, and had God-given ability, and the more great players you had out there the easier the game was."

Cousy: "Plus we played in a system that lent itself to that, David. We relied primarily on transition rather than set plays. There was always constant movement. We were always trying to impose the maximum pressure on the opponent whether it was on defense or offense. We tried to ram it down their throats all the time. We always tried to have them backpedaling and trying to decide what we were going to do. When you have that kind of speed and quickness, God, you can pretty much call your own offense in that kind of situation."

Friedman: "I would say, isn't that something that is really missing from today's game?"

Cousy: "Completely."

Friedman: "What stunned me--I covered a couple of the Pistons-Pacers playoff games--you would see so many times that there would be a three-on-two or the potential of a three-on-two break and the point guard dribbles to the foul line and then circles back out."

Cousy: "There are 29 teams in the league, David, and maybe three or four of them are running in transition (the Charlotte Bobcats--later renamed as the Charlotte Hornets--became the NBA's 30th team in the 2004-05 season, after this interview took place). We could talk about this all day. I think it's a basic insecurity, I think that it's all the pressures on the coaches today, I think partially that it's ego--they want to stand up and hold up numbers. 'Look at that, he's orchestrating everything.' It's not that kind of game. Basketball, unlike the other sports, is a game of free flow."

Friedman: "At least, it should be."

Cousy: "Yeah. That's the way I learned it and I'll go to my grave believing that. I had this discussion yesterday with a successful college coach in our area who tries to coach the same way. The more you structure it, especially on a professional level--you need a basic structure and discipline, I'm not saying go out there and go schoolyard, where the critics will say, 'Oh shit, they're throwing the ball all over the lot.' You need a basic structure, but once that is put in place the rest of it has to be--the option of a play in basketball works better 90% of the time than the play itself. The more you structure yourself--that's why all of these coaches today spend so much money on film and preparation. All of them know what the other teams are going to do. It still comes down to the individual moves of the players, and when you over-structure on a professional level, in my judgment, you neutralize (your own) superior talent. Maybe on a college level, high school level, as you go down the line, sure you need more structure and discipline because you are not dealing with that level of skilled players, so they need more coaching and more structure. But on this level, to structure to the point that 24 or 25 of the 29 coaches do is missing a golden opportunity, not exploiting your skilled players to the degree that you should be, and as a result I think for the most part you get underachievement instead of overachievement. You've got to let the players on this level have confidence in their skills and their abilities."

Friedman: "I definitely agree with that. Getting back to Sam Jones, for a lot of my readers who would not have had the opportunity to see Sam Jones play, what current or recent guard reminds you most of him either in terms of shooting ability or performance in the clutch? What recent guard would be reminiscent of Sam in some way?"

Cousy: "David, I've been asked that about myself over the years. I don't know. If you are talking about Hall of Famers or great athletes in any sport, I think that we all develop our own signature. I momentarily identified with Ernie D (Ernie DiGregorio), in terms of a small portion of his game. We used to like to do a few things the same way. Other than that, I was never able to say. Everyone says John Stockton--"

Friedman: "Of course."

Cousy: "But we didn't play the same. Our styles were completely different, even though we utilized some of the same weapons. 

Sam's signature was that backboard shot, but Sam could hurt you in every way imaginable. The only other one you would say that about would be Michael Jordan, but I wouldn't compare them, not so much because of skills, but Sam and Michael didn't play the same even though they utilized some of the same--they covered the board the same way. The point is that Sam was an absolute scoring machine. You might say Jerry West, he liked to use the backboard shot from time to time, but they weren't the same. I don't know. When I think of various centers who played the game--no one played like Kareem, certainly no one played like Russell, no one to this point plays like Shaq. No one springs to mind when you ask who reminds me of Sam. He was a great one and I haven't seen anyone who was able to score with the kind of proficiency that Sam did."

Friedman: "I asked the same question of Tommy Heinsohn when I interviewed him a couple days ago for this article and the name he threw out there--in terms of a guy who, like Sam, has the long distance game, the mid-range game, and the ability to drive, and that very few guards have a complete game like that--was Rip Hamilton from Detroit. Do you see any similarity there in terms of having all of the shots?"

Cousy: "As usual, I disagree with everything that Tommy says, including that (Cousy laughs). Number one, I don't think that Hamilton is going to be a Hall of Famer. He may--he has already played better in this series (the 2004 NBA Finals) than I thought he was capable of playing, and I hope that he continues tonight (game five) but I don't see any similarity other than the fact that they are both good shooters. Especially at this stage of the game. God, I think that is vastly underrating Sam."

Friedman: "I think that he meant it more from the standpoint of style, not necessarily skill. I didn't understand him to mean that Rip Hamilton is as good as Sam Jones--he made it pretty clear that he did not think that--but from the standpoint of style, because my question was not just about skill, but about style, the idea of someone who can shoot a variety of shots, not just a three point shooter or a driver."

Cousy: "I guess Tommy is more of a visionary than I am. I don't see anything of Sam's in Hamilton's game."

Friedman: "Well, I'll make sure to put it in there that you two completely disagreed on that (Cousy laughs)--I'll give you both equal time on that. I thought that it was an interesting comparison, but I see your point as well. 

Back to what you said about Stockton for a minute, I guess obviously people make that comparison because your physical size is similar and you both accumulated high assist totals, but I guess a big difference people overlook is that in your day you were a big time scorer. You were in the top 10 or 15 in scoring for several years, whereas Stockton was not that type of scorer. Wouldn't that be another difference between the two of you?"

Cousy: "I made the reference earlier that in my judgment a good point guard is primarily concerned with accomplishing whatever he has to accomplish with the least amount of wasted motion. I never tried to throw an unnecessary pass or a meaningless pass if I could avoid it. This is what I saw in Stockton's game. I think that Stockton did the same thing and I had great respect for that, but we did it in different ways, and other than that our games were not similar. Stockton could score when he had to score--I didn't have to because I was surrounded by a bunch of scorers, so I knew what my role was, but when it came time to shoot--the effectiveness of a good point guard is obviously affected by how he can generate offense when necessary to gain the respect of the opponent. If the defender feels you are not a legitimate offensive threat then he is going to play you accordingly and make it much more difficult for you to be a playmaker, so one complements the other. The minute that a guard disrespects your shooting it's going to be tougher to do your passing game, so you've got to be enough of an offensive threat to keep the defense honest--which both Stockton and I were--and keep them playing and reacting to the faking that you are doing so that you can make your plays."

Friedman: "One last question I wanted to ask you about Sam Jones. I appreciate the time you have taken and the thoughtful answers you have given. This question is similar to one that was asked to Bill Russell. After he had retired, he was asked about playing against Kareem, and he responded, 'Young man, you have the question backwards.' So in asking this question I don't mean it as disrespect or that I am presuming the answer. I'm interested in your analysis of this. Picture Sam Jones in his prime playing against Kobe Bryant or Tracy McGrady in their primes. What would these matchups be like?"

Cousy: "They'd have a bitch of a time guarding each other, if that's the question. I'm asked all the time, 'Could you play in today's game?' and my reaction is the same as Russell's--a lot of guys playing today couldn't have played in our day, simply because there were less teams and the talent was more concentrated. If you are talking about Hall of Fame athletes in any sport, it transcends the time period. Baseball players that I have spoken to--Ted Williams, Hank Aaron, Joe DiMaggio--Joe and Ted went to their deathbeds swearing that yesteryear's players were better than today's players. I don't know enough about it to make that judgment. I know that in all the other sports, like track and field, the records have fallen. Basketball, I look at the All-Star Game now and say, 'God, that is not the game that we played many years ago.' When I jumped as high as I could I got the bottom of the net and when Michael jumps as high as he can he jumps over the damn backboard. Yes, they've gotten bigger, better, stronger in basketball. Whether they execute the skills as well as we did, I would argue that point--the passing, dribbling, how to play the game skills, I think we could hold our own. When you are talking about Hall of Famers, Sam could easily play in today's era and give Kobe and Tracy and whoever all they could handle. When you are talking about McGrady, Kobe, Sam Jones--I mean, nobody could stop these guys. They have so many offensive weapons, unless you commit two or even three people to them you are not going to slow them down a lot. Sometimes they slow themselves down, like Kobe in this series (2004 NBA Finals), I don't know whether the business in Colorado has finally gotten to him or what, but he is not only ineffective in terms of being Kobe Bryant but he is losing his cool as well and he's not passing the ball the way he should. A lot of things go into the equation. Sam transcends the ages as well."

Friedman: "Right. I believe that. The point that I was getting at--as I indicated when I prefaced the question--I didn't mean that he couldn't (play well today). From an analytical standpoint--Sam went about 6-4 right?"

Cousy: "Yes."

Friedman: "Kobe and McGrady are 6-7 or 6-8. I was wondering, in one's mind's eye, picturing the matchup--Sam would bring the superior shooting, they would bring the superior size, what would the matchup actually look like or how would it go? I guess you would say that Sam would use his speed and quickness to get his shot off--"

Cousy: "Yeah, but these guys aren't slow either, David. As I said earlier, in my mind that's what separates the men from the boys. Both Tracy and Kobe, for their size, have speed in abundance as well, so what Sam would be giving up in height and maybe a little in strength he would make up by maybe being a little quicker and faster than these guys, but he wouldn't be blowing by anybody. All of us would be competitive, whether Sam is as good as Kobe, let someone else decide that. In our day at that point in time, God, there was no one who could create offensively as effectively as Sam could."

Friedman: "I've always thought--I wonder if you agree with this, I think that it is along the lines of what you are saying--that in looking at the players over the years that the top players from any era could compete with the top players from any other era, but what about the players who were 8-9-10 on the rosters in the 1950s or 1960s, do you think that they could compete?"

Cousy: "Well, if you are talking 8-9 as opposed to 11-12, the chances are that they would make the team simply because back then we only had eight teams or 10 teams but now there are 29 teams and there will be 30 next year. There are 29 teams but you only have about four centers in the league, David. How many point guards do you have? We have less than four. There are a lot of people who play that position, but I've been asked recently to name the top point guards. I get to Jason Kidd and Tony Parker and then I have to stop and think. You know what I'm saying? The chances are that (players) eight and nine could play today simply because there are so many more teams. Eleven and twelve I doubt."

Friedman: "The speed and quickness might become too big of a factor, right?"

Cousy: "Simply because of numbers. The situation in basketball today, it's sad when you see what the Celtics are going to have to go through--when you get to the bottom of the heap or close to the bottom, it can take you 20 years to rebuild because the demand is so much greater than the supply. I have no explanation for that. Basketball is the number two sport in the world in terms of participation. We have millions of kids playing it. I don't know why we don't produce more quality point guards and big people to play on the NBA level, but most teams in the NBA--even teams that have a center-type player--are utilizing the two power forward format. Look at Dallas, they have a 7-7 guy sitting on the bench for the most part--"

Friedman: "Shawn Bradley."

Cousy: "Yeah, Shawn Bradley. The point is, I have no explanation why (we aren't developing more point guards and centers) with all these kids (in America)--that's why we're looking for talent in China, Yugoslavia, Asia, and all these places. We're (America) just not producing enough talent to stock 29 teams--you can put bodies out there, but what you have--maybe that's the game plan for the NBA, in order to reach parity let's go to complete mediocrity. But the problem with that, as we've seen in the last eight or 10 years, is that creates two or three excellent teams, a half dozen good teams, and then the rest is just some degree of mediocrity. When you are shelling out 70, 80, 100 bucks--1000 bucks in some places--for a ticket to see L.A. play Milwaukee or Memphis--well, Memphis was fairly competitive this year--but that's not going to draw a lot of fans when you have that kind of differential between the teams, and that's what we've had in the NBA for quite a while now."

Friedman: "The lack of point guards is somewhat of a mystery, but I think that at least part of what happened with the lack of centers is that players who in the past would have been told, 'You're a center, get on the block,' are now called power forwards. Like Garnett or Duncan, in the past those guys would have been centers and the coach would have said, 'Look, you're a center, go on the block and play defense.' Now, they're called power forwards and they play facing the basket and they do all these other things."

Cousy: "That's a good point. The Hall of Fame just created this Bob Cousy point guard award. Jameer Nelson won it this year, the first year."

Friedman: "Right."

Cousy: "We created it because as players are coming through the schoolyards--even the point guards--they are getting bigger and stronger and they don't have to rely as much upon finesse. So they are not thinking about setting up (other players) as much as they are thinking about dunking. So the emphasis in the schoolyards as these guys are coming through maybe is having something to do with their mindset. They are not simply focusing on being point guards. There was some kind of disconnect, I thought, in the 1970s, and then Magic and Bird came along and reinvigorated the schoolyard kids in terms of the passing game because both of them did it so effectively. I think we are at a point where we need that kind of boost or impetus right now."

Friedman: "That brings up a natural question. What do you think of LeBron James? Can he have that kind of impact?"

Cousy: "Oh yes. I saw him only once, but this kid is the real McCoy. He can be whatever he wants to be. Maravich could have been the best point guard that ever played, but he was always with a team that needed him to score 35 points to be competitive, so despite his massive playmaking skills and what he could do with the ball and his vision he is remembered more as a scoring guard than as a creative guard--but that was because of his circumstances. LeBron is with a middle of the road team right now, but he could go either way--he could become a great scoring guard but in my judgment he has the skills to be a great point guard as well."

Friedman: "He seems to have tremendous court vision."

Cousy: "Absolutely. Absolutely. I saw him once, his first game in Boston earlier this year. We did the game (as local broadcasters). He didn't have a particularly effective game scoring--I think he scored 14, or whatever, but after the first quarter I was saying, 'This kid is the real McCoy.' I think he's going to be a great one in the Magic Johnson mold."

Friedman: "He sees the open man even when that man might not even realize that he is open and he delivers the ball."

Cousy: "Absolutely. He's going to be a great one."

Friedman: "Thank you very much for your time. I appreciate it. It was a great honor to speak with you."

Cousy: "Have a good day."

Friedman: "Thanks, you too."

Labels: Bill Russell, Bob Cousy, Boston Celtics, K.C. Jones, Kobe Bryant, LeBron James, Pete Maravich, Red Auerbach, Rip Hamilton, Sam Jones, Tommy Heinsohn

posted by David Friedman @ 10:04 PM

2 comments

James Harden's "Concert Tour" Heads to Toronto for Game Six

No NBA team has ever blown a 3-0 lead, but if any team is built to make such history that team is the Philadelphia 76ers, whose 103-88 loss to Toronto at home on Monday night turned what had only recently been a 3-0 lead into a 3-2 lead as the series shifts to Toronto for game six. 

Philadelphia Coach Doc Rivers led the Boston Celtics to the 2008 championship and he has accomplished a lot during his career, but he is also the only coach in pro basketball history whose teams have squandered three 3-1 leads. 

Joel Embiid's brief and undistinguished playoff career has featured him being out of shape and/or injured, and he has never advanced past the second round. He has not been the same in this series since he tore a ligament in his right thumb.

James Harden is perhaps the worst playoff choker ever and--as Jalen Rose so aptly put it--he has been on a "concert tour" since joining the 76ers: tour dates so far in the Toronto series include 3/9, 4/11, 5/17, 6/17, 7/13. One more March, April, May, or June concert tour date--those are Harden's game by game field goal percentages (placed in "calendar" order, not game to game order), in case you did not get Rose's joke--will go a long way to pushing this series to a seventh game, which could be the grand finale for Harden and the 76ers. 

The Raptors enjoy matchup advantages versus the 76ers; that--plus the playoff history noted above--is why I picked the Raptors to win the series. The 76ers are at full strength other than Embiid, while the Raptors played game five without All-Star guard Fred VanVleet, and at times they have also been without the services of 2022 Rookie of the Year Scottie Barnes and potent scorer/scrappy defender Gary Trent Jr., but in the past two games the Raptors have begun exploiting their matchup advantages (they actually began doing so in game three, but Embiid bailed out the 76ers with a game-winning three pointer at the end of overtime). 

The percentages may still suggest that Toronto will win game six at home before the 76ers right the ship to win the seventh game in Philadelphia--but if this series goes back to Philadelphia tied 3-3 there will be much more pressure on the 76ers than on the Raptors, because the 76ers are supposedly a title contender while no one outside of the Raptors' locker room thinks that the Raptors are a title contender this season. One of my biggest wishes since Harden sulked his way out of Brooklyn was for him to play in a seventh game as a 76er, so that we can all see once again what Daryl Morey's greatest scorer of all-time does when everything is on the line.

Labels: Jalen Rose, James Harden, Philadelphia 76ers, Toronto Raptors

posted by David Friedman @ 2:00 AM

0 comments

Celtics Advance to Second Round After Sweeping Nets

I am often skeptical of the "team no one wants to face" cliche. This year's "team no one wants to face"--the team that the reigning NBA champion Milwaukee Bucks apparently did not want to face in the first round--just got swept. Perhaps everyone should have wanted to face the Brooklyn Nets and their mismatched roster that has shooters who lack size and players who have size but lack shooting touch. The notion that Kevin Durant and Kyrie Irving could somehow lead this crew past a balanced, deep, and talented Boston team was as wrong as it was short-lived. The Celtics were perhaps the best team in the league over the last 40 games or so, and on Monday night they ended the Nets' season with a 116-112 game four victory.

Jayson Tatum led the Celtics with 29 points before fouling out with 2:49 remaining in the fourth quarter and the Celtics ahead by six, 109-103. The Celtics spent the rest of the game using most of the shot clock on each possession as opposed to running their offense, but they found just enough points to keep the Nets at bay. Jaylen Brown (22 points), Marcus Smart (20 points, 11 assists), Grant Williams (14 points), and Al Horford (13 points) rounded out a balanced attack comprised of players who can score in multiple ways and who can defend multiple positions. Durant scored a game-high 39 points in 47 minutes, but he shot just 13-31 from the field as the Celtics made him work hard for every shot attempt. Irving, J.J. Redick's favorite ball handling wizard, could not conjure up enough points (20 on 6-13 field goal shooting) or assists (five) to extend Brooklyn's season for even one more game.

After I wrote my recap of Boston's thrilling 115-114 game one win over Brooklyn, a reader questioned my rationale for picking Boston to win the series, and I responded, "The Celtics are potent both offensively and defensively, so the Nets are either going to have to hold them underneath 110-115 points or else find a way to score more than 110-115 points in four games." My prediction that the 110-115 point range would be a key benchmark for this series proved to be prophetic: the Celtics scored 115, 114, 109, and 116 points in the four games, while the Nets scored 114, 107, 103, and 112. The average score in the series was 113.5-109.

Much has been said and written about Ben Simmons' absence from this series--a subject that I will discuss in a separate article--but the Nets' problems run much deeper than his unavailability. The Nets made the playoffs in 2019 with a young roster led by Coach Kenny Atkinson, but instead of developing that team organically the Nets acquired Kevin Durant--who missed all of the 2020 season due to injury--and Durant's buddy Kyrie Irving, who played in just 20 regular season games before the Nets were swept in the first round by the Toronto Raptors. 

Before even finding out what a full season with Durant and Irving might look like, the Nets--acting like putting together a championship is as simple and quick as making "Minute Rice"--acquired James Harden from Houston to assemble a "Big Three." In the Harden deal, the Nets traded away three first round draft picks and four first round draft pick swaps, plus Jarrett Allen, who made the All-Star team this year with the Cleveland Cavaliers and who could have provided the inside presence that the Nets so desperately need. During Harden's brief Brooklyn career, the Nets went 1-1 in playoff series and 4-4 in playoff games. Atkinson resigned before the end of the 2020 season. Jacque Vaughn finished the season as the interim coach, and then the Nets hired Steve Nash, who had a connection with Durant dating back to Nash's time working for Golden State while Durant led the Warriors to two titles.

Irving missed the first part of the season due to his refusal to receive the COVID-19 vaccine, and he missed most of Brooklyn's home games because he did not comply with New York City's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. Harden became disenchanted in Brooklyn this season, and quit on the Nets just like he previously quit on the Rockets, so the Nets shipped him to Philadelphia for Ben Simmons, Seth Curry, and Andre Drummond. Getting rid of Harden is addition by subtraction--particularly since it also enabled the Nets to improve their depth with Curry and Drummond--but Simmons not appearing in a single game for the Nets was the final blow for the Nets. The "Minute Rice" approach of trying to just throw talent together while treating the regular season like it does not matter backfired, and led directly to the humiliating sweep at the hands of a Boston team built the right way.

Durant had an excellent season even as the Nets struggled to make the playoffs, but he had a subpar series by his lofty standards. However, it is silly to suggest that the Nets' disappointing season and this first round sweep in any way diminish what Durant has already accomplished, which includes winning two NBA titles, two Finals MVPs, one regular season MVP, and four scoring titles. Yet, it is worth mentioning that Durant fled Oklahoma City to join the Golden State team that had just beaten his Thunder in a seven game playoff series, and then he fled Golden State presumably to prove that he did not need the Warriors' preexisting championship culture to lead a team to a title. It is not clear what situation, if any, would fill whatever void is missing for Durant.

Faulty and frantic roster building doomed the Nets, but Steve Nash's coaching did not provide any advantages, to put it mildly. The Nets never formed a defensive identity, and their offensive identity consisted of Durant or Irving dribbling until deciding to shoot or pass. There was little off ball movement, little coherent structure, and not many tactics that either lightened the burden on the stars or helped the role players to be more effective. This should not be surprising considering Nash's history, because his playoff failures as a player mirror the Nets' playoff failure this season in terms of lack of offensive structure combined with lack of effective defense.

Before Steve Nash was an NBA head coach, he was the point guard for Phoenix Suns teams that scored a ton of points without much offensive structure, and without paying particular attention to defense. Suns fans may never quit whining that the NBA stole a championship from their team in 2007 by suspending Amare Stoudemire and Boris Diaw for game five of the San Antonio-Phoenix series, but the NBA's rule prohibiting players from leaving the bench during an on court altercation is a good rule and the NBA applied it correctly in that situation. During a recent interview on Sirius XM NBA Radio, former Sun Shawn Marion admitted that the 2007 Phoenix Suns lost because they ran a simple offense that was easy to defend against, and not because of the game five suspensions. Marion said that he knew during that season that the Suns were not going to win the championship, though he added that he thought that some of the other Suns' teams from that era had a better chance to win the championship than the 2007 squad. It is not clear which Suns team Marion thought could/should have won a title; the 2005 Suns lost 4-1 to the Spurs in the Western Conference Finals, and the 2006 Suns lost 4-2 to the Mavericks in the Western Conference Finals. All of those Suns teams ran predictable offenses that relied on talent more than tactics, an approach that worked better against inferior teams during the regular season than against elite teams during the playoffs.

After the Suns won game four versus the Spurs in 2007, I wrote, "The reality is that injuries, foul trouble and suspensions are all part of the game. The 1972-73 Boston Celtics went 68-14 and then lost in the Conference Finals when John Havlicek suffered a shoulder injury; they went on to win two of the next three championships. In other words, the cream rises to the top. The Spurs and Suns have each been contending teams for several years already. The Spurs have won three championships and the Suns have not won any." That year, I not only correctly picked the Spurs to beat the Suns in six games, but before the playoffs I correctly predicted that the Spurs would beat the Cavaliers in the NBA Finals.

Prior to game five of the 2007 Spurs-Suns series, I wrote, "Game Five is a golden opportunity for Nash to outduel Tim Duncan, who in addition to also being a two-time MVP is a three-time Finals MVP. If Nash really is the best player in the game then this would be a good time to show it." The Spurs won 88-85. Tim Duncan scored 21 points on 7-14 field goal shooting while grabbing a team-high 12 rebounds and tallying a game-high five blocked shots. Nash had 19 points and 12 assists but he shot just 6-19 from the field.  

The point of that trip down memory lane is that Nash's Suns lost because their offense was too predictable, and their defense was non-existent in critical moments. The same can be said of Nash's Nets. The unanswered question is what will the Nets do to create a different outcome next season?

Labels: Boston Celtics, Brooklyn Nets, Jaylen Brown, Jayson Tatum, Kevin Durant, Kyrie Irving, Marcus Smart, Steve Nash

posted by David Friedman @ 1:21 AM

2 comments

Could Number One Seeded Phoenix Be Headed for an Early Sunset?

The Phoenix Suns raced to the NBA's best record this season (64-18), so a first round matchup with the only sub-.500 team in the 2022 playoffs did not look challenging on paper--but the feisty 36-46 New Orleans Pelicans dominated the Suns 118-103 in game four to tie the series at 2-2. The Suns played very well in their 110-99 game one win, but they have not looked the same since Devin Booker suffered a hamstring injury in the second half of game two after scoring 31 points in the first half of game two. Booker has not returned to action since leaving game two, and he is expected to be out for at least two more weeks. The Pelicans won game two, and the Suns barely survived game three, escaping with a 114-111 win after Chris Paul scored 19 fourth quarter points to save the day. 

Paul's late heroics in game three revived the talk about Paul being the NBA's best leader and best clutch player, but anyone who has followed his career with an objective and attentive eye understands that those narratives distort the truth. The concept of leadership is meaningless unless it is connected to accomplishing a goal. The primary goal for an NBA team is--or should be--winning a championship. Therefore, by definition, the best leaders in the NBA are the players and coaches who have helped their teams accomplish that goal. Paul entered the NBA in 2005, and since that time he has played for many talent-laden teams but he has reached the NBA Finals just once. His teams missed the playoffs three times, and they lost in the first round on six other occasions; that adds up to Paul not making it past the first round for nearly a decade during a 17 season career--and one of the times that Paul made it to the second round his L.A. Clippers blew a 3-1 lead versus the Houston Rockets led by James Harden, one of the most notorious playoff chokers in recent memory. 

The consistent pattern throughout Paul's career is that as the playoffs progress he wears down and/or gets injured, which is not surprising considering that he is barely 6 feet tall. Size matters in the NBA, and it is a testament to Isiah Thomas' greatness that he led Detroit to back to back titles as a 6-1 point guard who did not play alongside a single member of the NBA's 50th Anniversary Team. Paul is not in Thomas' class as a leader, to put it mildly. 

It is worth remembering that the Suns advanced to the NBA Finals last season only after surviving Paul's awful first round performance versus the L.A. Lakers (9.2 ppg, 7.7 apg, 3.5 rpg, shooting splits of .386/.200/.750). This year in the first round thus far, Paul has played very well in the Suns' two wins, but very poorly in the Suns' two losses, including scoring four points on 2-8 field goal shooting in game four. 

The people who praise Paul for what he did in games one and three are hypocrites if they just ignore Paul's failures in games two and four. Michael Jordan and Kobe Bryant did not alternate between being great and being awful in the playoffs--and, because of their superior size and superior skill set, Jordan and Bryant could impact the game in many other ways even when they did not shoot well.

Booker is the Suns' best player; if Paul were out of action but Booker were playing, the Suns would not be tied 2-2 against the worst team in the 2022 playoff field. Booker's greatness enabled the Suns to survive Paul's first round struggles last season, but this time Booker will not be around to bail out Paul. Statistically and historically speaking, the most likely outcome is still that the Suns will prevail because they have home court advantage and they have the superior overall team, but what we have seen thus far reaffirms the assessment that I made quite some time ago: Chris Paul is a great player, but he is not at the level that some media members keep trying to place him.

Labels: Chris Paul, Devin Booker, New Orleans Pelicans, Phoenix Suns

posted by David Friedman @ 2:55 AM

7 comments