Harden’s Hubris, Lillard’s Situational Loyalty, and ESPN Abandons Even the Pretense of Providing Substantive Commentary
NBA free agency 2023 has just begun, but there has already been a flurry of activity. Three stories in particular caught my eye so far, and none of the stories relates to a player who has changed teams (at least up to this point): James Harden once again demanded to be traded after doing little to improve his current team, Damian Lillard asked to be traded after spending his whole career bragging about how loyal he is to Portland, and ESPN got rid of several credible commentators while retaining the services of "Screamin' A" Smith and other no-nothing blowhards.
Harden has never pretended to be loyal, nor has he ever shown self-awareness about his basketball abilities. Harden lusted after the money and accolades of a number one option without ever having the ideal mentality or game to be a number one option on a legit championship contender; instead of staying with the Oklahoma City Thunder to be the third option in an organically constructed "Big Three" with Kevin Durant and Russell Westbrook, Harden fled to Houston seeking money and individual glory. Harden's sorry elimination game resume--to which Harden added yet another awful stat line in 2023 (nine points, five turnovers, 3-11 field goal shooting in a game seven loss to Boston)--speaks for itself.
As Harden's career winds down, he is shamelessly jumping from team to team trying in vain to be what he should have been all along--the third option on a championship contender; he quit on the Rockets to force his way to Brooklyn (and reunite with Durant, who won two rings without Harden), then he whined his way out of Brooklyn to reunite with his biggest fan (Daryl Morey, who called Harden a better offensive player than Michael Jordan) in Philadelphia, and now Harden has exercised his $35.6 million player option for 2023-24 before making it clear that he prefers to hitch his wagon to Kawhi Leonard and Paul George of the L.A. Clippers, presumably believing that this duo has enough talent to overcome his perpetual playoff choking and deliver him a championship ring.
It will be fascinating to see how Morey handles this situation. Morey has devoted his career to slavishly admiring Harden, but Morey is known as a tough negotiator who is comfortable being uncomfortable: will Morey stand firm to get the best possible return for the 76ers (which is, after all, the job Morey is being paid to do), or will he cave in and lovingly send Harden to Harden's preferred destination regardless of what the Clippers offer in return? It will also be interesting to see when/if the 76ers' ownership group becomes fed up with being led by the nose by a series of "stat gurus" (first Sam Hinkie, now Daryl Morey) whose devotion to "advanced basketball statistics" has yet to lift the 76ers past the second round of the playoffs.
While Harden is a basketball mercenary/pirate seeking personal glory with little regard to the carnage he leaves behind with each of his former teams, Lillard's brand is built in no small part on his character and loyalty. Just a few months ago, I wrote about Lillard's Loyalty; my analysis of his skills was on point, but my praise for his loyalty was premature. This is not about Lillard's right to seek employment elsewhere, because I am not questioning that; my point is that no one forced Lillard to write an article titled "Loyalty Over Everything" in which he almost broke his arm patting himself on the back for his character, toughness, and loyalty:
I'm saying, you think you know how deep this goes, but you have no idea. When I say that I will never, ever switch up on the city of Portland, I mean what I say. When I say that I will never, ever switch up on this organization, I mean what I say.
They might switch up on me. That's business. That's basketball. But I will never switch up on the city. I don't want it easy. I'm drawn to the struggle. When I came here, we hadn't won a playoff series since 2000. You had so many injuries to franchise guys like Brandon Roy and Greg Oden over the years, and it's so tough to come back from that. Even going way back, you had All-Stars like Clyde Drexler and Bill Walton who didn't choose to end their careers as a Blazer.
Well, I'm going to be that. I'm going to carry that. I'm going to bring a ring to this city or go down swinging...
I ain't turning my back on the city, because the city has been riding with me since Day One.
I'm not for the fake or the pretend. Too much of that going around these days. I'm for the authentic. It's the same as it was when we were sleeping four-to-a-motel-room with the Rebels. I'm trying to win with my people. Everything I ever experienced, every chapter of it, the good and the bad and the grimy, that's what made me.
At best, the above paragraphs now sound corny and contrived; at worst, Lillard looks like a liar, or at least like someone who lacks the inner strength to stay true to his expressed core beliefs. Don't tell us "I'm going to bring a ring to this city or go down swinging" and then beg to be traded to Miami to hook up with a team that has reached the NBA Finals twice in the past four seasons without you. Going to the Heat is the opposite of being "drawn to the struggle"; it is hitching your wagon to Jimmy Butler's star, and hoping to ride all the way to a championship.
Lillard's trade request makes one reevaluate his whole career, because it is just not clear what he wants or what he ever wanted. It has always been evident to any informed observer that Lillard is not good enough to be the best player on a legitimate championship contender (every time I hear someone compare Lillard or Chris Paul to Isiah Thomas I feel physically ill, because Thomas--in marked contrast to Lillard and Paul--joined a lousy NBA team, stayed with that team his whole career, and won two titles while facing Bird, Magic, and Jordan in their primes). Thus, if Lillard's main goal is to win a title then he should have been taking less money throughout his career so that the Trail Blazers could sign a player who is qualified to be a legit number one option for a championship contender. If Lillard's main goal is to make as much money as possible, then there is nothing wrong with him signing max deals even though that did not leave enough money available to build a legit championship contender--and there is no reason for him to leave Portland, because Portland can pay him more than any other team. More to the point, if Lillard is really the ride or die type of guy that he has always portrayed himself to be then he should never have asked for a trade.
It is not clear what changed to induce Lillard to renounce a central aspect of his public identity; it is not a newsflash that the Trail Blazers have not provided the superstar and role players that Lillard would need to seriously contend for a title--and Lillard never publicly complained about that--so it is odd that all of a sudden Lillard changed his tune and decided to join the team-hopping brigade, which includes LeBron James, Kevin Durant, Kawhi Leonard, Harden, and Kyrie Irving. At least James, Durant, and Leonard can plausibly argue that they bring championship contention with them in their suitcases; Harden, Irving, and now Lillard show up asking (metaphorically) "Who is going to carry me to the mountaintop?"
It is also not clear what the Heat are thinking if it is true that they are eager to acquire Lillard. The Denver Nuggets bludgeoned the Heat in the paint at both ends of the court in the 2023 NBA Finals, so adding the undersized Lillard and his infamous logo shots to the mix in no way positions the Heat to beat the Nuggets in a playoff series, nor does it position the Heat to beat a full strength Milwaukee team (or any other elite team that uses its size effectively). Lillard could help the Heat's inconsistent offense, but that is not enough to win a title.
Shifting focus to the people who cover the NBA, it is disappointing--but, sadly, not surprising--that ESPN let go several outstanding commentators, including Jeff Van Gundy and Jalen Rose (plus Steve Young, perhaps the network's most insightful NFL analyst). ESPN's NBA analysis is now reduced to Tim Legler--who is outstanding--and a few games per season during which the legendary Hubie Brown provides color commentary. Other than Legler and Brown, when one watches ESPN's NBA coverage one can abandon all hope of hearing intelligent commentary (Mark Jackson is solid, but why isn't more made of the fact that he left Nikola Jokic off of his 2023 regular season MVP ballot?).
Rose was one of the few ESPN commentators who would contradict nonsense even if it was spouted by another ESPN commentator. Rose used the phrase "concert tour" to describe James Harden's ridiculously poor playoff field goal percentages (Harden's numbers look like spring or summer concert tour dates, such as 5-13); that turn of phrase--both funny and insightful--is typical of the perspective that Rose provided. He was the entertaining and intelligent commentator that "Screamin' A" believes himself to be.
Van Gundy had a little Bill Walton in him in terms of going off on whimsical tangents, but Van Gundy consistently provided an elite coach’s insight about basketball. He often declared, "Horses trot, players run"--in reference to so-called superstars who jog up and down the court--and during the height of Kobe Bryant's career his voice provided a lonely but welcome counterpoint to the nonsense spewed by the likes of Bill Simmons, Mike Wilbon, and other nationally prominent commentators who constantly made unfair and unwarranted criticisms of how Bryant played. Van Gundy did not buy into the nonsense that other ESPN commentators spew about in game adjustments. Van Gundy consistently stated that playoff series are not decided by in game adjustments because "You are who you are by this time of the year and you have to go with your best stuff and expect them to go with their best stuff." It is amazing that Mike Wilbon and Brian Windhorst have been with ESPN for so long yet apparently are incapable of grasping this piece of wisdom dispensed by a colleague who, unlike either of them, coached a team to the NBA Finals.
No one gets everything right in terms of predictions or skill set analysis, but the best commentators view the game in a way that consistently enables them to provide insights that elude many media members and "stat gurus." Hopefully, TNT or NBA TV will pick up the ball dropped by ESPN, and hire Rose and Van Gundy.
Labels: Damian Lillard, Daryl Morey, ESPN, Hubie Brown, Jalen Rose, James Harden, Jeff Van Gundy, Philadelphia 76ers, Portland Trail Blazers
posted by David Friedman @ 11:09 AM
8 Comments:
Great post.
With regards to Lillard, I think he would say Portland “switched up” on him. He wanted the team to use the 3rd pick to get win now players. I understand what you are saying but I also understand where he is coming from.
I questioned Dame's "loyalty" in the comments section on your post in March, asking if it's really "loyalty" that is keeping him in Portland - or the massive contracts he has received this whole time. I still love Dame's game, but I think his trade request has proven me mostly right.
As you pointed out at the time, David, it's hard to build around small players. It's harder when those players make $44MM annually. And as the Blazers are no doubt finding right now, it's hard to receive close to fair value when those players demand trades, especially when they make their preferred destinations known.
I'm all for players earning as much as they can, but Portland has lost a lot of talent through the years in order to keep Dame in town: Norm Powell, Rob Covington and CJ McCollum are among them. I agree with your point from March, David, that these players are not the second-best players on a championship team, but they were good enough to beat a young Nuggets team in 2019 and reach the WCF.
If Dame were truly loyal to Portland, he would have made the financial sacrifices necessary to keep that core together and push to add more pieces in the frontcourt. Maybe he offered to do that and the public never knew about it, but it seems unlikely to me.
Regarding Harden: What a shame it would be to see the Clippers sacrifice their depth for this guy, who has not even indicated that he would show any loyalty to a team that trades for him (by way of a contract extension). I hope the Sixers let his contract expire, with or without him on the court.
Regarding ESPN: Their TV contract with the NBA is possibly the worst thing that has happened to the NBA in my lifetime.
Anonymous:
Thank you.
In Lillard's article, the context makes it clear that "switched up" means that the team decides to trade or cut him. Lillard emphasized that he would never ask out of Portland no matter what, but now he has asked out of Portland.
I understand why he wants out. What I don't understand is why he wrote an article asserting that he would never ask to be traded because he loves the struggle. He could have just played out his career without blowing all of that hot air about how he is so different from all of the other NBA players who fled to what they presumed to be greener pastures. He is not any different.
TR:
Lillard's trade request is not about money. He will not make any more money elsewhere than he would make by staying in Portland.
I agree with you that if Lillard were serious about winning in Portland then he would have been amenable to taking less money so that the front office could build a better roster, but there is no evidence that the Blazers ever approached Lillard with a concrete plan to do that. I can't blame Lillard for taking max money when it is offered, nor would I suggest that he should voluntarily give up money without a concrete plan in place regarding how that money would be used.
I would love to see the Sixers keep Harden, force him to play, and fine/suspend him if he refuses to play--but that is not the way such situations typically play out.
If you watch old CBS or NBC games/pregame shows from the 1980s and 1990s, and compare those to the ESPN/ABC games/pregame shows, it is very clear how far the standards have fallen (with a few notable ESPN/ABC exceptions, such as Hubie Brown and Tim Legler). Combine that with the fact that the game itself is not as good as it used to be, and that makes it tough to watch NBA games on ESPN/ABC, though I do so anyway because I am a lifelong basketball fan and NBA fan.
It increasingly looks like one of the worst things a team can do (after drafting/trading for an outright bust) is to acquire a talented undersized player who is not a good defender but still becomes a superstar. Unless his name is Steph Curry, and even then there are a lot of caveats.
The usual rationale provided for tanking is that you don't want to be stuck in that unpleasant zone of never being good enough to win while never getting high draft picks that will make you better. This has proven to be every bit as dubious an assertion as the more thoughtful observers claimed it is from the start of the tanking era.
But meanwhile we have identified an actual very good way to get stuck with a millstone around your neck, and it is to get an undersized guard as your franchise player. Regardless of how dedicated to winning that player is, you are not going to win anything with him as the number one option, simply because he is too small, but with the way the game has shifted towards the perimeter he will become sufficiently big within the franchise to demand max/supermax deals, and that is the end of your prospects of putting a championship team together.
The way that movie ends is with demands for a trade (often one that does not return proper value) or an albatross contract than you need to give away real assets to get rid of.
Lots of such situations around the league in recent years -- Lillard, Beal, John Wall, Chris Paul, Harden, etc. -- and a few developing ones (e.g. Trae Young and Ja Morant).
Lillard isn't really to blame for it in this case, but it's just the reality of the game. Also, the Blazers actually doubled down on the mistake by pairing him with CJ McCollum for most of the decade. So they had two undersized guards in their backcourt, not just one.
The reasons it worked out for the Warriors are:
1. Klay Thompson is not small and was one of the best defenders in the league before he got hurt
2. Those teams played very good defense all around and were extremely well coached and drilled overall
3. Curry and Klay are the best shooters in history -- the difference between 43-44% and 41-42% on high volume on one hand (Curry and Klay) and 37% and 38-39% on the other (Lillar/McCollum) may seem small but it's actually huge
4. They had Durant. And in fact despite all of the above, winning was a sure and comfortable thing only when they had KD. Aside from that it was always on the edge, i.e. everything had to come together the right way from them to win (which it did in 2015 with injuries for the Cavs and in 2022 with the Celtics collapsing, but didn't in 2016 and in 2019 when Klay went down too after KD).
So the recipe for winning while relying on perimeter shooting is to have the two best shooters in history playing together, one of them being 6'6'' (and not 6'3'' and under as most such guards these days are) and a great defender, the team as a whole playing lockdown defense, and then having some luck break your way too.
That sure looks like a sustainable and replicable plan...
Anonymous:
I agree with everything you wrote. Your point that the worst thing that a team can do is obtain a talented undersized player who becomes (or, I would argue, is perceived as) a superstar is something that few people seem to grasp.
It will be very interesting to see how serious the Heat are about signing up for four years of Lillard--culminating in paying a 36 year old undersized guard more than $63 million on the final season of that contract--and how much they are willing to give up to do that.
David,
While I agree with your point that adding Lillard won't help the Heat in a playoff series against the Nuggets, Bucks, or any other team with more size, the Heat are also kind of stuck right now.
Starting next offseason (partially due to the new CBA), Miami won't be able to trade a package centered around Tyler Herro, Duncan Robinson, and picks in exchange for a player earning 45 million dollars (in other words, a big-time player).
It's now or never for the Heat, and Butler is no spring chicken. For better or worse, they better hope that they land Dame, because I don't think that attempting to run it back with this current squad (minus two starters from last season in Gabe Vincent and Max Strus) would be a good decision.
Todd:
Even if one accepts your premise that the Heat "are stuck"--and the reality is that there are so many salary cap exceptions that few teams are "stuck"--how would being on the hook to pay Lillard so much money help the Heat? The Heat have proven that they can find and develop under the radar players, so why do you assume that the loss of Strus and Vincent--unheralded players who the Heat found and developed--is a crippling blow?
I agree that the Heat as presently constituted do not seem likely to return to the NBA Finals--but the Heat did not seem likely to make the NBA Finals last season, either, and they were just a few minutes away from being eliminated by Chicago in the Play-In Tournament. A well-coached team with hard-working players can accomplish a lot.
While it could be argued that it is part of Heat culture to make big moves (such as acquiring Hardaway, Mourning, Shaq, LeBron, Bosh, Butler), I would argue that--in terms of making a team a championship contender--Lillard would be less valuable than any of the players I just listed while also costing a ton of money due during what will likely be the final seasons of his career (and almost certainly the final seasons during which he can realistically be expected to score more than 20 ppg).
Post a Comment
<< Home