Rockets Go All In With Small Ball
Give Daryl Morey credit for one thing: he is consistent in his beliefs. Ralph Waldo Emerson said, "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds," but Morey is focused on analytics, not literature. Morey's interpretation of basketball analytics has convinced him that the best way to play is to shoot as many three pointers as possible. He believes that big players and post play are inefficient relics that have no place in the modern game--and Morey has put his money where his mouth is, trading away center Clint Capela and rolling the dice with a primary lineup rotation that does not include anyone who is taller than 6-6.
Speaking of analytics, in some quarters there is a false dichotomy suggesting that a person is either pro-analytics or anti-analytics (and, by implication, behind the times). Not all analytics are created equal. In my line of work (legal analytics), we distinguish between analytics that are accurate, complete and relevant, and self-proclaimed "analytics" that are inaccurate, incomplete and therefore not only irrelevant but actually misleading and dangerous. The point of analytics is (or should be) to facilitate rational decision making that increases your likelihood of winning.
Are Morey's decisions based on analytics that are accurate, complete and relevant, or are his decisions based on a data set that is inaccurate, incomplete and/or irrelevant?
Over a decade ago I
wrote about the statistical profile of an NBA championship team, and what I found then is still true today: championship teams tend to excel at point differential and defensive field goal percentage. The article noted that the previous 18 NBA champions had an average rank of 3.1 in point differential and an average rank of 5.2 in defensive field goal percentage; updating those numbers for the last three seasons, we see that the 2019 champion Toronto Raptors ranked third in point differential and fourth in defensive field goal percentage, the 2018 champion Golden State Warriors ranked third in point differential and third in defensive field goal percentage, and the 2017 champion Golden State Warriors ranked first in both categories.
Thus far, the 2020 Houston Rockets rank seventh in point differential and 17th in defensive field goal percentage. The Milwaukee Bucks rank first in both categories. If Morey is not sure what a "foundational player" looks like, he should stop staring at James Harden and observe the all-around brilliance of Milwaukee's Giannis Antetokounmpo.
It is logical to suggest that the Rockets will not win the championship unless they improve their point differential at least a little, and unless they significantly improve their defensive field goal percentage. Therefore, from the perspective of building a championship team the correct question to ask about Morey's personnel moves and strategic decisions is whether or not they will help Houston improve their performance in the statistical categories that matter the most.
Trading Capela and going small is very unlikely to improve Houston's defensive field goal percentage. Houston may improve a little in point differential, by virtue of using three point barrages to blow out lesser teams, but that will probably be fool's gold that will not be indicative of what will happen during the playoffs when a team can zero in on the opposing team's weaknesses.
Houston Coach Mike D'Antoni, who is as much of an iconoclast as Morey, has embraced the new look lineup (not that he has much choice). D'Antoni understands that the Rockets will be outrebounded, and that they will be outscored in the paint, but he asserts that if the Rockets limit their opponents' second chance points and shoot a high volume of three point shots at an efficient rate then they can be successful.
The disadvantages of this approach should be obvious: opposing teams should be able to shoot a high percentage while they wear down the Rockets' smaller players. Morey's "analytics" focus on the self-evident fact that three point shots are worth more than two point shots, but do his equations factor in the reality that small players who are forced to guard big players will grow fatigued (both during a particular game, and also over the course of a season) and will not shoot the same percentages that they would shoot under more favorable circumstances?
The main advantage for Houston is that an offense with five players
stationed outside of the paint will create many open driving lanes for
Russell Westbrook, the team's best player. If the Rockets are smart enough to figure out that Westbrook is their best player, they could pose intriguing matchup problems, though I still am skeptical that this team playing this style will win a championship. Harden's game largely revolves around gimmicks, and he can be slowed down/frustrated by gimmick defenses--but Westbrook's game is based on playing hard and relentlessly attacking the paint, particularly in transition. If the Rockets rebound adequately and then Westbrook pushes the ball up the court, it will be very difficult for opposing teams to keep him out of the paint. D'Antoni believes that opposing bigs will have more trouble matching up with Houston's "small" players than Houston's "small" players will have matching up with bigger opponents--but Westbrook is the key element for this unconventional strategy to succeed.
Houston started the post-Capela era with a 121-111 win over the L.A. Lakers last night. Westbrook led both teams with 41 points on 17-28 field goal shooting. He tied Robert Covington, who was acquired in the Capela deal, with a team-high eight rebounds as the undersized Rockets finished with 37 rebounds, just one fewer than the Lakers had. Westbrook's +12 plus/minus number was second only to Covington's +16. James Harden finished with 14 points on 3-10 field goal shooting, plus seven rebounds and seven assists. He was one of just two Rockets who had a negative plus/minus number (-3).
Anthony Davis (32 points and 13 rebounds) and LeBron James (18 points, 15 assists, nine rebounds) each displayed a remarkable ability to put up gaudy individual numbers that had little impact on team success. Why did James attempt eight three pointers and just one free throw against a team whose starting center was at least two inches shorter than he is? Why did James focus on racking up assists when there was not a player on the court who had a prayer of stopping him from scoring in the paint? Is leading the league in assists more important than helping his team develop the necessary habits to win in the playoffs? James may surpass Kareem Abdul-Jabbar on the all-time regular season scoring list, so it is beyond dispute that James is one of the greatest scorers of all-time, yet James seems intent on trying to prove that he is not primarily a scorer; do you think that Abdul-Jabbar--a six-time NBA champion--would have focused on racking up assists if he were being guarded by players who stood 6-6 or less?
Meanwhile, Westbrook joined Oscar Robertson and LeBron James as the only players in NBA history who have amassed at least 20,000 points, at least 7000 assists, and at least 6000 rebounds. Westbrook's gaudy numbers have tended to correspond with team success (and some of his post-Kevin Durant Oklahoma City Thunder teams were just awful unless Westbrook posted 30 point triple doubles) Westbrook was the best player on the court--an All-Star reserve outshining three 2020 All-Star starters--and he is a borderline Pantheon player, but he is not close to being recognized as such, and he will not actually cross that threshold without adding a few more deep playoff runs to his resume (which includes four Western Conference Finals appearances and one trip to the NBA Finals).
The Rockets do not have to revolve around a gimmicky James Harden show. If the Rockets let Westbrook take the lead offensively and if they collectively play hard on defense then they could surprise some teams.
Westbrook's rebounding, particularly on defense, is very important for Houston.
Even before the Capela trade, we saw a glimpse of how good the Rockets can be when the focus is not on the Harden show. On Monday January 27, Harden sat out due to a leg injury, Westbrook sat out the second game of a back to back set, and Capela sat out due to a heel injury. You might have thought that the Rockets did not have a chance, but the Rockets beat the Jazz in Utah, 126-117. The Jazz had been 18-3 at home prior to this game. Without Harden dribbling the ball until he created potholes in the court, Eric Gordon scored a career-high 50 points on 14-22 field goal shooting. The Rockets shot 15-40 (.375) from three point range, putting the lie to the notion that Harden is surrounded by a bunch of scrubs who cannot score without his help.
The Rockets have several talented, scrappy players, and on any given night they can beat anybody. That is not the issue, though. The issue is whether or not this style of play with this group of players is the optimal approach if the goal is to win a championship. This is the culmination of the way Morey has built this team for over a decade, and the final evaluation of his impact on the sport may depend on the result of this small ball experiment. Morey has held this job for 13 years, which is a long run for someone
whose teams have failed to advance past the first round for more than half of his tenure. My basic take on Morey has not changed: "If you ran an organization and Morey showed up in your office offering
to sell you his expertise/his proprietary analytics would you buy based
on those results?"
Going all in on small ball is Morey's swing for the fences attempt to wipe out the memories of nearly a decade and a half that has not seen Houston able to sustain an elite level of play despite having Morey's "foundational player" (Harden) and despite supposedly enjoying the advantage conferred by Morey's analytical perspective.
Labels: Anthony Davis, Daryl Morey, Eric Gordon, Houston Rockets, James Harden, L.A. Lakers, LeBron James, Mike D'Antoni, Russell Westbrook
posted by David Friedman @ 2:46 AM
The Houston Rockets are Not Helpless Without James Harden
A popular narrative this season has been that James Harden's outlandish scoring has been necessary for the Houston Rockets to win--but is that true?
Last night, James Harden sat out because he was shocked that in Houston's previous game--a 111-106 loss to the L.A. Lakers--the officiating crew actually called offensive fouls against him. No, just kidding: he sat out because he had flu-like symptoms and a sore neck. Harden's wallet is $25,000 lighter after he complained about the officiating; he seems to be genuinely astonished to find out that it is a foul when an offensive player extends his arm and pushes the defensive player out of the way. Harden is apparently certain that those fouls were only called against him because referee Scott Foster is personally biased against him (for the record, Foster did not call all of the fouls that were called against Harden, and all of the fouls that were called against Harden were correct).
Without Harden, the Rockets nevertheless beat the Golden State Warriors, a team that has been favorably compared to the greatest teams of all-time. Chris Paul had 23 points, 17 assists and five rebounds. Eric Gordon, inserted into the starting lineup in Harden's place, scored a team-high 25 points. Clint Capela scored eight points and grabbed a game-high 15 rebounds. Kenneth Faried scored 20 points and snared 10 rebounds. The reality is that, contrary to widespread belief, the Rockets have several very good players and they have players who can both create their own shots as well as create shots for others. The Rockets shot 16-43 from three point range, which is a typical game for them in terms of makes, attempts and percentage. The myth is that Harden's one on one wizardry creates Houston's record-breaking three point shooting attack but the truth is that without Harden in the lineup the Rockets are quite capable of generating those shot attempts and converting them at the same efficiency.
The defending champion Warriors, who have the best record in the Western Conference and the third best record in the league behind Milwaukee and Toronto, had their full complement of players, though Draymond Green sat out the last few minutes of the fourth quarter after spraining his ankle. Kevin Durant scored a game-high 29 points, Stephen Curry added 25 points and Klay Thompson contributed 20 points.
Yes, this was just one game and one game is a small sample size, but it is worthwhile to compare Harden and his supporting cast to the supporting casts of the only two guards in pro basketball history who averaged at least 35 ppg for a season.
Michael Jordan averaged 37.1 ppg for the 40-42 Chicago Bulls in 1986-87. Jordan played in all 82 games that season, so we do not know how that team would have fared without him in the lineup--but we can make an educated guess. Only two other Bulls averaged at least 10 ppg: second year pro Charles Oakley (14.5 ppg) and John Paxson, who became a nice role player for Chicago's first three championship teams but he was
not the third scoring option on those teams. Gene Banks, Dave Corzine and Earl Cureton were the three players who started the most games for the Bulls other than Jordan, Oakley and Paxson. Other Chicago starters that season included Granville Waiters, Steve Colter and Brad Sellers. It is difficult to picture that roster winning more than 20 games without Jordan; in the previous season, the Bulls went 9-9 with Jordan and 21-43 in the 64 games that he missed due to injury. That 1985-86 team had more talent than the 1986-87 team, with Orlando Woolridge averaging 20.7 ppg and Hall of Famer George Gervin scoring 16.2 ppg. After the 1986 season, Woolridge left as a free agent and Gervin retired. The Bulls were without question a Draft Lottery team sans Jordan but they were a playoff team with Jordan.
Kobe Bryant averaged 35.4 ppg for the 45-37 L.A. Lakers in 2005-06, highlighted by a sensational
January during which Bryant averaged 43.4 ppg, including an 81 point outburst versus Toronto. The Lakers went 9-4 with Bryant in January and 0-2 in the January games that he missed. Those were the only two games that Bryant missed that season but a glance at the Lakers' roster provides all one needs to know about the team's prospects without him. Five other Lakers started at least 46 games: Lamar Odom, Smush Parker, Kwame Brown, Chris Mihm and Brian Cook. Odom never made the All-Star team but he was a solid player who won the Sixth Man Award in 2011. Parker was out of the league by 2008 at age 26. He might be the worst starting point guard ever for a playoff team. The only times that Brown ever started playoff games were his two seasons playing alongside Bryant. Mihm played 41 more NBA games after the 2006 season. Cook's career lasted six more seasons, during which he started a total of 26 games and never averaged more than 5.0 ppg for a season. Bryant's supporting cast makes the 1987 Bulls look like a powerhouse. Yet, somehow, Bryant and this motley crew pushed the Phoenix Suns--a talented team featuring two-time MVP Steve Nash--to seven games in the first round, and the
Lakers would have won in six games if they could have secured one defensive rebound late in regulation. Instead, the ball literally slipped through their fingers and then Brown failed to close out properly to Tim Thomas, who nailed a three pointer to send game six to overtime. Bryant scored all 13 of the Lakers' points in overtime, finishing with 50 points on outstanding 20-35 (.571) field goal shooting, but the Lakers gave up 21 points in the extra session. Other than Odom, not one player in Bryant's 2006 supporting cast would receive meaningful minutes--or, quite possibly, any playing time at all--on the 2019 Houston team.
In contrast to the (non) supporting casts Jordan and Bryant were saddled with, Harden is surrounded by talent. Not counting Carmelo Anthony (who is no longer with the team) or Faried
(who has averaged 16.0 ppg in 14 games for Houston so far), the Rockets
have four double figure scorers in addition to Harden. Paul, Gordan and Austin Rivers are each capable of creating shots for themselves as well as for their teammates. The big man rotation of Capela, Faried and Nene Hilario is first rate; Capela is an All-Star caliber center, while Faried and Hilario provide energy/toughness/rebounding. P.J. Tucker, the only Rocket who has started all 59 of the team's games this season, is an excellent "3 and D" wing who defends, rebounds and knocks down open three pointers.
The 1987 Bulls and 2006 Lakers needed the 35-plus ppg scoring that they received from Michael Jordan and Kobe Bryant respectively. When surrounded by better supporting casts, Jordan and Bryant won multiple titles. In contrast, the Rockets have a very good roster even without Harden; they do not need for him to dribble all of the time and take so many shots, but this is the way that Harden wants to play and the team has accepted it for several years now. Unlike Jordan and Bryant, Harden has yet to prove that he can be the best player on a team that advances to the NBA Finals, much less be the best player for multiple championship teams.
Labels: Chris Paul, Clint Capela, Eric Gordon, Golden State Warriors, Houston Rockets, James Harden, Kevin Durant, Klay Thompson, Kobe Bryant, Michael Jordan, Stephen Curry
posted by David Friedman @ 1:13 PM
Houston Sans Harden
James Harden has put up some very impressive statistics in the first portion of the 2017-18 season (league-leading 32.3 ppg, plus 9.1 apg and 5.0 rpg) and he has been touted as a legitimate MVP candidate. One would therefore logically expect that (1) any player other than a superstar who replaces him in the starting lineup would be much less effective and (2) the team would also be much less effective sans such an essential player. Harden is expected to miss at least two weeks of action after suffering a hamstring injury. The early results during his absence are mixed.
The following data is from a small sample size but it at least provides a
glimpse at the impact that coaching/playing style can have on
individual player statistics. Eric Gordon has taken Harden's place in the starting lineup. Gordon is a good player who won the 2017 Sixth Man Award but he has never been an All-Star, let alone an MVP candidate. In the four games that Harden has missed thus far, Gordon scored 21.5 ppg while shooting .437 from the field, exceeding his season averages in both of those categories. Gordon is averaging just 2.6 apg overall this season and he has never averaged more than 4.4 apg during a season but in the past four games he has averaged 7.3 apg even while playing alongside perennial All-Star Chris Paul, who is a high usage/high apg player. Gordon has not matched Harden's production but Gordon's numbers suggest that any reasonably good player thrust into that role in Houston's offense can score a lot of points while also accumulating a lot of assists.
The Rockets went 2-2 in those games, beating non-playoff teams Orlando and Chicago while losing to defending champion Golden State and a solid Detroit team. The Rockets averaged about 115 ppg with Harden in the lineup and they have averaged just under 112 ppg since he has been out of action. Again, this is obviously a small sample size, so it will be interesting to see how the Rockets and Gordon perform during the rest of the games that Harden misses. It should also be noted that the Rockets were slumping with Harden even before Harden got hurt; they lost five games in a row before needing two overtimes to beat the weak L.A. Lakers (that is the game during which Harden got hurt).
There is no question that Houston is worse without Harden; he is an All-Star caliber player, so the Rockets not only miss the talent that he brings to the table but they also have less depth when he is out of the lineup. The significant points are (1) Houston Coach Mike D'Antoni's offensive system tends to inflate the numbers posted by his guards and (2) Houston's high-powered offensive attack is not solely dependent on Harden.
Labels: Eric Gordon, Houston Rockets, James Harden
posted by David Friedman @ 6:59 AM
Houston Overcomes Westbrook's Third Straight Triple Double to Take 3-1 Series Lead
Russell Westbrook posted his third straight playoff triple double--a feat matched by only Wilt Chamberlain, who had four consecutive playoff triple doubles in 1967--but the Houston Rockets came from behind to beat the Oklahoma City Thunder 113-109 and take a 3-1 lead in their best of seven first round series. Nene led the Rockets with 28 points on 12-12 field goal shooting. Houston outscored Oklahoma City by 24 points when he was on the court. Nene also had a team-high 10 rebounds in just 25 minutes.
Eric Gordon and Lou Williams each scored 18 points in reserve roles, with Houston outscoring Oklahoma City by 18 when Gordon was in the game and by 10 when Williams played. Trevor Ariza played a game-high 43 minutes and chipped in 14 points plus his usual excellent defense. The Rockets outscored the Thunder by two when he was on the court. James Harden added a quiet 16 points on 5-16 field goal shooting. He led the Rockets with eight assists but he also had seven turnovers and his plus/minus number was 0 in 39 minutes of action.
As has often been the case during Harden's Houston playoff career, when the Rockets made their run he was either on the bench or watching other players do the heavy lifting. Harden attempted seven free throws after living at the free throw line in the first three games of the series. Harden is constantly flopping and flailing but when the referees do not fall for this--and when the Thunder have enough game plan discipline to avoid foolish reach in fouls--Harden is not an elite, efficient playoff scorer. The proper way to defend Harden is play with "high hands"--if the referee sees the defender's hands then he is not likely to blow his whistle.
Harden essentially has two moves: the stepback jumper and the lumbering drive during which he extends his hands low and baits the referee into calling a foul. The Houston/Harden philosophy is to avoid shooting long two point jumpers, so it is baffling that any defender would fall for Harden's shot fakes in that range; just play Harden to either shoot threes or flop while he is in the lane. If Harden is met at the hoop by a big guy with high hands, Harden will throw his body into that player and if he does not get the foul call then the ball will fly harmlessly away; we have seen this happen several times during this series, particularly in the first halves of games when the Rockets routinely get off to slow starts. Can Harden finish at the hoop? Yes, but he is not an explosive finisher at the rim so if he is met by high hands then he has to figure out how to loft a shot over, under or around those arms.
Incidentally, the Rockets are constantly questioning calls but no Rocket should ever complain about fouls considering the calls that Harden typically gets. Harden's flopping has been somewhat obscured in this series by the fact that the Thunder have committed many stupid fouls against him but even in this series it has been clear that when Harden does not receive foul calls he is not the same player; it has also been clear that, at least against the Thunder, Houston is good enough to keep the game close even when Harden is non-factor.
Oklahoma City is awful when
Westbrook is not in the game. Westbrook does not enjoy the luxury of winning despite having an off night or even just sitting on the bench for a few minutes while his teammates carry the load. The Thunder outscored the Rockets by 14 points during Westbrook's 39 minutes of action and were outscored by 18 points during his nine minutes off of the court; at that rate, the Thunder would be outscored by 96 points over a 48 minute game!
Westbrook posted 17 points, 10 rebounds and 10 assists in the first half, becoming the first player in 20 years to log a first half triple double in a playoff game. He shot a respectable 5-11 from the field, yet the Thunder only led 58-54. Harden had scored six points on 2-9 field goal shooting at that point and
this looked like a replay of game two, when Westbrook nearly had a first half triple double before finishing with 51 points, 13 assists and 10 rebounds: it was obvious that if someone else on the Thunder did not step up then the Rockets would win, as they did in game two.
Westbrook's gaudy numbers do not fully capture his impact; some of his first half plays were just breathtaking, like when he soared in the air to block center Clint Capela's dunk attempt off of a lob pass or when he grabbed a defensive rebound in traffic, burst up court and spoon fed Stephen Adams for a transition layup. How many point guards in pro basketball history could make such plays?
The Thunder led by as many as 14 points in the third quarter but when Westbrook took a short breather the Thunder leaked more oil than a broken down jalopy. The Thunder struggled so much to score, defend or just do anything productive that it felt like every reasonable basketball play should be celebrated by a standing ovation or a parade.
Oklahoma City was clinging to a 77-73 lead entering the fourth quarter. Houston wiped out that advantage almost instantly as Westbrook took his customary rest early in the period. The Thunder just as quickly regained the advantage after Westbrook reentered the game. Around that point, ABC ran a graphic showing that the Thunder had outscored the Rockets by 20 points during Westbrook's 31 minutes and had been outscored by 18 points during his eight minutes of rest.
Much will likely be made of Westbrook's second half field goal percentage and/or shot selection but any intelligent, objective person understands that those things did not decide the outcome of the game; this was a double digit blowout in the Thunder's favor when Westbrook played and a double digit blowout in the Rockets' favor when Westbrook sat. That is the main story.
One of the great little sideline sound bytes from Phil Jackson when he
coached Michael Jordan and the Chicago Bulls was, "Don't leave Michael yet. It's not time." Jackson conveyed so much in just a few words: Jackson was not so subtly challenging
Jordan's teammates by essentially saying, "I know that you are going to
leave Michael but at least wait until later in the game to do so." This
was almost a form of psychological warfare or reverse psychology; by
asking them to not leave Michael "yet" he was really urging them to not
leave Michael at all.
Jackson's point was that even Jordan could not be superhuman for a full 48 minutes but if his teammates could wait to "leave" him until the closing minutes then he could be superhuman down the stretch. Keep in mind that peak Jordan was about
6-6, 225 and peak Kobe Bryant was about the same size. Westbrook is
about 6-3, 195. In terms of speed, jumping ability, explosiveness and
competitive heart, Westbrook is cut from the same cloth; recently, Jerry
West went so far as to call Westbrook a more athletic version of
Jordan. However, in terms of size and strength Westbrook will never be
able to match Jordan or Bryant and when Westbrook's teammates repeatedly surrender double digit leads in just a few minutes with more than a quarter left in the game he is not physically equipped to single-handedly save the day; even though he actually
did just that in several regular season games, the task is much harder during the playoffs.
That being said, the Thunder squandered some golden opportunities down the stretch. Trailing by four, Stephen Adams conferred briefly with Westbrook before attempting the second of two free throws. Adams intentionally missed, grabbed the rebound and immediately passed to Westbrook, who launched a shot from several feet behind the three point arc. Westbrook's bomb cut Houston's lead to 108-107 and all that the Thunder needed to do was commit a foul in order to have a chance to tie or win on the game's final possession. Instead, the Thunder permitted the Rockets to advance the ball up the court with no resistance, culminating in a three point play by Nene that sealed the victory.
Five-time Super Bowl champion Coach Bill Belichick has repeatedly said that stupid players cost you games and/or that he cannot put stupid players on the field. The Thunder's late game execution in that sequence was atrocious and instead of potentially going to Houston with a chance to take a 3-2 lead the Thunder now face the task of simply avoiding elimination.
Westbrook refuses to even discuss what others call his "supporting cast," nor does he whine about not having help. LeBron James has two All-Star teammates, a great group of role players and a roster that is among the best compensated in NBA history, yet he constantly complains that he does not have enough help. When he was asked a couple years ago during the NBA Finals why he was confident that his team could win he replied "Because I am the best player in the world."
In contrast, Westbrook has defiantly challenged media members who refer to his "supporting cast." Westbrook declares that the Thunder are one team and that he does not have a supporting cast. The postgame press conference had an interesting moment. Some
reporter who apparently is seeking a Pulitzer Prize nomination for
investigative reporting asked Stephen Adams to talk about the Thunder's
drop off in performance whenever Westbrook is not on the court. Before
Adams could answer, Westbrook replied that he would not let the media divide the team and that they win and lose as a group. The reporter whined that he had asked a legitimate question and that his microphone should not be taken away until Adams answers. It must really
be frustrating for this reporter that he cannot just write the narrative
that he wants to write--that Westbrook is a bad teammate--but if he is actually worth his salt as a
journalist then he knows that Westbrook's quotes are golden and could be
the basis for a wonderful story. If the reporter were not trying to make himself the center of attention, he could have pulled Adams aside privately and repeated his question.
Despite his fiery persona, Westbrook's leadership is similar to Julius Erving's or Scottie Pippen's as opposed to Jordan's or Bryant's. Erving and Pippen always sought out public and private opportunities to praise their teammates. Jordan is perhaps the first NBA superstar who talked publicly about his "supporting cast" and his leadership style was almost always confrontational; Bryant took a similar approach, though he perhaps mellowed a bit with age (that did not happen to Jordan). James repeatedly speaks about his teammates' shortcomings but the media generally frame his comments as reasonable concerns, not petulant complaints.
Westbrook will probably score 40 points and/or post a triple double in game five but if his teammates "leave" him again then the Rockets will move on to the second round, even if Harden is again the fourth most effective player on his own team.
Labels: Eric Gordon, Houston Rockets, James Harden, Lou Williams, Nene, Oklahoma City Thunder, Russell Westbrook
posted by David Friedman @ 4:25 AM
Houston Survives Westbrook's Historic Triple Double to Take 2-0 Series Lead
Russell Westbrook authored the first 50 point triple double in NBA playoff history (51 points, 13 assists, 10 rebounds) but the Houston Rockets came from behind to beat the Oklahoma City Thunder 115-111 and claim a 2-0 series lead. Westbrook
averaged a triple double this season despite playing just under 35 mpg--and the Thunder went 33-9 when he posted a triple double--but in game two Westbrook played 41 minutes and fatigue clearly had an effect down the stretch, notwithstanding Westbrook's admirable refusal to make any excuses: he shot 13-25 from the field in the first three quarters but just 4-18 in the final stanza. Westbrook's critics predictably focus on the number of shot attempts and the low fourth quarter shooting percentage but the most telling statistic is that the Thunder outscored the Rockets by 11 with Westbrook in the game but were outscored by 15 during the seven minutes that he sat.
Westbrook nearly had a triple double at halftime (22 points, 10 assists, eight rebounds) but the Thunder only led 68-62 and the writing was already on the wall: unless someone else stepped up at some point, Westbrook would inevitably wear down under the massive burden he is being expected to carry just to give his team a chance to win.
Was Westbrook's fourth quarter shot selection great? He took some questionable shots but most of the shots that he took are shots that he normally makes and shots that he made in the first three quarters. Eddie Johnson made a great point on Sirius XM NBA Radio today: when a caller suggested that the Thunder's problem was that Westbrook stopped passing in the fourth quarter, Johnson retorted that plenty of guys who are willing and able to shoot in the first three quarters simply do not want the ball in the fourth quarter of a close game. Westbrook knew that his team's best chance to win was for him to shoot the ball; if he were truly "chasing stats" as his critics suggest, then the easiest way to do that would have been to pass the ball every time in the fourth quarter: he already had a triple double with more than 30 points on an excellent shooting percentage, so shooting the ball when he was tired was more likely to hurt his stats than help them. Westbrook was asked about his stat line and he replied that it did not matter because his team lost.
The easy narrative is that James Harden is outplaying Westbrook but that narrative is false. In two games (admittedly a small sample size but that is the nature of comparing two players early in a playoff series), Westbrook has more points, rebounds, assists, steals and blocked shots than Harden. Westbrook's free throw percentage is slightly better than Harden's. The only individual categories that Harden is winning are field goal percentage and turnovers.
The true narrative is that Harden's teammates are dominating Westbrook's teammates. Five Rockets not named Harden are averaging at least 10 ppg and three of Harden's teammates are averaging at least 7.5 rpg; Harden is averaging 5.5 rpg, barely half of Westbrook's series-leading 10.5 rpg. Only one Thunder player not named Westbrook is averaging at least 10 ppg and only one Thunder player not named Westbrook is averaging at least 7.5 rpg--Andre Roberson is averaging 15.0 ppg and 8.0 rpg.
Harden's team is outplaying Westbrook's team but that does not mean that Harden is the better player or even that Harden is having a better series; when evaluating players I look at skill set and production, not necessarily the team result.
It is also worth noting that Houston's team success is only loosely correlated with Harden's minutes and productivity, which was also true during Houston's
fluky run to the 2015 Western Conference Finals. Harden was on the bench when the Rockets cut into the Thunder's double digit lead and that is why his plus/minus number for this game was just +2; when he and Westbrook were both on the court, the Thunder outplayed the Rockets. The difference is that Eric Gordon (22 points, +15) and Lou Williams (21 points, +18) annihilated the Thunder's bench players--every single Thunder reserve had a negative plus/minus number!
It is stupefying that after Westbrook accomplishes rare or even unprecedented feats the critics nitpick Westbrook's flaws instead of appreciating his greatness. Prior to last night, there had been just five 40 point triple doubles in NBA playoff history. The players on that list are Oscar Robertson (twice), Jerry West, Charles Barkley and LeBron James. Robertson, West and James are on any sensible list of the top 10-15 players in pro basketball history. Barkley is no worse than a top 30 player. West won the first ever NBA Finals MVP after his triple double, even though his team lost the game and the series.
LeBron James posted the most recent 40 point triple double in a playoff game, with 40 points, 14 rebounds and 11 assists in a 104-91 game five loss to the Golden State Warriors in the 2015 NBA Finals. James shot 15-34 from the field, including 7-19 in the second half and his plus/minus number was -11. Thus, his shooting performance was similar to Westbrook's--including excellent first half shooting followed by poor second half shooting--and James' team was actually losing with him on the court, while Westbrook's team was winning while he was on the court but I do not recall James receiving much if any criticism after his triple double. James was carrying an injury-depleted team but he still had Tristan Thompson, J.R. Smith and Matthew Dellavedova (who started 54 games this year for a Milwaukee team that made the playoffs), which is a better supporting cast than Westbrook currently has.
Game three could be interesting. Oklahoma City is clearly a deeply flawed team that is inferior to Houston but home court matters in the playoffs and Houston has weaknesses that can be exploited; if the Thunder defend their turf in this game and in game four then in game five there would be a lot of pressure on the Rockets. It will probably take 35-10-8 or something like that in each game from Westbrook just for the Thunder to have a chance but Westbrook is up for that challenge; the real question is whether or not his supporting cast can at least tread water long enough to permit him to rest for 10-15 minutes so that he can be fresh down the stretch. Westbrook plays so big and with so much energy that it is easy to forget that Westbrook he is 6-3, 190, not 6-6, 225 like Michael Jordan or Kobe Bryant; no matter how athletic Westbrook is, his body simply cannot take the pounding or workload that Jordan or Bryant could.
Labels: Eric Gordon, Houston Rockets, James Harden, Lou Williams, Oklahoma City Thunder, Russell Westbrook
posted by David Friedman @ 8:55 PM
A Different Hollywood Ending: Chris Paul Joins the Clippers, Not the Lakers
The L.A. Clippers made a major bid for citywide supremacy--if not more--by obtaining Chris Paul from the New Orleans Hornets. Unless the Lakers counter with some deals of their own the 2009/2010 NBA champions may become the second best team that calls Staples Center home. Blake Griffin seems poised to become one of the NBA's 10 best players and if Paul--the runner-up in 2008 MVP voting--returns to form then the Clippers will have a deadly inside-outside duo. Meanwhile, the Hornets sidestepped the nightmare scenario of losing Paul for nothing after this season and acquired young, relatively inexpensive talent that can either form the foundation for a rebuilding process or else be packaged to acquire other assets.
However, while the potential upside for the Clippers is very obvious, few people seem to appreciate that there is some risk involved. Eric Gordon, the soon to be 23 year old third year guard who the Clippers shipped to the Hornets in this transaction, arguably was just as good a player as Paul was last season (Gordon averaged roughly six more ppg than Paul, while Paul averaged roughly five more apg than Gordon--though apg numbers in general and Paul's numbers in particular
must be taken with a grain of salt) and it is far from clear how much Paul's balky right knee will affect the rest of his career: for most of last season it did not seem like Paul had his former explosiveness and there is some question about how much cartilage is left in his surgically repaired knee. I am not convinced that a handful of good playoff games against the ancient, nearly immobile Derek Fisher prove that Paul completely returned to elite status (and, even against Fisher, Paul faded by the end of the series). Penny Hardaway looked poised to be a perennial All-NBA player until knee woes derailed his career and a knee problem just ended Brandon Roy's career at age 27. Paul is much smaller than both of those guys and thus quickness is an essential part of his game; not only must he be quick to be effective but he must put a lot of stress on his knees on a nightly basis just to play his normal game, while bigger guards like Hardaway and Roy could at least spend some time on the block and/or find other ways to get by at times without having to simply blow by people.
It is certainly possible that the Griffin-Paul tandem will turn the Clippers into perennial contenders for the next several years--but it is also possible that Gordon will emerge as an All-Star while Paul sits on the bench in street clothes and Griffin throws down monster dunks for a .500 team. We all understand why the Clippers made the trade and it is good for the league that Donald Sterling is trying to win as opposed to just being satisfied with making money but if we learned anything from last season it should be that there is no such thing as a sure thing no matter what a team looks like on paper or on a spreadsheet.
Lakers' fans will undoubtedly be furious at this turn of events, because on the surface it looks like Commissioner David Stern--
by vetoing the deal that would have shipped Paul to the Lakers and then approving the deal that sent Paul to the Clippers--intentionally damaged their team. The Lakers now not only do not have Paul but, seemingly as a direct result of the fallout from that failed trade, they also lost the services of Lamar Odom after the Lakers subsequently shipped the now-disgruntled sixth man to the Dallas Mavericks. It is clear that as long as the league owns the Hornets there will be an appearance of a conflict of interest and thus the NBA should find a new owner for the team as soon as possible. That said, Lakers' fans should realistically look at their team: the Mavericks did not just beat the Lakers in last year's playoffs, they humiliated the Lakers and thus vividly demonstrated that the Lakers are now
at a crossroads. Kobe Bryant is still a great player but it is doubtful that he can just score 40 ppg for a month to carry his team the way he did in his prime; in order to contend for at least one more ring during Bryant's career while also preparing for his inevitable decline and retirement, the Lakers must get younger and more athletic. Frankly, I don't think that acquiring Paul for Pau Gasol and Lamar Odom would have made the Lakers any better and I also think that the loss of Odom can be overcome if the Lakers ultimately use their remaining assets to bring in Dwight Howard. The Lakers' championship window with the previous roster closed last season with Phil Jackson's retirement/Pau Gasol's playoff disappearing act, so the Lakers' only realistic hope to win the 2012 title hinges on pairing Bryant with Dwight Howard. Otherwise, the Lakers have to get younger in a hurry and hope for the best. The Lakers open the season with back to back to back games and without the services of Andrew Bynum, who will miss the first five games of the season as a result of his cheap shot against J.J.Barea in game four versus Dallas; I think that the Lakers should seriously consider sitting out Bryant for the second game to preserve his knee for the stretch run, though I doubt that Coach Mike Brown will try this or that Bryant would accept this if Brown mentioned it.
It may superficially seem like the lockout was pointless because as soon as it ended Dwight Howard and Chris Paul tried to maneuver their way out of small markets to seek their fortunes in big markets but that is a shortsighted view; the owners
locked out the players to fix the NBA's broken business model and that meant making two major adjustments: changing the BRI split and creating a system that strongly encouraged elite players to remain with the teams that originally drafted them. We all know that the owners won the battle over BRI but the owners also made major system changes, many of which seem to be not fully appreciated yet by the general public. The so-called Derrick Rose rule will make it very expensive for future young stars to spurn their original teams, while the escalating luxury tax will make it very expensive for teams to stockpile max contract players. If the NBA owners had sought to put in provisions to specifically restrict Howard and Paul then (1) the lockout could have lasted for years and (2) the players would have had very good grounds to sue (and win); Howard and Paul are entitled to become free agents under the terms of their contracts and thus they have the leverage to force their way out of Orlando and New Orleans respectively--but they will likely be the last elite players able to do so (at least without sacrificing tens of millions of dollars while also costing their new teams hefty luxury tax assessments).
Labels: Chris Paul, Eric Gordon, L.A. Clippers, L.A. Lakers, New Orleans Hornets
posted by David Friedman @ 5:15 AM
News Flash: Teams Generally Perform Well When Their Leading Scorers Score at Least 30 Points
Some NBA commentators enjoy cherry picking numbers to support their favorite storylines; for instance, Mike Wilbon long ago
fell in love with the idea that the L.A. Lakers' success is directly linked to Kobe Bryant attempting less than a certain number of shots. Wilbon articulates this sentiment with such conviction that you half expect Lakers Coach Phil Jackson to jump out of his special "throne chair" on the sidelines to tackle Bryant if Bryant is approaching Wilbon's magical number (a number that Wilbon seems to adjust from time to time to make sure that the winning percentages superficially correlate with his "theory"). After all, if the Lakers are all but guaranteed to win as long as their best player shoots less frequently--reread that again in case the crux of Wilbon's contention escaped you the first time around--then wouldn't Coach Jackson do anything in his power to stop Bryant from shooting? Do not be deceived by the fact that Jackson won six championships in Chicago with Michael Jordan capturing the scoring title each time; Wilbon is an ESPN-certified NBA expert and he has decreed that the secret to winning in the NBA is to take the ball out of the hands of your best player and distribute shots to less talented players who are not as willing and/or able to create their own shots under pressure.
Sarcasm aside, Wilbon's "theory" sounds less than convincing to anyone who is intelligent and thinks about the subject for at least 10 seconds. Field goal attempts are an odd way to evaluate a scorer, because FGAs can consist of "hand grenades" (shots fired up to beat the shot clock buzzer after a teammate passes the ball to a player right before the shot clock "explodes"), half court heaves at the end of quarters, late game shots launched in a flurry as a trailing team desperately tries to come back and other anomalies; the chicken-egg question that Wilbon never discusses is whether Bryant's "extra" field goal attempts cause losses (as Wilbon apparently believes), whether they are the result of Bryant picking up a heavier load in games that the Lakers are losing because his teammates disappeared or whether other factors are involved.
Rather than arbitrarily designating a certain number of field goal attempts to be good or bad, let's take a look at the NBA's top scorers this season and examine how their teams do when they have big scoring nights. No NBA player is averaging 30 ppg this season but all of the top scorers have had several 30-plus point scoring games, so that seems to be a reasonable cutoff point to designate a "big" scoring game--40 point games would provide a very small sample size, while 20 or 25 point games would just be "average" performances for these guys.
Here is a list of the NBA's top 10 scorers this season, including their scoring averages, their teams' records and their teams' records when they score at least 30 points:
1) Kevin Durant, 28.5 ppg. The Oklahoma City Thunder are 27-13 overall (.675) and 13-2 (.867) when Durant scores at least 30 points.
2) Amare Stoudemire, 26.0 ppg. The New York Knicks are 22-17 overall (.564) and 9-4 (.692) when Stoudemire scores at least 30 points.
3) Monta Ellis, 25.7 ppg. The Golden State Warriors are 16-23 overall (.410) and 7-4 (.636) when Ellis scores at least 30 points.
4) LeBron James, 25.4 ppg. The Miami Heat are 30-11 overall (.732) and 9-2 (.818) when James scores at least 30 points.
5) Kobe Bryant, 25.3 ppg. The L.A. Lakers are 30-11 overall (.732) and 9-3 (.750) when Bryant scores at least 30 points.
6) Dwyane Wade, 25.1 ppg. The Miami Heat are 30-11 overall (.732) and 10-2 (.833) when Wade scores at least 30 points.
7) Derrick Rose, 24.5 ppg. The Chicago Bulls are 26-13 overall (.667) and 6-3 (.667) when Rose scores at least 30 points.
8) Eric Gordon, 23.7 ppg. The L.A. Clippers are 13-25 overall (.342) and 2-3 (.400) when Gordon scores at least 30 points.
9) Dirk Nowitzki, 23.6 ppg. The Dallas Mavericks are 26-12 overall (.684) and 4-2 (.667) when Nowitzki scores at least 30 points.
10) Carmelo Anthony, 23.5 ppg. The Denver Nuggets are 22-16 overall (.579) and 5-4 (.556) when Anthony scores at least 30 points.
One could enlarge this survey by looking at more players and/or a longer period of time and one could break down the data based on opposing teams' winning percentages among the 30 point games but there is little reason to believe that a team--whether it is contending for a title or languishing at the bottom of the standings--does worse when its best scorer exceeds his scoring average. That is probably why teams tend to focus their defensive game plans on stopping elite scorers, which is also why lesser players can sometimes accumulate the gaudy field goal percentages that fool so-called experts (and stat gurus) into believing that teams should allocate field goal attempts based strictly on field goal percentages; earlier this season, a prominent NBA scout
told me that a "stat guru" had once said to him that teams should "start the players with the five highest field goal percentages because field goal percentage is such an important statistic." The "stat guru" was completely oblivious to the reality that this would result in ludicrous lineups consisting of role players who have limited capabilities to create their own shots.
I know that every TV and radio talking head has a stack of statistics and facts placed in front of him before each broadcast plus a producer constantly talking to him in his ear; what I simply cannot fathom is why so many people on TV and radio say things that just do not make sense and then try to support this nonsense with
faulty and/or misleading data. Is it really that hard to think logically, are media members so devoted to storylines that they consider to be
"higher truths" that they make intentionally misleading statements or do certain people simply lose all sense of pride/self respect regarding their work once they have "made it" (in terms of receiving huge salaries)? Consumers should be disappointed that many of the people who get paid the most to provide commentary/analysis are so unprofessional about their work; paraphrasing a line from "Fiddler on the Roof," would it spoil some vast eternal plan if the large scale content providers hired more people who both understand the subject matter at hand (whether that subject is NBA basketball or anything else) and possess top notch writing skills? I have file folders that are packed with old articles that I have cut out from various newspapers and magazines because those articles contain interesting facts, perspectives and opinions--you can find some of them
here--but far too much of what is published today is unreadable, let alone being worthy of being reread and savored.
Labels: Amare Stoudemire, Carmelo Anthony, Derrick Rose, Dirk Nowitzki, Dwyane Wade, Eric Gordon, Kevin Durant, Kobe Bryant, LeBron James, Monta Ellis
posted by David Friedman @ 3:41 AM
Kevin Durant Leads the Way as Team USA Wins FIBA World Championship for First Time Since 1994
FIBA World Championship MVP Kevin Durant capped off a spectacular tournament with a game-high 28 points plus five rebounds to carry Team USA to an 81-64 gold medal game victory over Turkey. Durant set Team USA FIBA World Championship records for points in a tournament (205) and scoring average (22.8 ppg) while shooting .556 from the field (including .456 from three point range) and .912 from the free throw line. In Team USA's 89-74 semifinal win versus Lithuania, Durant set a Team USA single game FIBA World Championship record with 38 points. The seemingly effortless way that Durant scored at will throughout this event was remarkable to watch and was reminiscent of how Brazilian legend Oskar Schmidt poured in points in FIBA play during his prime years.
I concluded my
FIBA World Championship preview article with this statement:
Team USA can win the gold medal if they play smart and tenacious defense, force turnovers and score a lot of points in transition--but even if this team plays the best basketball that they are capable of playing they will probably have at least one or two close games; it should not surprise anyone if Team USA fails to win the FIBA World Championship.
Team USA followed the above prescription en route to posting a 9-0 record in the tournament but--as I expected--they had to survive a couple close games: they slipped by Brazil 70-68 in the third game of the preliminary round after the Brazilians missed a potentially tying shot at the buzzer and they trailed as late as midway through the second quarter in the quarterfinal game versus Russia before prevailing 89-79.
Team USA's defensive execution was inconsistent during the early part of the tournament but they used their depth, their athleticism and Durant's scoring punch to get victories. They hit their collective stride defensively in the elimination portion of the event but even at that stage I think that depth was an underrated factor in their success; while Durant was far and away the best player on Team USA, the other main players in the rotation were largely interchangeable (at least in terms of their overall impact in a FIBA setting): opposing teams could often hang with Team USA in the early going but when both teams went to their benches Team USA experienced little or no drop off while the opposing teams became significantly less effective.
After the 2008 Olympics, I
authored a report card containing grades for each of Team USA's players. Here is how I explained my methodology:
Players are listed in order of minutes played because that statistic provides a hint about Coach Mike Krzyzewski's evaluation...It should go without saying--but I'll say it anyway--that it is not meaningful to compare a player's numbers in 40 minute games played under FIBA rules with his numbers in 48 minute games played under NBA rules...
The grades listed below represent how well a particular player filled his respective role on the team; obviously, some players had bigger roles than others, so a bench player's "B" does not mean the same thing as a starter's "B." Production when games were close is given a heavier weight than production that took place after the victories were already well in hand.
Using those same standards, here are my grades for the 2010 version of Team USA:
Kevin Durant (28.2 mpg, 22.8 ppg, 6.1 rpg, 1.8 apg, 13 steals, six blocked shots)
Durant led Team USA in scoring, three point field goal percentage and free throw percentage, he ranked second in both rebounding and steals and he tied for second in blocked shots. No opposing player had the right combination of foot speed and length to be able to guard him effectively; the only method that has a chance versus Durant is to play him very physically (a la Ron Artest in the first round of the 2010 NBA playoffs) and it is surprising that Team USA's opponents did not try that approach more consistently: frankly, while it is true that Durant made some very impressive one on one moves, it is stunning how often Team USA's opponents left Durant open for face up jumpers--particularly since Eric Gordon was the only other regular member of the rotation who was consistently making jump shots.
Grade: "A"
Chauncey Billups (23.1 mpg, 9.8 ppg, 1.9 rpg, 3.1 apg, 11 steals, zero blocked shots)
"Mr. Big Shot" looked like "Mr. Brick Shot" for much of this event: his .391 overall field goal percentage was the worst on the team and he fired up the second most three point attempts despite shooting just .318 (seventh on the team) from long range--and FIBA's "long range" (20 feet, six inches) is actually a midrange NBA jumper. As an All-Star and former NBA Finals MVP, Billups was supposed to be a stabilizing force for his younger, less experienced teammates but instead he seemed to be channeling the shot selection of his NBA teammate J.R. Smith; Billups attempted more than twice as many three pointers as two pointers, a ratio only approximated by Eric Gordon--but Gordon was this team's version of Vinnie "Microwave" Johnson off of the bench (particularly against weaker opponents), while Billups was misfiring from all angles regardless of how closely he was being guarded or how much time remained on the shot clock. Billups scored 19 points on 5-7 three point field goal shooting versus overmatched Angola but he had just four points and missed all five of his field goal attempts in the gold medal game versus Turkey. In the semifinal game versus Lithuania, Billups scored three points on 1-5 three point field goal shooting. Billups scored 15 points on 4-8 three point field goal shooting in the quarterfinal game versus Russia. One out of three may get you into the Baseball Hall of Fame but one good game out of three in the final stanza of this event when you are supposed to be one of the team's leaders is hardly impressive.
Billups ranked second on the team in scoring and assists, he had the best assist/turnover ratio among the team's primary ballhandlers and he played solid defense against bigger, slower opponents (though he struggled versus quick guards); those are the reasons that he started every game and played relatively heavy minutes but he was not nearly as efficient as he should have been as a scorer.
Grade: "B-/C+"
Derrick Rose (23.1 mpg, 7.2 ppg, 2.1 rpg, 3.2 apg, 10 steals, three blocked shots)
Rose led the team in assists but after playing very well in the first four games of the preliminary round he slumped in the next four games, culminating in a scoreless performance versus Lithuania during which he played just 12 minutes and was benched for the entire fourth quarter. He struggled to make outside shots and could not find his way to the hoop as consistently or as effectively as Russell Westbrook did.
Grade: "C-"
Lamar Odom (22.0 mpg, 7.1 ppg, 7.7 rpg, .4 apg, five steals, six blocked shots)
As I predicted in my preview article, Odom led Team USA in rebounding. Despite all of the talk about Odom's versatility, the reality is that the one skill set area in which he is significantly above average is rebounding. He is an erratic shooter (and therefore an inconsistent scorer) and his ballhandling decisions are at times questionable (leading to offensive fouls or other turnovers) but there is no doubt that he is a very good rebounder and he did yeoman's work for Team USA despite playing out of position as the starting center. One of Odom's best contributions to Team USA is that he attempted just four three pointers, making three of them; he is not a great outside shooter, so he showed good judgment with his shot selection.
ESPN's Fran Fraschilla heaped praise on Odom throughout the tournament, particularly during the final two games. There is no question that Odom played very well versus Lithuania (13 points, 10 rebounds) and Turkey (15 points, 11 rebounds); in those games he not only did excellent work on the boards but he emerged as the second scoring option behind Durant, connecting on drives, putbacks and cuts to the hoop. However, his 28 points in those two games nearly matches his scoring output in the first six games (36 points). Odom only had four total assists, though it must be noted that he made some outstanding outlet passes that fueled fastbreak scoring opportunities.
Odom is an excellent complementary player because he understands and accepts his role, something that proved to be as true when he played for Team USA as it is when he plays for the Lakers.
Grade: "B+"
Russell Westbrook (19.4 mpg, 9.1 ppg, 2.8 rpg, 2.6 apg, 12 steals, four blocked shots)
Westbrook ranked third on the team in scoring, assists and steals despite not starting a single game. There were extended stretches when he was Team USA's most effective guard. In contrast to Billups, Westbrook did not pad his stats against Angola but he scored in double figures in each of the final three games, though his two point field goal percentage versus Russia and Turkey was not great. Westbrook drew Fraschilla's ire sometimes for missing dunks or attempting flashy plays but overall he had a very positive impact off of the bench, providing a change of pace (literally and figuratively) that opposing teams could not match.
Grade: "B+"
Andre Iguodala (18.8 mpg, 5.7 ppg, 4.6 rpg, 1.9 apg, 16 steals, zero blocked shots)
Iguodala started every game at small forward and he emerged as the team's designated defensive stopper on the perimeter. Like Odom, he wisely limited his three point attempts (seven, making just two of them) and he pretty much restricted his shot attempts to dunks and layups. He led the team in steals and ranked fourth in rebounding. Iguodala is used to dominating the ball as an NBA player but he adjusted very well to being a complementary player for Team USA.
Grade: "B+"
Eric Gordon (17.6 mpg, 8.6 ppg, 1.6 rpg, .6 apg, eight steals, two blocked shots)
Gordon's main role on this team was to hit open jumpers, particularly from three point range, and he did an excellent job, ranking fourth on the team in scoring, second in three pointers made and second in three point shooting percentage despite not starting a game and ranking just seventh in minutes played. However, Gordon did most of his damage versus Tunisia (21 points) and Angola (17 points) while making very minimal contributions in the final three games, scoring six, three and zero points against Russia, Lithuania and Turkey respectively. He did what he was asked to do but his lack of production versus the top teams in the most important games lowers his grade.
Grade: "B-"
Rudy Gay (13.4 mpg, 7.0 ppg, 2.9 rpg, .8 apg, nine steals, eight blocked shots)
Gay is the kind of athletic, versatile forward who is perfectly suited for FIBA play and that is why in my preview I suggested that he could be an X factor for Team USA. He started out strongly with double figure scoring efforts in the first two preliminary round games but he did not score in double figures again except for the Angola game. Minutes were a bit hard to come by for him at times because he could not match Durant's scoring or Odom's rebounding.
Grade: "B-"
Stephen Curry (10.6 mpg, 4.6 ppg, 1.4 rpg, 2.1 apg, four steals, zero blocked shots)
I love watching Stephen Curry play and his father
Dell Curry is one of my favorite non-superstar NBA players of all time--but it was quite predictable that Stephen Curry would have a small role for Team USA. As I have repeatedly stated in my articles about FIBA play, contrary to popular belief it is not necessary or desirable to stock Team USA's roster with players whose primary and/or exclusive skill is three point shooting; the FIBA three point shot is a midrange NBA shot anyway and it is much more important for Team USA's perimeter players to be able to defend and to be able to handle the ball against pressure than it is for them to be able to hit spot up shots.
Curry almost got whiplash a few times as he watched quicker guards drive around him and on other occasions he had some trouble defending screen/roll sets, either ending up out of position or switching on to a bigger player and getting abused in the post.
Again, I love watching Stephen Curry and I think that he has a great NBA future but Coach Krzyzewski's substitution patterns tell you all you need to know about Curry's role on this team: Curry played double figure minutes in the first game versus Croatia and in the blowout wins versus Iran, Tunisia and Angola but he did not play at all in the nailbiter versus Brazil and he logged just five, two and seven minutes respectively versus Russia, Lithuania and Turkey.
When the "experts" say that Team USA needs shooting specialists but Coach Krzyzewski wins gold medals while deadeye shooters like Michael Redd (in 2008) and Curry ride the bench except for garbage time are you going to believe the "experts" or are you going to believe Coach Krzyzewski?
Grade: "B-"
Kevin Love (8.8 mpg, 5.7 ppg, 4.9 rpg, .8 apg, three steals, one blocked shot)
Fraschilla repeatedly raved about Love but I never quite understood the fuss; before the tournament I predicted that Love would "put up impressive per minute statistics during garbage time" and that is exactly what he did. Although I was not correct that he would be the team's 12th man (he logged 11 more total minutes than Granger and played two more total minutes than Chandler), Love--like Curry--saw very little action against the top teams: Love played just five minutes versus Brazil, three minutes versus Russia, eight minutes versus Lithuania and one minute versus Turkey.
I like Love as an NBA player and I think that he will be a better pro than many people originally predicted but the prototypical FIBA big man is lithe and mobile (Chris Bosh, Kevin Durant, Lamar Odom, Rudy Gay), two words that do not accurately describe Love.
I am sure that "stat gurus" everywhere are salivating over Love's per minute numbers and wondering why he did not play 30 mpg but I'll trust my own eyes and Coach Krzyzewski's judgment over "advanced statistics" that are the product of Love's garbage time production against inferior opponents.
Grade: "A" (again, keep in mind that the grade is based on production relative to one's role, so this does not mean that I am equating Love with Durant)
Danny Granger (9.7 mpg, 4.1 ppg, .9 rpg, 1.0 apg, one steal, one blocked shot)
As I expected, Granger did not crack the regular rotation and most of his minutes came in garbage time--in two of the nine games he did not play at all. I don't see how to fairly give him any grade other than "incomplete."
Grade: "I"
Tyson Chandler (8.6 mpg, 2.6 ppg, 2.7 rpg, .4 apg, two steals, five blocked shots)
Chandler was probably the most disappointing player on the team. Despite being the only true center on the roster he not only failed to hold on to the starting center spot but he dropped out of the main rotation entirely as Coach Mike Krzyzewski elected to go predominantly with a "small" lineup--a strategic decision that I predicted in my preview article, though I still thought that Chandler would be part of the regular rotation.
Despite his limited minutes, Chandler tied for fourth on the team in fouls committed. He failed to provide much of a presence defensively or on the glass and, as usual, his offensive repertoire was largely restricted to point blank shots.
Grade: "D"
Final thoughts:
I analyze NBA games from an objective perspective, not as a partisan fan, but as an American I am happy that Jerry Colangelo, Coach Krzyzewski and a dedicated corps of players (the 2008 Olympians plus the current members of Team USA) have helped USA Basketball earn respect not only by winning gold medals but by doing things the right way on and off the court. Basketball was invented in America, so it was embarrassing to go a decade and a half without winning the sport's world championship, but the exemplary way that this team conducted itself en route to the gold medal wipes out the horrible memories of the desultory performances of previous editions of Team USA (with the nadir being the sixth place finish in the 2002 FIBA World Championship held in Indianapolis, Indiana).
While I enjoyed watching this team play, it is hilarious to read/listen to much of the mainstream commentary about FIBA play in general and Team USA in particular; we are consistently told that in order to win in FIBA events you have to have big men and you have to have shooters, despite the fact that both of these contentions have repeatedly been refuted: Team USA's winning recipe consists of stingy defense--particularly versus screen/roll plays and versus opposing three point shooters--forcing turnovers and scoring in transition. Team USA's halfcourt offense will never be as smooth or sophisticated as the halfcourt offenses of the other elite FIBA teams, true back to the basket big men are not as valuable as versatile, mobile forwards who can face the basket offensively and guard multiple positions defensively and the ability to hit three point shots is not nearly as important as the ability to defend against opposing three point shooters; reread the preceding sentence and you will understand why Michael Redd and Carlos Boozer hardly played for the 2008 version of Team USA and why Stephen Curry and Tyson Chandler reprised those players' respective roles on the 2010 version of Team USA--but I have no doubt that prior to the 2012 Olympics we will once again hear "experts" declaring how important it is for Team USA to add shooting specialists and big men to the roster.
Labels: 2010 Team USA, Andre Iguodala, Chauncey Billups, Danny Granger, Derrick Rose, Eric Gordon, Kevin Durant, Kevin Love, Lamar Odom, Rudy Gay, Russell Westbrook, Stephen Curry, Tyson Chandler
posted by David Friedman @ 4:26 AM
Team USA Faces Major Challenge in FIBA World Championship
The FIBA World Championship begins on August 28. This competition rarely receives much publicity in the United States but for many basketball-minded nations it is very important, equal to--if not even greater than--the Olympics in terms of prestige; American kids who play basketball dream of winning an NBA championship but kids in other countries dream of leading their homeland to the FIBA World Championship title.
The significance of this year's FIBA World Championship for Team USA is that the winner receives an automatic bid for the 2012 Olympics (Team USA
captured the 2008 Olympic gold medal but the previous Olympic champion is not guaranteed a spot in the next Olympic games); if Team USA does not win the FIBA World Championship then the United States will have to qualify for the Olympics by playing in the 2011 FIBA Americas tournament and that could be a dicey proposition if the NBA endures a strike/lockout: during the 1998 lockout, the U.S. fielded a team of non-NBA players that worked very hard but only managed to win a bronze medal in the 1998 FIBA World Championship (after the lockout ended, Gary Payton, Tim Duncan, Kevin Garnett and Tim Hardaway led Team USA to a 10-0 sweep in the 1999 FIBA Americas Tournament to qualify for the 2000 Olympics). It is extremely unlikely that a Team USA squad consisting entirely of non-NBA players could win the FIBA Americas Tournament in 2011, so if Team USA fails to win the FIBA World Championship and the NBA suffers the work stoppage that many people are anticipating then the United States may not send a basketball team to the 2012 Olympic Games for just the second time ever (the first time was when the U.S. boycotted the Moscow Olympics in 1980 to protest the Soviet Union's invasion of Afghanistan).
Team USA sent the "A" team to the 2008 Olympics--including Kobe Bryant (the sport's best all-around player), 2000 Olympic gold medalist Jason Kidd (who has never lost a game in FIBA play), LeBron James (who subsequently won two NBA MVPs) and 2006 NBA Finals MVP Dwyane Wade--but for a variety of reasons none of the members of the so-called "Redeem Team" will be participating in this year's FIBA World Championship; this year's squad is headlined by Kevin Durant, who has never played for the national team before. Durant, Chauncey Billups, Danny Granger and Derrick Rose are the only members of the team who have ever been NBA All-Stars, while only Durant and Billups have made the All-NBA Team. Billups and Lamar Odom are the only Team USA players who have won an NBA championship. This year's team lacks star power, championship experience and FIBA experience.
Team USA has historically not fared well in this event, finishing first just three times in 15 FIBA World Championship appearances (in contrast, the U.S. men's national basketball team has captured 13 of a possible 17 Olympic gold medals); the last U.S. team to earn a FIBA World Championship gold medal was the 1994 squad (the so-called "Dream Team II") led by a star-studded cast including Shaquille O'Neal (18.0 ppg, 8.5 rpg), Reggie Miller (17.1 ppg, .526 3FG%), Dominique Wilkins (12.6 ppg) and Joe Dumars (12.6 ppg). After that came the lockout-depleted 1998 team that earned a bronze medal, the embarrassingly inept 2002 team that finished sixth despite enjoying homecourt advantage (in Indianapolis) and the 2006 team that settled for a bronze medal despite featuring some big name players (including LeBron James, Dwyane Wade, Carmelo Anthony, Chris Paul and Chris Bosh) who have been in the news for various reasons this summer.
In a September 4, 2007 article titled
The Real Story Behind Team USA's Losses in Previous FIBA Events, I refuted some misconceptions about why the United States suffered humiliating defeats in the 2002 FIBA World Championship, the 2004 Olympics and the 2006 FIBA World Championship. The points that I made in that article are still relevant regarding Team USA's prospects this time around:
1) Most FIBA teams rely on the ability to drive to the hoop, draw in the defense and then kick the ball out to open three point shooters. In order to be successful, Team USA's guards must control dribble penetration. Also, Team USA's defense must be "on a string" when opposing teams run screen/roll actions, because otherwise their opponents will either shred Team USA with wide open layups or bombard them from three point range.
2) It is certainly a nice luxury for Team USA to shoot well from three point range but it is far more important to shut down opposing three point shooters without compromising the interior defense; this requires communication, discipline and hustle, because otherwise at least one player will be out of position and the whole defense will fall apart, something that was a recurring theme during Team USA's dreary performances in 2002, 2004 and 2006.
FIBA play is more physical than NBA play, particularly on the perimeter; expect to see opposing teams be very physical with Durant, who did not fare well in the first round of the 2010 NBA playoffs versus Ron Artest's bump and run defense. No FIBA team has an individual defender who is as skilled and as strong as Artest but the FIBA rules allow for a lot more contact than NBA rules do so it will not be easy for Durant to rack up 25-30 ppg while shooting a good percentage from the field and he likely will not be granted as many free throw attempts per game as he receives in the NBA.
Tyson Chandler is the only true center on the roster but I am not very concerned about Team USA being outrebounded or having a lot of trouble defending the post; Team USA is athletic enough to compete with anyone on the glass and the nature of the FIBA game (the wide lane and the general style of play) is such that it is very unlikely that opposing teams will just pound the ball into the low post. Team USA will certainly go "small" for a significant percentage of the time, putting Lamar Odom or another forward at the center spot.
NBA TV's Steve Smith declared that Odom is the second most important player on the team (behind only Durant) but, with all due respect to Smith's basketball acumen and Odom's skill set, if that turns out to be true then Team USA will settle for the bronze medal again. Derrick Rose has to be the team's second best player and he will have to be the go-to player in clutch situations if the opposing team smothers Durant. Rudy Gay may not be the third best NBA player on the roster but his size and athletic ability should enable him to have an impact from either forward spot; he could prove to be a real X-factor and should be one of the team's leading scorers after Durant. Chauncey Billups will likely be the other starting guard alongside Rose and the team will rely on him for calm, veteran leadership, rugged defense and timely three point shots. Odom's primary responsibility for Team USA will be the same as it is for the Lakers: rebounding. Odom may very well lead Team USA in that department. Other than that, Odom needs to monitor his shot selection (i.e., stop shooting three pointers and long jumpers) and cut down on his turnovers (he had a 6-3 turnover/assist ratio during the four game exhibition tour).
Andre Iguodala started all four exhibition games at small forward but he shot just .333 from the field and .125 from three point range, bringing back (bad) memories of Richard Jefferson's performance during the 2004 Olympics (Jefferson started all eight games despite shooting just .321 from the field and .261 from three point range). Iguodala should be a valuable player because he can score, pass and defend but it remains to be seen how well he will adjust to the FIBA game.
Eric Gordon's ability to both shoot and defend could earn him a key spot in the rotation but it will be difficult for him to supplant Billups or Rose; likewise, Russell Westbrook's athleticism could be valuable but there are only so many possible minutes at the guard spots (keep in mind that FIBA games last 40 minutes, not 48).
Stephen Curry will be this team's version of Michael Redd on the 2008 Olympic team: the dead-eye three point shooter who mainly gets in the game when--or, in this team's case, if--Team USA has a comfortable lead. Curry actually is a better all-around player than Redd, though, and his ability to play both guard positions could help him to carve out a slightly larger role than Redd had two years ago.
Danny Granger played sparingly during the exhibition tour and he struggled with his shot, so even though he has been an All-Star it will probably be difficult for him to move up the depth chart at this point.
Kevin Love is the designated 12th man, a rebounder/passer who will put up impressive per minute statistics during garbage time.
The nightmare scenario for Team USA (other than an injury or foul trouble sidelining Durant) is for an opponent to carve them up with screen/roll plays, hit a high percentage of three point shots and use physical defense to frustrate finesse wing players such as Durant and Gay. Team USA's players are mostly young and inexperienced and could get that "deer in the headlights" look if an opposing team hits them with a 10-0 run. Team USA lacks a lock down perimeter defender--a role that Bryant filled brilliantly in the 2008 Olympics--and does not have a defined go-to scorer other than Durant.
Team USA can win the gold medal if they play smart and tenacious defense, force turnovers and score a lot of points in transition--but even if this team plays the best basketball that they are capable of playing they will probably have at least one or two close games; it should not surprise anyone if Team USA fails to win the FIBA World Championship.
Labels: 2010 Team USA, Andre Iguodala, Chauncey Billups, Danny Granger, Derrick Rose, Eric Gordon, Kevin Durant, Kevin Love, Lamar Odom, Rudy Gay, Russell Westbrook, Stephen Curry, Tyson Chandler
posted by David Friedman @ 2:10 AM
This Year RoY Should be Spelled R-O-S-E
No rookie averaged 20 ppg or made the All-Star team this season but Derrick Rose has been consistently productive from day one and his Chicago Bulls are in contention for a playoff berth. Point guard is generally considered to be the toughest position for a young NBA player to learn, which makes Rose's smooth transition to the NBA even more impressive.Here is an analysis of the performances of this year's top rookies:It is very difficult for a rookie to make an impact in the NBA, either individually or in terms of helping his team to substantially improve. Only two rookies have made the All-Star team since 1998, Tim Duncan (1998) and Yao Ming (2003). Since 2000, only four rookies have averaged at least 20 ppg (Elton Brand, LeBron James, Carmelo Anthony and Kevin Durant). The last Rookie of the Year whose team made the playoffs is Amare Stoudemire (2003), who was a distant third in scoring (13.5 ppg) for the Phoenix Suns.
This season has not broken any of those patterns: no rookie made the All-Star team and no rookie is averaging 20 ppg. We cannot yet say whether or not the Rookie of the Year will play in the playoffs, because we do not know who the Rookie of the Year will be nor do we know the final playoff seedings. However, the fact that only one of the top Rookie of the Year candidates has his team in contention for a playoff berth certainly speaks in his favor; Derrick Rose has responded very well to the pressure of being the No. 1 overall draft pick and playing for his hometown team, the Chicago Bulls, who currently hold a 1.5 game lead over Charlotte for the eighth and final Eastern Conference playoff berth. Rose is averaging 16.6 ppg, 6.2 apg and 3.9 rpg while putting up very solid shooting numbers from the field (.470) and the free-throw line (.791). His three-point shooting percentage is terrible (.235) but he is attempting less than one three-pointer per game, so he understands that he should not be firing away from long distance until he improves his accuracy.
Rose ranks 10th in the NBA in minutes played, which is a very impressive statistic for a young point guard: that shows that he has not hit the "rookie wall" mentally or physically and that his coach trusts him to be the team's leader at all times. Rose ranks first among all rookies in assists and second in scoring. He has been a very consistent performer, both in terms of his month to month production and by posting nearly identical scoring, rebounding and assist averages at home and on the road. Point guard is generally considered to be the toughest position for a young NBA player to learn but Rose has immediately emerged as a very solid contributor for a Bulls team that -- with six games remaining -- has already won three more games than they did last season.
O.J. Mayo averaged 23.1 ppg on .480 field goal shooting in November to unofficially take the early lead in the Rookie of the Year race but his numbers have dropped off dramatically since that time; in March he scored 14.7 ppg on .430 field goal shooting. Mayo is not a great rebounder, passer or defender, so his value mainly consists of how much -- and how efficiently -- he scores. While some people touted him as the most "NBA ready" rookie, I was a little less optimistic after I saw him play in the Summer League, when I offered this early assessment: "Mayo has the tools to be a good NBA scorer but it remains to be seen if he will be an impact player overall -- let alone a superstar -- or if he will primarily be a guy who, as the saying goes, "gets buckets.'" Mayo still leads all rookies in scoring (18.3 ppg) and his three point and free throw percentages (.375 and .876 respectively) are good but the Memphis Grizzlies are just as terrible this year with him as they were last year without him.
When Kevin McHale traded Mayo's draft rights as part of a deal to acquire Kevin Love, some critics made the predictable jokes referring to McHale's track record as Minnesota's General Manager and suggested that he had made a boneheaded move. It is unfortunate that snide comments are passed off as intelligent basketball analysis but the problem is that too many of the so-called experts do not have the foggiest idea about how to watch a player and actually form an intelligent opinion about whether or not he can play, so they shift the issue to a tired, old familiar storyline. I am not going to defend McHale's record because it has nothing to do with the real issue in this context, which is whether or not Love can play.
After I watched Love play in the Summer League, I wrote, "Regardless of the superficial impression that Love's movement creates, he knows how to play the game. He sets screens, makes the correct passes and goes to the glass aggressively at both ends of the court. Love seems to intuitively understand where he is supposed to go, like in one sequence when (teammate Pooh) Jeter drove, drew the defense and Love faded to the perimeter a la Bill Laimbeer, catching a pass and without hesitation drilling a jumper from just behind the college three-point line...In his first NBA action, Love displayed better than advertised mobility, willingness to attack the glass at both ends of the court and a good understanding of how to play offensively in terms of setting screens, making passes and operating in the paint. He made some 'rookie mistakes,' particularly defensively, but most of the things that he did wrong are correctable errors as opposed to fundamental problems with his game/skill set."
Love has surprised a lot of people who did not pay attention to the skill set that he displayed during the Summer League and he is averaging 11.2 ppg and 9.0 rpg (first among rookies, 10th in the league) while shooting .466 from the field and .787 from the free throw line. Love has really played well since the All-Star break, averaging 14.9 ppg and 9.5 rpg while increasing his shooting percentages to .487 and .803 respectively.
Mayo is arguably not even the best rookie on his own team: Marc Gasol is averaging 11.7 ppg (seventh among rookies) and 7.4 rpg (third among rookies) while shooting .532 from the field. While Mayo has been fading fast, Gasol has increased his production across the board since the All-Star break (13.4 ppg, 8.0 rpg, .552 field goal shooting).
Brook Lopez has provided a solid inside presence for a New Jersey team that stayed on the fringes of the battle for the eighth playoff spot in the East until recently sliding backwards in the standings. He is averaging 12.9 ppg (sixth among rookies) and 7.9 rpg (second among rookies) while shooting .528 from the field. He ranks 10th in the NBA in total offensive rebounds and ninth in the league in blocked shots.
Two explosive rookie guards have emerged in the latter portion of the season. Eric Gordon of the L.A. Clippers is averaging 18.8 ppg on .458 field goal shooting since the All-Star break. Overall, though, Gordon is scoring 15.7 ppg (tied for third among rookies) for a team that has the second worst winning percentage in the West and the worst winning percentage for the franchise since 1999-00 -- remember, we're talking about the Clippers here! That just does not look like a Rookie of the Year resume, particularly in contrast to what Rose has accomplished.
The Oklahoma City Thunder's Russell Westbrook is averaging 17.3 ppg since the All-Star break but he is only shooting .395 from the field during that time. For the season, he is averaging 15.7 ppg (tied with Gordon for third among rookies) and 5.1 apg (second among rookies) for a team that started slowly but now has a marginally better winning percentage than last year.
Mayo's early scoring exploits probably left a lingering impression that will garner him some Rookie of the Year votes but Rose is the most deserving candidate. It will be interesting to see if the voters are savvy enough to appreciate the non-flashy but quite substantive contributions being made by Gasol, Love and Lopez.
Labels: Brook Lopez, Derrick Rose, Eric Gordon, Kevin Love, Marc Gasol, O.J. Mayo, Russell Westbrook
posted by David Friedman @ 6:45 AM
