Player Evaluation, Media Bias and False Narratives
Media coverage of the NBA is either amusing or pathetic, depending on
your perspective and sense of humor (the same is true of media coverage of the world in a
broader sense but that is a story for a different day and a different
platform). For instance, here are the 2019 first round playoff
statistics of two players, one of whom is portrayed as a clutch
performer and the other of whom is portrayed as a player who did not
perform well at all:
Player A: 21.7 ppg, 2.8 rpg, 7.7 apg, .8 spg, .2 bpg, .433/.333/.829 shooting
Player B: 22.8 ppg, 8.8 rpg, 10.6 apg, 1.0 spg, .6 bpg, .360/.324/.885 shooting
Player
A is Lou Williams and Player B is Russell Westbrook. It should be noted
that the above numbers represent, by far, the best playoff performance
of Williams' 14 year NBA career; his brief 2019 playoff run is an outlier, not his typical level. This is not meant as a knock against
Williams, who is a very good player and a top sixth man. The point is
that many media members craft narratives that suit their purposes and
biases, regardless of the truth. Williams is a soft-spoken, well-liked
and well-respected player. It is understandable why media members like him. Williams had some strong performances as his L.A. Clippers battled valiantly against the two-time defending champion Golden State Warriors before losing, 4-2.
Westbrook is a brash,
outwardly confident--if not arrogant--player who treats many media
members with outward contempt. In the pre-internet days it used to be
said that one should not pick quarrels with those who buy ink by the
barrel. Westbrook is engaged in active combat with the people who write/tell the stories that define his career; those same people also vote for awards such as MVP and the All-NBA Team.
In his 2019 exit interview, Westbrook made it clear that he does not care what those people think, write or say:
If you want to determine my career and what I've done over two, three
games, you go ahead. That don't mean [anything] to me. It doesn't. I'm
going to wake up, like I told you before, three beautiful kids, I'm
going to wake up and smile, be happy, enjoy my life. Doesn't change
anything about--talk about if I'm playing bad or who's better, who's
not. I know who I am as a person, and that's the biggest thing I can say
about myself. I know who I am. I know what I'm able to do. I know my
capabilities. I know what I've done. I know what I can and can't do. So
I'm OK with that. I'm OK with who I am. I'll just be blessed to wake up
every day and enjoy my life. The talk about--I don't even know what
talk you're talking about, but whatever that is, you guys can keep
talking about it, and I'm going to keep living my life...
There used to be conversations if I was a ball hog, but now I lead
the league in assists for the past three years or whatever it is, that's
getting squashed out. So now the conversation is about
shooting. Next year I'm going to become a better shooter. After that
it'll be probably [be] my left foot is bigger than my right one. Who
knows. So that's why, back to your point, I don't really
care what people say, what they think about me, because it doesn't
really matter. I know what I'm able to do and know what I'm able to do
at a high level every night, and nobody else can do what I can do on a
night-in, night-out basis, and I truly believe that. If they could, I'm
pretty sure they would. But I know for a fact that nobody can...
When you do so much at a high level, a lot of haters come. That's how life is, man. That's life, man. When you do so much,
people going to try to pull and take away and try to take that away from
you. But nobody can take away from me. I've been blessed, and I stay
prayerful, stay thankful to be able to do what I'm able to do, and
nobody can ever take that away from me, regardless of what it is, how
many stories are written, how many stats are put up, how many numbers
are put up.
Westbrook was asked if he has made the triple double "passé" by averaging a triple double for three straight seasons and he replied, "If it's passé, so be it. Let somebody else do it, or try to."
Here is Westbrook's resume:
- Only player who has ever averaged a triple double for three straight regular seasons
- One regular season MVP (2017); four straight top five finishes (2015-18)
- Seven All-NBA selections, including two First Team nods
- Eight All-Star selections
- Two All-Star Game MVPs earned by playing hard in an era when too many of his colleagues literally lay down on the court instead of playing defense (The All-Star Game officially jumped the shark in 2017 when Stephen Curry lay down on the court to let Giannis Antetokounmpo have an uncontested dunk).
- Led the league in games played four times
- Led the league in assists twice
- Led the league in scoring twice
- Only scoring champion who has led the league in assists more than once
- Key player for four teams that advanced to the Western Conference Finals, one of which advanced to the NBA Finals
Two notes:
1) Any attempt to suggest that the triple double is watered down now--or was watered down when Oscar Robertson became the only player to average a triple double in a season even once--is refuted by the simple fact that no one other than Robertson has come close to matching what Westbrook is doing. If the triple double were easy or watered down, then other players would be averaging triple doubles.
2) The NBA is designed to encourage and create parity--not to the extent of the NFL, but to a large extent nonetheless. Thus, 13 of the 15 Western Conference teams advanced to the Conference Finals at least once between 2000-2018 (only the Clippers and Pelicans failed to do so). However, just four teams made it that far at least four times: Spurs (nine), Lakers (seven), Warriors (four) and Thunder (four). The Thunder is the only team from that group that did not win a championship, but what Westbrook accomplished alongside Kevin Durant should not be blithely dismissed, because that is a level of team achievement that is rare in the NBA. The best and most dominant players from those teams--Tim Duncan, Shaquille O'Neal, Kobe Bryant, Kevin Durant, Stephen Curry, Russell Westbrook--are a cut above just about everyone else who played in the NBA during that era. LeBron James, whose teams advanced to eight straight NBA Finals and nine NBA Finals overall while he played in the Eastern Conference, can be added to that list as well but few--if any--other players from that era combined that degree of high level team success with individual statistical dominance.
---
Westbrook is a 30 year old, 11 season NBA veteran who has already established himself as a first ballot Hall of Famer. He has also endured multiple knee surgeries that have clearly taken away some of his explosiveness and flexibility and those physical issues have affected his shooting percentages: he cannot finish at the rim like he used to, nor can he get the same elevation on his jump shot.
All great players need help to win a championship, and they need the right kind of help to mesh with their (many) skill set strengths and their (few) skill set weaknesses. The Warriors have dominated the NBA for the past four years by accumulating more star power than anyone else and then just overwhelming the opposition, though the Warriors have also featured good to excellent benches as well. LeBron James only won championships when he was surrounded by excellent shooters, plus big men who were willing to do the grunt work of setting screens and playing defense. Kobe Bryant won three championships alongside a dominant big man and then two more championships with a very good--but not great--big man. Tim Duncan won championships with ensemble casts containing a good mixture of shooting, defense and high basketball IQ.
Even when the Thunder had Durant along with Westbrook, there never was a season during which the team had the best or most suitable roster to complement Westbrook's game. The previous iteration of the Thunder was built around Durant and came very close to winning a title. The post-Durant version of the Thunder has been cobbled together year to year and is less than the sum of its parts because those parts, some of which may appear to be good in isolation, do not fit together properly.
Looking specifically at the first round series during which Portland beat Oklahoma City 4-1, Eddie Johnson of Sirius XM Radio correctly noted, "The Portland Trail Blazers have a better team around their two guards."
The
Thunder's supporting cast is not well designed for the modern NBA
playoffs. They do not shoot the three point shot particularly well, nor
do they defend the three point shot particularly well. With each passing year, the NBA is becoming more and more like FIBA. As I have noted in many of my articles about Team USA's participation in FIBA events, it is not essential to shoot a high percentage from three point range to win at the FIBA level but it is essential to limit the opposing team's three point shooting percentage.
Portland made 12 more three pointers than Oklahoma City while shooting .405 from three point range compared to .331 for the Thunder. Paul George led the Thunder by a wide margin with 47 three pointers attempted but he made just 15 (.319). Meanwhile, Damian Lillard shot 26-54 (.481) from three point range and C.J. McCollum shot 17-38 (.447) from three point range. The Thunder could have survived George's subpar three point shooting if they had defended better.
NBA defense is not about one player or one matchup. It is about five players being, as coaches put it, "on a string." If that string breaks at any point, the whole string collapses. The Thunder put up good team defense numbers during the regular season but those overall numbers hid inconsistencies and flaws. The Thunder were prone to lapses and to giving up big runs; those things tend to be washed out when looking at 82 games' worth of numbers but they are magnified in a short series.
The Thunder either need a better defensive game plan, or they need players who are more committed to consistently executing the coaching staff's game plan.
At the other end of the court, the Thunder need an
offense that consistently generates shots that are high percentage shots
for the personnel that they have on the roster. That is largely on the
coaching staff. The Thunder also need to surround Westbrook with a
complementary supporting cast. That is the front office's responsibility
for the most part, though the coaching staff plays a role in terms of
developing the players who are on the roster to their maximum potential.
Ignoring the realities described above, it has become fashionable to blame most or all of the Thunder's problems on Westbrook's shot selection. It is true that his shot selection could be better. He does not shoot well from
three point range but he attempts a large volume of three pointers.
Shot
selection, particularly at the NBA level, involves a multi-factor
analysis. The 24 second shot clock looms large. When teams pack the
paint and the clock is ticking down, sometimes there is little choice
but to launch a three pointer--and when that happens, the team's star player is stuck with the "hand grenade" (shot clock that is about to explode) more often than the team's other players (unless, like LeBron James and James Harden, he is skilled at ducking his responsibilities by chucking that "hand grenade" to one of his less-skilled teammates).
OK, one might answer, but why does
Westbrook shoot them early in the clock? The point is that there is a chain reaction happening here; poorly run offenses often generate "hand grenades," and then the star may adjust by electing to shoot earlier in the shot clock because he knows that if he waits until late in the shot clock then he is going to end up with a shot from the same location that is more contested because the defender can crowd him, knowing that there is not enough time to drive.
Thus, while it is true that in an ideal world Westbrook would either (1) shoot fewer threes and/or (2) shoot a better percentage from three point range, the realities of the situation are more nuanced than most media members are capable of understanding and/or willing to report. On deadline, writing about a player who you don't like who just shot 6-20 (or whatever), it is much easier to write, "Westbrook is killing his team by shooting too much" as opposed to analyzing the game at a deeper level.
Looking at this issue even more deeply, there
are many often repeated fallacies about shot distribution and about the
capabilities of various players. A player's shooting percentage is
affected by the defensive attention that is paid to the other players on
the court. Thus, a player who shoots 4-8 on a particular diet of shots
may not shoot 8-16 on a different diet, but media members love to count field goal attempts, look at field goal percentages and then draw broad (and wrong) conclusions. Think of Mike Wilbon and Jon Barry breathlessly counting Kobe Bryant's field goal attempts while also breathlessly ignoring everything else that happened during the game.
Put more simply, just because a
star player shot 6-20 from the field and a different player on the same team shot 6-12 from the field one
cannot necessarily conclude that the star should have shot less often
and the other player should have shot more often. In many cases, those 12 "good" shots were created by the presence and skills of the star, while the star's 20 "bad" shots were a result of the overall functioning of the offense.
Perhaps
the oddest thing about the coverage of the Portland-Oklahoma series is that George--a
dark horse MVP candidate according to many media members during the regular
season--shot worse than Westbrook on three pointers and free throws
while also accumulating fewer rebounds, fewer assists and fewer blocked
shots. If George is supposedly an MVP level player and supposedly the
best player on the team then why do all of the media narratives blame
only Westbrook for the Thunder's loss?
---
All of this overreaction to one playoff series is reminiscent of the hack who wrote, 10 years ago, that game seven of the Lakers-Rockets series would be the defining moment of Kobe Bryant's career. That hack was no doubt eagerly anticipating that the Rockets would beat the Lakers; the media's decade-long love affair with Daryl Morey and the Rockets had just begun, while the media also loved to take unwarranted shots at Bryant.
Not surprisingly, after the Lakers beat the Rockets and went on to capture the first of their back to back titles in the second half of Bryant's career, that hack had nothing to say about the Lakers' game seven win over the Rockets or Bryant's subsequent Finals MVP.
Prior to the Houston series, Bryant had won three titles and had distinguished himself numerous times in postseason play. That game seven against Houston was important--all elimination games are obviously important--but by no stretch of the imagination would that one game define his career, win or lose.
Bryant won two of his five titles at the back end of his career with some of the weakest championship team supporting casts in recent memory, but the media consensus is that LeBron James--who has won three titles during his entire career--not only surpassed Bryant but is on par with Michael Jordan.
Perhaps the funniest thing about all of these comparisons is that the media purports to be ranking players by championships and then selects Jordan, who won six, as the standard, ignoring other all-time greats who won at least six titles. Bill Russell won 11. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar won six. Neither of those players had losing records in the Finals, let alone a mark as bad as James' 3-6.
If putting up elite individual statistics while winning the most championships are the benchmarks for being the greatest player of all-time, LeBron James is not even close to the top of the list; after Russell, Abdul-Jabbar and Jordan, there is Bryant (five), Tim Duncan (five), Magic Johnson (five) and Shaquille O'Neal (four), not to mention players who also won three titles and have to be in this conversation as well (Julius Erving, Larry Bird). There are also players who, while not quite individually on par with James, were great players in their own right who made significant contributions to multiple championship teams; that list includes
John Havlicek (eight championships) and
Scottie Pippen (six championships).
Labels: Damian Lillard, L.A. Clippers, Lou Williams, Oklahoma City Thunder, Portland Trail Blazers, Russell Westbrook
posted by David Friedman @ 12:49 PM
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
Boston Versus Philadelphia Preview
Eastern Conference Second Round
#4 Boston (39-27) vs. #8 Philadelphia (35-31)
Season series: Philadelphia, 2-1
Philadelphia can win if…the 76ers are able to limit their turnovers, force Boston to turn the ball over and then score in transition.
Boston will win because…the
Celtics have three future Hall of Famers plus a top notch point guard who is probably their most valuable player now; the Celtics simply have too much talent and too much championship level experience to lose to an inexperienced team that lacks a true superstar and struggles to score in a half court set. Andre Iguodala and Lou Williams lead a nice cast of solid Philadelphia players but with Paul Pierce, Kevin Garnett, Ray Allen and Rajon Rondo the Celtics can use multiple options/looks both offensively and defensively.
Other things to consider: Derrick Rose's injury cleared the way for the 76ers to upset the Chicago Bulls in the first round but even with Rose--and then Joakim Noah--sidelined by injury Philadelphia hardly won convincingly. Doug Collins is an excellent coach who has squeezed the most out of his team but it is not realistic to think that the 76ers can defeat the Celtics in a seven game series unless the Celtics suffer a rash of injuries.
This series could feature some very ugly, low scoring games, particularly if the Celtics do not turn the ball over and thus force Philadelphia to execute against an entrenched defense; the 76ers have tremendous difficulty generating points in their half court offense, so they could easily sputter their way to some 10 point quarters and/or 30 point halves against Boston.
The Celtics do not look like a championship caliber team but if they defeat Philadelphia, win one road game in the Eastern Conference Finals and defend their home court in that series versus Miami or Indiana then the "Big Three plus Rondo" could make one last trip to the NBA Finals.
Labels: Andre Iguodala, Boston Celtics, Kevin Garnett, Lou Williams, Paul Pierce, Philadelphia 76ers, Rajon Rondo, Ray Allen
posted by David Friedman @ 6:42 AM
