A Young Man's Game
Veteran savvy and playoff experience can be helpful when trying to win a title but ultimately youth and raw talent are the most important ingredients in the championship recipe. Magnus Carlsen demonstrated this in the
2013 World Chess Championship and the past two NBA seasons have reinforced the value of youth/health/energy relative to experience/accumulated wisdom. The injuries and fatigue suffered by older players more than offset the theoretical advantages that veteran players enjoy in terms of their experience in pressure-packed games.
The 2012-13 L.A. Lakers assembled a starting lineup that would have dominated the NBA just a few years ago: Kobe Bryant, Dwight Howard, Steve Nash, Pau Gasol and Metta World Peace. Unfortunately for the Lakers, four of those five players have declined, while the fifth--Howard--moved like an old man as a result of his recovery from offseason back surgery. That star-studded quintet started just seven games together and did not win any of those contests. They did not play a single minute together as a collectively healthy unit. Assembling that group looked great on paper--and I
thought that the Lakers had the right kind of balance to challenge the Miami Heat--but expecting those five players to stay healthy and to quickly mesh together was, in retrospect, not realistic. The Lakers were not the 1995-96 Bulls, a squad that partnered three Hall of Famers who were each in--or at least very close to--their primes; Bryant was the only Laker who consistently played at a high level in the 2012-13 season and
his left Achilles tendon ruptured under the weight of the Lakers' ineptitude.
The Brooklyn Nets did not draw the right conclusions from the Lakers' failed geriatric experiment; the Nets brought in Kevin Garnett, Paul Pierce and Jason Terry--three older players who have championship experience--to bolster the Deron Williams-Joe Johnson-Brook Lopez trio. On paper, a starting lineup of Garnett, Pierce, Lopez, Williams and Johnson looks powerful--but on the court that quintet has gone just 3-5 this season. Much has been written and said about the strategic acumen of first year Coach Jason Kidd but the reality is that he has not yet had the opportunity to direct the squad that he expected to lead; the Nets have been wracked with injuries and several of their veteran players have performed well below expectations: Garnett has appeared in 28 of Brooklyn's 31 games but he looks washed up, averaging just 6.5 ppg, 6.9 rpg and 1.6 apg while shooting a career-low .364 from the field.
Experience can certainly be an asset--
LeBron James became a back to back champion in no small part because he learned from his failures in the
2011 NBA Finals and the
2010 Eastern Conference semifinals--but the benefits of youth cannot be overstated; LeBron James possesses superior health/conditioning, enabling him to maximize his talent and thus overpower/wear down opposing teams during a seven game series. The NBA season is such a long grind that older teams like the 2012-13 Lakers and the 2013-14 Nets struggle to make it to the postseason at full strength, let alone survive the mental, physical and emotional rigors of playoff basketball.
Labels: Brooklyn Nets, Dwight Howard, Kevin Garnett, Kobe Bryant, L.A. Lakers, Metta World Peace, Pau Gasol, Paul Pierce, Steve Nash
posted by David Friedman @ 11:58 AM
38 Special, "Changing the Culture" and a Peaceful Suspension: Random Thoughts as the 2012 NBA Season Concludes
Today is the final day of the 66 game, lockout-shortened 2012 NBA season. We already know the identities of all 16 playoff teams and the top three seeds in each conference but several playoff matchups will be determined by the results of tonight's games. There will only be one day of rest before the playoffs begin, so coaches will not have much time to prepare for the important game one of the playoffs (the winner of that contest ultimately wins the series
the vast majority of the time) and I will have less time than usual to complete my annual awards article and my playoff preview article--but three subjects that I will not cover in those two articles are weighing on my mind:
1) The L.A. Lakers' game versus the Sacramento Kings is "meaningless" for both teams but I remember when star players played--and sometimes put up big numbers--in such "meaningless" games. If the teams and the players are truly going to treat such games as "meaningless" then they should refund the ticket revenue from those games (the Boston-Miami game on Tuesday night--with LeBron James, Dwyane Wade, Chris Bosh, Kevin Garnett, Ray Allen and Rajon Rondo all sitting out--was a travesty and everyone who bought a ticket deserves a refund plus a free ticket to a real NBA game). Kobe Bryant needs to score at least 38 points to beat out Kevin Durant for the scoring title. If Bryant hits that number exactly or barely exceeds it then this will be the closest scoring title race in NBA history, surpassing the
legendary 1978 duel when David Thompson scored 73 points in a "meaningless" game only to lose the crown to George Gervin, who scored 63 points in a "meaningless" game to finish with a 27.22 ppg average (Thompson averaged 27.15 ppg). Whether you are a Bryant fan, a Durant fan or an unbiased observer, if you truly love NBA basketball then you want to see Bryant play in that game and you want to see him try to score 38 points, a total that barely exceeds his 2006 season average (35.4 ppg) but that he has matched or bested just seven times in 58 games this season. If Bryant captures the crown he will be the oldest scoring champion other than Michael Jordan in NBA history, while if Durant is victorious he will be the first player to win three straight scoring titles since Jordan won the 1996-98 scoring titles. George Mikan, Neil Johnston, Wilt Chamberlain, Bob McAdoo and George Gervin are the only other players who won at least three consecutive scoring titles.
2) Metta World Peace is a repeat offender who has been suspended multiple times for violently striking opposing players (and, on one infamous occasion, charging into the stands to strike a fan, nearly starting a riot in the process). The vicious elbow that he delivered to James Harden's head could have seriously injured--or even killed--Harden; fortunately, Harden seems to have avoided serious injury but he does have a concussion, which could not only affect him in this year's playoffs (possibly costing the Oklahoma City Thunder a chance to win a championship) but could leave him susceptible to future concussions and possible long term health consequences. Suspending Peace for seven games is, literally, about the least that the NBA could do; it would not at all have been excessive for the league to sit him down for the entire playoffs and require him to successfully complete anger management training before being allowed to return. He has serious mental health issues that could have disastrous consequences if they are not properly addressed. If Peace did not learn from and was not deterred by previous suspensions that cost him more than 100 games plus millions of dollars in salary then why should anyone think that a seven game suspension is going to deter him now?
3) Chris Paul is receiving a lot of credit for "changing the culture" in L.A. and media members seem poised to anoint him as high as third in the MVP race. Paul is still not quite the player he was in 2008 and 2009 when he made the All-NBA First Team and All-NBA Second Team respectively but this has been a nice bounce back campaign for him after injuries limited his effectiveness the past two seasons. Paul certainly deserves a lot of credit for the L.A. Clippers' success this season but suggesting that he has single-handedly transformed a losing team into a playoff team is
just as ludicrous as saying that LeBron James' departure single-handedly ruined the Cleveland Cavaliers. Blake Griffin leads the Clippers in points per game, rebounds per game, field goal percentage and total minutes played, so it is far from clear that Paul is even the best player on his own team, let alone the third best player in the entire league. However, regardless of whether Griffin or Paul deserves to be considered the top Clipper, it is indisputable that the Clippers have a vastly different eight man rotation this season than they did last season: only Griffin, DeAndre Jordan and Randy Foye ranked in the top eight in total minutes played for the Clippers both last season and this season. Caron Butler, Mo Williams, Kenyon Martin and Reggie Evans joined Paul as new members of the Clippers' eight man rotation--and the Clippers' ninth player in minutes played, Chauncey Billups, started the first 20 games of the season, during which the team went 14-6. The Clippers are only 24-20 since a ruptured Achilles tendon ended Billups' season, so if Billups had gotten hurt just a bit earlier the team might not have even made the playoffs.
Paul has had a very good season and has reestablished himself as one of the league's top point guards but there is no reason to exaggerate how well he has played or the impact that he has had; that is the kind of mistaken thinking that resulted in Derrick Rose winning the 2011 MVP over LeBron James and led to Steve Nash winning two MVPs while Shaquile O'Neal and Kobe Bryant only received one MVP apiece. Perhaps media members more readily relate to players who are closer to their own size but at the NBA level it is very difficult for even a great small player to have the same kind of impact that a great midsize player or a great big man has. It is not a coincidence that the vast majority of NBA championship teams have been led by a great big man and/or a great midsize player; the 2004 Pistons, the 1989-90 Pistons and the 1979 Sonics are three exceptions: those teams triumphed either because of the collective strength of an ensemble cast of very good players (2004 Pistons, 1979 Sonics) or because of the greatness of two small Hall of Fame guards (Isiah Thomas, Joe Dumars) supported by gritty and tenacious big men who played suffocating defense. Rose's Bulls captured the number one seed in the East in 2012 because of their great defense/strong rotation of big men even though Rose missed a large chunk of this season but Nash never led a team to a championship (or even to the NBA Finals) and I doubt that Paul will ever be the best player on a championship team.
Labels: Chris Paul, Kobe Bryant, Metta World Peace
posted by David Friedman @ 6:58 AM
Seven Games of Life Without Kobe Bryant
Kobe Bryant will apparently return to action on Friday as the L.A. Lakers face the San Antonio Spurs in a game that has significant seeding implications for both teams: the Spurs are trying to hold on to the top spot in the West, while the Lakers are clinging to a half game lead over the L.A. Clippers for the Pacific Division title/third seed. The Lakers went 5-2 during Bryant's seven game absence, while the Clippers gained ground by going 6-1 in that stretch. The winner of the Pacific Division title will not only likely avoid a tough first round pairing with the Memphis Grizzlies but would also likely avoid having to face the West's top seed in the second round (assuming that the first round goes according to form).
The Lakers'
first game sans Bryant was an unmitigated disaster: their worst loss of the season, a blowout defeat at the hands of a Phoenix team that may not even make the playoffs. The Lakers then narrowly beat the worst team in the West (New Orleans), shockingly beat a rested Spurs team in San Antonio and posted two close wins against fringe playoff teams (Denver, Dallas) at home before getting blown out in a rematch versus the Spurs. Then the Lakers padded their individual and collective stats with an easy win over a Golden State team that is trotting out a rookie/D-League lineup that plays hard but will ensure that the Warriors lose enough games to retain possession of the Lottery-protected draft pick that they acquired in a trade. Other than the two games versus the Spurs, the Lakers faced a very favorable schedule during Bryant's absence and they did slightly better than I would have expected; I think that a Bryant-less Lakers team would, over the course of an entire season, be a Lottery team in the West--a team that would have a slightly above .500 record that would not quite be good enough to qualify for the playoffs--but in a short Bryant-less burst I would have expected them to beat Phoenix, New Orleans and Golden State, to split the Dallas and Denver games and to lose both times to San Antonio: a 4-3 mark against that opposition sounds about right, but the Lakers slightly exceeded that by going 5-2. The win against San Antonio was as impressive as it was unexpected but the Lakers also had their two worst losses of the season (based on point differential), so the difference between what I expected and what actually happened ultimately turned out to be the overtime win against Dallas.
The big surprise during the seven game stretch was Metta World Peace's revival at both ends of the court; after being out of shape for most of the season, after shooting very poorly and not defending quite as well he had in the past, Peace gave the Lakers a boost with timely shots and tenacious defense. Apparently, a back injury had limited Peace's mobility and his ability to train but now that this injury has healed Peace has worked hard to get in shape and raise his level of play. Peace has always been an erratic shooter, so it is not likely that he will continue to shoot .506 from the field overall or .387 from three point range, but if he keeps playing with high energy then this will obviously greatly help the Lakers. Matt Barnes also made valuable contributions during Bryant's absence, a surprising development after Barnes sleepwalked through most of the season. Recently acquired point guard Ramon Sessions is still getting used to playing for his new team and his performances have been up and down regardless of Bryant's presence but Sessions made significant contributions in the wins over New Orleans and Dallas, victories that may ultimately preserve the Lakers' third seed status.
Of course, while Bryant was out most of the media attention focused on Andrew Bynum and Pau Gasol; according to the "stat gurus" and to many media members, Bryant supposedly hurts the Lakers collectively and those two players individually because he shoots too much instead of feeding the ball to them: this presupposes that the high field goal percentages posted by Bynum and Gasol are independent of any contributions that Bryant makes (not just by passing the ball but also by drawing double teams) and also presupposes that, with or without Bryant, those big men could maintain their shooting percentages even if their field goal attempts dramatically increased. This seven game stretch provided an interesting test of those contentions: Bynum and Gasol, as expected, shot more frequently and scored more points than they did when Bryant was in the lineup but both players experienced significant declines in their field goal percentages:
Andrew Bynum's performance in 51 games with Bryant this season: 18.3 ppg, 12.5 FGA/g, .583 FG%
Andrew Bynum's performance in seven games without Bryant this season: 23.1 ppg, 19.6 FGA, .467 FG%
Pau Gasol's performance in 56 games with Bryant this season: 17.0 ppg, 13.6 FGA/g, .510 FG%
Pau Gasol's performance in seven games without Bryant this season: 21.1 ppg, 18.3 FGA/g, .469 FG%
Bynum has shot .500 or better in 43 out of 58 games this season--but four of his 15 sub-.500 performances came in the seven games that Bryant missed; Gasol has shot .500 or better in 35 of 63 games this season--but five of his 28 sub-.500 performances came in the seven games that Bryant missed. It is indisputable that both Bynum and Gasol shot much worse without Bryant than they did with Bryant. A seven game sample size--while not definitive by any means--represents a little more than 10% of this compacted season's schedule. I believe that this field goal percentage decline was predictable--indeed, I have been predicting it for years in terms of what would happen when Bryant retires or if he missed extended playing time due to injury--and is largely attributable to the defensive attention that Bryant draws: Bryant is regularly double-teamed, which means that Bynum and Gasol usually have the luxury of only facing one defender and they often are merely facing a defender who is rotating to them as the defense tries to recover after a trapped Bryant passes the ball. Bynum is not an explosive athlete and when he faces defensive resistance he often either turns the ball over or misses his shots, even from point blank range; Gasol is a very skillful player but he is not very aggressive in the post, so he can be pushed off of his spot and/or relegated to shooting faceup jumpers.
It must be noted that Bynum's field goal percentage without Bryant is much worse than the above numbers suggest if we take out his 12-14 performance last night versus Golden State's "twin towers" Mikki Moore and Mickell Gladness; Bynum should certainly dominate those guys with or without Bryant being on the court but Bynum's .423 field goal shooting in the other six games without Bryant is a stunning number, even worse than what I would have predicted: Bynum shot no better on point blank shots sans Bryant than Bryant has shot over the course of the season on contested attempts as a 33 year old, banged up, 16 year veteran perimeter player! The media killed Bryant for supposedly shooting too much when Bryant's field goal percentage dipped below his career norm of circa .450 but after Bynum shot .375 in the Lakers' narrow escape against Dallas one addled writer for the self-proclaimed Worldwide Leader declared that Bynum had proven himself to be the best center in the league! Field goal percentage is not the sole way that players should be evaluated but it makes no sense to blast a perimeter player for shooting less than .450 but laud a big man for shooting less than .400 on point blank shots.
There are two issues here:
1) A skill set evaluation of the Lakers' overall roster strongly suggests that this team is just not as good as Oklahoma City and San Antonio and that, over the course of a long season, would struggle to earn a playoff berth in the West sans Bryant; the Lakers squeaked to a 5-2 mark against a weak schedule without Bryant but, much like the Philadelphia 76ers feasted on a weak schedule early in the season and are now leaking oil, the Lakers would fall off if they had to endure an extended period without Bryant: the Lakers' big guys cannot consistently create high percentage shots for themselves and World Peace would not shoot .500 or better over the course of dozens of games.
2) Instead of objectively evaluating players and teams, "stat gurus" make bold declarations that are not supported by observed facts and they refuse to amend their declarations even as contradictory evidence emerges; also, media members--some of whom are "stat guru" sycophants, while others reach idiotic conclusions of their own free will--apply nonsensical and often contradictory standards when they evaluate players. Bryant's field goal percentage and shot selection
are regularly criticized without any semblance of understanding of the context in which Bryant takes those shots, while other players are evaluated by much more lenient standards: Derrick Rose won the 2011 MVP over LeBron James largely because Rose supposedly carried a weak supporting cast to the best record in the East and Rose's frequent subpar, high volume shooting performances were excused because he allegedly had no help--but this year the Bulls still have the best record in the East even though Rose has missed nearly half of the season and the young, athletic Rose shot worse than Bryant in 2011 and has only shot slightly better than Bryant this season. Why is Bryant evaluated mainly by FG% and FGAs while a different, more lenient standard is applied to Rose? I think that both Bryant and Rose are great players--
as I made clear in my 2011 NBA awards article--but I evaluate Bryant and Rose (and all NBA players) based on their skill sets, not based on media-driven story lines ("Rose carries talentless Bulls team") or the bleatings of "stat gurus" ("Bynum and Gasol are great, efficient big men, while Bryant is an inefficient gunner"). "Stat gurus" and media members regularly issue incorrect evaluations of players and teams because they are more concerned with preconceived story lines than they are with objectively and intelligently analyzing what actually happens during games.
Labels: Andrew Bynum, Kobe Bryant, L.A. Lakers, Metta World Peace, Pau Gasol
posted by David Friedman @ 3:47 PM
