NBC's NBA "Throwback Tuesday" Hit All the Right Notes
NBC's "Throwback Tuesday" doubleheader telecast took viewers on a sentimental journey complete with the old NBA on NBC graphics and music. I grew up with the NBA on CBS in the 1970s and 1980s, but the NBA's run on NBC from 1990-2002 was very memorable both for the quality of play and the quality of the broadcasts. During those dozen seasons, the Michael Jordan-Scottie Pippen Chicago Bulls bagged a pair of three-peats (1991-93, 1996-98) bracketed around the Houston Rockets' back to back championships. Then, the San Antonio Spurs ushered in the Tim Duncan era by winning the 1999 NBA title in the wake of Michael Jordan's (second) retirement and a lockout that shortened the regular season to 50 games. Phil Jackson came out of a short-lived retirement from the Chicago Bulls to coach the Shaquille O'Neal-Kobe Bryant L.A. Lakers to three straight titles (2000-02). During that era, NBC also covered the exploits of the 1992 Dream Team in the Barcelona Olympics, an epic event that inspired many of the international players who have dominated the NBA in recent seasons.
Thus, the NBA on NBC covered one of the most consequential eras in NBA history, a period that featured three three-peats, Houston's repeat, the first of Tim Duncan's five NBA titles, and the debut of NBA players performing for Team USA in the Olympics, which planted the seeds for the emergence of European stars such as Dirk Nowitzki, Giannis Antetokounmpo, Nikola Jokic, and Luka Doncic.
Hannah Storm, Isiah Thomas, and P.J. Carlesimo hosted the "Throwback Tuesday" pregame show, fittingly called "NBA Showtime" in a nod to the NBA on NBC's original pregame show. Throughout the night, Storm, Bob Costas, and others made a point of acknowledging key members of the NBA on NBC family who have passed away or were not able to join "Throwback Tuesday" for other reasons, including Bill Walton (passed away in 2024), Steve "Snapper" Jones (passed away in 2017), Dick Enberg (passed away in 2017), Marv Albert, Ahmad Rashad, Julius Erving, and Matt Guokas. I did not hear Peter Vecsey's name mentioned; he has always been a divisive figure so perhaps his omission is not surprising--but the "Viper" was a memorable participant in the old NBA on NBC broadcasts.
The first game of the doubleheader was a dud on the scoreboard as the San Antonio Spurs routed the Philadelphia 76ers 131-91, but the telecast provided a great opportunity for Bob Costas, Doug Collins, Mike "Czar of the Telestrator" Fratello, and sideline reporter Jim Gray to reminisce not just about their shared time at NBC but their careers in general.
Costas mentioned the numerous great 76ers who started their careers in the ABA--including George McGinnis, Julius Erving, Bobby Jones, and Moses Malone--and he gave a plug to the recently released ABA-themed documentary "Soul Power." Costas began his broadcasting career as the play by play announcer for the ABA's Spirits of St. Louis, and he proudly calls himself an "ABA guy." His historical knowledge and his reverence for sports history add much value to every broadcast that he does.
Collins recalled scheming with his teammate Julius Erving to miss a free throw on purpose in a late game situation so that Erving could slam home the game-winning putback. It was very meaningful to Collins to return to Philadelphia, where his NBA playing career began and where he served as the team's coach from 2010-13.
Fratello talked about broadcasting games with play by play partner Marv Albert, who for decades was the witty, wry, and knowledgeable voice of the NBA. When Albert called a national game, his presence made it seem like a big event.
Gray recalled being a young reporter working in Philadelphia in the early 1980s when Erving was the NBA's biggest star, and Gray remembered covering a young Kobe Bryant for the NBA on NBC. It is poignant to see footage of Bryant at the start of his great career now that we know his life would end at just 41 years old in a helicopter crash that also took the lives of his 13 year old daughter Gianna and seven other people.
As the Spurs put the game out of reach, Costas referenced Marv Albert's line about "extended garbage time," but Doug Collins gently countered by noting that Hubie Brown would get upset if NBA Draft
coverage returned to air late after a commercial and missed announcing a draft pick; that moment was special for one of the 60 best players in the world, Brown would lament. Collins' point was that "garbage time" may seem insignificant, but it is important to the players who get on the court after not getting much action for most of the season. Collins also said that Hubie Brown is the "gold standard" for NBA color commentators, and Collins mentioned that he learned a lot from Brown. Brown is the best, but Collins is one of a select few who rank right behind Brown.
While the 76ers absorbed a blowout loss--something that 76ers' fans have often suffered through during the seemingly endless "Process"--Collins noted that he was not coaching the 76ers when they started tanking 13 years ago. Fratello wisely pointed out that some teams tank and never get out of the tank--a sentiment that applies to the 76ers, who advanced to the second round in 2012 with Collins as their coach, and have not advanced past the second round since going into the tank in 2013. The 76ers have not "tanked to the top," nor has any other team; the 2025 NBA champion Oklahoma City Thunder obtained franchise player Shai Gilgeous-Alexander not by tanking but by shrewdly acquiring him via a trade with the L.A. Clippers--and in that same trade, the Thunder also acquired the draft pick that became Jalen Williams, their second best player. The Thunder then tanked to obtain more draft picks, but they acquired the two centerpieces of their championship team from one trade, not from tanking.
Near the end of the game, NBC ran a graphic comparing the NBA in 1990 with the NBA in 2026: in the 1990-91 season, NBA teams averaged 106.3 ppg and 7.1 three point field goal attempts per game, while in the 2025-26 season so far NBA teams are averaging 115.3 ppg and 37.0 three point field goal attempts per game. In 1990-91, the Denver Nuggets led the league with 12.9 three point field goal attempts per game, while in 2025-26 the Sacramento Kings rank last in the league with 30.1 three point field goal attempts per game. "Stat gurus" insist that NBA teams are optimizing possessions by jacking up so many three pointers, but there is no way to prove that to be true when every single team is jacking up three pointers; when every team jacks up dozens of three pointers per game then of course the championship team will be a team that jacks up dozens of three pointers per game--but high volume three point shooting is a high variance approach to the game, so it would be fascinating to see a team like the 1986-87 Showtime Lakers face any of the recent NBA championship teams. The 1987 Lakers averaged 117.8 ppg on .516 field goal shooting while attempting just 5.5 three point field goals per game. Would the Lakers' ability to relentlessly attack the paint wear down a modern team, or would a modern team's three point bombing shoot the Lakers out of the gym? I would pick the Lakers in such a matchup, and it would be fascinating if a modern NBA team had the courage to buck the trend of high volume three point shooting in favor of efficient shooting from all areas of the court.
Prior to the second game of the doubleheader, Isiah Thomas talked about the Spurs' sound organization (a marked contrast with how the 76ers have been run in recent years, though he did not say that), and he mentioned that when he visited Gregg Popovich he noticed that there was just one picture in the office: John Havlicek. Carlesimo said that he had not known in advance that Thomas would mention this, but that it brings to mind a story from when Carlesimo worked as an assistant coach for Popovich. Carlesimo recalled that Popovich was thrilled when Havlicek presented a trophy to the Spurs, and that is when Carlesimo learned that Havlicek was Popovich's favorite player. Carlesimo knew Havlicek, and he was able to arrange for Popovich to meet Havlicek.
In the second game of the doubleheader, the Phoenix Suns defeated the Sacramento Kings, 114-103. The game telecast did not feature throwback broadcasters, but Grant Hill and Noah Eagle ably called the game while Storm, Carlesimo, and Thomas did the halftime show and the postgame show. During the game, NBC showed some highlights of Grant Hill playing for the Detroit Pistons in the 1990s when NBC broadcast his games--and then NBC showed a picture of Eagle as a child during the 1990s, reminding us how quickly time passes!
At the end of the telecast, Storm, Carlesimo, and Thomas talked frankly--and lovingly--about how much it meant to them to be back together on air again. As Thomas said, you never know when they will all be in the same place at the same time again, so this was a moment to cherish.
I have seen wry social media comments prior to last night's telecast making fun of the people who suggest that NBA basketball was better back in the day; such comments argue that it would be odd that basketball is the only sport where basic evolution has not happened. I won't comment about other sports in this article, but I strongly feel that the NBA game was better in the 1980s, 1990s and early 2000s than it is now, and after watching a retro telecast it is evident that NBA telecasts--from the studio shows to the game broadcasters to the graphics (which were clearer and more readable on the retro telecast than on modern telecasts)--were better back in the day, too. It was refreshing to watch an NBA doubleheader devoid of screaming, hot takes, and general foolishness--and it was wonderful to listen to broadcasters who know and respect the history of the game, in marked contrast to uninformed and ungrateful commentators who disrespect the players who laid the foundation for the modern NBA: J.J. Redick is making millions of dollars per year now not because he is so intrinsically special, but because Bob Cousy and the other great NBA players from the league's early years laid the foundation for what has become a multi-billion dollar business in which even average players and average coaches become millionaires. Billy Martin once said that George Steinbrenner was born on third base but thought he hit a triple, a sentiment that applies to Redick and many others who now benefit from the hard work (and superior talent) of those who came before them.
Labels: ABA, Bob Costas, Doug Collins, Hannah Storm, Isiah Thomas, Jim Gray, Julius Erving, Kobe Bryant, Marv Albert, Mike Fratello, NBC, P.J. Carlesimo, Philadelphia 76ers, Phoenix Suns, Sacramento Kings, San Antonio Spurs
posted by David Friedman @ 11:18 AM
Knicks Fire Their Most Successful Coach of the Past 25 Years
"You're timing stinks. We've just made a billion eight for the second year in a row. That's three and a half billion in the past two years. But mark my words, Henry. You may never see a billion eight again. And do you know why? Because you don't know how the f--- we made it in the first place." Lee Iacocca to Henry Ford after being fired by Ford
A family run business can hire and fire on a whim. That is how Ford Motor Company operated under Henry Ford II, which is how Lee Iacocca ended up at Chrysler, where he revitalized a company that had seemed to be on the brink of imminent collapse; meanwhile, Ford Motor Company's market share gradually declined after the Iacocca firing. Iacocca had a lot to do with Ford Motor Company's success in the 1960s and 1970s, but job performance had nothing to do with Henry Ford II's decision to fire Iacocca.
What does this trip down automotive history memory lane have to do with the NBA? Tom Thibodeau just coached the New York Knicks to their most successful season in the past 25 years--the culmination of three straight years of improved regular season records--but that was not enough to save his job when James Dolan decided to fire him. Much like Henry Ford II ran Ford Motor Company as a family business (never mind the existence of a supposedly independent board of directors), Dolan runs the Knicks as a personal fiefdom where he can declare "Off with their heads!" on a whim.
The Knicks steadily improved during Thibodeau's tenure, and before this season began no
reasonable person would have said that reaching the 2025 Eastern
Conference Finals would constitute failure, let alone be a fireable
offense. The Knicks went 21-45 in the COVID-19 abbreviated 2019-20 season, and then went 41-31 in Thibodeau's first season at the helm. After slipping to 37-45 in 2021-22, the Knicks went 47-35, 50-32, and 51-31 in the next three seasons, advancing to the second round in back to back years before reaching the Eastern Conference Finals this season.
Prior to hiring Thibodeau in 2020, the Knicks had missed the playoffs for seven straight seasons under six different coaches. The Knicks have had 13 head coaches in the 24 years since the departure of Jeff Van Gundy in 2001.
Do you see the pattern? The one constant is James Dolan, who has owned the team through all of this turbulence; the general managers change, the coaches change, the players change, but Dolan is always there, presiding over the chaos.
Firing excellent coaches is a trademark move of a dysfunctional franchise. Sensible reasons to fire a coach include underperformance relative to
reasonable expectations, declining performance in the absence of
extenuating circumstances, or the availability of a superior coach.
Those reasons are not applicable to Thibodeau and the Knicks.
Bashing excellent coaches is a trademark move of media members who do not understand the sport that they cover. The correct way to critique a coach is to focus on a specific coaching decision, provide evidence demonstrating why that coaching decision was suboptimal, and then suggest an alternative coaching decision that would have been better, supporting that alternative with evidence. Media members do not do this for a simple reason: they are not capable of doing this. The barriers to entry for some fields are quite high: to become an attorney, you must first get a high LSAT score, then you must graduate from law school, and then you must pass the bar exam; to become a chess master, you must achieve a rating in timed, competitive play that exceeds the ratings of 99% of competitive chess players. To become a media member, all you have to do is know someone who knows someone who likes you, and that is why media members who could not coach their way out of a paper bag with a machete are paid to intone solemnly (or yell bombastically) about how they would coach a team much better than a career professional coach would.
The prevailing media-driven narrative that Thibodeau did not use his bench enough is as lazy as it is stupid, and the people who propagate that nonsense fail to explain (1) who specifically Thibodeau should have played more minutes, (2) who specifically Thibodeau should have played fewer minutes, and (3) what evidence exists to demonstrate that making those moves would have produced a better outcome than losing in the Eastern Conference Finals.
When I critique a coach, I provide specific evidence-based reasons for that critique. For example, when Kevin Durant entered the NBA and Seattle Coach P.J. Carlesimo declared that he would move Durant from forward to guard, I expressed skepticism:
Durant has not played one minute of regular season action in the NBA,
yet even though he has been advertised as a great inside player his
coach already wants him to switch positions. Carlesimo clearly wants to
spare Durant from being pounded in the paint but the move to the
backcourt will lead to other problems. To the best of my knowledge,
Durant has never played guard; now he will have to learn how to do so
against the best guards in the world. Also, from what I saw in the
summer league, Durant has a very high dribble and is not a great
ballhandler, so he will be a turnover waiting to happen if he is relied
upon to do a lot of dribbling.
Durant clearly needs to put on
some weight but that will be true regardless of which position he plays.
I think that he and Seattle would be better served if he takes his
lumps at his natural small forward position where he will at least be in
the comfort zone of playing in areas of the court that are familiar to
him.
The Seattle franchise subsequently moved to Oklahoma City and replaced Carlesimo with Scott Brooks, who immediately shifted Durant back to forward, a decision that I praised: "Moving Durant to small forward is a big step in the right direction that
I predict will pay noticeable dividends, possibly as soon as the end of
this season." The rest is history, as Durant assembled a Hall of Fame career as a forward; he averaged 20.3 ppg on .430 field goal shooting in his one year as a shooting guard, and in the next 16 seasons he never averaged less than 25.1 ppg and he never shot worse than .462 from the field.
A few years later, Carlesimo was coaching the Brooklyn Nets and Thibodeau was coaching the Chicago Bulls. The teams met in the first round of the 2013 playoffs, and I predicted that Chicago would win: "This series features a huge coaching mismatch. TNT's Kenny Smith says
that if a team loses by more than five points then blame the players but
if it loses by less than five points blame the coach; the games in this
series figure to be low scoring and close and I trust Chicago's Tom
Thibodeau much more than I trust Brooklyn's P. J. Carlesimo; this is not
just about in-game adjustments but also about elements of preparation
that give one team an edge over another." Sure enough, Chicago--which had won 45 games during the regular season while Brooklyn had won 49 games--won that series, 4-3. After the series, I distinguished coach evaluating from coach bashing:
Coach bashing is a favorite media pastime but most media members do not
have a clue how to determine if a team is well coached or poorly
coached. I respect all NBA coaches tremendously and I fully realize that
even a bad NBA head coach knows more about basketball than the vast
majority of coaches at any other level of the sport; [George] Karl is a very good
NBA coach but he seems to be better suited for rebuilding
teams/coaching underdogs than he is at extracting the maximum out of
50-plus win teams. Carlesimo was an excellent collegiate coach and he
served as an assistant on Gregg Popovich's San Antonio staff so
Carlesimo obviously has a very good basketball mind--but as an NBA head
coach he has not measured up well in comparison with the best of the
best, a category in which Thibodeau clearly belongs.
When I critique coaches like Carlesimo and Karl I am not trying to
suggest that I know more about basketball than they do or that I would
be a better NBA head coach; in other words, I am not acting like Bill
Simmons. I am just doing my job as an NBA analyst by pointing out that,
as much as Karl and Carlesimo know about basketball, there are other
coaches who are demonstrably performing at a higher level.
Media members do not like to admit being wrong and it is interesting to
see the lengths some of them will go to in order to avoid such
admissions. Simmons used to regularly bash Doc Rivers' coaching acumen
but now Rivers is widely recognized as a great coach so Simmons had to
stop degrading Rivers--but did Simmons admit that he was wrong? Of
course not! Simmons' story is that Rivers has evolved into being a great
coach. Rivers won the 2000 Coach of the Year award in his first season
as an NBA head coach after leading the "heart and hustle" Orlando Magic
to a 41-41 record with Darrell Armstrong, John Amaechi and Chucky Atkins
as the top three players in the rotation. Has Rivers become a better
coach in the intervening 13 years? I am sure that he has; I hope that
anyone who does something for more than a decade becomes better at
it--but the idea that Rivers was a terrible coach who then became a
great coach is absurd. Simmons was dead wrong about Rivers and he should
just admit it.
After retiring from the NBA, Brian Scalabrine has played several one on one games versus regular people who assume that because he was a bench player in the league and is now a retired player they have a chance to beat him--but Scalabrine routinely dominates these players, and he has correctly stated that he is closer to LeBron James' level than any of those players are to his level. Similarly, the worst coach in the NBA is closer to Phil Jackson's level of basketball understanding and acumen than any media member is to the worst coach's basketball understanding and acumen. In other words, media members should approach their craft with humility and with the goal of trying to learn more about basketball strategy--but that does not generate hype or TV ratings, so basketball fans will continue to be subjected to empty minds with large mouths loudly proclaiming "hot takes" devoid of cold logic.
Labels: James Dolan, Jeff Van Gundy, Kevin Durant, New York Knicks, Oklahoma City Thunder, P.J. Carlesimo, Scott Brooks, Seattle Supersonics, Tom Thibodeau
posted by David Friedman @ 10:32 PM
James Harden's Travels Through the NBA Record Book
Back in the day, when someone traveled in one of my rec league games and the referees missed it, a friend of mine used to yell, "Ref, he took a bus!"--as in, the offender did not just slightly travel, but he took an extended journey so far beyond the confines of the traveling rule that Stevie Wonder could have made the call.
There is a backlash against the backlash against James Harden and it goes something like this: "Why is everyone hating James Harden's greatness? He makes stepback threes that no one else can make, he has a knack for drawing fouls and he has a combination of strength/quickness that enables him to get to the hoop and finish in traffic. No one else can score as prolifically as Harden, nor can anyone else score in the variety of ways that he scores."
I will stipulate that the court of basketball truth may take judicial notice of the following facts: Harden is capable of making difficult shots, Harden is both strong and quick, and Harden has a knack for finishing in traffic/drawing fouls.
All of that being stipulated for the record, I cannot speak for all of the so-called "haters" but I can state clearly and simply why I am not impressed by what Harden is doing this season: James Harden travels on a regular basis, and this is a major reason accounting for his ongoing travels up the charts in the NBA record books. There are other reasons to be skeptical of Harden's supposed greatness, but that is the biggest single one--at least for me. I would estimate that Harden is scoring an extra 8-10 ppg purely based on being permitted to blatantly and repeatedly travel. Those extra points are the difference between being the 28-30 ppg scorer that he has been in recent years, and the 35-40 ppg scoring machine that he has been in recent weeks.
Harden's traveling is not a subject for debate; just watch the tape, with the understanding that the traveling rule remains the same as it has always been: after a player stops dribbling, he must pass or shoot without taking more than a "1, 2" step. In other words, if you pick up your dribble in midstride then you can put one foot down and then put down the other foot (or come to a two-footed jump stop immediately after picking up your dribble) but before you take a third step the ball must be out of your hands via shot or pass.
P.J. Carlesimo recently did a segment for ESPN that lasted about 90 seconds and that showed several different examples of Harden taking three or more steps before draining a shot. Carlesimo commented that if he were coaching against Harden then he would be yelling at the officials all the time to enforce the traveling rule because there is no way to guard Harden if he is going to be allowed to blatantly and repeatedly violate the traveling rule.
There is no doubt that Harden is a talented scorer. There is no doubt that he makes some shots that are very difficult.
There is also no doubt that any above average NBA player is going to score a lot more points than usual if he is permitted to take extra steps.
The issue is compounded by the fact that Harden often pushes off first before he takes his three steps backward. In other words, he commits an offensive foul, then he travels, and then he scores. He often looks with disdain at his discarded defender before making the wide open shot. Forgive me for not being entertained by this nonsense.
I don't know how to guard Harden under the current set of circumstances but a couple thoughts come to mind, beyond the obvious "high hands" strategy that San Antonio Coach Gregg Popovich has advocated for a while:
(1) No soft fouls. If Harden pushes you and then travels, live with the outcome, because lunging at him and committing a soft foul just results in a potential four point play.
(2) Many hard fouls. Old-timers may recall that Dave Cowens was once whistled for what he deemed to be a questionable call, whereupon on an ensuing play he basically laid out an opposing player, turned to the ref and declared, "Now that's a (bleeping) foul!" That kind of blatant hard foul would almost certainly be considered a flagrant foul today but one possible answer to Harden's shenanigans is to put a non-essential player on him for a stretch of a few minutes and instruct that player that every time Harden does the foul/travel combo whack Harden's shooting hand as hard as you can. I don't believe that fouling a shooter's shooting hand would be deemed a flagrant foul, particularly if you look like you are going for the ball, and it would be interesting to see if Harden retained an appetite for violating the rules after receiving a steady diet of such fouls.
Anyone who has played basketball at any level knows that there are ways to get someone to stop being foolish and to simply play the game without doing anything that is flagrant or dangerous. I think that it was Charles Barkley who once said that every time he played against Dennis Rodman he would elbow Rodman in the ribs the first time Rodman yanked his shorts or did some other offense that went undetected; the message was, "Do you want to play ball or do you want to do something else?" Rodman was much more successful against players like Alonzo Mourning who fell for the proverbial banana in the tailpipe then he was against players who neither tolerated shenanigans nor let shenanigans distract them. If I were coaching against Harden I would not complain to the referees and I would fine any of my players who got technical fouls for doing so; if this nonsense is going to be legislated out of existence then it is going to take place league-wide and not by lobbying individual officials. However, as a coach or player I would make sure that my team takes countermeasures against Harden, as described above.
As a competitor, one thing that I would not do is just accept that a player on the other team is allowed to get away with violating the rules.
If Harden can score 35-plus ppg within the confines of the rules, more power to him and I have never believed that it is appropriate to hard foul a guy just if he is beating you within the confines of the rules--but let's be honest and admit that is not what is happening with Harden. Harden has had some legitimately great moments and great games but the bulk of what he is doing would not be possible without the traveling violations.
As for the large number of free throws that Harden shoots, after watching him play a lot I have reached two conclusions: (1) He is awarded a lot of questionable calls and (2) he does have a knack for baiting unfocused defenders into fouling him. These are not mutually exclusive concepts; it is possible--and, in fact, true--to say both that Harden benefits from a favorable whistle and that Harden is very good at drawing fouls.
Saturday night's Oklahoma City-Houston game was a microcosm of the good, the bad and the ugly regarding Harden. The Rockets built a 68-42 first half lead as Harden scored on a variety of shots/moves, some of which were incredible but legal and others of which involved the push off/travel duo. Predictably, once the Rockets stopped making three pointers the Thunder came roaring back to win, 117-112. Most of the in game commentary focused on Harden--who scored 42 points on 11-28 field goal shooting--and Paul George, who scored 45 points on 12-22 field goal shooting. Meanwhile, Russell Westbrook "merely" amassed his ninth straight triple double (21 points, game-high tying 12 rebounds, game-high 11 assists), tying the all-time triple double streak set by Wilt Chamberlain. Westbrook struggled with his shot and he had several sloppy turnovers but, as George noted after the game, Westbrook had his fingerprints on just about everything positive that the Thunder did as well.
Harden's poor shooting is justified by some because he shoots so many three pointers and free throws but the reality is that regardless of Harden's points per shot or true shooing percentage 17 Houston possessions ended in missed shots by Harden; that is a ton of empty possessions and that is a recipe for blowing a lead. Harden had a -9 plus/minus number, which means that the Rockets had the advantage when he sat and lost the lead while he played. George had a +16 plus/minus number, while Westbrook's plus/minus was +2. Westbrook's miscues played a role in Oklahoma City falling behind, but his rebounding, passing and defense--plus a few timely shots-- also played a role in the comeback.
The ebbs and flows of that game strongly suggest that no matter how much the league tilts calls in Harden's favor it will still be difficult for Houston to consistently beat good teams, which means that their 2019 postseason run will most likely end in a meltdown similar to the ones that punctuated each of Harden's previous Houston postseasons. Basketball purists who are not entertained by the Rockets and by Harden's shenanigans cannot wait for the madness to end.
Labels: Houston Rockets, James Harden, Oklahoma City Thunder, P.J. Carlesimo, Paul George, Russell Westbrook, traveling
posted by David Friedman @ 1:04 AM
P.J. Carlesimo and Jon Barry Agree with Frank Vogel's Roy Hibbert Decision
Indiana Coach Frank Vogel has received widespread condemnation for his decision to twice bench 7-2 shot blocker Roy Hibbert and go with a small lineup against Miami in late game situations. On both occasions, LeBron James scored by driving straight to the hoop, including the game-winning layup as time expired in overtime; after trailing by one point with just 2.2 seconds left, Miami escaped with a 103-102 victory in game one of the Eastern Conference Finals. Vogel justified benching Hibbert by saying that if Hibbert had been on the court then Miami could have run a play for Chris Bosh, who is more mobile than Hibbert. Vogel opted to use a small lineup so that his players could switch on all screens without creating any favorable mismatches for Miami. There is some validity to what Vogel said but in order to be successful in the long run a coach must develop a system that enables him to maximize the talents of his best players; Hibbert is one of the best rim protectors in the league, so Indiana's defense should take advantage of his size and length--and if that size and length forces opposing teams to run plays for their centers to shoot jumpers instead of attacking the hoop then that is an advantage for Indiana. If Vogel's regular plan in late game situations is to go small then he should stick with that plan--but Vogel has generally tried to force teams to match up with his squad and not the other way around, so benching Hibbert is not just a questionable move strategically but also psychologically because it could result in the Indiana players feeling that Vogel does not trust his system and/or trust them.
The larger, mostly unmentioned issue is that there was no reason for Paul George to overplay James to such an extent on the final play that he gave James a wide open driving lane; regardless of who was on the court for Indiana, the team defensive strategy when up by a point with 2.2 seconds left has to be (1) defend without fouling and (2) make the opponent shoot a contested jump shot to beat us. Whether or not benching Hibbert was the best choice, the Pacers still could have won if they had forced James--or another Miami player--to shoot a contested jump shot. Did Vogel not remind George to give James a cushion or did George simply forget his assignment under pressure?
The worst possible shot for Indiana to give up was a layup or dunk by James; putting Hibbert in the game and planting him in front of the rim would have made it much less likely that James would have scored on a dunk or layup, so it is difficult to agree with Vogel's decision. Being able to switch all screens is nice and if that is how Vogel's team played throughout the season and throughout most of this game then it would be understandable for him to ride or die with that plan but Hibbert is the anchor for Indiana's stingy defense and Vogel should have stuck with what got Indiana to the Eastern Conference Finals in the first place: size, toughness and the ability to protect the paint.
It is not a good sign for Vogel that two of the people who agreed with his Hibbert decision are P.J. Carlesimo, who
has hardly distinguished himself as a top NBA strategist, and Jon Barry, who
has a history of saying things that do not make sense. When P.J. Carelismo and Jon Barry are praising your strategic acumen, it is time to rethink your late game defensive plan. It will be very interesting to see what Vogel does if this particular scenario presents itself again; I suspect that Vogel will keep Hibbert in the game and that Vogel will emphasize the importance of forcing a Miami player to shoot a contested jump shot.
Labels: Chris Bosh, Frank Vogel, Indiana Pacers, Jon Barry, LeBron James, Miami Heat, P.J. Carlesimo, Roy Hibbert
posted by David Friedman @ 10:31 PM
Real Talk About Media Coverage of NBA Coaching
I correctly predicted the winner of seven of the eight first round series, including both upsets in the #4 versus #5 matchups; my only mistake was favoring Denver over Golden State: the Nuggets took game one on Andre Miller's buzzer-beating layup and then lost four of the next five games. I should have known better than to pick a George Karl-coached team in the playoffs: Karl has a .599 regular season winning percentage but just a .432 playoff winning percentage; compare that to the winning percentages of championship-winning coaches Phil Jackson (.704/.688), Gregg Popovich (.681/.613), Erik Spoelstra (.660/.633), Pat Riley (.636/.606), Rick Carlisle (.587/.515), Larry Brown (.568/.511) and Doc Rivers (.554/.529) and it is clear that neither Karl's playoff winning percentage nor the gaping differential between his regular season/playoff winning percentages suggest that Karl is an elite level coach.
Coaching matters in the NBA, even though some "stat gurus" dispute this. When I picked Chicago to beat Brooklyn I
wrote, "This series features a huge coaching mismatch. TNT's Kenny Smith says
that if a team loses by more than five points then blame the players but
if it loses by less than five points blame the coach; the games in this
series figure to be low scoring and close and I trust Chicago's Tom
Thibodeau much more than I trust Brooklyn's P. J. Carlesimo; this is not
just about in-game adjustments but also about elements of preparation
that give one team an edge over another." Only two of the seven games in the Chicago-Brooklyn series were decided by five points or less--with each team winning one of those games--but five of the games were decided by eight points or less (including the triple overtime contest that Chicago won by eight points) and the Bulls went 4-1 in those games. Brooklyn's other two victories were both blowouts; there is no doubt that the Nets have a more talented team on paper than the injury-ravaged Bulls but the Bulls proved to be a more disciplined and focused squad: the Bulls did all of the "little things" that actually are quite important, such as setting solid screens, executing plays crisply and taking advantage of opportunities to score easy baskets on inbounds plays while also denying Brooklyn similar opportunities.
Bum Phillips once said that Don Shula "can take his'n and beat your'n or he can take your'n and beat
his'n." The Chicago-Brooklyn series very much had that feel; in game seven, the Bulls were without the services of 2011 MVP Derrick Rose (who missed the entire 2012-13 season), All-Star Luol Deng and Kirk Hinrich while the Nets had all hands on deck yet the Bulls took a huge first half lead and never trailed en route to a 99-93 road win: if everything else were kept the same but the head coaches switched sides, I'd be willing to bet that the Nets would have won the series.
Coach bashing is a favorite media pastime but most media members do not have a clue how to determine if a team is well coached or poorly coached. I respect all NBA coaches tremendously and I fully realize that even a bad NBA head coach knows more about basketball than the vast majority of coaches at any other level of the sport; Karl is a very good NBA coach but he seems to be better suited for rebuilding teams/coaching underdogs than he is at extracting the maximum out of 50-plus win teams. Carlesimo was an excellent collegiate coach and he served as an assistant on Gregg Popovich's San Antonio staff so Carlesimo obviously has a very good basketball mind--but as an NBA head coach he has not measured up well in comparison with the best of the best, a category in which Thibodeau clearly belongs.
When I critique coaches like Carlesimo and Karl I am not trying to suggest that I know more about basketball than they do or that I would be a better NBA head coach; in other words, I am not acting like Bill Simmons. I am just doing my job as an NBA analyst by pointing out that, as much as Karl and Carlesimo know about basketball, there are other coaches who are demonstrably performing at a higher level.
Media members do not like to admit being wrong and it is interesting to see the lengths some of them will go to in order to avoid such admissions. Simmons used to regularly bash Doc Rivers' coaching acumen but now Rivers is widely recognized as a great coach so Simmons had to stop degrading Rivers--but did Simmons admit that he was wrong? Of course not! Simmons' story is that Rivers has evolved into being a great coach. Rivers won the 2000 Coach of the Year award in his first season as an NBA head coach after leading the "heart and hustle" Orlando Magic to a 41-41 record with Darrell Armstrong, John Amaechi and Chucky Atkins as the top three players in the rotation. Has Rivers become a better coach in the intervening 13 years? I am sure that he has; I hope that anyone who does something for more than a decade becomes better at it--but the idea that Rivers was a terrible coach who then became a great coach is absurd. Simmons was dead wrong about Rivers and he should just admit it.
Simmons' arrogance is not unique; Cleveland media members still give the Simmons treatment to Bill Belichick, who took over a 3-13 Browns team in 1991 and transformed them into an 11-5 playoff team by 1994. During Belichick's entire tenure in Cleveland the media relentlessly mocked his coaching strategies and his public speaking style. The Browns have not won a playoff game since the 1994 team went 1-1 in the postseason, while Belichick has won three Super Bowls in New England. Belichick is now widely acknowledged to be one of the greatest coaches in NFL history--but do the Cleveland media members admit that they were wrong? Of course not! They insist that Belichick learned from his supposed mistakes in Cleveland and became a much better coach in New England. Sure, that makes sense: he was a dunce in Cleveland but he became a genius in New England--well, if ignorance is contagious then perhaps one could theorize that he caught it from those Cleveland media members! Smart people are much more apt to learn from their mistakes than stupid people, so there is no doubt that Belichick learned from some mistakes that he made in Cleveland but the record before, during and after his time there shows that he did a great job as the Browns' coach. A lot of those very same media members
gave Mike Brown the Belichick treatment during Brown's first term as the Cavaliers' coach and they are no doubt gearing up to do so again as Brown takes over for the fired Byron Scott. We will be told that Brown should hire John Kuester as some kind of "offensive coordinator"--so that the Cavs can hope to replicate the awesome scoring attack that Kuester built during his tenure as Detroit's head coach when the Pistons ranked 29th and 22nd in points scored. Brown will be mocked for talking about his players letting him coach them, even though Hall of Fame Coach Chuck Daly
said exactly the same thing; that statement has nothing to do with being a soft person or a bad leader and everything to do with understanding the nature of the culture in an NBA locker room: if a coach cannot elicit "voluntary cooperation" (Pat Riley's way of referring to the concept mentioned by Daly and Brown) then he cannot function effectively.
Mike Brown does not need me to defend him; he is well paid for his services and he is well respected by people who actually understand the technical aspects of the sport--I just wish that media members covered the league more intelligently, but we are all getting the media coverage that we accept/tolerate; perhaps some day editors and consumers will hold writers/TV talking heads to higher standards but it does not seem like that kind of change will happen any time soon.
Labels: Bill Belichick, Bill Simmons, Boston Celtics, Brooklyn Nets, Chicago Bulls, Doc Rivers, Mike Brown, Orlando Magic, P.J. Carlesimo, Tom Thibodeau
posted by David Friedman @ 3:31 AM
Kevin Durant's Evolution
It has been fascinating to observe Kevin Durant's evolution from skinny, one dimensional rookie to fully grown, multidimensional veteran. After Durant struggled during the summer league as a rookie, I
wrote a skill set evaluation
that included this comment about Durant's ballhandling: "...what I saw was a player with a high dribble (a quick handed
NBA guard would have picked Durant clean at midcourt) who did not attack
the hoop straight on but launched a soft shot that turned out to be an
airball." Durant came into the NBA as a very raw talent and, instead of just hyping him up like some commentators did, I informed readers about Durant's strengths and weaknesses, concluding with these words: "If you are a University of Texas fan or a Seattle fan and think that I
am being too harsh on Durant, just go to NBA.com and watch the webcasts
of his games. As they say, the eye in the sky doesn't lie. I have
nothing against him and wish him all the best but he's got an uphill
climb ahead of him and all of the breathless praise and lofty
predictions really do him a disservice; somebody needs to get in his ear
about the things that he doesn't do well and help him out. If all
Durant hears is how great he is going to be then what incentive is he
going to have to work on his game?"
Durant's first coach, P.J. Carlesimo, foolishly shifted him from forward
to shooting guard; contrary to the bleatings of some so-called experts,
positional designations matter, and the young Durant was ill-suited to play shooting guard. After the Oklahoma City Thunder replaced Carlesimo with Scott Brooks, Brooks
immediately moved Durant back to forward and Durant
thrived as soon as he returned to his comfort zone. Durant could have rested on his laurels and been content as a one-dimensional scoring machine but Durant eagerly attacked his skill set weaknesses in order to become a much better all-around player.
Research
has
demonstrated that "effortful study" is essential to achieving skill set mastery in many fields
and Durant is yet another example of this; Lee Jenkins' recent
Sports Illustrated article about Durant states that Durant realized that he
"dribbled too high," that his shot selection needed improvement and that
he must become a better passer. Durant became great precisely because he was smart enough to recognize his flaws and because he worked very hard to improve his game. Working hard does not guarantee success but not working hard guarantees failure.
Labels: Kevin Durant, Lee Jenkins, Oklahoma City Thunder, P.J. Carlesimo, Scott Brooks
posted by David Friedman @ 6:54 AM
Avery Johnson is a Victim of Unrealistic Expectations
Avery Johnson won the Coach of the Month Award in November and the Brooklyn Nets fired him in December. Did Johnson suddenly forget how to coach? No, he is simply the latest in a long line of NBA coaches who are victims of unrealistic expectations held by owners and/or executives. It is not clear why so many people believe that the Nets as currently constructed should be a championship contender;
I predicted that the Nets would finish seventh in the Eastern Conference and the 14-14 Nets are currently in eighth place in the East, right about where I expected them to be and right about where they probably will finish.
Maybe the Nets will throw a huge pile of money at Phil Jackson and perhaps the Zen Master can push the Nets up to the fifth or sixth seed--but, regardless of who is at the helm, this team lacks depth and is one injury away from possibly not even making the playoffs: the Nets went 2-5 when Brook Lopez sat out due to injury. Lopez is a good, solid big man but hardly a franchise player. What will happen to the Nets if Deron Williams or Joe Johnson miss a few games? Both former All-Stars are performing well below their usual standards but if either player is out of the lineup the Nets will be in serious trouble.
Williams is the person who looks the worst in this scenario; he talked his way out of Utah and convinced the Nets to build their franchise around him but he has regressed as a player, he publicly whined about his role (which may have contributed to Johnson being fired) and he has shown no indication that he is capable of being the best player on a championship contending team. The terms "franchise player" and "elite player" are very overused; at any given point in time, there are only a handful of legitimate franchise players in the NBA. In the past decade or so, franchise players who have led their teams to at least one NBA title include Shaquille O'Neal, Tim Duncan, Kobe Bryant, Dirk Nowitzki and LeBron James. The 2004 Pistons did not have an All-NBA First Team player but they had an ensemble cast of four All-Star caliber players and the 2008 Celtics similarly split up franchise player responsibilities among Kevin Garnett (who made the All-NBA First Team that season), Paul Pierce (who won the Finals MVP) and Ray Allen. Dwyane Wade went nuts in the 2006 NBA Finals after the Dallas Mavericks focused their defense on Shaquille O'Neal, who made the All-NBA First Team that season (Wade made the Second Team). Wade displayed franchise player qualities during that title run but he also
presided over Miami's collapse once injuries and age prevented O'Neal from being consistently dominant. I have never considered Wade, even at his best, to be quite equal to James and Bryant at their respective bests, though I know that other people hold Wade in higher regard than that--but a lot of those people ended up looking silly when they kept insisting that Miami was still Wade's team even after James led the Heat in just about every important statistical category.
Right now, LeBron James, Kevin Durant and Kobe Bryant are the only full fledged franchise players in the NBA; James is the best player in the league, Durant is right behind him and Bryant--who was the league's best player for several years until James surpassed him
late in the 2008-09 season--is still playing at a high enough level to lead a team to a championship (assuming that the Lakers actually put a healthy team around him). A fully healthy Dwight Howard is a franchise player but Howard is not fully healthy. Chris Paul is a great player but there have been very few franchise players who were barely six feet tall (Bob Cousy, Nate Archibald and Isiah Thomas). Russell Westbrook could be a franchise player if he improved his shot selection. It is way too soon to anoint Carmelo Anthony as a franchise player--though that has not stopped many people from doing so, much like many people
prematurely praised Gilbert Arenas (I'll take the current version of Anthony over the 2007 version of Arenas but I will not take either of those players over the current versions of James, Durant or Bryant). Tim Duncan and Dirk Nowitzki used to be franchise players but age/injuries have knocked both players off of that pedestal (though Duncan is still very effective and Nowitzki will presumably return to All-Star or even All-NBA form once he is fully healthy again).
Anyone who understands the preceding analysis realizes that it is silly for the Nets to fire Johnson after 28 games; Williams is not a franchise player nor is he surrounded by a championship caliber supporting cast. Johnson's replacement, at least on an interim basis, is P.J. Carlesimo, a good college coach who has a .408 regular season winning percentage as an NBA head coach and has never won a playoff series. Carlesimo inexplicably
played Kevin Durant out of position at shooting guard, a mistake that Scott Brooks
immediately corrected after he replaced Carlesimo. If the Nets do not replace Carlesimo soon then their best case scenario is probably a first round loss as the eighth seed--and it is possible that they will miss the playoffs.
Labels: Avery Johnson, Brook Lopez, Brooklyn Nets, Deron Williams, Joe Johnson, Kevin Durant, Kobe Bryant, LeBron James, P.J. Carlesimo
posted by David Friedman @ 6:28 AM
Durant is Back in his Comfort Zone at Small Forward
The most fascinating storyline in Oklahoma City, one that will have ramifications for years to come and could very well determine the future of the Thunder, concerns Kevin Durant. Shortly after the Thunder--then known as the Seattle SuperSonics--drafted Durant, Coach P.J. Carlesimo announced that he planned to shift Durant from forward to shooting guard and
I immediately expressed skepticism:
Maybe some people have visions of Durant being the 21st century version of George Gervin, a slender forward who moved to guard early in his pro career and won four scoring titles--but there are some important differences to consider between Gervin and Durant. Gervin started his career at his natural position of forward and proved that he could rebound, draw fouls and even block shots, averaging 8.4 rpg, 6.3 FTA/g and 1.6 bpg in his first full ABA season (Gervin played just 30 games as a rookie after the Virginia Squires discovered him in the middle of the season while he was playing in the minor league Eastern Basketball Association). San Antonio Spurs Coach Bob Bass moved Gervin to guard late in Gervin's third season, after Gervin had already established himself as an All-Star forward.Durant has not played one minute of regular season action in the NBA, yet even though he has been advertised as a great inside player his coach already wants him to switch positions. Carlesimo clearly wants to spare Durant from being pounded in the paint but the move to the backcourt will lead to other problems. To the best of my knowledge, Durant has never played guard; now he will have to learn how to do so against the best guards in the world. Also, from what I saw in the summer league, Durant has a very high dribble and is not a great ballhandler, so he will be a turnover waiting to happen if he is relied upon to do a lot of dribbling.Durant clearly needs to put on some weight but that will be true regardless of which position he plays. I think that he and Seattle would be better served if he takes his lumps at his natural small forward position where he will at least be in the comfort zone of playing in areas of the court that are familiar to him.It is interesting that the first thing that interim Coach Scott Brooks did is put Durant back at his natural position, small forward. During Brooks' pregame standup on Wednesday, I asked him to explain specifically why he made this move and if he expects this to be a permanent change. One thing that is important to keep in mind is that Carlesimo hired Brooks to be one of his assistants, so Brooks feels very loyal to Carlesimo; in fact, Brooks specifically told the assembled media that the fact that Carlesimo essentially gave Brooks his blessing to take the job, saying that this is just part of the business, made this a much smoother transition for Brooks then it otherwise might have been. So, whatever Brooks thinks about Carlesimo's original strategy of putting Durant at shooting guard, he obviously is going to choose his words carefully. With that caveat in mind, here is Coach Brooks' response: "We're just evaluating it as the season goes along. I think that the advantage that we have with Kevin and Jeff (Green, the starting power forward) is that they are both very good, talented, young forwards--kind of like throwback guys. It seems like the league is going small. You've got 6-2 two guards (shooting guards), 6-5, 6-6 three men (small forwards). With Kevin, he's good enough to do a lot of things in a lot of different spots. The guy's a terrific young talent and we're all excited that we have him. He works extremely hard. You can put him on the floor and he's going to perform well."
I followed up by asking, "By putting him at forward, does that allow him to operate in different areas of the court or attack in different ways than he was attacking at guard, giving him some kind of advantage?"
Coach Brooks replied, "Well, I think a job as a coach whether he is at the two or the three or the four is that we put him in those spots where we can dictate where he takes most of his shots and that's our focus: getting good shots. We don't want to just say that now that he's at the three we assume that he is going to get good shots. It goes hand in hand with the player and the coach to find the best spots on the court that he is going to be successful in. I think Kevin is a smart player and he looks forward to getting better every day and he--along with myself--will figure out what are the best spots on the court for him. But he's good, he's one of those players who can score high, side, low, free throws, transition. He's a talented player."
Coach Brooks' answers are very informative, if understood correctly. He diplomatically avoided criticizing Carlesimo and he made sure to emphasize that Durant is a talented and hard working player but he made it clear that the idea moving forward (no pun intended) is to "dictate where he takes most of his shots" and to improve Durant's shot selection; the first part of that process is putting Durant at his natural position, thus getting him into a comfort zone.
After getting Coach Brooks' take on the matter, I went into the Thunder's locker room to find out what Durant thinks about the change; Durant had just finished his pregame shooting drills (see Notes From Courtside in my
recap of Cleveland's 117-82 win over Oklahoma City for a description of his shooting form) and he was sitting by his locker reading the pregame notes. I made sure that I was not disturbing his pregame routine and then conducted a brief interview with the 2008 Rookie of the Year:
Q: "In the early part of your NBA career you have predominantly been playing shooting guard but since Coach Brooks has taken over he has switched you to small forward. Tell me about that adjustment and what are some of the differences in playing those two positions. What is the advantage of having you at small forward?"
Durant: "I think that in our system the two and the three is basically the same but moving me to the three puts me closer to the basket. I'm going to be able to post up a little bit more now. Other than that I think it's just about the same. Wherever coach puts me I just want to come out and play hard."
I think that many writers would take that quote, run with it and use it as the basis of a story saying that the change does not matter. However, if you understand the game and know the history of Durant's career then you realize that his first answer was just a polite, superficial response to what he may have assumed was a generic question from a generic reporter. Many players assume--in some cases, correctly--that members of the media don't understand much about the sport, so when players are asked a question they often just give a simple, formulaic answer because they figure that all the reporter wants is any kind of sound bite. So Durant simply said that the positions are basically the same and then showed that he is "on message" by echoing Coach Brooks' emphasis on the importance of playing hard.
As you will see, after a few more questions the truth about the position switch emerges. First, I asked Durant, "But through all of your career prior to the NBA you always played forward, right? You hadn't played guard until getting to the NBA level, right?"
Durant confirmed this: "I hadn't played guard until my rookie year; that is the only year I played guard in my entire life."
Q: "So wasn't that an adjustment in terms of getting the ball in different spots on offense and wasn't it totally different on defense as well?"
Durant: "Exactly. Playing against the smaller guys, guarding them on defense, and then having little guys who could reach up under me and guard me--it was an adjustment. It was something I had to go through but I'm glad I'm at my natural position now."
Read that last sentence again. Playing shooting guard was "something I had to go through but I'm glad I'm at my natural position now." In other words, the two positions are not "basically the same," particularly for someone who had never played guard before at any level and who was now forced to learn the position at the very highest level of the sport.
Q: "What is the one aspect of your game you worked on the most during the summer in order to improve from your rookie season to your second season?"
Durant: "Just everything--getting stronger, my post up game, my ballhandling. Everything. I think that I did a good job on working on that and I just have to continue to work to become better."
Durant struggled with his shot during most of his rookie season but really picked things up down the stretch. I asked him what changed and he told me, "I think that I was getting easier shots. I started to post up more in the second half of the year. I was knocking down open shots and my teammates did a great job of getting me easy baskets, layups and dunks and things like that. That helped me out a lot."
Q: "The process of getting easier shots--was that an adjustment that you made in terms of your shot selection?"
Durant: "Most definitely. I stopped shooting three pointers. I was shooting close to six or seven a game early on and I cut that down to maybe one or two. By doing that, my field goal percentage went up and I was getting easier shots."
Q: "Was that an adjustment the coaching staff suggested to you or you just decided on your own that you needed to stop doing that?"
Durant: "It was something that I told myself that I need to stop doing until I get comfortable with the three point line and consistently knocking it down. I think that was me growing up, learning to move in some and not shoot too many threes."
Q: "Watching you shoot when you were warming up, it looked like the midrange shot--the elbow jumper and the shot from the baseline--you hardly missed those at all but when you backed up just one or two steps to the three point line you still shot a good percentage but it seemed like there was a difference in your comfort level. Would you say that is true with the three point shot still, that the extra step makes a difference?"
Durant: "I'm still trying to find my comfort level at the three point line but I think that the midrange game is where my shot is; that's why I knock all my (midrange) shots down. The midrange game is something that I love doing and my teammates do a great job of finding me there. I work hard on it after practice, before practice, shootarounds, after shootarounds--just knocking that shot down. If I continue to work then it will be an even better shot for me."
Q: "Is there a veteran player, either on your team on another team, that you watch and on whom you model your midrange game?"
Durant: "There are a lot of guys. LeBron has a good midrange jumper, I think. Carmelo (Anthony), Michael Redd, also Paul Pierce does a great job of shooting from midrange. I watch those guys and learn a lot from them."
It is a bit ironic that Durant mentioned LeBron James, because I think that Durant's midrange shot is already better than James' midrange shot; maybe Durant was simply being deferential to a player he respects and who he was about to face that night. Anthony, Redd and Pierce certainly do have midrange games worth admiring. I thought that Durant might mention Richard Hamilton.
During Coach Brown's pregame standup on Wednesday, I asked him if the position switch for Durant changed his defensive plans in any way. Coach Brown replied, "For us (defensively), the two and the three are the same. We just look at the two guys and have LeBron guard whoever is bigger and Delonte (West) guard whoever is smaller...It really doesn't make a difference to us but psychologically in their minds it may make a difference. I don't know, because I am not in their locker room." It is important to remember that even though the defensive matchup does not change for Cleveland that is not the case for other teams. Also, Oklahoma City's lineup switch is not only designed to impact who guards Durant but also where Durant is stationed on the court offensively--"put him in those spots where we can dictate where he takes most of his shots" is the way Coach Brooks put it, as noted above--and who Durant guards when the Thunder are on defense.
My analysis of Durant's game in previous posts since he was drafted may have seemed harsh at times but all I am doing is reporting what I see and then drawing logical conclusions; in the process I also tried to tone down all of the hype that was showered on him. In the long run, I think that the groundless hype could do him more damage than my substantive criticisms, many of which he clearly has figured out on his own to be true (such as the importance of getting stronger, improving his ballhandling and shooting fewer three pointers). Durant is an earnest, soft spoken and likable person and I can honestly say that I hope he does succeed in becoming a great player--but with his body type and skill set I think that he has his work cut out for him to become as great as some people projected. Jeff Van Gundy recently called Durant a disappointment but in my opinion that says more about overheated expectations than it does about what should realistically have been expected of Durant by this stage. Moving Durant to small forward is a big step in the right direction that I predict will pay noticeable dividends, possibly as soon as the end of this season.
Labels: Kevin Durant, Oklahoma City Thunder, P.J. Carlesimo, Scott Brooks
posted by David Friedman @ 9:45 AM
Cavs Silence Thunder, 117-82
Cleveland opened with a 13-0 run, led 33-14 after the first quarter and completely dominated Oklahoma City in a 117-82 victory. Even in the most lopsided blowouts the losing team usually makes some kind of a run but Cleveland led by at least 29 points for the entire second half. The easy win enabled LeBron James to play a career-low tying 17 minutes but he made the most of his limited court time with 14 points, three rebounds, three assists, three blocked shots and one steal. Zydrunas Ilgauskas led Cleveland with 17 points and seven rebounds. Chris Wilcox paced Oklahoma City with 14 points. Kevin Durant scored 13 points on 6-16 field goal shooting and only had one rebound and one assist.
The Cavaliers set three franchise records in this game:
1) Their 12-3 record is their best start ever, surpassing 11-3 marks set in 1976-77 and 1988-89.
2) Their 34 point halftime lead tops the previous mark by two (set on April 20, 2001 versus Orlando).
3) The 35 point margin of victory is their largest win ever over the Thunder/Sonics franchise.
It is also worth noting that all 12 Cleveland players scored at least one point for the second game in a row, the Cavs have not trailed at all in their past three games and their .608 field goal percentage is their best single game mark in that category since March 21, 1996.
Oklahoma City was playing the second game of a back to back but so was Cleveland. The Cavs are obviously very good but it takes nothing away from Cleveland's performance to acknowledge that the Thunder look like an expansion team--and a bad one at that. I can't recall seeing in person an NBA team perform worse than they did; they reminded me of the 12-70 1986-87 Clippers, the 11-71 1992-93 Mavericks and the 15-67 2000-01 Bulls. On press row we spent the first half debating whether the Thunder are more atrocious on offense or defense but did not reach a definitive verdict; they finished the game shooting .354 from the field--with 10 of their shots being blocked--and, as mentioned above, they helped the Cavs shoot .608 from the field by all but escorting them to the hoop. At halftime I mentioned something to Sam Amico of Pro Basketball News that bears repeating: none of the individual stats from the second half of this game will be significant because that whole 24 minutes is nothing but garbage time but at the end of the season those numbers will be factored into various team and individual statistical rankings, including per minute stats that will be skewed by gaudy, misleading totals such as Tarence Kinsey's 11 points on 3-3 shooting in nine minutes. There is certainly value in tracking every possible statistic and having those numbers available for analysis but without placing numbers in a larger context they can often be not only meaningless but outright deceptive.
In his postgame standup, Cleveland Coach Mike Brown very tactfully alluded to Oklahoma City playing the second game of a back to back and being a team in transition (with Scott Brooks recently taking over as coach for the fired P.J. Carlesimo). As for his own team's efforts, Brown said, "I thought our guys entered the game with the right mind frame, the right focus. They came out and did what they were supposed to do on both ends of the floor. That's good to see because one of the things we're preaching is developing good habits." He singled out Delonte West for praise: "He did a nice job of running the ball club and trying to get guys the ball on time and on target. Another thing we say is 'pass on time, pass on target' and Delonte's passes were on time and on target."
Coach Brooks said, "The lesson to be learned is you have to come with it every night...the biggest thing we will talk about on Friday will be, when we play against a good team you have to be prepared to take their first hit." Prior to the game, Coach Brooks mentioned that the number one problem he saw with the Thunder so far this season is that the players did not play hard all the time and that comment turned out to be very prophetic (see Notes From Courtside for a fuller exploration of this issue).
*****************************
Notes From Courtside:
I arrived at Quicken Loans Arena two hours before tip off and Durant was already on the court working on shooting drills; I did not get to count all of his attempts but this is what I observed: he made nearly every elbow (free throw line extended) jumper that he took and he shot the ball with a fluid, effortless motion. He seems to have gotten taller and longer; when he took one dribble from the three point line he covered a large area before shooting midrange jumpers that he also rarely missed. I only saw him miss two free throws (he shot these before he moved from one spot on the court to another as he practiced his jumpers from various locales) and he again displayed a very nice shooting motion. However, when he shot from behind the three point line his motion did not look quite as smooth and his percentage dropped noticeably, though he still shot well overall (keep in mind that he was close to 100% on his midrange jumpers, so a big drop off behind the arc still means he made close to half of the threes I saw him try). When I spoke to Durant just a few minutes later he candidly admitted that he is not nearly as comfortable behind the three point line as he is with the midrange jump shot.
Durant's shooting motion is much smoother and more consistent than the shooting motion that LeBron James demonstrated when I watched him do shooting drills
prior to Cleveland's home opener versus Charlotte. That said, James has improved his free throw shooting so far this season (see below) and he is better than Durant in every skill set area other than pure shooting, which is why James is a legit MVP candidate and Durant is not yet an All-Star caliber player.
***
Coach Brooks played for Cleveland for part of the 1997-98 season, when Ilgauskas was a rookie. They were roommates back then, so during Brooks' pregame standup he good-naturedly made fun of Ilgauskas' driving skills and how much of a "slob" he was that time before adding on a serious note, "He's a terrific guy, first and foremost. That guy is a quality, quality person and Cleveland is lucky to have him for all the years that he has played. He's a good player, an All-Star multiple years."
***
During his pregame standup, Coach Brooks said that a major reason for the Thunder's poor record is "I don't think we played hard enough. It's important to play hard. It's very important to me that we play hard. It's important that our players realize how important it is to leave it on the floor every night. I've stressed to them that it just doesn't happen on game nights. You have to do it on the practice floor. That's the only way I know. I was one of those guys who loved practice. I believe that is how you get better. You can't all of a sudden work on this shot or I'm going to work on this move or I'm going to work on this defense in the middle of a game and expect the other team to participate in that. You have to prepare yourself in game-like situations in practice."
He then addressed some other subjects but the first time I had a chance I asked him this followup: "You mentioned the team not playing hard. When that happens what do you think is the cause of that and as a coach what can you do if you see a certain player or group of players not playing hard?"
Coach Brooks answered, "I don't think that players mean not to play hard. As you go through an NBA season, most players play hard but what you really want them to do is play really hard. There is a difference; it's a little bit of a difference but it is a difference. Guys don't do it on purpose. You just have to figure out which ways to motivate players and it takes different ways to motivate different players."
I then asked, "Is it true sometimes--particularly with younger players--that maybe they don't really know what it really means to play hard at the NBA level? Maybe college was kind of easy for them, that based on talent they just did certain things but the NBA game is a little bit different so that is part of the adjustment?" I meant for this line of inquiry to focus more on the true nature of "playing hard" and not so much on "young players" but Coach Brooks either perceived the question differently than I meant it or else simply wanted to make a point about his team when he replied, "No, I've been around a lot of veteran players who don't play hard. On paper that sounds good--you like to blame it on the young guys--but I don't buy into that at all. I think you want high character guys who understand that we are all here to play hard and whether you are young or a veteran guy you need to have that responsibility."
Rather than reask my question again--I'm not Mike Wallace jumping out of the bushes on 60 Minutes--I followed the train of Coach Brooks' thought process and said, "So that is part of the speech already, 'We're not using it as an excuse that we are young.'"
Coach Brooks answered, "I've never told the guys--not one time--that we're not ready because we're young. We are learning ways to win and it is a process. Not one time have I ever told the guys that we are not playing to win . We are playing every game to win and that's our message: Play hard and find ways to win."
***
LeBron James did not attempt any free throws during his cameo appearance against Oklahoma City but he is shooting a career-high .786 this season, so after the game I asked him what he is doing differently. He replied, "Free throws are all about maintaining focus and going up there and knocking them down. First of all, you have to get some type of routine and then consistently go up there and do that. I found that touch."
I asked James if he changed his routine this year and he answered, "Yes, I changed it but once I found a comfort level that I could go up there every time and do the same thing every time I stuck with it."
Labels: Cleveland Cavaliers, Kevin Durant, LeBron James, Mike Brown, Oklahoma City Thunder, P.J. Carlesimo, Scott Brooks
posted by David Friedman @ 6:16 AM
