Placing Kevin Garnett's Career in Proper Context is Complicated
Kevin Garnett recently announced his retirement, ending a 21 season career that was highlighted by one NBA championship (Boston, 2008), one regular season MVP award (2004), one Defensive Player of the Year award (2008), four rebounding titles (2004-07) and nine All-Defensive First Team selections. Garnett will be a first ballot Hall of Famer, albeit one who will be overshadowed by two other first ballot Hall of Famers in his class (Kobe Bryant and Tim Duncan).
Garnett's impact extended beyond the court, because he directly or indirectly influenced changes in how the business of basketball operates. He entered the NBA in 1995 as a 19 year old known as "The
Kid" and "The Big Ticket." He was the first basketball player to make
the preps to pros jump since Darryl Dawkins in 1975 and the first to become an All-Star after doing so since Moses Malone, who jumped from high school straight to the ABA in 1974 and eventually became a
three-time NBA MVP. In contrast, Dawkins enjoyed a 14 year NBA career but he
never made the All-Star team.
Garnett's successful NBA debut paved the
way for Kobe Bryant, LeBron James and several other future Hall of Famers to jump straight to the NBA from
high school--but the failures of many other high school players who
attempted the same feat (and shall remain nameless here) ultimately led
to the NBA instituting a rule preventing teams from drafting or signing
players who had just finished high school. After Garnett emerged as an All-Star in 1998, he signed a then mind boggling six year, $126 million contract extension that precipitated the 1999 lockout as owners scrambled to change the rules regarding rookie contracts and maximum contract size. Garnett's huge deal was grandfathered in, though, and
is a major reason that Garnett has the highest career earnings of any player in NBA history.
Despite Garnett's fat bank account, no credible analyst would propose that he is one of the top 10 players of all-time or even one of the top 20 players of all-time; even his staunchest supporters would hesitate to rank him higher than somewhere between 21-30 among the best of the best.
However, the "stat gurus" always loved Garnett and one of the major themes repeated by many of the "stat gurus" when "advanced basketball statistics" were first gaining attention was that Garnett's value was not fully appreciated by old school talent evaluators but was only captured by proper numbers crunching. I found the whole spectacle ridiculous for a variety of reasons: (1) Garnett achieved fame, wealth and awards long before most people had any idea that "advanced basketball statistics" existed, so he was hardly underrated or ignored by conventional player evaluation methods; (2) many of the statistical systems that supposedly proved Garnett's efficiency had serious flaws; (3) the underlying premise that Garnett was the best player in the league ("stat guru" Dave Berri tapped Garnett for that honor not once, not twice but four years in a row!) is demonstrably false. In fact, the insistence by so many "stat gurus" that Garnett was underrated when he clearly was not underrated was one of the first warning signs to me that many "stat gurus" were not pursuing truth but rather creating story lines that would justify them being hired by ESPN or by NBA front offices (and this plan worked out very well for the "stat gurus," even if it made ESPN's NBA coverage--in both TV and print formats--unbearable at times and even if
it made teams like the Philadelphia 76ers deplorable and unwatchable).
Addressing the first point, no one needed to crunch numbers on a fancy spreadsheet to figure out that Garnett was a very good player; the eye test showed that he was a mobile seven footer who scored, rebounded, passed, blocked shots and accumulated steals. He set solid (and, arguably, illegal) screens, he could guard multiple positions and he was durable. Those reasons explain why Garnett was able to go straight from high school to the NBA and quickly become the highest paid player ever while receiving All-Star selections and other honors. It is absurd to suggest that no one understood Garnett's worth until Dave Berri and other "stat gurus" showed up.
Regarding the second point, I have always insisted that if we are going to buy the premise that a given player is the best in the league because statistical system "X" says so then we also have to buy the premise that the other conclusions of statistical system "X" are valid, because the same methodology informs those conclusions. For example, let's take Value Over Replacement Player (VORP). According to that metric, in the past 20 years LeBron James has been the best player in the NBA eight times. Maybe you buy that premise, maybe you don't, but let's dig deeper. The other multiple leaders since 1996-97 are Kevin Garnett (three times) and Stephen Curry (twice). VORP tapped Shaquille O'Neal as the best player once and it never placed Kobe Bryant higher than third (VORP only placed Bryant in the top five in the NBA three times during his entire career). Tim Duncan also was only listed as the best player once. Maybe you are still on board with VORP, so try this on for size: VORP ranked Steve Francis as the best player in the NBA in 2000-01. If you still take VORP seriously, I don't think that I can help you understand basketball (or anything else). According to VORP, Tim Duncan was the best player in the NBA in 2001-02 and Kevin Garnett was the second best player. I disagree with that but maybe you don't think those particular rankings are outlandish, so please note that in 2001-02 VORP ranked Brent Barry as the fourth best player in the NBA (O'Neal was eighth and Bryant 12th as they somehow defied "advanced basketball statistics" to lead the L.A. Lakers to a third straight championship).
So, if you are using VORP (or Berri's statistical gibberish, which produced similarly bizarre results) to support the idea that Garnett should have won three MVPs, then you are also co-signing on Francis winning one MVP and Brent Barry being an All-NBA First Team caliber player in 2001-02. This kind of nonsense explains why I spent so much time decrying "stat gurus" and "advanced basketball statistics" during the early years of 20 Second Timeout (with age I have come to realize that it is difficult to turn fools away from foolishness, particularly if the fools can make money by propounding said foolishness).
As for the third point, I don't believe that Garnett was ever the best player in the NBA; Berri and VORP are way off base by suggesting that he should have won multiple MVPs and even the official MVP voters lost the thread a bit in 2004 when they were so excited about the possibility of Garnett finally winning a playoff series that they gave him the MVP. The best thing that Garnett did in the 2003-04 season is stay healthy; he played in all 82 games, while Bryant, Duncan and O'Neal each missed at least 13 games. If the MVP voters used durability as the tiebreaker when choosing Garnett I can accept that but I am not buying that Garnett deserved the MVP because VORP and Berri said so.
Garnett was certainly a viable MVP candidate in 2004 but Duncan--already a two-time NBA champion--essentially posted the same numbers in 2004 that he did in 2003 when he won the second of his back to back MVPs. The San Antonio Spurs went 51-18 when Duncan played but just 6-7 in the games that he missed, which kind of suggests that Duncan was rather valuable. Similarly, the Lakers went 48-17 with Bryant and just 8-9 without him. The Lakers posted a 15-4 record when Bryant scored at least 30 points.
Garnett paid a lot of attention to his individual numbers, particularly during the first half of his career. During his prime, Garnett bragged that he produced "20-10-5" (averages of at least 20 ppg, 10 rpg and 5 apg) on a yearly basis. While that was true from 2000-2005, it is also true that his Minnesota Timberwolves went 5-13 in the playoffs during the first four of those seasons, never making it out of the first round. After adding two-time NBA champion Sam Cassell and 1999 NBA Finalist Latrell Sprewell to the roster, Minnesota advanced to the 2004 Western Conference Finals before losing in six games to the Lakers, who somehow overcame the non-MVP caliber VORP numbers of Bryant and O'Neal. Garnett's Timberwolves then missed the playoffs each of the next three seasons.
After the first of Garnett's six straight 20-10-5 seasons, Minnesota lost 3-1 to Portland in the first round of the 2000 playoffs. Scottie Pippen, in the twilight of his career at 34 years old, averaged 18.8 ppg, 7.0 rpg and 4.3 apg for Portland in the series. He shot just .419 from the field but he shot .421 from three point range and nearly a third of his field goal attempts were from beyond the arc, so his shooting was actually rather efficient overall. Pippen led Portland in scoring and rebounding during the series, while ranking second in assists. Garnett averaged 18.8 ppg, 10.8 rpg and 8.8 apg but he shot just .385 from the field, without the benefit of a lot of made three pointers to offset all of his errant attempts. He led Minnesota in rebounding and assists while ranking second in scoring to Terrell Brandon, who averaged 19.5 ppg on .508 field goal shooting.
A few years later, Pippen--never one to mince words--
made some pointed comments about Garnett: "He really set the tone for self-destruction. He's very productive but unproductive. He gets you all the stats you want, but at the end of the day his points don't have an impact on [winning] the game. He plays with a lot of energy and a lot of enthusiasm, but in the last five minutes
of the game he ain't the same player as in the first five." Magic Johnson and Charles Barkley had both previously criticized Garnett for not having a go-to scoring move in the post and for not carrying enough of the scoring burden down the stretch in close games.
Here is my
June 2007 take on Garnett just before he was traded to Boston:
Garnett has put up gaudy numbers during his career--20.5 ppg, 11.4 rpg,
4.5 apg--but it could be argued that he has less impact on winning and
losing then perhaps any other player who has ever won an MVP. Go through
the list of MVP winners and try to find another one whose teams missed
the playoffs for three straight years while he was healthy and in his
prime. Garnett once boasted in a TV ad about how he puts up "20, 10 and
5" (referring to ppg, rpg and apg) year in and year out but one wonders
if achieving those stats means more to him than putting up 50 (regular
season wins) and 16 (the number of playoff wins it takes to win a
championship). Tim Duncan seems utterly unconcerned with attaining
certain specific individual statistical totals; he does whatever his
team needs him to do to win on a given night.
The arrival of Julius Erving in Philadelphia turned the 76ers into instant, perennial championship contenders and he stuck it out with the franchise until they finally won a title. Isiah Thomas joined a 16 win Detroit team and transformed them into back to back champions a few years later during an era when the NBA was dominated by Magic Johnson, Larry Bird and Michael Jordan. Jordan joined a bad Chicago team and eventually led the Bulls to the top of the heap. Garnett strung together a bunch of first round losses, made it to the Conference Finals once and then wanted to flee Minnesota after missing the playoffs for three years in a row.
The trade to Boston was perfect for Garnett, for it teamed him up with two future Hall of Famers (Paul Pierce and Ray Allen) who were more than happy to do the clutch scoring down the stretch of close games. The Celtics also had a deep roster surrounding their All-Star trio, including a young point guard in Rajon Rondo who was the best player on the court at crucial times during the 2008 championship run.
The Celtics rolled to a 66-16 regular season record in 2007-08 and Garnett finished third in the regular season MVP voting. I would argue that this was perhaps the best season of his career even though he did not come close to 20-10-5, because Garnett was entirely focused on winning a championship, as opposed to putting up gaudy individual numbers to convince critics that it was not his fault that his team was losing. It is worth remembering, though, that Pierce--not Garnett--won the Finals MVP as the Celtics defeated Bryant's Lakers in six games.
Boston made it back to the Finals in 2009 but Bryant won the Finals MVP as his Lakers triumphed in seven games. Garnett battled injuries and declining skills during the rest of his career, making stops in Brooklyn and then Minnesota again before finally deciding to retire.
Duncan was without question the best power forward of this (or any) era. He averaged 19.0 ppg, 10.8 rpg, 3.0 apg and 2.2 bpg during his regular season career, increasing those numbers to 20.6 ppg, 11.4 rpg, 3.0 apg and 2.3 bpg during the playoffs. Garnett averaged 17.8 ppg, 10.0 rpg, 3.7 apg and 1.4 bpg during the regular season and 18.2 ppg, 10.7 rpg, 3.3 apg and 1.3 bpg during the playoffs. The numbers look comparable, though Duncan enjoys at least a slight edge across the board except for assists. However, Duncan had a much greater impact; he anchored the Spurs in the paint at both ends of the court, while Garnett far too often drifted away from the paint. Garnett had much more jumping ability than Duncan, yet Duncan blocked more shots. It is not a coincidence that Duncan won five championships and contended for titles throughout his career while Garnett won one championship and went through long stretches during which he did not contend for titles.
Garnett made the All-NBA First Team four times. Bryant and Karl Malone hold the record with 11 All-NBA First Team selections each. Duncan made the All-NBA First Team 10 times, matching Bob Cousy, Bob Pettit, Elgin Baylor, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Michael Jordan and LeBron James. Players with nine All-NBA First Team selections include Oscar Robertson, Magic Johnson and Larry Bird (Julius Erving made the All-ABA First Team four times and the All-NBA First Team five times for a total of nine First Team selections).
Garnett's nine All-Defensive First Team selections are tied for first all-time with Jordan, Bryant and Gary Payton. Garnett's Defensive Player of the Year award in 2008 was well deserved, as his work at that end of the court played a major role in turning Boston into a dominant defensive team.
Much is made about Garnett's trash talking and toughness but I was never much impressed by either quality with Garnett. While I prefer athletes with a quiet demeanor like Erving, Duncan and Bjorn Borg, I have also rooted for and appreciated flamboyant performers such as Muhammad Ali, Reggie Jackson and Deion Sanders; I don't mind if you talk and strut if you back up the words and swagger by winning championships. Garnett spent more than 20 years running his mouth and he has exactly one championship to show for all of that noise--and he was not the best player on the court during that championship series. Ali, Jackson and Sanders were at their best when they faced the best. Regarding toughness, I don't remember Garnett confronting Charles Oakley or other real tough guys; when I picture Garnett yapping I picture him screaming at guys half his size and/or half his ability. OK, he tapped Duncan on the head once--and Duncan looked at Garnett like Garnett was crazy. Garnett did not intimidate Duncan and Garnett seemed far from enthusiastic about tapping anyone on the head who might have remotely considered responding in kind.
In his prime, Garnett was a first rate rebounder and defender. He scored and passed well, though not well enough to carry a team very far without substantial help. Garnett was a great player but he was never the NBA's best player. I think that the criticisms that Pippen, Magic and Barkley made about Garnett during Garnett's Minnesota days were valid and I don't think that the Boston championship refuted those criticisms; that championship proved that Garnett was willing and able to reduce his role to fit in on a title team (and he deserves credit for doing that) but it did not prove that Garnett was at the same level as his contemporaries O'Neal, Duncan, Bryant and James, players who performed at an individually dominant level during multiple championship runs.
Perhaps this article may come across as more negative than it is intended to be but I am simply trying to place Garnett's career in proper context, which is not easy to do after years of media rhapsodizing and reams of "analysis" that supposedly proved that Garnett was perennially the NBA's best player when O'Neal, Duncan and Bryant were all in the primes of their careers. It is not necessarily Garnett's fault that his value was overstated at times but as an analyst/commentator I feel duty bound to correct the record as the books close on a great--but not
Pantheon level--career.
Labels: Boston Celtics, Kevin Garnett, Latrell Sprewell, Minnesota Timberwolves, Paul Pierce, Ray Allen, Sam Cassell
posted by David Friedman @ 7:25 AM
Celtics Sinking in Wake of Marbury Signing
It is early in the Stephon Marbury experiment for the Celtics but, to paraphrase Yogi Berra, it is getting late early in Boston--at least in terms of trying to obtain the number one seed in the Eastern Conference. The Celtics have gone 4-4 since signing Marbury and are currently 3.5 games behind the Cleveland Cavaliers. The Cavs have won five straight games and nine of their last 10; if they maintain their .803 winning percentage the rest of the way then the Celtics would have to go undefeated in their 15 remaining games to have a chance to catch them. Barely a week ago, some commentators overreacted to Boston's home win versus Cleveland and proclaimed that the Celtics would capture the top seed in the East. I saw things differently,
declaring, "I think that the Cavs unofficially clinched the best record in the East as soon as the ink dried on Marbury's Boston contract." At this point, the Celtics not only have little realistic chance to pass the Cavs but they are in a dog fight with the Orlando Magic, who have creeped to within a half game of seizing the second seed.
Obviously, Boston's decline is not entirely Marbury's fault. Kevin Garnett has been out of the lineup for 11 games due to injury, Rajon Rondo missed two games because of a sprained ankle and some other rotation players are also banged up. However, people who thought that signing Marbury was a good move for Boston asserted two things: his talent would enable him to make a positive contribution and there was no downside for Boston because if Marbury caused any kind of problem the Celtics would just cut him loose. The Celtics went 17-4 in their first 21 games sans Garnett last season and this season, meaning that they have lost as many games without Garnett during the brief "Marbury era" as they did over the previous year and a half.
Marbury has been amazingly unproductive, averaging 3.4 ppg, 2.9 apg and 1.9 tpg while shooting just .317 from the field. Marbury has attempted just one free throw and only has three steals. He has been a defensive sieve who opposing teams target as soon as he enters the game and he has twice posted game-worst plus/minus numbers, indicating that the Celtics collectively perform worse when he is on the court than when he is on the bench: Marbury had a game-worst -11 plus/minus number in Boston's March 15 loss to Milwaukee and a game-worst -14 plus/minus number in Boston's March 8 loss to Orlando; those are staggering numbers for someone who played just 17 and 21 minutes respectively in those games. In Boston's March 1 loss to Detroit, Marbury had a +6 plus/minus number but that was mainly because he was an innocent bystander as the team made a second half charge that ultimately fell short; during Marbury's first stint in that game he had his pocket picked twice in the backcourt by the seldom-used Will Bynum, so when Marbury reentered the game Eddie House relieved Marbury of ballhandling responsibilities: Marbury was literally standing around watching as the Celtics rallied behind some timely shotmaking by House and Paul Pierce.
The Celtics obtained some luxury tax relief by trading Sam Cassell to the Sacramento Kings but Cassell is a proven winner who made several clutch plays in the playoffs during last year's championship run. Cassell has not appeared in a regular season game this season but he is healthy and it is hard to believe that he would be as unproductive as Marbury has been. I don't know what other options the Celtics had prior to signing Marbury but considering that Marbury's previous team banished him--paying him big dollars not to show up at games or even practices--and that every team he leaves gets better and every team he joins becomes worse I never saw an upside to bringing him into the fold. Marbury has not been the entire problem during Boston's downturn but he certainly has not been much of a solution, either.
Labels: Boston Celtics, Kevin Garnett, Sam Cassell, Stephon Marbury
posted by David Friedman @ 7:01 AM
Sam Cassell: A Student of the Game Evolves into A Teacher
I have always enjoyed watching Sam Cassell, in no small part because it is apparent that he takes very seriously what Steve Young would call the "craft" of playing his sport. Relative to top NBA players, Cassell never possessed great size, speed or jumping ability, yet he has always been able to get off--and make--his shot in pressure situations. In his first two NBA seasons, Sam Cassell played a key role on Houston’s back to back championship teams; as a rookie in 1993-94, he ranked fourth on the team during the playoffs in assists and three pointers made. After Cassell’s third season in Houston, the Rockets traded him to Phoenix as part of the deal to acquire aging star Charles Barkley. That was the beginning of a nomadic odyssey around the league for Cassell, who ultimately played for three teams in the 1996-97 season alone (Suns, Mavs, Nets). In his only full season with the Nets (1997-98), Cassell blossomed into an All-Star caliber player, averaging 19.6 ppg (16th in the NBA) and 8.0 apg (10th in the NBA). During the 1999 lockout-shortened season, the Nets shipped Cassell to Milwaukee, where he helped the Bucks to reach the 2001 Eastern Conference Finals. Cassell ranked in the top ten the league in assists in 2000 (9.0 apg, 3rd) and 2001 (7.6 apg, 8th) and he averaged between 18.2 ppg and 19.7 ppg in each of his four seasons with Milwaukee. Cassell’s next stop was Minnesota as the Timberwolves continued to try to find the right pieces to fit around Kevin Garnett. Cassell and Latrell Sprewell proved to be excellent perimeter complements to Garnett’s game and the Timberwolves made it to the 2004 Western Conference Finals as Cassell enjoyed his most decorated NBA season, earning his only All-Star selection, his only All-NBA Second Team nod and placing 10th in MVP voting. The Timberwolves were not able to duplicate that success the next season and in 2005 Cassell was traded to the L.A. Clippers, who had not made the playoffs since 1997. With Cassell at the helm, the Clippers went 47-35—their best record since 1974-75, when the franchise was known as the Buffalo Braves--smashed Denver 4-1 in the first round and took Phoenix to seven games before bowing out in the second round. In 2006-07, injuries limited Cassell to 58 games and the Clippers missed the playoffs. Midway through the 2007-08 season, the Clippers bought out Cassell’s contract and he signed with the Boston Celtics, reuniting with Garnett and eventually winning a third championship ring 14 years after winning one as a Houston rookie. Cassell hit some big shots in spot duty for Boston—including back to back games of 20 and 22 points late in the regular season and a 10 point fourth quarter outburst in the first game of the Cleveland series—but this year Doc Rivers plans to use him sparingly in the regular season. In effect, Cassell has become a player-coach, a mentor on the practice court to the team’s younger players, including starting point guard Rajon Rondo.I recently spoke with Cassell about a wide range of subjects, including the difference between winning a championship as a young player and as a veteran and how he developed the ability to be a consistent NBA scorer despite not being super athletic.Friedman: "You won championship rings in your first two seasons and now you have won a ring as a veteran player. What is the difference in your perspective on winning a ring as a young player versus winning a ring as a veteran player?"
Cassell: "This ring I got recently with this team—I know what winning a championship is all about. When you win so early like I did, I didn’t understand the concept of winning a championship, what it meant—the grind, the struggles, the sweat, the tears, the blood, the injuries, you know what I’m saying? All of that is a part of it. What we accomplished last year was unbelievable for me because it’s 13 years since my last championship. Going through the whole struggle and not winning and then finally winning, that was big. I felt it. I felt it."
Friedman: "Did you almost go from having the attitude as a young player that you were going to win championships every year to wondering if you were going to get just one more before you have to retire?"
Cassell: "No doubt about it. Yeah. That’s what I thought. Is it possible I could win another one? Out there in L.A., the window of opportunity was closed. Not closing—it was closed. I got new breath with these guys and I jumped at the opportunity to come and be a part of this."
Friedman: "I interviewed
Kenny Smith a while ago and he told me something very interesting about when you were teammates. He had a conversation with you when you were playing the same position and in competition for the same minutes and he told you that he would never be on the bench rooting for you to fail. What kind of impact did that have on you when a veteran player said something like that and how have you communicated that to the younger players who you have worked with since then?"
Cassell: "The advice that Kenny gave me was big. It definitely helped me to become the player that I am now. For instance, if Rajon (Rondo) is playing well and it is my opportunity to play and (Coach) Doc (Rivers) tells me to go sub in for Rajon, I’ll tell Doc, 'Let him play. Just let him play.' Like in game six (of the 2008 NBA Finals). I could have subbed for him but I said to Doc, 'He’s playing well. Let him play.' That’s what players on good teams do: sacrifice for each other for the betterment of the team. The team is the most important thing. On our team we have great individual ball players but they understand the team concept and that makes us even better."
Friedman: "You are not big for an NBA guard and you have never been a high flyer but you have the ability to post up other guards and are able to play down low even against players who are bigger than you. How did you develop that aspect of your game? How are you able to play on the block against players who are bigger and more athletic?"
Cassell: "I worked on it, first and foremost. It’s about making the game easier for me. That made the game easier. The closer you get to the basket, the higher your shooting percentages are; the farther away you get from the basket, the lower your percentages are. So, I learned that and I worked on it. I understood the concept of it."
Friedman: "What is the concept? If you are going against a player who is 6-6 and jumps better that you, most people would assume that that guy has an advantage against you. You must see an advantage from your perspective; what advantage do you see?"
Cassell: "Number one, I know how that guy is looking at me: he’s looking at me like I’m small and I won’t be able to get my shot off. I’m crafty with it; I pump fake and my whole thing is to shoot the ball when they don’t think that I’m going to shoot it, especially when I’m on the post."
Friedman: "So it is all about getting the defender out of rhythm."
Cassell: "Yeah. When I have the ball, I’m going to take the shot I want to take; I’m not going to take the shot that the defender wants me to take—then I’m playing into his hands. When I have the ball, I’m controlling the situation right now. If I want to take two dribbles, turn to the baseline, pump fake, pump fake again and then shoot it, that’s what I’m going to do. He’s not going to dictate what I’m going to do when I have the ball."
Friedman: "Do you think that a lot of times younger players or players who are gifted with a lot of athleticism kind of settle for shots and don’t have the mentality that you described?"
Cassell: "Yeah. You’ve got to learn it. When you’re young you think that you can jump over the world. The name of this game is putting the ball in the basket. That’s the name of this game—and how frequently and at what rate you can do it. It took me three years to understand how to do that. It took me three good years in this league to learn how to score, how to get a basket when I need to score."
Friedman: "So it was different than when you were in college and maybe didn’t think of the game in quite the same way. In college you simply had an athletic advantage over a lot of the players who you faced."
Cassell: "College cannot be compared to this. I breezed through college basketball. I didn’t average 20 points but I averaged 18 points two years in college but it wasn’t hard for me. Three guys on my team (Florida State) averaged at least 18 points a game (in 1993; Bob Sura and Doug Edwards were the other two players). It wasn’t hard for me to score points in college but when I got to the pros my first year I averaged seven points a night. My second year I averaged 10 points a night. By my third year I started to understand how to score the ball and how to be a complete ball player in this league."
Friedman: "Is that something you learn from veteran players or from coaches?"
Cassell: "It’s just on the job training. A guy can’t tell you how to score. You’ve got to understand it and go do it yourself."
Friedman: "Throughout your career, you’ve had the ability to take and make big shots. You don’t shrink from that. I think that there are some players in the league who don’t really want the ball in that situation. They may say that they do but you can see that when a screen is set for them they come off of it just a little bit slow so they’re not open."
Cassell: "Yeah."
Friedman: "How did you develop that mentality that you really want the ball in those situations?"
Cassell: "I had to because when I played in Houston I had great players on my team, Clyde Drexler and Hakeem Olajuwon. Those guys got double-teamed so I was left open. It was either take it and miss it or take it and make it."
Friedman: "You played in Houston with two future Hall of Famers and now on this team you are playing with three future Hall of Famers. What are some of the similarities and differences between the leadership styles of the main guys in Houston compared to the main guys in Boston?"
Cassell: "The guys in Houston were soft spoken. They led by example. They just went out and played the game. They weren’t critical. These guys (in Boston) are critical. Clyde and 'Dream' just played."
Friedman: "You played with Kevin Garnett when he won the MVP in Minnesota and you are playing with him again now. Outsiders might perceive him differently now because he won a championship but from your perspective has his game changed from then to now or is it just a matter of being in a better situation and having a better opportunity?"
Cassell: "Better situation and better opportunity. Put Paul Pierce and Ray Allen with us in Minnesota and we would have won a couple championships. Unfortunately, the game doesn’t go like that. So all three of those guys are blessed to have one another on the same team with Kendrick Perkins and Rajon—it’s a whole team. People are so fast to give those three guys all the credit but Leon Powe, myself, Eddie House, 'Baby,' Tony Allen, we understand the whole concept. Everybody might not like their role but they can respect their role. That’s what makes us successful."
Friedman: "Which player or players guarded you the toughest during your career?"
Cassell: "Eric Snow was a good defender. Craig Ehlo was a good defender at that time, long and lanky. Nate McMillan. Gary Payton, wow, Gary Payton was a tough defender at my position."
Labels: Boston Celtics, Clyde Drexler, Hakeem Olajuwon, Houston Rockets, Kevin Garnett, Paul Pierce, Ray Allen, Sam Cassell
posted by David Friedman @ 8:30 AM
Rebuilt Pacers Pound Celtics in Rousing Home Opener
Danny Granger scored 20 points and T.J. Ford added 19 points and four assists while not committing a single turnover as the new look Indiana Pacers beat the Boston Celtics 95-79 in front of a raucous sellout crowd of 18,165 at Conseco Fieldhouse; the Pacers set a franchise record for fewest points allowed in a home opener. The Pacers were without the services of Mike Dunleavy--who started all 82 games for them last year--and they lost starting center Rasho Nesterovic to an ankle injury early in the fourth quarter when the Celtics were still within striking distance. The Celtics hurt themselves by committing 24 turnovers, shooting just 27-78 (.346) from the field and making just 21-35 (.600) free throws but--as Boston Coach Doc Rivers freely admitted after the game--the Pacers have to be given a share of the credit for forcing Boston to shoot poorly from the field and mishandle the ball. Kevin Garnett led the Celtics with 18 points and a game-high 14 rebounds but he also committed a game-high six turnovers. Paul Pierce finished with 15 points, 10 rebounds and four assists but he shot just 3-15 from the field and 7-12 from the free throw line. Ray Allen had a quiet 10 points and six rebounds; he and Pierce also had four turnovers apiece.
What a difference a year makes. Last season, a mediocre Indiana Pacers team played in front of a half deserted Conseco Fieldhouse that had all the vitality and energy of a mausoleum. That is why Pacers President Larry Bird and newly promoted General Manager David Morway retooled the roster this summer; seven of the 15 players who are on the team now were not on the 2007-08 opening night roster. The Pacers fought hard but lost 100-94 in their season opener on Wednesday in Detroit and now they have knocked off the defending NBA champions. When Indiana's lead swelled to 20 points in the fourth quarter, the team received an enthusiastic standing ovation from a crowd that has been starving to see good basketball from their beloved Pacers.
Many NBA analysts and fans are sleeping on the Pacers--the
consensus at ESPN is that the Pacers will finish 12th in the 15 team Eastern Conference--but in my
2009 Eastern Conference Preview I wrote, "Most people seem to expect Indiana to be terrible this year but the Pacers only missed the playoffs by one game. They sent Jermaine O'Neal to Toronto in exchange for T.J. Ford, a point guard who will be able to push the ball up the court and feed the team's many three point shooters. I think that the Pacers will surprise a lot of people but in the end they will probably once again fall just short of the playoffs." Obviously, one home opening win does not a season make and the Celtics will most likely finish at least 20 games ahead of the Pacers this season but the Pacers are certainly good enough to challenge for the eighth playoff spot.
Last season, Boston started to make me a believer after I watched in person as the Celtics played hard on every possession and ground out a
101-86 win at Indiana. Later, I had the opportunity to see the Celtics in person during their Eastern Conference playoff showdown with the Cleveland Cavaliers. Win or lose, in each of those games the Celtics played harder and with more focus than they did versus Indiana tonight. When Coach Rivers emerged from the locker room to do his postgame standup, he looked at the gathered media horde and said with a wry grin, "You waited around for this?" That reminded me of the old story that has been told about a basketball coach who was so disgusted by his team's performance that he tried to get thrown out of the game but the referee would not eject him, saying, "If I have to watch this then you do, too." Rivers was not happy with any aspect of how his team played: "We were bad all game. Turnovers, sloppy play, missed free throws--but give Indiana credit. I thought that Jim had them prepared. They played hard, they were fired up for the game. They had fresh legs, clearly, but we have to be mentally tougher. We got in late but we just didn't play well in any aspect of the game and it was amazing that in the third quarter we were only down by nine or 10. It was a miracle but we didn't deserve to win that game."
Someone asked Coach Rivers the question that he will probably hear before and after every game (you can see the slightly different version of it that I asked Rivers before the game in Notes From Courtside): how will the team respond now that every other team in the league will be playing their best game against the Celtics, particularly at home? Rivers candidly answered, "I don't know the answer. I just don't know yet. We'll find that out. Tonight, one thing we're going to learn is that we cannot come out flat because every night we are going to get every team's best (effort). On those flat nights we are going to get our butts whipped and that is what happened tonight."
As for Indiana's prospects, Rivers declared, "I love what they've done. Number one, the character of their basketball team is up. You win with character--and they can play. I just like their team and what they've done. To do that in one summer is pretty impressive."
Casual NBA fans may not know much about Granger, who I
singled out over the summer as one of the most underrated players in the league. Rivers is also impressed by Granger: "He's a good player. People don't know who he is yet but they will soon. He's a terrific basketball player. It seems like he's a really good kid--I don't know that because I don't know him but it comes off that way. On the floor, you can see how his teammates respond to him. I think that by moving some of the older guys out and different guys out, it's kind of in some ways become his team and the other players accept that and that's a really good thing."
Pierce literally cooled out in front of his locker after the game: with ice packs on his knees, he tried to explain why Boston lost: "There are a lot of things we didn't do well but Indiana did what they had to do and I give a lot of credit to them. They really executed their game plan. They made their run. We didn't match their energy. It was a tough shooting night for us and we turned the ball over. I thought we played pretty good defense for the most part but in the third quarter we gave up too many layups. We have to expect every team's best, especially on the road in their home opener. I thought we really got caught up in yelling at the referees and we lost our composure."
Pierce was understandably low key as he answered various questions but he managed to find some humor in the situation when someone asked him if Boston's free throw problems are "contagious." Pierce chuckled and replied, "I don't think it's contagious. I mean, it's not like it's a disease. Just because I miss them that doesn't mean everybody else is going to miss them."
Ray Allen had a very pragmatic, matter of fact perspective about the loss: "We're turning the ball over, which takes away a possession from ourselves and then we get an opportunity to score (free throws) with the clock not moving we're not knocking those down, so we were digging ourselves a hole every which way. It's very unlike us and we look forward to playing the next game."
Allen refused to use the Celtics' 4 a.m. arrival in Indiana as an explanation for the team's flat performance. He smiled and said, "We've been doing this for a long time. There are no excuses associated with something that every team in the league has to go through."
*****************************
Notes From Courtside:
Three-time NBA champion Sam Cassell is kind of a player/assistant coach for the Celtics this season. He is on the 15 man roster but was not part of the 12 man active roster for this game. However, he was quite active in the pre-game warmups, playing a spirited one on one game with Brian Scalabrine. After some fans and courtside personnel started watching, both players played to the crowd a bit. Scalabrine called traveling on Cassell, who appealed that verdict by asking the people on the sidelines; the consensus was that Cassell definitely shifted his pivot foot, so Cassell shook his head but gave the ball to Scalabrine. Cassell kept Scalabrine off balance by alternating pullup jumpers with drives to the hoop, while Scalabrine showed off some dribbling moves and fadeaway jumpers that he certainly will not be using in live action any time soon. I watched them for a few minutes before leaving to go to Coach Rivers' pregame standup but we all found out the result when Cassell bounded into the hallway and shouted, "Hey, Doc! I'm ready, baby" before going into the locker room. Rivers laughed and then explained, "That means he won the one on one game." When I mentioned that Cassell had been playing Scalabrine, Rivers added, "Sam beat him yesterday, too. Sam's good at that." Apparently, this is an ongoing friendly grudge match. I remember that years ago Danny Ferry and Bobby Phills--who both played for the Cavaliers at the time--used to often play one on one in pre-game warmups.
Although Cassell is not part of the regular 12 man rotation, Rivers said, "He's important to our team and I think that he's going to help us on the floor in certain games as well. Obviously, late in the year is far more important to me with Sam than now. We'll activate him on certain nights just to get him game experience, just to play him. That will be later in the year...He reminds me of what Kevin Millar was for the Red Sox. He keeps things loose yet serious and he's able to say things to players that I probably couldn't say."
***
I asked Rivers, "Last year at this time, at least in the outside world, there were doubts and questions about how all of this would work out. This year you are clearly in the position of the hunted and being looked at as the favorite. How does that affect your attitude or your decision making process?"
He replied, "It doesn't change us at all. As far as we're concerned--and I've said it before--last year is last year and this year is this year. You know, this is not boxing. In boxing, when you lose the championship you have to give the belt back; in basketball you get to keep the trophy. So, the trophy we earned last year is our trophy. We don't have to defend that trophy. That's our mindset. We're trying to win a new trophy, so as far as we're concerned we may be the hunted but we're hunting again as well and that's got to be our philosophy all year."
I followed up by asking, "Do you have an advantage this year from the standpoint that you did win a championship, so now you know that the group can do it and there are not questions about that?"
Rivers answered, "Well, it's a different group but I hope so. Clearly, they have confidence from having done it and the way we won it--there has never been a harder way because we played more games to win it than anyone else. That has to help us. But, we also understand that because we won it every team is going to give us their best effort every night, so that's a task in itself."
***
Boston's poor free throw shooting is not just a one game phenomenon. Before the game, Rivers said, "Overall, if there is a big negative on our team now it is that we have to make free throws. We work on them but you can't mock a game situation in practice."
After the game, some of the Boston reporters spoke at length with Ray Allen--whose .889 career free throw percentage ranks seventh in NBA history--about the team's free throw woes. One of them asked Allen how many free throws he shoots each day and Allen said that on a typical game day he generally attempts about 75 free throws but not all at once; he shoots five to 10 free throws after each drill. As I said about LeBron James'
pregame shooting routine, the best way to try to replicate game situations is to work up a sweat and then shoot some free throws, so it is not surprising that Allen's regimen is structured that way. James shoots about .700 from the free throw line in games and, not surprisingly, shot about .700 when I watched him practice before the Charlotte game on Thursday. So, I told Allen that I understand that he obviously wants to make every free throw but I asked him what is his realistic benchmark for free throw percentage for his 75 practice free throws and he immediately replied, "I expect 90. Above 90." In response to an earlier question, he also explained the proper approach to take when working on this skill: "Now that we know the situation that we have missed free throws, each man on the team really has to focus in every time we get the opportunity to practice free throws...You go through a routine with your body and try to stay connected with the free throw. It's easy to shoot free throws laughing and joking but you've got to have a serious nature when you shoot."
Labels: Boston Celtics, Danny Granger, Indiana Pacers, Kevin Garnett, Paul Pierce, Ray Allen, Sam Cassell, T.J. Ford
posted by David Friedman @ 3:27 AM
Kenny Smith: Always Ahead of the Game
Kenny Smith had an excellent career at North Carolina and won two NBA championships with the Houston Rockets but he is hardly content to rest on his laurels. He, Charles Barkley and Ernie Johnson host TNT's
Inside the NBA, must-see TV for NBA fans. Smith's broadcasting work has given him a platform to branch out into other areas, most notably when he gathered together dozens of NBA players on short notice for a charity game to raise money for victims of Hurricane Katrina. I recently spoke with Smith about being a teammate of Michael Jordan's, playing for Bill Russell in Sacramento, winning NBA titles and whether he would be interested in coaching and/or running a team at some point (if you pay close attention when Smith breaks down game film on air, you probably can guess the answer to that one).
My article about Smith can be found here (10/10/15 edit: the link to HoopsHype.com no longer works, so I have
posted the original article below):
Kenny Smith is best known now for appearing alongside Ernie Johnson and Charles Barkley on TNT's Inside the NBA, but he played with Michael Jordan for one season at North Carolina and later learned from Bill Russell when the Celtics legend coached the Sacramento Kings. Jordan and Russell each merit serious consideration as the greatest NBA player ever and they both left an indelible impression on Smith.
Jordan was a junior when Smith was a freshman. "No, I don't think that anyone could have foreseen that," Smith says of Jordan winning six NBA titles and five MVPs. "I think that you could see that he was going to be a hard worker and a good player, all of the positive things, but to be the greatest player to ever play in our lifetime? I might have treated him a little differently (Smith laughs). The one thing that I always tell young guys is that the things that used to be his deficiencies became his strengths as his career went on, which is incredible. In college, he wasn't a great ballhandler, he wasn't a great outside shooter; he was good. Then those things became his strengths in the NBA--his ballhandling ability and his outside jump shot and his turnaround jumpers and his shot on the baseline and pull-up jumpers. That is just a testament to how hard he worked. I always say that he was probably the first fundamentally sound great athlete."
Smith was voted a consensus First Team All-American in 1987 after his senior season at North Carolina, during which he averaged 16.9 ppg and 6.1 apg. He set a school record for career assists with 768 (since broken by Ed Cota).
The Kings selected Smith with the sixth overall pick. Sacramento was a bad team and Russell lasted less than a season as the team's coach. But two decades later Smith still vividly recalls words of wisdom from the greatest winner in the history of North American team sports. "I could write a book," Smith says with a laugh. "It was a great experience; any time that you are around greatness it is a great experience. I always said, 'Coach, you talk like Confucius. Every time you talk it seems like you have a quote that should be written down as a proverb somewhere.' I think that he took a special liking to me. He was coming in as a coach and he drafted me. I always had to sit next to him on the bus and always had to sit next to him on the plane. So he talked my ear off--anybody who knows Bill knows he is a talker. Even to this day--I went to China two years ago and he expected me to sit next to him. I took my daughter and she was laughing, 'He likes talking to you.'"
During a recent TNT broadcast, Smith mentioned that Russell would sometimes tell the Kings' big men, "Just go get the ball."
Smith noted that for great players the game really is simple--you see the ball and you go get it. "I think that the one thing you would say is that great players take for granted that they are great and they expect greatness from others," Smith explains. "A lot of times, when you expect greatness from others, obviously, you are not going to receive that. I think that was probably a big aspect of what was frustrating at times for a lot of guys on our team. For me, it wasn't frustrating, honestly. I had been around Coach (Dean) Smith and all these great players at North Carolina. It wasn't a big misunderstanding, so to speak, about how to decipher what he was actually trying to get out of you--for me it wasn't."
Smith tells another story about Russell that he'll never forget. "We could be in the middle of a team meeting and he's telling us what we need to do, what we did wrong, defensively we didn't do a good job and oh, by the way, Bill and John go see the trainer," Smith says. "You're thinking, 'Wait a minute, he just cut these guys.' It's kind of a little insensitive but as a great player you're thinking that he will get a job somewhere. But for a guy who is on the bubble, who is not a great player, that was his one chance to be in the league."
Smith was in no danger of being cut, of course, and he savored the opportunity to learn the ropes from a great champion. "For me he was great because he told me all the great stories of how great teams thought," Smith continues. "He wouldn't let me sit next to certain guys. 'Don't sit next to him. You can't talk to him, Kenny. This guy doesn't want to win. He's never going to be a winner; you don’t want to sit next to him.'"
Smith spent two and a half seasons with the Kings, finishing the 1989-90 campaign in Atlanta before ending up with the Houston Rockets. In 1990-91, Smith scored 17.7 ppg for the Rockets while shooting .520 from the field, .363 from three-point range and .844 from the free throw line. He also averaged 7.1 apg and had a career-high 106 steals. In some years, those numbers would merit selection to the All-Star team but that honor eluded Smith during his 10-year NBA career.
"I don't think that I was underappreciated," Smith says thoughtfully. "I don't think that I was underrated. I think that when I played, we had guys who were perennial guys. You know, it would almost be like trying to make it to the All-Star Game now as a forward in the Western Conference. Tim Duncan is going to be there. Kevin Garnett is going to be there. Dirk Nowitzki is going to be there. I was in that situation because it was point guard heaven when I was playing."
The 1991 West All-Stars included point guards Magic Johnson, Kevin Johnson, Terry Porter, John Stockton and Tim Hardaway, plus shooting guard Clyde Drexler. "I just came up in the wrong time, in the wrong position, and I know that," Smith says. "It doesn't bother me as much (now) as probably it did when I was playing. My father asked me one time, 'Would you rather be a perennial All-Star or win two NBA championships?' I had never won one at the time he said that. I said, 'I'll take two championships.' Here it is at the end of my career that I have two championships and no All-Star appearances. So I guess I talked my way into it. So I always tell my son, 'You want to be a perennial All-Star who wins five championships.'"
Smith started at point guard for most of his six seasons in Houston but during the two championship seasons in 1994 and 1995 he split time with Sam Cassell, who was just a rookie in 1994. Cassell often played during key fourth quarter minutes, which meant that Smith sat on the bench. Smith defused what could have become a very awkward situation.
"All of my life I had been 'that guy,' so to speak, who ran the show," Smith says. "I had to start practicing what I had always preached to guys who were coming into the league or guys who were coming to North Carolina. I used to say, 'First of all, just because you are not playing doesn't mean you can't play. Remember that.' The other thing is, 'You can never be in competition with me.' I used to tell guys, 'Don't be in competition with me. I'm on your team.' I pulled Sam aside--because the papers love to say, 'This guy should be starting' or 'This guy's better'--and this is when we had no problems, because I said, 'Sam, you'll never have to worry about this.' He said, 'What?' and I said, 'That when you're in the game I'm hoping that you're doing badly. You'll never have to worry about that.'"
It turns out that Smith's words made a greater impression on Cassell than Smith realized at that time. "You know, to this day he says that was one of the biggest phrases that helped him to relax and become a good basketball player," Smith adds. "I had him on my radio show maybe three months ago and we were talking about Shaun Livingston--before he got hurt--and he said he had that conversation with Shaun. The reason he did it is because I had that conversation with him. That almost brought chills to me--I was like, 'Wow.'"
Smith retired from the NBA when he was just 31. He still had offers to play, but they came in the form of one-year contracts. "I did not feel that those one-year situations were productive for me because of my kids and having to fly around--it wasn't productive," Smith says. "I was playing for the love of the game, but I didn't love the teams that were calling me."
Just as Smith was beginning to consider retirement, he received an offer from TNT. The timing was perfect.
Being on TNT has provided Smith a platform that he can use to have an impact on society in a variety of ways, most notably by organizing a charity game to benefit victims of Hurricane Katrina. Smith feels blessed that he had the opportunity and the ability to bring so many players together so quickly for such an important cause. "I think that one thing that I have found--after getting 42 NBA players for the Katrina game, 23 or 24 of whom have been All-Stars and a lot of them perennial All-Stars--is that guys always want to do something (positive) but they are not sure what to do, whether it is charitable or if its societal or if its business. They always want to be involved in something but are not sure how to initiate it or how to be the one to initiate it."
Smith's philanthropy consists of a lot more than that game, though. Smith explains that he started the Aim High Foundation "for inner city kids in New York, to help them achieve goals through sports and education. That was primarily what we did (at first), from giving kids coats to wear to school to buying them books to taking them to basketball camps and basketball tournaments. After New Orleans, there became an added part to help Katrina victims."
When Smith analyzes basketball on TNT, he sounds like a coach designing a game plan or a general manager trying to construct a team. This is not an accident. Smith is very interested in becoming an NBA coach or general manager at some point. "I think that it's inevitable, because of what is transpiring from what I say on television," Smith says. "It's pretty easy to see my philosophies, how I think about the game and what my thought processes are. That's the first thing. Then, it helps that people can see your personality and they know what type of guy you are, so to speak. Lastly, the things that have happened in the last year or two show my ability to be a magnet, to bring players together for different events. I think that woke a lot of people up (to the fact) that I can get to this guy. I know that obviously the situation with Katrina had a big part and was divine intervention but also I was put there as a vehicle. So that spoke a lot of volume about (my) ability to make things happen."
Labels: Bill Russell, Houston Rockets, Kenny Smith, Michael Jordan, Sacramento Kings, Sam Cassell
posted by David Friedman @ 1:45 AM
Len Elmore: Athlete, Attorney and Advocate for Social Change
Len Elmore had a solid 10-year ABA/NBA career, but he never lost sight of his goal of becoming an attorney and urging athletes to develop self-reliance and community responsibility. He is currently the President of the National Basketball Retired Players Association (NBRPA) and in a recent interview he shared with me his goals for the organization:
"Increase our membership and in doing so there are a number of things that we have to do: make our benefits more visible, get guys to understand that this is a way that they can stay close to the game after retirement--but most importantly our involvement and our mission statement focuses on helping our own, which includes the guys who have not been as fortunate as some of us have been, helping them get on their feet and helping their kids to get an education, as well as helping others by contributing resources, manpower and influence to other organizations that help us carry out our mission, which is to spread good will through the game of basketball. Another thing is to increase the revenue and contributions to the organization, which will allow us to do these wonderful things. We would like to continue to grow the Dave DeBusschere Scholarship Fund. We’d like to be able to continue to keep the trust with the Legends Foundation, which provides emergency funds for needy players—guys who are certainly down and out. (We’d like to continue to) be able to fund organizations that use the game of basketball (to help others)--Playing for Peace, which is a terrific, global organization, or Bobby Jones’ group, 2XSalt, or some other organizations that are doing wonderful things in the community, particularly with kids."
Here is my HoopsHype article about Elmore, followed by some "DVD Extras" that do not appear in the article (10/7/15 edit: the link to HoopsHype.com no longer works, so I have
posted the original article below):
The 1974 Maryland Terrapins went 23-5 and featured future pros Len Elmore, Tom McMillen and 1976 No. 1 draft pick John Lucas. Elmore recalls well the joys--and ultimate frustration--of that season. "All year we were among the top three or four teams in the nation. Unfortunately, the road to the NCAA Tournament and the NCAA Championship went through Greensboro and the ACC Tournament. All year North Carolina State was the No. 1 team. We played them twice and lost to them by razor-thin margins and the same thing happened in the ACC Tournament. The unfortunate part about it is that only one team could represent the conference (in the NCAA Tournament)."
North Carolina State defeated Maryland 103-100 in overtime and went on to win the national championship. In 1975, the NCAA finally expanded the tournament and for the first time allowed bids to be issued to teams that did not win their conference championship.
The NBA's Washington Bullets and the ABA's Indiana Pacers drafted Elmore in 1974. Two reasons made going to Indiana an easy choice: "Money and security."
"I think that the Bullets at the time underestimated the Pacers' offer," Elmore says. "I know that the Bullets would have loved to have me, as a local product, but in the end they only offered a three-year contract with two years guaranteed. The Pacers offered a six-year guaranteed contract. The Pacers were a stable group even though they were in the ABA."
Elmore averaged 6.6 ppg, 5.1 rpg and 1.2 bpg in his rookie season and boosted his production to 10.6 ppg and 8.1 rpg in the playoffs. The Pacers lost to the Kentucky Colonels in the 1975 ABA Finals.
The following year he improved his numbers in all three categories, averaging 14.6 ppg, 10.8 rpg and 2.3 bpg in the final season before the ABA-NBA merger. "It was a good experience, a good building block experience for me and I went into my third season with a lot of confidence," Elmore recalls. "The problem is that I tore ligaments in my right knee in the preseason and missed all but six games."
Elmore believes that if he had signed the shorter deal with Washington, he may never have gotten an opportunity to return to action. His guaranteed contract provided an incentive to keep him around while he built his strength back, but teams did not like to rely heavily on players who had suffered knee injuries. "What happened, regardless of how strongly you came back, in those days you were essentially viewed as damaged goods and so you got some playing time and you got a chance to get involved but you never really got a chance to get back to where you thought that you could be." Elmore played for seven more seasons, but never again averaged double figures in scoring or rebounding.
From the time that Elmore was in the seventh grade, he knew that he wanted to be a lawyer. "Growing up in the '60s, the tumultuous '60s as I call it, with so many things going on--civil rights struggles, the war in Vietnam--so many seminal events that have shaped our lives today, I thought that the law was a vehicle by which you could have an impact as far as social change is concerned. I am a child of the TV era when you watched things like 'Perry Mason' or 'The Defenders,' shows like that in which the lawyers always seemed to the good guys and would help those who could not help themselves or speak for those who didn't have a voice for themselves. That's what I wanted to be in those socially conscious times. I never really lost that, although I kind of got sidetracked a little bit by sports. I never lost that zeal to become an attorney."
Elmore is proud of his accomplishments as a player agent: "The most enjoyable part was being able to teach and have those teachings resonate with my clients regarding the mantra that I used, which was 'develop self-reliance and community responsibility'--to be able to have guys listen and develop ways in which they could develop those two virtues. The self-reliance part had a lot to do with how they managed their financial affairs and how they took an interest in understanding that. The community responsibility part had a lot to do with their participation in the community and giving back. I was proudest of Walt Williams when he started a scholarship fund for needy students at the University of Maryland. I was proud of Sam Cassell when he promoted a health fair in his neighborhood in Baltimore City, with health trailers driving into the neighborhood housing projects. You could not ask for more from a standpoint of being the ideal citizen, which is what I wanted my guys to be. I'm very proud of the fact that many of them took that road; I'm just using Sam and Walt as examples."
Unfortunately, not all players or agents share Elmore's lofty ideals. "The frustrating part was the client acquisition part," Elmore explains. "Here you are trying to play within the rules and all of a sudden, because you've had some success, your competitors up the ante and many times have done unethical and unscrupulous things that many of those same competitors who still exist today continue to do...Ultimately, what got me out of the business is that I couldn't compete with the unethical and unscrupulous nature of the game. Fortunately, I had television, which provided me with an excellent bully pulpit to continue to preach the virtues of self-reliance and community responsibility as the keys to success not only during your playing career but that when your playing career is over would help to continue to push you forward so that a lot of these young guys could become captains of industry and fine businessmen but also quality members of the community."
Elmore is currently the President of the National Basketball Retired Players Association (NBRPA). "I joined as a rank and file member about five or six years ago," Elmore recalls. "Actually, before that, I was a member under the old name, XNBA. There were times when we would call Providence, Rhode Island--where the offices were--and just get a recording. We could never get a response from anyone, so I stopped my membership for a while. It wasn't until later on that I decided to join again and this time get involved. I went to meetings and started participating."
A lot of people don't realize the desperate straits that have befallen many of the NBA's earliest players. They are known as the pre-1965ers, because they retired before 1965, the year that the NBA established a pension plan. "That's another reason that we want to continue to build revenues, because we do want to try to contribute to funds to help these guys," Elmore says. "I mean, they were the pioneers of the NBA. Unfortunately, they retired at a time that was prior to the formation of the union and collective bargaining and the defined benefit program that resulted. So they are not eligible for the pension as we know it. They have a non-qualified plan that money is contributed to periodically and then distributed. There are only 80-plus guys remaining who are pre-1965 players. Many of them are in need. Many of them are in their elderly years, their golden years, and certainly could use the pension or the benefits. We're advocates for an increase overall of the defined benefits program, which would help our guys who retired post-1965 and receive pensions. We want to have those pensions increased. We are what is called third-party beneficiaries; we don't really have a standing with regard to how the monies are distributed or invested."
In other words, the pre-1965ers only receive whatever funds the NBA and the Players Association are willing to donate to them. The question that the NBA and the Players Association should be forced to answer is this: If it is not possible for the pre-1965ers to be included in the defined benefits that started post-1965, isn't there a way that David Stern from the NBA and Billy Hunter from the Players Association can make some kind of announcement that they are forming some separate, non-profit organization and endowing it with, say, $5 million--half from the league and half from the players--and that the $5 million will be invested in some conservative way and split evenly among those 80 players or among whichever ones really need medical care and so forth?
That would probably go a long way toward alleviating their suffering, it wouldn't be that expensive relative to the NBA's total revenues and it would be great public relations--the NBA is always promoting "NBA Cares" and they could do a whole publicity blitz about how the league and its players care about the sport's pioneers.
"I think that ideas like that have been continually kicked around but as for why it hasn't occurred is something that you have to ask the union and the NBA," Elmore says. "At this point, our advocacy includes the pre-1965ers, but we've got a broader universe that also includes guys who retired after 1965. We're doing the best that we can to do our part, but that's a question that needs to be asked of the league as well as the union."
While the NBRPA has no formal say in how the NBA and the Players Association divide the league's revenues, Elmore stresses that his organization has not forgotten about the pre-1965ers. "We're looking for ways to raise funds," Elmore says. "We're hoping to do a gala event at the All-Star Weekend in Las Vegas and a portion of those proceeds would go to the pre-1965ers. We have a number of initiatives that we would like to continue to fund, including the Dave DeBusschere Scholarship Fund, which not only helps the offspring of our members but also helps a number of our members who want to go back to college but can’t afford it."
*******************************************************************************
As the above article details, Elmore's 1974 Maryland team was denied an NCAA berth when the Terrapins lost to eventual NCAA Champion North Carolina State 103-100 in overtime in the ACC Championship Game. Talking about that game prompted Elmore to offer his opinion about the players who have had the most impact in college basketball history:
"It was a tremendous game (versus N.C. State), a tremendous series (N.C. State won the two regular season matchups by close margins). I think that David Thompson always made the difference, whether he was scoring or whether just his mere presence made other guys better. I consider David Thompson one of the three greatest players in the history of college basketball. He always made a difference." Asked who the other players on that list would be, Elmore replies, "I should have said top four," mentioning Thompson in the 1970s, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (then known as Lew Alcindor) in the late 1960s, Oscar Robertson in the early 1960s and Bill Russell in the 1950s. Elmore notes that his selections are "based on impact," not purely on statistics.
One of Elmore's Indiana teammates was Roger Brown, the subject of one of my earlier HoopsHype pieces (
Roger Brown: Ankle Breaker and Shot Maker). Elmore says, "Roger was one of those guys who always had fun with the game. That is what happens when you are a veteran toward the end of your career--you start to recognize what this game truly means and how much you should cherish the experience because it is not coming back. Roger was pretty much loose and happy go lucky. He certainly would be focused during the course of the game but he never took it so seriously that it was out of context. That was important for a rookie like me and also for Billy Knight, who was my teammate. We were a close knit team during my rookie year and a lot of that had to do with the veterans on the team. Roger was kind of the leader of that. He also had a calming effect to a great extent on our star George McGinnis, always joking with him and keeping him loose. As a player, you still saw flashes of the prime Roger Brown, with that killer crossover. Before Dwyane Wade or anybody else, it was Roger Brown who started breaking ankles with that crossover. He just had an uncanny knack for getting to the basket. Even at his advanced age in his mid-thirties he still found a way to beat people off the bounce and create opportunities. He didn't play a lot of minutes but Slick--our coach Bob Leonard--found ways to insert him when he could be effective and sometimes even carry the team for a period of time coming off the bench. He was a very generous person with his time. He was kind. He was a father at that time; he had a little girl, Gail, who was very young then. He was a doting dad--just a guy who the community totally embraced and it is unfortunate that he was taken from us so early because there were a lot of things that he could add to the careers of young players today."
Elmore saw both the ABA and the NBA incarnations of Julius Erving, but his ties to Dr. J actually go back to when Elmore was a junior in high school and Erving was a freshman at the University of Massachusetts: "We played against each other at the Jack Donohue Camp in Saugerties (a Catskills resort in New York). The funny thing about that was here I was a center and Doc was the tallest guy on the counselors' team. The tip went up and he won the jump ball. We started going up and down the court. As a center, I'm used to playing guys who are playing in the pivot and here is this guy who I'm supposed to guard who is running like a guard, who is running on the fast break, rebounding and pushing it up and it was an amazing eye-opener to see what a guy with his size and athleticism was capable of doing. Certainly, in the pros we know how great he was."
Elmore's 1981 Milwaukee Bucks lost a hard fought seven game series to Erving's Philadelphia 76ers. Elmore did not play much that season, but he had a good view of the Doctor operating in that postseason battle: "The thing that just knocked me out again was how focused Julius was throughout those seven games. Defensively, they were always a gambling bunch with he and Bobby Jones on the wings; they created some turnovers and got the best of us. But we still had to be proud of the guy who essentially changed the game a little bit, became the human highlight and brought people's focus back (to the NBA). They talk about Michael, they talk about Larry--and that's true--but always looming there in the early and mid '80s is Julius and what he brought to the table. I think that in many instances he does not get enough credit for helping to revitalize the NBA."
Labels: Indiana Pacers, Julius Erving, Len Elmore, Milwaukee Bucks, Roger Brown, Sam Cassell, Walt Williams
posted by David Friedman @ 3:15 AM
