There have been 9 seasons in the NBA in which a player has recorded over 1000 assists. John Stockton did it 7 times, Isiah Thomas did it once, and Kevin Porter did it in 1978-79. Porter recorded over 300 more assists (1099 to 762) than John Lucas, who had the 2nd most assists that season. Porter averaged 13.4 assists (to go along with 15.4 points per game) and no other player averaged double digits. And yet Porter received exactly zero MVP votes and was shut out from the All-NBA Teams (First and Second, as there were only two All-NBA teams in those days).
Kevin Porter led the NBA in assists four times, yet never got an MVP vote, made an All-NBA Team, or even an All-Star Team. For context, the only other player in NBA history to lead the NBA in assists multiple times and not make an All-NBA team was Guy Rodgers (in 1962-63 and 1966-67), but Rodgers made the All-Star team four times. In fact, the only players besides Rodgers and Porter to lead the NBA in assists multiple times (starting in 1952) are Bob Cousy, Oscar Robertson, Magic Johnson, John Stockton, Jason Kidd, Steve Nash, and Chris Paul. Not a stinker in the bunch. 4 Hall of Famers and 3 future Hall of Famers (yes, I am already projecting Chris Paul as a Hall of Famer).
So how does a player record 13.4 assists per game (the 7th highest average in NBA history!) and get absolutely no recognition?
First, let's examine the players who made the All-NBA team ahead of Porter. The four guards selected were George Gervin and Paul Westphal on the First Team, and Phil Ford and World B. Free on the Second Team. Gervin lead the league in scoring at 29.6 PPG on 54% shooting. No qualms there. Westphal averaged 24 points and 6 assists on a 50 win Phoenix team that finished 3rd in the West. Can't argue with that. World B. Free averaged 28 points (but didn't do much else - 4 rebounds, 4 assists) on a 43 win San Diego team that missed the playoffs. Doesn't sound as good as 15 and 13 to me. Phil Ford, in his rookie season, averaged 16 and 8.5 on a 48 win Kansas City team that won its division. I can't help but feel that Ford got the nod over Porter for the same reason that Wes Unseld won the MVP in 1969 as a rookie - the writers fell in love with a young player and overvalued his contribution. Ford never made another All-NBA Team or even an All-Star team. Point proven. Porter was in his 7th season, and 78-79 was his third time leading the league in assists.
So the Westphal and Gervin selections can't really be refuted. The Free and Ford selections are dubious, however.
As for the MVP voting, 10 players got votes (in order): Moses Malone, Gervin, Elvin Hayes, Kareem, Bob Dandridge, World B. Free, Jack Sikma, Ford, David Thompson, and Walter Davis. Besides Ford, none of the votes can really be disputed. Moses was deserving. Hayes and Dandridge were the best players on the team (Washington) with the best record. World B. Free did have a good season. Kareem is Kareem. Sikma is a little dubious, as the Seattle team that year was led by Gus Williams, Dennis Johnson and Sikma. Thompson and Davis were the leading scorers on playoff teams. But how can a player average over 13 assists not get a single MVP vote?
Let's look at Porter now. Three Pistons scored more than Porter: Bob Lanier, ML Carr, and John Long. But Porter seemingly handled all of the playmaking duties, as no other Piston averaged more than 3.3 assists. Porter shot a decent percentage, 48%. He averaged almost 2 steals, but over 4 turnovers (though Porter didn't lead the league - turnover machine George McGinnis did). I can't imagine a point guard in 2010 averaging double digit assists without at least making the All-Star team. Just seems crazy.
Along the same logic as Michael Adams' quiet 26 and 10 season, Kevin Porter put up his 15 and 13 on a non-playoff team, the Detroit Pistons, who finished tied for 8th out of 11 in the East with a record of 30-52. By all statistical metrics, the Pistons were a below average team in 1978-79, but they were not the worst by an means. They didn't play a ridiculous pace that inflated Porter's numbers (the Pistons played the 6th fastest pace in the league). They weren't particularly bad, they just weren't any good. But is that enough to shut off a historically awesome season from postseason recognition? I can't believe it did.
Saturday, February 13, 2010
Thursday, February 11, 2010
The Quietest 26 and 10 Season Ever
How does a player average 26.5 points per game and 10.5 assists per game in one of the most competitive seasons in NBA history and receive absolutely no recognition? Not a single MVP vote, in a season when 20 players received at least one vote? No place on the All-NBA teams? How does a player finish second in three point field goals made (playing only 66 games), third in assists per game, sixth in points per game, and seventh in steals per game, yet have nothing to show for it?
This is the conundrum of Michael Adams' 1990-91 season. Adams was the point guard for the Denver Nuggets that year and, based on his stats, wanted to recreate Tiny Archibald's (in)famous 72-73 season, in which Tiny lead the NBA in scoring and assists. Adams led the Nuggets in points, assists, field goals made and attempted, free throws made and attempted (making at tidy .879 clip), three pointers made and attempted (Adams attempted 433 more three pointers than number 2 on the Nuggets), and steals. Adams did not lead the Nuggets in field goal percentage, shooting an ugly .394.
Adams only played 35.5 minutes per game, and yet averaged 26 and 10. This is surely due to the breakneck pace at which Denver played - they lead the league with a 113.7 Pace Factor (an "estimate of the number of possessions per 48 minutes" a team has). But we'll get to that. I want to address the ridiculousness of a player averaging a 26 and 10 and receiving zero recognition.
[It should be noted that the of fifteen players who got All-NBA Honors, 11 are Hall 0f Famers: Jordan, Magic, Barkley, Robinson (1st team), Drexler, Ewing, Dominique (2nd team), Dumars, Hakeem, Stockton, Worthy (3rd team), and there will be 12 Hall of Famers soon, as soon as Karl Malone is inducted. Chris Mullin, Kevin Johnson, and Bernard King (who should be in the HoF) were the other three All-NBAers.]
Only two other players have ever in the history of the NBA averaged 26 points and 10 assists in a full season. The aforementioned Tiny Archibald in 72-73 and Oscar Robertson in five (5!) seasons: 61-62 (the triple-double season), 63-64, 64-65, 65-66, and 66-67. In each of those six respective seasons, Tiny and Oscar made the All-NBA First Team and did not finish lower than 4th in the MVP voting, with Oscar winning in 1964.
If we extend the parameters, we find that there have been 20 seasons in which a player has averaged 20 PPG and 10 APG: Tiny (1), Oscar (5), Tim Hardaway (1), Kevin Johnson (3), Magic Johnson (3), Chris Paul (2 - working on a third this season), Isiah Thomas (4), and Michael Adams (1). In each of the seasons excepting Michael Adams in 90-91, the above players either received MVP votes or made an All-NBA team, usually doing both. Only Tim Hardaway (in 92-93) and Kevin Johnson (in 89-90) did not receive an MVP vote, but they made the Third and Second All-NBA Teams, respectively. In fact Hardaway's inclusion on the Third Team was the only occurrence of any of the above players not making either the First or Second Teams. Magic Johnson won the MVP each of the seasons he put up a 20 and 10 - 86-87, 88-89, and 89-90. So clearly Adams exclusion from postseason awards was an aberration.
But wait, you say, what about players who averaged 26 points and 10 rebounds? Surely some of them didn't get any MVP votes or All-NBA recognition. Well, dear reader, you are correct. There have been 79 seasons in which a player averaged 26 PPG and 10 RPG (compared to the seven we saw earlier with 10 APG):
Kareem (9 times), Barkley (2), Elgin (7), Walt Bellamy (3), Bird (1), Wilt (7), Billy Cunningham (1), Ewing (2), Elvin Hayes (3), Spencer Haywood (2), Karl Malone (8), Moses (2), Bob McAdoo (4), George Mikan (1), Shaq (10!), Hakeem (4), Bob Pettit (6), Oscar (3), David Robinson (2), Chris Webber (1), and George Yardley (1).
Of those 79 seasons, there were exactly 5 in which the player either did not receive an MVP vote or did not make an All-NBA team: Walt Bellamy in 61-62 and 63-64, and Elvin Hayes in 68-69, 69-70, and 70-71. Bellamy was (predictably) shut out by Russell and Wilt in both of his 26 and 10 seasons (the NBA did not add a Third Team until the 1988-89 season, meaning only 2 players per position got an All-NBA nod). Hayes was snubbed in favor of Wes Unseld and Willis Reed in 1969, then Reed and Kareem each of the next two seasons.
We shouldn't feel too bad for Hayes and Bellamy - they did eventually get recognition for their skills: Hayes got MVP votes in 6 seasons, finishing as high as 3rd in 1975 and 1979, and made 6 All-NBA Teams, including 3 First Teams. Bellamy won the Rookie of the Year in 1962 and got MVP votes the following season. Most importantly, Bellamy was inducted into the Hall of Fame in 1993, while Hayes was inducted in 1990.
Michael Adams received exactly 1 fifth-place MVP vote in 1988 and made the All-Star Team in 1992. Basketball Reference puts hit Hall of Fame Probabilty as 2.7% - and that seems far, far too high. Adams retired after the 1995-96 season and I can't imagine he ever got serious Hall of Fame consideration.
Let's return to how Adams put up a 26 and 10. As I said, the Nuggets played the fastest pace in the NBA in one of the faster post-merger seasons. For context, the average Pace Factor in 1990-91 was 97.8 - this season only the Golden State Warriors have a higher Pace Factor (100.3). Denver's Pace Factor of 113.7 was more than 10 possessions per game than the 2nd place team that year, the Warriors. Despite leading the NBA in scoring at over 119 points per game, the Nuggets finished in the bottom third in the league in offensive efficiency (a measure of points scored per 100 possession). So the Nuggets did not use their ridiculous amount of possessions very efficiently - not exactly a surprise. But this pace no doubt led to an inflation in Adams stats. Adams never averaged more than 18.5 points or 7.5 assists per game in any other season. He played on other Nuggets teams that lead the league in Pace Factor, but never with such a crazy number as 113.7 possessions per game.
The Nuggets also did not, how do you say?...ah yes, play defense. The Nuggets surrendered a ludicrous 130 points per game. 130! More damning though was their league worst defensive rating (number of points given up per 100 possessions), which means one can not write off the 130 points per game on the pace they played; they also gave up points at an alarming rate (for context, the Toronto Raptors of 2009-2010, who have been the punch line of many a joke about their porous D, have a defensive rating of 112, compared to Denver's rating of 114.7 in 1990-91). And Michael Adams, no doubt, was, as the Nuggets best player, the face of this historically bad defense.
Another factor in Adams' lack of recognition certainly was his poor shooting percentages (.396 and .296) and his high turnover rate (3.6 per game). Adams did record 2.2 steals per game, but had a historically bad 115 defensive rating (the NBA-record for worst defensive rating while playing at least 50 games is 118).
[Tangent: Looking at Adams Basketball Reference page, I see that Adams was traded by the Nuggets after his 26 and 10 season along with first and second round picks (in 1991 and 1993, respectively) to the Wizards for their 1991 first round pick, which the Nuggets used on Mark Macon (who?). I am just befuddled by this. Unless Adams was one of those "best players" who was a bad teammate and ball-hog (see: Adams' 1421 field goal attempts) who, despite his positive on the court production, was a cancer off the court. Perhaps, I don't know.]
The biggest reason for Adams' lack of recognition probably stemmed from the Nuggets league worst 20-62 record. No way an MVP voter taps a player who only won 20 games. However, as I said earlier, Adams only played in 66 games. In those 66 games, the Nuggets went 19-47, meaning they were 1-15 without Adams in the lineup. That's got to count for something, right?
So what does all this mean? I'm not really sure. Part of why I was interested in the curious case of Michael Adams is the absurdity of a player having a historically statistically significant season and getting no recognition. I don't think we'll ever see another season like Michael Adams' 1990-91 season. The closest thing we have to Michael Adams this season is Monta Ellis - a gunner playing on the fastest team in the league (that is also one of the worst teams in the league) averaging 26 points per game. But Monta is only averaging 5 assists per game, while playing the second most minutes in the league. One thing is the same though: I can almost guarantee that Monta Ellis will not be on an All-NBA Team or get an MVP vote.
Of all the crazy statistical seasons the NBA has seen, Adams' is perhaps the strangest. Let's start to appreciate just how crazy it really was.
This is the conundrum of Michael Adams' 1990-91 season. Adams was the point guard for the Denver Nuggets that year and, based on his stats, wanted to recreate Tiny Archibald's (in)famous 72-73 season, in which Tiny lead the NBA in scoring and assists. Adams led the Nuggets in points, assists, field goals made and attempted, free throws made and attempted (making at tidy .879 clip), three pointers made and attempted (Adams attempted 433 more three pointers than number 2 on the Nuggets), and steals. Adams did not lead the Nuggets in field goal percentage, shooting an ugly .394.
Adams only played 35.5 minutes per game, and yet averaged 26 and 10. This is surely due to the breakneck pace at which Denver played - they lead the league with a 113.7 Pace Factor (an "estimate of the number of possessions per 48 minutes" a team has). But we'll get to that. I want to address the ridiculousness of a player averaging a 26 and 10 and receiving zero recognition.
[It should be noted that the of fifteen players who got All-NBA Honors, 11 are Hall 0f Famers: Jordan, Magic, Barkley, Robinson (1st team), Drexler, Ewing, Dominique (2nd team), Dumars, Hakeem, Stockton, Worthy (3rd team), and there will be 12 Hall of Famers soon, as soon as Karl Malone is inducted. Chris Mullin, Kevin Johnson, and Bernard King (who should be in the HoF) were the other three All-NBAers.]
Only two other players have ever in the history of the NBA averaged 26 points and 10 assists in a full season. The aforementioned Tiny Archibald in 72-73 and Oscar Robertson in five (5!) seasons: 61-62 (the triple-double season), 63-64, 64-65, 65-66, and 66-67. In each of those six respective seasons, Tiny and Oscar made the All-NBA First Team and did not finish lower than 4th in the MVP voting, with Oscar winning in 1964.
If we extend the parameters, we find that there have been 20 seasons in which a player has averaged 20 PPG and 10 APG: Tiny (1), Oscar (5), Tim Hardaway (1), Kevin Johnson (3), Magic Johnson (3), Chris Paul (2 - working on a third this season), Isiah Thomas (4), and Michael Adams (1). In each of the seasons excepting Michael Adams in 90-91, the above players either received MVP votes or made an All-NBA team, usually doing both. Only Tim Hardaway (in 92-93) and Kevin Johnson (in 89-90) did not receive an MVP vote, but they made the Third and Second All-NBA Teams, respectively. In fact Hardaway's inclusion on the Third Team was the only occurrence of any of the above players not making either the First or Second Teams. Magic Johnson won the MVP each of the seasons he put up a 20 and 10 - 86-87, 88-89, and 89-90. So clearly Adams exclusion from postseason awards was an aberration.
But wait, you say, what about players who averaged 26 points and 10 rebounds? Surely some of them didn't get any MVP votes or All-NBA recognition. Well, dear reader, you are correct. There have been 79 seasons in which a player averaged 26 PPG and 10 RPG (compared to the seven we saw earlier with 10 APG):
Kareem (9 times), Barkley (2), Elgin (7), Walt Bellamy (3), Bird (1), Wilt (7), Billy Cunningham (1), Ewing (2), Elvin Hayes (3), Spencer Haywood (2), Karl Malone (8), Moses (2), Bob McAdoo (4), George Mikan (1), Shaq (10!), Hakeem (4), Bob Pettit (6), Oscar (3), David Robinson (2), Chris Webber (1), and George Yardley (1).
Of those 79 seasons, there were exactly 5 in which the player either did not receive an MVP vote or did not make an All-NBA team: Walt Bellamy in 61-62 and 63-64, and Elvin Hayes in 68-69, 69-70, and 70-71. Bellamy was (predictably) shut out by Russell and Wilt in both of his 26 and 10 seasons (the NBA did not add a Third Team until the 1988-89 season, meaning only 2 players per position got an All-NBA nod). Hayes was snubbed in favor of Wes Unseld and Willis Reed in 1969, then Reed and Kareem each of the next two seasons.
We shouldn't feel too bad for Hayes and Bellamy - they did eventually get recognition for their skills: Hayes got MVP votes in 6 seasons, finishing as high as 3rd in 1975 and 1979, and made 6 All-NBA Teams, including 3 First Teams. Bellamy won the Rookie of the Year in 1962 and got MVP votes the following season. Most importantly, Bellamy was inducted into the Hall of Fame in 1993, while Hayes was inducted in 1990.
Michael Adams received exactly 1 fifth-place MVP vote in 1988 and made the All-Star Team in 1992. Basketball Reference puts hit Hall of Fame Probabilty as 2.7% - and that seems far, far too high. Adams retired after the 1995-96 season and I can't imagine he ever got serious Hall of Fame consideration.
Let's return to how Adams put up a 26 and 10. As I said, the Nuggets played the fastest pace in the NBA in one of the faster post-merger seasons. For context, the average Pace Factor in 1990-91 was 97.8 - this season only the Golden State Warriors have a higher Pace Factor (100.3). Denver's Pace Factor of 113.7 was more than 10 possessions per game than the 2nd place team that year, the Warriors. Despite leading the NBA in scoring at over 119 points per game, the Nuggets finished in the bottom third in the league in offensive efficiency (a measure of points scored per 100 possession). So the Nuggets did not use their ridiculous amount of possessions very efficiently - not exactly a surprise. But this pace no doubt led to an inflation in Adams stats. Adams never averaged more than 18.5 points or 7.5 assists per game in any other season. He played on other Nuggets teams that lead the league in Pace Factor, but never with such a crazy number as 113.7 possessions per game.
The Nuggets also did not, how do you say?...ah yes, play defense. The Nuggets surrendered a ludicrous 130 points per game. 130! More damning though was their league worst defensive rating (number of points given up per 100 possessions), which means one can not write off the 130 points per game on the pace they played; they also gave up points at an alarming rate (for context, the Toronto Raptors of 2009-2010, who have been the punch line of many a joke about their porous D, have a defensive rating of 112, compared to Denver's rating of 114.7 in 1990-91). And Michael Adams, no doubt, was, as the Nuggets best player, the face of this historically bad defense.
Another factor in Adams' lack of recognition certainly was his poor shooting percentages (.396 and .296) and his high turnover rate (3.6 per game). Adams did record 2.2 steals per game, but had a historically bad 115 defensive rating (the NBA-record for worst defensive rating while playing at least 50 games is 118).
[Tangent: Looking at Adams Basketball Reference page, I see that Adams was traded by the Nuggets after his 26 and 10 season along with first and second round picks (in 1991 and 1993, respectively) to the Wizards for their 1991 first round pick, which the Nuggets used on Mark Macon (who?). I am just befuddled by this. Unless Adams was one of those "best players" who was a bad teammate and ball-hog (see: Adams' 1421 field goal attempts) who, despite his positive on the court production, was a cancer off the court. Perhaps, I don't know.]
The biggest reason for Adams' lack of recognition probably stemmed from the Nuggets league worst 20-62 record. No way an MVP voter taps a player who only won 20 games. However, as I said earlier, Adams only played in 66 games. In those 66 games, the Nuggets went 19-47, meaning they were 1-15 without Adams in the lineup. That's got to count for something, right?
So what does all this mean? I'm not really sure. Part of why I was interested in the curious case of Michael Adams is the absurdity of a player having a historically statistically significant season and getting no recognition. I don't think we'll ever see another season like Michael Adams' 1990-91 season. The closest thing we have to Michael Adams this season is Monta Ellis - a gunner playing on the fastest team in the league (that is also one of the worst teams in the league) averaging 26 points per game. But Monta is only averaging 5 assists per game, while playing the second most minutes in the league. One thing is the same though: I can almost guarantee that Monta Ellis will not be on an All-NBA Team or get an MVP vote.
Of all the crazy statistical seasons the NBA has seen, Adams' is perhaps the strangest. Let's start to appreciate just how crazy it really was.
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
2010 World Championship Team, As Invisioned By One Young Man
So the short list for the 2010 World Championship was announced today. 27 players in all, 9 returning from the Redeem Team, and only two minor surprises in the way of guys being left off the list: Brandon Roy, who apparently doesn't want to put unneeded stress on his knees (a concern I can understand) and Rajon Rondo, who apparently was "unresponsive" to advances made by USA Basketball, something I can't understand (not that I would want Rondo on the 12-man team, but come on, it's playing for the national team!).
Anyhow, it's time to look forward, not behind. This list puts a crimp in my dream roster for the World Championships (starting CP3, Kobe, 'Melo, LeBron, Howard and having Wade, Roy, Deron Williams, KD, Jeff Green, Bosh, and Bynum off the bench). Roy, Green and Bynum were left off the short list (for the latter two I don't know if they didn't want to play or if Colangelo didn't pick them). Since Durant is obviously going to make the team, I thought having his buddy and OKC teammate Jeff Green (no slouch himself, mind you) there to keep company/make him feel comfortable would be a good thing. Oh well. And Bynum would be great to have, especially due to his familiarity with Kobe.
Here is the story with the 27 players. http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/olybb/news/story?id=4902362
Some I can tell you right off the bat will not be playing for the US in either 2010 or 2012: Eric Gordon, OJ Mayo. Actually those are the only two guys I can say with certainty will not make the team. The rest I can envision contributing solid minutes.
Of the nine returnees, eight are locks (though LeBron, Wade, and Bosh have all said that contract talks come first, Team USA second, but let's forget about that for now): Chris Paul, Kobe Bryant, Carmelo Anthony, LeBron James, Dwight Howard, Deron Williams, Dwyane Wade, and Chris Bosh. You could put Adam Morrison, Kwame Brown, Hilton Armstrong, and Brian Cardinal with those 8 and still win gold. But we might as well fill the remaining four slots with the best possible players (Carlos Boozer is the other Redeem Teamer returning, but he got the least minutes in the Olympics, and, though he is playing really right now, I don't consider him on par with the 8 locks).
So who should be the final four? Based on my thinking, here is who we have to choose from: Boozer, Durant, Derrick Rose, Amar'e, Billups, Odom, Al Jefferson, Kevin Love, Rudy Gay, Andre Iguodala, Danny Granger, David Lee, Brook Lopez, Russell Westbrook, LaMarcus Aldridge, and Gerald Wallace.
As I said earlier, Durant is a virtual lock, so there are only three spots left to fill. Of the 9 locks, there are only two bigs (Howard and Bosh), so we need at least one or two power forwards or centers. The Redeem Team managed with three bigs (Howard, Bosh, and Boozer), with LeBron ostensibly starting at the 4 (By the way, I think the starting lineup should remain intact, but with CP3 replacing Kidd.) The one criticism against the team in 2008 was a lack of depth up front, so let's assume that Colangelo will want to address that by adding two bigs to go along with Bosh and Howard.
There are four centers to choose from: Jefferson, Perk, Lee, and Lopez. My initial choice is Jefferson, as I thought he would have been a lock on this team, due to his performance over the previous couple of seasons, though this year he has seemed to regress a little, with injuries playing a big role in that regression. No way I'm choosing Perk - he's a thug with no discernible skills (and plays for Boston). Lopez, I like his fundamentals, but he needs the ball in his hands to be effective. That leaves us with David Lee. Lee has stepped up his game this season, and probably should have been an All-Star. There is clearly a focus on athleticism in the international game, and Lee is the most athletic of the available centers. Plus, whiteness returns to the National Team after being shut out in 2008!
As for power forwards, these are the options: Boozer, Amar'e, Odom, Love, Aldridge. Not exactly talent on par with the rest of the roster. Each guy does bring skill to the table. Boozer: experience with the team, mid-range game, post moves. Amar'e: athleticism, finishing ability, great on the fast break. Odom: athleticism, ball-handling, outside shooting. Love: rebounding, passing. Aldridge: mid-range game. And we can't forget about Gerald Wallace, who is technically a small forward, but is averaging almost 11 rebounds per game this season.
Of course each of these players has his flaws, too. Boozer: soft (because he went to Duke, ftw). Amar'e: mid-range game comes and goes, a sieve defensively. Odom: only plays hard when he wants to. Love: not nearly enough experience - let's wait til 2012 to truly consider Love. Aldridge: soft, no defense, don't trust his finishing ability. Wallace: size, consistency.
Well this is tough. What I want to happen and what I think will happen are two completely different things. I think that Boozer will get tapped, in no small part due to Mike Krzyzewski returning to coach (Krzyzewski had Boozer at Duke). My heart says Gerald Wallace, because holy crap there could be some crazy-ass lineups with him. But I just don't trust him. Let's leave this until the end, and move onto the guard and small forward spots.
If Colangelo follows the model from 2008, Chauncey Billups fits the Jason Kidd Veteran Point Guard role (though, you know, with actual skill). However, I think CP3 starts, which would expatiate the veteran point guard role.
(Tangent: The problem, if one wants to call it that, with the ridiculous boom of young talent, is that it doesn't allow the other young talent right behind it to have the same opportunities for growth. Chris Paul and Deron Williams are the "veterans" at the point, though they are only 24 and 25, respectively. Derrick Rose and Russell Westbrook, the two young point guards on the short list, are each 21. I can't envision a situation in which Rose or Westbrook would unseat Paul or Williams on the national team except for the latter two deciding not to play. Even in 2016 in Rio, CP3 and Deron will just have only reached their 30s and, assumedly, will still be two of the best PGs in the Association. What of Rose and Westbrook, then? Not to mention Tyreke Evans, John Wall, and any other uber-talented young point guard?)
The team carried three point guards in 2008. If we assume the same will happen this time around, then either Rose or Westbrook should be included to apprentice with CP3 and Deron. Rose has the higher upside and will eventually make an Olympic/World Championship team, but I think Westbrook would have the most to gain from training and playing with the team. Plus, he fills the role of Durant's teammate/buddy. So let's add Westbrook.
Due to miscounting on my part (see, I do suck at math), I thought I had two guard spots to fill, but, alas, there is only one. Let it be known that if Brandon Roy were available, he would fill that spot no question.
As of right now, I have 11 players selected: CP3, Deron Williams, Westbrook, Kobe, Wade, 'Melo, LeBron, KD, Bosh, Howard, and Lee. I'll reiterate that I think this 11 could play with, oh, I don't know, noted clubhouse cancer Ricky Davis and still win the gold.
I'm down to Gerald Wallace and Amar'e in my head. It should be mentioned I didn't even consider Iggy, Gay, or Granger due to the ridiculous depth at SF ('Melo, LeBron, KD). Yes, I know Wallace is a SF, but in name only, not in spirit. You know what, defense beats offense any day - Gerald Wallce, boom baby.
OK so my hypothetical 2010 World Championship team looks like this:
Starters: Chris Paul, Kobe Bryant, Carmelo Anthony, LeBron James, Dwight Howard
Bench: Deron Williams, Russell Westbrook, Dwyane Wade, Kevin Durant, Gerald Wallce, Chris Bosh, David Lee.
Gold Medal, here we come.
Anyhow, it's time to look forward, not behind. This list puts a crimp in my dream roster for the World Championships (starting CP3, Kobe, 'Melo, LeBron, Howard and having Wade, Roy, Deron Williams, KD, Jeff Green, Bosh, and Bynum off the bench). Roy, Green and Bynum were left off the short list (for the latter two I don't know if they didn't want to play or if Colangelo didn't pick them). Since Durant is obviously going to make the team, I thought having his buddy and OKC teammate Jeff Green (no slouch himself, mind you) there to keep company/make him feel comfortable would be a good thing. Oh well. And Bynum would be great to have, especially due to his familiarity with Kobe.
Here is the story with the 27 players. http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/olybb/news/story?id=4902362
Some I can tell you right off the bat will not be playing for the US in either 2010 or 2012: Eric Gordon, OJ Mayo. Actually those are the only two guys I can say with certainty will not make the team. The rest I can envision contributing solid minutes.
Of the nine returnees, eight are locks (though LeBron, Wade, and Bosh have all said that contract talks come first, Team USA second, but let's forget about that for now): Chris Paul, Kobe Bryant, Carmelo Anthony, LeBron James, Dwight Howard, Deron Williams, Dwyane Wade, and Chris Bosh. You could put Adam Morrison, Kwame Brown, Hilton Armstrong, and Brian Cardinal with those 8 and still win gold. But we might as well fill the remaining four slots with the best possible players (Carlos Boozer is the other Redeem Teamer returning, but he got the least minutes in the Olympics, and, though he is playing really right now, I don't consider him on par with the 8 locks).
So who should be the final four? Based on my thinking, here is who we have to choose from: Boozer, Durant, Derrick Rose, Amar'e, Billups, Odom, Al Jefferson, Kevin Love, Rudy Gay, Andre Iguodala, Danny Granger, David Lee, Brook Lopez, Russell Westbrook, LaMarcus Aldridge, and Gerald Wallace.
As I said earlier, Durant is a virtual lock, so there are only three spots left to fill. Of the 9 locks, there are only two bigs (Howard and Bosh), so we need at least one or two power forwards or centers. The Redeem Team managed with three bigs (Howard, Bosh, and Boozer), with LeBron ostensibly starting at the 4 (By the way, I think the starting lineup should remain intact, but with CP3 replacing Kidd.) The one criticism against the team in 2008 was a lack of depth up front, so let's assume that Colangelo will want to address that by adding two bigs to go along with Bosh and Howard.
There are four centers to choose from: Jefferson, Perk, Lee, and Lopez. My initial choice is Jefferson, as I thought he would have been a lock on this team, due to his performance over the previous couple of seasons, though this year he has seemed to regress a little, with injuries playing a big role in that regression. No way I'm choosing Perk - he's a thug with no discernible skills (and plays for Boston). Lopez, I like his fundamentals, but he needs the ball in his hands to be effective. That leaves us with David Lee. Lee has stepped up his game this season, and probably should have been an All-Star. There is clearly a focus on athleticism in the international game, and Lee is the most athletic of the available centers. Plus, whiteness returns to the National Team after being shut out in 2008!
As for power forwards, these are the options: Boozer, Amar'e, Odom, Love, Aldridge. Not exactly talent on par with the rest of the roster. Each guy does bring skill to the table. Boozer: experience with the team, mid-range game, post moves. Amar'e: athleticism, finishing ability, great on the fast break. Odom: athleticism, ball-handling, outside shooting. Love: rebounding, passing. Aldridge: mid-range game. And we can't forget about Gerald Wallace, who is technically a small forward, but is averaging almost 11 rebounds per game this season.
Of course each of these players has his flaws, too. Boozer: soft (because he went to Duke, ftw). Amar'e: mid-range game comes and goes, a sieve defensively. Odom: only plays hard when he wants to. Love: not nearly enough experience - let's wait til 2012 to truly consider Love. Aldridge: soft, no defense, don't trust his finishing ability. Wallace: size, consistency.
Well this is tough. What I want to happen and what I think will happen are two completely different things. I think that Boozer will get tapped, in no small part due to Mike Krzyzewski returning to coach (Krzyzewski had Boozer at Duke). My heart says Gerald Wallace, because holy crap there could be some crazy-ass lineups with him. But I just don't trust him. Let's leave this until the end, and move onto the guard and small forward spots.
If Colangelo follows the model from 2008, Chauncey Billups fits the Jason Kidd Veteran Point Guard role (though, you know, with actual skill). However, I think CP3 starts, which would expatiate the veteran point guard role.
(Tangent: The problem, if one wants to call it that, with the ridiculous boom of young talent, is that it doesn't allow the other young talent right behind it to have the same opportunities for growth. Chris Paul and Deron Williams are the "veterans" at the point, though they are only 24 and 25, respectively. Derrick Rose and Russell Westbrook, the two young point guards on the short list, are each 21. I can't envision a situation in which Rose or Westbrook would unseat Paul or Williams on the national team except for the latter two deciding not to play. Even in 2016 in Rio, CP3 and Deron will just have only reached their 30s and, assumedly, will still be two of the best PGs in the Association. What of Rose and Westbrook, then? Not to mention Tyreke Evans, John Wall, and any other uber-talented young point guard?)
The team carried three point guards in 2008. If we assume the same will happen this time around, then either Rose or Westbrook should be included to apprentice with CP3 and Deron. Rose has the higher upside and will eventually make an Olympic/World Championship team, but I think Westbrook would have the most to gain from training and playing with the team. Plus, he fills the role of Durant's teammate/buddy. So let's add Westbrook.
Due to miscounting on my part (see, I do suck at math), I thought I had two guard spots to fill, but, alas, there is only one. Let it be known that if Brandon Roy were available, he would fill that spot no question.
As of right now, I have 11 players selected: CP3, Deron Williams, Westbrook, Kobe, Wade, 'Melo, LeBron, KD, Bosh, Howard, and Lee. I'll reiterate that I think this 11 could play with, oh, I don't know, noted clubhouse cancer Ricky Davis and still win the gold.
I'm down to Gerald Wallace and Amar'e in my head. It should be mentioned I didn't even consider Iggy, Gay, or Granger due to the ridiculous depth at SF ('Melo, LeBron, KD). Yes, I know Wallace is a SF, but in name only, not in spirit. You know what, defense beats offense any day - Gerald Wallce, boom baby.
OK so my hypothetical 2010 World Championship team looks like this:
Starters: Chris Paul, Kobe Bryant, Carmelo Anthony, LeBron James, Dwight Howard
Bench: Deron Williams, Russell Westbrook, Dwyane Wade, Kevin Durant, Gerald Wallce, Chris Bosh, David Lee.
Gold Medal, here we come.
Monday, February 8, 2010
My Hastily Thrown Together "Wine Cellar" Team of the 2000s
I got this idea, obviously, from Bill Simmons' epic The Book of Basketball. The idea, basically, is to take the best "vintages" (aka great seasons) from players and put them together to form a super team (in Simmons' conception, to defeat aliens in order to save our planet).
As I know the NBA of the 2000s fairly well (esp. from 2004 on) I humbly present my Wine Cellar team (and I am taking both regular season and post-season performance into question):
Starters:
'00 Shaquille O'Neal
'03 Tim Duncan
'09 LeBron James
'01 Kobe Bryant
'07 Steve Nash
Bench:
'08 Kevin Garnett
'07 Dirk Nowitzki
'04 Ben Wallace
'09 Trevor Ariza
'09 Dwyane Wade
'07 Chris Paul
'07 Baron Davis
Comments: My team does admittedly skew toward the latter half of the decade, but that's because a) I watched way more basketball in the later half, and b) the level of play was just better 05-09 than 00-04. '07 Dirk gets on for his regular season (which, despite what Simmons thinks, was his best season) and '07 Baron gets on for kicking Dirk's ass in the Playoffs. '07 Chris Paul makes it over '09 Chris Paul (who was probably better/more experienced) for the sensation he caused in every Basketball fan who realized we were watching the Next Great True Point Guard. '09 Wade makes it over '06 Wade (despite '06 Wade owning the Finals) because he didn't so much as own the Finals as take advantage of ridiculous refereeing and just barreling to the hoop every other play. '07 Nash makes it over the MVP years based on Simmons' logic in his book. '00 Shaq makes it because it was his first title, only MVP, and only season where he gave a shit the entire season. '04 Ben Wallace makes it because even though I hated those Pistons teams, I respected them. And the Afro. '03 Duncan and '09 LeBron are obvious. '08 Garnett for his defensive mastery and title run.
Toughest Omissions: '06 Paul Pierce (when he was killing himself for a shit Celtics team aka a guy who plays hard every night); '06 or '08 James Posey (bumped him for '09 Ariza for the three-point shooting); '01 Reggie Miller (I wanted another stone-cold free throw shooter, but I couldn't bring myself to bump Baron and his beard); '09 Dwight Howard (got bumped by KG, a more mature defensive force who won the title).
This is obviously quite subjective, but I like what I put together. Would get crushed by Simmons' Wine Cellar team, but he had the superstars of the 80s and 90s at his disposal. My team probably could take a game or two out of seven though.
As I know the NBA of the 2000s fairly well (esp. from 2004 on) I humbly present my Wine Cellar team (and I am taking both regular season and post-season performance into question):
Starters:
'00 Shaquille O'Neal
'03 Tim Duncan
'09 LeBron James
'01 Kobe Bryant
'07 Steve Nash
Bench:
'08 Kevin Garnett
'07 Dirk Nowitzki
'04 Ben Wallace
'09 Trevor Ariza
'09 Dwyane Wade
'07 Chris Paul
'07 Baron Davis
Comments: My team does admittedly skew toward the latter half of the decade, but that's because a) I watched way more basketball in the later half, and b) the level of play was just better 05-09 than 00-04. '07 Dirk gets on for his regular season (which, despite what Simmons thinks, was his best season) and '07 Baron gets on for kicking Dirk's ass in the Playoffs. '07 Chris Paul makes it over '09 Chris Paul (who was probably better/more experienced) for the sensation he caused in every Basketball fan who realized we were watching the Next Great True Point Guard. '09 Wade makes it over '06 Wade (despite '06 Wade owning the Finals) because he didn't so much as own the Finals as take advantage of ridiculous refereeing and just barreling to the hoop every other play. '07 Nash makes it over the MVP years based on Simmons' logic in his book. '00 Shaq makes it because it was his first title, only MVP, and only season where he gave a shit the entire season. '04 Ben Wallace makes it because even though I hated those Pistons teams, I respected them. And the Afro. '03 Duncan and '09 LeBron are obvious. '08 Garnett for his defensive mastery and title run.
Toughest Omissions: '06 Paul Pierce (when he was killing himself for a shit Celtics team aka a guy who plays hard every night); '06 or '08 James Posey (bumped him for '09 Ariza for the three-point shooting); '01 Reggie Miller (I wanted another stone-cold free throw shooter, but I couldn't bring myself to bump Baron and his beard); '09 Dwight Howard (got bumped by KG, a more mature defensive force who won the title).
This is obviously quite subjective, but I like what I put together. Would get crushed by Simmons' Wine Cellar team, but he had the superstars of the 80s and 90s at his disposal. My team probably could take a game or two out of seven though.
Why Kevin Durant Will Never Be the Player LeBron Is
Many Basketball writers, bloggers, and commenters have fallen in love with Kevin Durant over the past few years, with the praise seemingly reaching its peak earlier this season. Things came to a head when, before the season started, writer Bill Simmons suggested on Pardon the Interruption that Durant might have a better career than LeBron James. Naturally Kornheiser and Wilbon were incredulous (as was I). Simmons clarified this statement, I believe, in a column. His point was that Durant might end up being a better scorer (possible) and having more team success than LeBron, based on the ridiculous amount of young talent on the Former Sonics - Westbrook, Green, and Harden in particular. Obviously it is impossible to project future team success so early in LeBron and Durant's respective careers (who thought, as late as the beginning of the 1990-91 season, that Michael Jordan would go down as one of the greatest winners in league history?). I am inclined to predict that LeBron will probably finish with more championships than Durant, based simply on their playing styles, as unselfish stars (Magic, Bird, Duncan) usually win more often than volume-scorers (Jordan doesn't qualify as a volume-scorer because he brought so much more to the table; Kobe...same thing I guess).
Point being, there seems to be faction of NBA fans who believe that Kevin Durant will some day be better than LeBron, without qualification. I am absolutely befuddled by this. Under no circumstances will I ever think Durant is a better player. Operative word is player. Durant is a great scorer, possibly better than LeBron, but he is not nearly the player LeBron is.
(Before I go further with this, let me qualify: I have nothing against Durant. I like Durant. I like his game. I love watching the Former Sonics play. I just hate all the fellatio he receives from the media for being a taller, modern-day Alex English or Adrian Dantley (full disclosure: I've never seen either English or Dantley play, but by what I've read and their stats, I feel the comparison is apt).)
I want compare LeBron and Durant's first three seasons in the Association. For fairness' sake, I'll compare the per-36 minute stats (LeBron played 41.5 minutes his first three seasons, Durant 37.5). It's also hard to compare the two, as their supporting casts were rather different (and I'm not nearly enough of a stathead to figure out statistical +/- or any of that jazz). However I will says this: LeBron had more success in his first three years with a supporting cast not that much better than Durant's. Following is team record and each player's four best teammates that year:
LeBron, 03-04: 35-47 (Carlos Boozer, Zydrunas Ilgauskas, Ricky Davis, Jeff McInnis)
Durant, 07-08: 20-62 (Wally Szczerbiak, Chris Wilcox, Earl Watson, Nick Collison)
LeBron, 04-05: 42-40 (Zydrunas Ilgauskas, Drew Gooden, Jeff McInnis, Eric Snow)
Durant, 08-09: 23-59 (Jeff Green, Russell Westbrook, Nenad Krstic, Nick Collison)
LeBron, 05-06: 50-32 (Zydrunas Ilgauskas, Larry Hughes, Drew Gooden, Flip Murray)
Durant, 09-10: 29-21 so far (Jeff Green, Russell Westbrook, Nenad Krstic, James Harden)
So clearly LeBron has had more team success (I can't see this Former Sonics team making it to 50 wins, though they'd have to go 21-11, not unfathomable; nor can I see them making the Finals next season, as LeBron did in his 4th season - though obviously the Western Conference of 2010-11 will be much, much harder than the Eastern Conference of 2006-07). LeBron had slightly better teammates, though the real advantage came in the fact that LeBron's top runnings mates were mostly veterans, guys who had been in the league for at least a few years; Durant has Westbrook and Green, young guys with tremendous upside. I would argue that Durant's situation has allowed him to mature into a better player/teammate quicker than LeBron was able to - being saddled with the Ira Newbles and Donyell Marshalls of the world cannot help in developing a young talent (there was a reason the Cavs traded Ricky Davis 22 games into LeBron's rookie season). All this being said, Round 1 (team success) goes to LeBron. Onto the individual statistics!
Per 36-minutes, the scoring is basically even. Durant has a slight edge, 23.4 to 23.0. Similarly, Durant has a slight edge in field goal percentage, .461 to .458. Durant is a better mid-range shooter, while LeBron gets to the rim more. Durant also takes a half a shot less than LeBron per 36 mintues, 17.7 compared to 18.2. In the area that is supposed to be Durant's advantage (scoring), it is pretty much a wash. Durant is a better three point shooter than LeBron was (.364 to .330), taking about the same number per 36. Durant's first true advantage comes in free throw shooting. Durant makes at a .872 clip, while LeBron shot .746 his first three seasons. They take almost exactly the same number of free throws per-36 (7.0 and 6.9). Looking at advanced stats, Durant definitively wins the battle of True Shooting %, .565 to .540 (though the advantage stems greatly from the free throw gap). As for Effective FG%, Durant again has a slight edge, .492 to .488.
More areas that are pretty much a wash: rebounds per-36 - 5.7 for LeBron (1.0 off, 4.7 def) and 5.6 for Durant (1.0 off, 4.7 def - that's strange). Blocks per-36: .8 for Durant, .6 for LeBron. Turnovers per-36: 3.0 for Durant, 2.9 for LeBron. They foul at the same rate (1.7 per-36). LeBron has the edge in steals: 1.6 to 1.1 per-36.
And now we come to the heart of the matter: assists. LeBron averaged 5.7 per 36 his first three seasons, Durant 2.6. Based on their per game averages, LeBron averaged 4 more assists per game, leading to at least 8 extra points (who says I can't still do math!). LeBron is simply a much more willing passer than Durant; I watched most of LeBron's games those first three seasons (and the next four as well, obvo) and he passed a lot. Maybe a little too much, especially in end of game situations. He had yet to find the balance he has now between facilitator-LeBron and scorer-LeBron (one need only look at the Portland game earlier this season, when LeBron had 31 points and 2 assists at the half, and finished with 41 and 8, along with 10 rebounds). It is slightly unfair to simply say that LeBron passes more than Durant - he had the ball in his hands more than Durant does. LeBron played (esp. in the early days before the arrival of Mo Williams) a point-forward type position, so he clearly had more opportunities to get assists, as evidenced by LeBron's ridiculous advantage in Assist %: 31.2 to 13.2 (assist percentage is "an estimate of the percentage of teammate field goals a player assisted while he was on on the floor"). Interestingly enough, Durant and LeBron had very similar Usage % (which is "an estimate of the percentage of team plays used by a player while he was on the floor"), with LeBron having the slight edge: 30.6 to 29.2. So not only did LeBron "use" more possessions (those that ended in either shot attempts, free throws, or turnovers by LeBron, he almost tripled Durant in the percentage of teammates' field goals assisted (and to add circumstantial evidence, LeBron has a ridiculous amount of passes that end with his teammates shooting free throws - great passes to an open Z or Andy under the basket, when the defense's only recourse is to foul).
LeBron also holds a large advantage in all the advanced stats: PER, Win Shares, Offensive and Defensive Rating. I'm not going to pretend that I understand how these stats are calculated, but I have faith in them. BELIEVE WHAT THE MACHINE TELLS YOU!
If we just look at the stats for each player's third season alone (the current one for Durant), the same things for the most part hold true: scoring, shooting (except FT%), steals and blocks are all pretty much even. Durant takes the lead in rebounding, but LeBron has the same advantage in assists. LeBron still has the lead in the advanced stats (28-25 PER advantage), though Durant takes the lead in Defensive Rating.
(If we look at full careers, LeBron has much, much better stats (incl. FG%) in every single relevant category, except FT%.)
So the stats have told us that LeBron and Durant, in their first three seasons, played rather evenly, except for the fact that LeBron was a more willing passer and a better facilitator (though Durant plays with a great young PG, something LeBron didn't do until last season). From one point of view, LeBron passed more out of necessity - he was the best playmaker on his team, so naturally he will have more assists and a higher assist percentage. Durant has never been asked to be a passer, only a scorer. From the other point of view, LeBron simply is a better passer and team player. Is Earl Watson really that much better than Jeff McInnis, that Durant couldn't have the ball in his hands more?
Both play small forward, though Durant is a little taller and LeBron has the obvious advantage in physicality (weighing 260 pounds, in a conservative estimate, to Durant's 215). LeBron has become a lockdown defender in the past couple of years, also adding the chase down block (the most exciting play in Basketball, especially if you sense it coming) to his arsenal.
All of this points to the fact that LeBron is a better all around player than Durant. Again, I'm not saying Durant isn't a great player (he is definitely one of the 17 best players in the Association, along with Bosh, LeBron, Howard, Joe Johnson, Wade, 'Melo, Billups, Deron Williams, Brandon Roy, Kobe, Pau, Nash, Amare, Dirk, Duncan, and Chris Paul). But Durant is a scorer first, and a player second. Though he is a great teammate, somehow it always seems like he looks for his own shot every single time he has the ball - the same cannot be about LeBron.
LeBron is, by every conceivable metric, a better all around player.
Where I got these stats:
First three seasons: http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/tiny.cgi?id=tXsNM
Third Season: http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/tiny.cgi?id=wPT4Y
Point being, there seems to be faction of NBA fans who believe that Kevin Durant will some day be better than LeBron, without qualification. I am absolutely befuddled by this. Under no circumstances will I ever think Durant is a better player. Operative word is player. Durant is a great scorer, possibly better than LeBron, but he is not nearly the player LeBron is.
(Before I go further with this, let me qualify: I have nothing against Durant. I like Durant. I like his game. I love watching the Former Sonics play. I just hate all the fellatio he receives from the media for being a taller, modern-day Alex English or Adrian Dantley (full disclosure: I've never seen either English or Dantley play, but by what I've read and their stats, I feel the comparison is apt).)
I want compare LeBron and Durant's first three seasons in the Association. For fairness' sake, I'll compare the per-36 minute stats (LeBron played 41.5 minutes his first three seasons, Durant 37.5). It's also hard to compare the two, as their supporting casts were rather different (and I'm not nearly enough of a stathead to figure out statistical +/- or any of that jazz). However I will says this: LeBron had more success in his first three years with a supporting cast not that much better than Durant's. Following is team record and each player's four best teammates that year:
LeBron, 03-04: 35-47 (Carlos Boozer, Zydrunas Ilgauskas, Ricky Davis, Jeff McInnis)
Durant, 07-08: 20-62 (Wally Szczerbiak, Chris Wilcox, Earl Watson, Nick Collison)
LeBron, 04-05: 42-40 (Zydrunas Ilgauskas, Drew Gooden, Jeff McInnis, Eric Snow)
Durant, 08-09: 23-59 (Jeff Green, Russell Westbrook, Nenad Krstic, Nick Collison)
LeBron, 05-06: 50-32 (Zydrunas Ilgauskas, Larry Hughes, Drew Gooden, Flip Murray)
Durant, 09-10: 29-21 so far (Jeff Green, Russell Westbrook, Nenad Krstic, James Harden)
So clearly LeBron has had more team success (I can't see this Former Sonics team making it to 50 wins, though they'd have to go 21-11, not unfathomable; nor can I see them making the Finals next season, as LeBron did in his 4th season - though obviously the Western Conference of 2010-11 will be much, much harder than the Eastern Conference of 2006-07). LeBron had slightly better teammates, though the real advantage came in the fact that LeBron's top runnings mates were mostly veterans, guys who had been in the league for at least a few years; Durant has Westbrook and Green, young guys with tremendous upside. I would argue that Durant's situation has allowed him to mature into a better player/teammate quicker than LeBron was able to - being saddled with the Ira Newbles and Donyell Marshalls of the world cannot help in developing a young talent (there was a reason the Cavs traded Ricky Davis 22 games into LeBron's rookie season). All this being said, Round 1 (team success) goes to LeBron. Onto the individual statistics!
Per 36-minutes, the scoring is basically even. Durant has a slight edge, 23.4 to 23.0. Similarly, Durant has a slight edge in field goal percentage, .461 to .458. Durant is a better mid-range shooter, while LeBron gets to the rim more. Durant also takes a half a shot less than LeBron per 36 mintues, 17.7 compared to 18.2. In the area that is supposed to be Durant's advantage (scoring), it is pretty much a wash. Durant is a better three point shooter than LeBron was (.364 to .330), taking about the same number per 36. Durant's first true advantage comes in free throw shooting. Durant makes at a .872 clip, while LeBron shot .746 his first three seasons. They take almost exactly the same number of free throws per-36 (7.0 and 6.9). Looking at advanced stats, Durant definitively wins the battle of True Shooting %, .565 to .540 (though the advantage stems greatly from the free throw gap). As for Effective FG%, Durant again has a slight edge, .492 to .488.
More areas that are pretty much a wash: rebounds per-36 - 5.7 for LeBron (1.0 off, 4.7 def) and 5.6 for Durant (1.0 off, 4.7 def - that's strange). Blocks per-36: .8 for Durant, .6 for LeBron. Turnovers per-36: 3.0 for Durant, 2.9 for LeBron. They foul at the same rate (1.7 per-36). LeBron has the edge in steals: 1.6 to 1.1 per-36.
And now we come to the heart of the matter: assists. LeBron averaged 5.7 per 36 his first three seasons, Durant 2.6. Based on their per game averages, LeBron averaged 4 more assists per game, leading to at least 8 extra points (who says I can't still do math!). LeBron is simply a much more willing passer than Durant; I watched most of LeBron's games those first three seasons (and the next four as well, obvo) and he passed a lot. Maybe a little too much, especially in end of game situations. He had yet to find the balance he has now between facilitator-LeBron and scorer-LeBron (one need only look at the Portland game earlier this season, when LeBron had 31 points and 2 assists at the half, and finished with 41 and 8, along with 10 rebounds). It is slightly unfair to simply say that LeBron passes more than Durant - he had the ball in his hands more than Durant does. LeBron played (esp. in the early days before the arrival of Mo Williams) a point-forward type position, so he clearly had more opportunities to get assists, as evidenced by LeBron's ridiculous advantage in Assist %: 31.2 to 13.2 (assist percentage is "an estimate of the percentage of teammate field goals a player assisted while he was on on the floor"). Interestingly enough, Durant and LeBron had very similar Usage % (which is "an estimate of the percentage of team plays used by a player while he was on the floor"), with LeBron having the slight edge: 30.6 to 29.2. So not only did LeBron "use" more possessions (those that ended in either shot attempts, free throws, or turnovers by LeBron, he almost tripled Durant in the percentage of teammates' field goals assisted (and to add circumstantial evidence, LeBron has a ridiculous amount of passes that end with his teammates shooting free throws - great passes to an open Z or Andy under the basket, when the defense's only recourse is to foul).
LeBron also holds a large advantage in all the advanced stats: PER, Win Shares, Offensive and Defensive Rating. I'm not going to pretend that I understand how these stats are calculated, but I have faith in them. BELIEVE WHAT THE MACHINE TELLS YOU!
If we just look at the stats for each player's third season alone (the current one for Durant), the same things for the most part hold true: scoring, shooting (except FT%), steals and blocks are all pretty much even. Durant takes the lead in rebounding, but LeBron has the same advantage in assists. LeBron still has the lead in the advanced stats (28-25 PER advantage), though Durant takes the lead in Defensive Rating.
(If we look at full careers, LeBron has much, much better stats (incl. FG%) in every single relevant category, except FT%.)
So the stats have told us that LeBron and Durant, in their first three seasons, played rather evenly, except for the fact that LeBron was a more willing passer and a better facilitator (though Durant plays with a great young PG, something LeBron didn't do until last season). From one point of view, LeBron passed more out of necessity - he was the best playmaker on his team, so naturally he will have more assists and a higher assist percentage. Durant has never been asked to be a passer, only a scorer. From the other point of view, LeBron simply is a better passer and team player. Is Earl Watson really that much better than Jeff McInnis, that Durant couldn't have the ball in his hands more?
Both play small forward, though Durant is a little taller and LeBron has the obvious advantage in physicality (weighing 260 pounds, in a conservative estimate, to Durant's 215). LeBron has become a lockdown defender in the past couple of years, also adding the chase down block (the most exciting play in Basketball, especially if you sense it coming) to his arsenal.
All of this points to the fact that LeBron is a better all around player than Durant. Again, I'm not saying Durant isn't a great player (he is definitely one of the 17 best players in the Association, along with Bosh, LeBron, Howard, Joe Johnson, Wade, 'Melo, Billups, Deron Williams, Brandon Roy, Kobe, Pau, Nash, Amare, Dirk, Duncan, and Chris Paul). But Durant is a scorer first, and a player second. Though he is a great teammate, somehow it always seems like he looks for his own shot every single time he has the ball - the same cannot be about LeBron.
LeBron is, by every conceivable metric, a better all around player.
Where I got these stats:
First three seasons: http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/tiny.cgi?id=tXsNM
Third Season: http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/tiny.cgi?id=wPT4Y
Saturday, February 6, 2010
How I Became A Cavaliers Fan
As I referenced in my previous post, I am irrevocably in love with LeBron James as a Basketball player. I spend an inordinate amount of time thinking about LeBron, his teammates, the Cavaliers, the Association, the US Olympic Basketball team, basically anything connected to LeBron's game. But how did this come to be?
I grew up in Maine, where those who care about basketball root for the Celtics. My family is transplanted from New York/New Jersey, so I was raised a Knicks fan (and a NY Giants fan, and a Yankees fan). As a youngster, I loved any and all sports - loved playing them, loved watching them, loved seeing the emotions of my father during games, hoping one day I would feel that invested in a team. I naturally gravitated toward the Yankees as my favorite of all, for two main reasons: first, they were awesome in my childhood (the first full season I remember was 1996, when rookie Derek Jeter and the Yankees won the World Series). And second, I loved playing baseball more than any other sport. I wasn't any better at baseball than basketball or soccer, but it consumed me and I became obsessed with the history of the game and all the fun stuff that came along. When the Yankees won three World Series in a row I was the happiest kid alive. During Game 7 of the 2003 ALCS I was too nervous to watch the middle innings, but when Aaron F---in' Boone homered off Tim Wakefield I couldn't stop smiling for weeks (well that's not true, because the Yankees lost to the Marlins in the World Series). And the collapse in 2004 was the biggest devastation that had befallen me to that time (and even now, it's one of the top five worst times of my life). When I lived in New York, the Yankees didn't win a single playoff series, suffering three consecutive first round exits, then missing the Playoffs altogether in 2008. When I moved away, they found their winning ways, almost as if they were waiting for me to leave to get back on top. The 2009 World Series will always mean the most to me, because it is the first time the Yankees won when I actually knew what was going on (not that 13 year old me in 2000 didn't know what was up, but come on, I was 13). Anyways, all this is to say that the Yankees have always and will always be my favorite team in sports, even though I now consider Basketball to be my favorite sport.
In the late 90s I was a pretty big Knicks fan - I remember sending a letter to the Knicks asking for Patrick Ewing's autograph, but instead they sent back a Hubert Davis autograph. My father liked basketball well enough, but had never cared for the Knicks as strongly as he did for the Yankees. My earliest basketball memory is the Rockets' demolishing of the Knicks in the 1994 Finals. I was 7, so I don't really remember it. Next is Michael Jordan's first comeback - I even had a little framed picture of him that said "I'm back," even though my father strongly disliked the Bulls, for obvious reasons. I don't actually remember the Bulls second three-peat. I guess I was rooting for the Knicks in those days, but I can't be sure. When they miraculously made the Finals in 1999 as an 8-seed, I furiously jumped on that bandwagon. Tim Duncan and the Spurs quickly made me jump back off.
What followed was a black hole in my NBA fandom. I'm sure I still followed the league (these were the days when I would watch Sportscenter for hours a day - something I still do when I have access to a TV). To be perfectly honest, I don't know if I watched a single minute of any of the Lakers' Finals games from 2000-2002. I do remember Mark Madsen's atrocious dancing at the parade. That is rather indicative of my level of interest in the NBA - I don't remember the best guard-center combo since Magic and Kareem, but I do remember the goofy white guy dancing afterward.
This period (1999-2003) probably marked the height of my interest in College Basketball. A Syracuse fan since their title game run in 1996 (I was quite the little bandwagon jumper when I was little - but I've remained a Syracuse devotee ever since, even though I know study at basketball crazy Indiana University, I root exclusively for the Orange), I believed the myth that the college game was more fundamentally sound and played "better" than the pro game during this time. I loved Jim Boeheim's 2-3 zone (and still do). Everything peaked, obviously, in 2003 when freshman Carmelo Anthony led the Orangemen (as they were still known) to the NCAA title (an example of my perhaps misguided devotion - the NCAA tournament coincided with the first invasions of Iraq in 2003, and whenever CBS would cut into a game to give an update on the fledgling war, I would get annoyed).
Leading up to the 2003 draft, it was impossible to avoid all the hype surrounding high school phenom LeBron James. I took an interest in LeBron, though I'm not entirely sure why. I was rooting for the Cavaliers to get the top pick, if only for the hometown angle. I had no interest whatsoever in the Cavaliers before - they were just another NBA franchise to me.
I never watched any of LeBron's high school games, so the talk of his skill was all hearsay to me. But I wanted to like Basketball again. I think subconsciously I wanted LeBron (and to a lesser extent, Carmelo) to be my own personal Basketball savior, while simultaneously saving Basketball in Ohio. Sure enough, the Cavs got the top pick and took LeBron. I got legitimately excited that I would be able to watch a young star come into the league and develop. I could sense something special was happening with him.
LeBron's first NBA game was against the Sacramento Kings, the second half of a double-header on ESPN. The first game was between the Orlando Magic and the Knicks. I watched the first game only because I didn't want to miss the moment of LeBron's debut. Now, as I remember it, the Magic-Knicks game went into double-OT and I missed the beginning of the Cavaliers game. I was beyond disappointed (and this also points to how far my interest in the Knicks had fallen). I don't remember who won that double-OT game (I just checked Basketball Reference, and the Magic won 85-83 in single OT; 85-83 in overtime! No wonder I didn't watch the NBA), but I do remember when they finally cut to the Kings-Cavaliers. Somehow, this young 18 year old was better than I had expected. His size, speed, strength, and athleticism all amazed me, not to mention his Basketball acumen. I was hooked right then.
I began watching all of LeBron's games on national television. I developed my biggest sports-based man crush since Derek Jeter. I can't remember when I got my first LeBron jersey (the home white), but I still wear it to this day. At some point that season, my father, God bless him, offered to get NBA League Pass so I dould watch all of LeBron's games. I immediately said yes, and the love affair truly began. The Cavaliers were horrible that year (Dajuan Wagner, anybody?), but that didn't matter to me...yet.
Starting in LeBron's second season (2004-05) I began to care more about the Cavaliers as a team. Maybe it was that scumbag Carlos Boozer lying to a blind guy and leaving town, maybe it was Big Z and the way he connected with the fans. Something made me adopt the Cavaliers as my new favorite NBA team. Watching an amazing talent like LeBron will do that to an impressionable mind.
Of course during that time I would still inwardly rejoice when LeBron had a good game, but the Cavs lost. But then something changed the first time I saw LeBron in person. I wish I could remember the exact date, but I know it was in either 2005 or 2006. I could check my livejournal to see, because I knew I was counting down to the date. I'd rather not, though (Broke down and checked - April 5, 2006: NY 96, CLE 94). Point being, I went with my brother to MSG to see the Cavaliers play the Knicks. We had nosebleed seats, but I was happy as a pig in shit. My boy, LeBron James, in the flesh.
The game itself wasn't that good (Qyntel Woods (!) started for the Knicks), and LeBron passed up a shot at the buzzer that could have tied/won the game. I was angry as all hell; not because LeBron messed up (that was part of it), but because the Cavs had lost a winnable game. It was then I knew it was Cavaliers first, LeBron second. The Cavaliers made their first Playoffs that season and won a series (over the Wizards). I was in.
I've watched as many of LeBron's games as possible. The results affect me a little too much (as my college friends can attest - sometimes I would break plans and not go out if the Cavaliers had lost earlier in the night). I've seen LeBron in person three or four more times, including the famous 52 point, 11 assist, 9 rebound game at MSG.
I was unable to watch LeBron's "48 Special" against the Pistons in 2007 - I was living with my aunt at the time, and she didn't have cable or satellite. I listened to the game on the radio and followed along with the gamecast. Even without actually watching the game, it was one of the most memorable experiences of my life. The subsequent dismantling the Cavaliers received from the Spurs in the Finals stung for a long time. Last season, I had ultimate faith that the Cavs would return to the Finals. But it was not to be. This year, again, I have ultimate faith in LeBron.
A friend of mine who is a die-hard Knicks fan asked me recently if I'll follow LeBron if he leaves Cleveland, meaning if I'll become a fan of whatever team LeBron lands on. I told him, no, I am a Cavaliers fan first and foremost. I'll remain loyal to my team. However, I don't know how honest of an answer that is. Ideally I wouldn't have to make that choice. But if I do, I don't know what will happen. I can't imagine ever rooting against LeBron. He single-handedly resurrected my interest in the NBA. I spend about half my free time thinking about LeBron. He'll always be my favorite player, for technical and sentimental reasons. He is the driving force behind this blog. He made me a Cavaliers fan.
Please, LeBron, don't make me choose between my favorite player and my favorite team.
I grew up in Maine, where those who care about basketball root for the Celtics. My family is transplanted from New York/New Jersey, so I was raised a Knicks fan (and a NY Giants fan, and a Yankees fan). As a youngster, I loved any and all sports - loved playing them, loved watching them, loved seeing the emotions of my father during games, hoping one day I would feel that invested in a team. I naturally gravitated toward the Yankees as my favorite of all, for two main reasons: first, they were awesome in my childhood (the first full season I remember was 1996, when rookie Derek Jeter and the Yankees won the World Series). And second, I loved playing baseball more than any other sport. I wasn't any better at baseball than basketball or soccer, but it consumed me and I became obsessed with the history of the game and all the fun stuff that came along. When the Yankees won three World Series in a row I was the happiest kid alive. During Game 7 of the 2003 ALCS I was too nervous to watch the middle innings, but when Aaron F---in' Boone homered off Tim Wakefield I couldn't stop smiling for weeks (well that's not true, because the Yankees lost to the Marlins in the World Series). And the collapse in 2004 was the biggest devastation that had befallen me to that time (and even now, it's one of the top five worst times of my life). When I lived in New York, the Yankees didn't win a single playoff series, suffering three consecutive first round exits, then missing the Playoffs altogether in 2008. When I moved away, they found their winning ways, almost as if they were waiting for me to leave to get back on top. The 2009 World Series will always mean the most to me, because it is the first time the Yankees won when I actually knew what was going on (not that 13 year old me in 2000 didn't know what was up, but come on, I was 13). Anyways, all this is to say that the Yankees have always and will always be my favorite team in sports, even though I now consider Basketball to be my favorite sport.
In the late 90s I was a pretty big Knicks fan - I remember sending a letter to the Knicks asking for Patrick Ewing's autograph, but instead they sent back a Hubert Davis autograph. My father liked basketball well enough, but had never cared for the Knicks as strongly as he did for the Yankees. My earliest basketball memory is the Rockets' demolishing of the Knicks in the 1994 Finals. I was 7, so I don't really remember it. Next is Michael Jordan's first comeback - I even had a little framed picture of him that said "I'm back," even though my father strongly disliked the Bulls, for obvious reasons. I don't actually remember the Bulls second three-peat. I guess I was rooting for the Knicks in those days, but I can't be sure. When they miraculously made the Finals in 1999 as an 8-seed, I furiously jumped on that bandwagon. Tim Duncan and the Spurs quickly made me jump back off.
What followed was a black hole in my NBA fandom. I'm sure I still followed the league (these were the days when I would watch Sportscenter for hours a day - something I still do when I have access to a TV). To be perfectly honest, I don't know if I watched a single minute of any of the Lakers' Finals games from 2000-2002. I do remember Mark Madsen's atrocious dancing at the parade. That is rather indicative of my level of interest in the NBA - I don't remember the best guard-center combo since Magic and Kareem, but I do remember the goofy white guy dancing afterward.
This period (1999-2003) probably marked the height of my interest in College Basketball. A Syracuse fan since their title game run in 1996 (I was quite the little bandwagon jumper when I was little - but I've remained a Syracuse devotee ever since, even though I know study at basketball crazy Indiana University, I root exclusively for the Orange), I believed the myth that the college game was more fundamentally sound and played "better" than the pro game during this time. I loved Jim Boeheim's 2-3 zone (and still do). Everything peaked, obviously, in 2003 when freshman Carmelo Anthony led the Orangemen (as they were still known) to the NCAA title (an example of my perhaps misguided devotion - the NCAA tournament coincided with the first invasions of Iraq in 2003, and whenever CBS would cut into a game to give an update on the fledgling war, I would get annoyed).
Leading up to the 2003 draft, it was impossible to avoid all the hype surrounding high school phenom LeBron James. I took an interest in LeBron, though I'm not entirely sure why. I was rooting for the Cavaliers to get the top pick, if only for the hometown angle. I had no interest whatsoever in the Cavaliers before - they were just another NBA franchise to me.
I never watched any of LeBron's high school games, so the talk of his skill was all hearsay to me. But I wanted to like Basketball again. I think subconsciously I wanted LeBron (and to a lesser extent, Carmelo) to be my own personal Basketball savior, while simultaneously saving Basketball in Ohio. Sure enough, the Cavs got the top pick and took LeBron. I got legitimately excited that I would be able to watch a young star come into the league and develop. I could sense something special was happening with him.
LeBron's first NBA game was against the Sacramento Kings, the second half of a double-header on ESPN. The first game was between the Orlando Magic and the Knicks. I watched the first game only because I didn't want to miss the moment of LeBron's debut. Now, as I remember it, the Magic-Knicks game went into double-OT and I missed the beginning of the Cavaliers game. I was beyond disappointed (and this also points to how far my interest in the Knicks had fallen). I don't remember who won that double-OT game (I just checked Basketball Reference, and the Magic won 85-83 in single OT; 85-83 in overtime! No wonder I didn't watch the NBA), but I do remember when they finally cut to the Kings-Cavaliers. Somehow, this young 18 year old was better than I had expected. His size, speed, strength, and athleticism all amazed me, not to mention his Basketball acumen. I was hooked right then.
I began watching all of LeBron's games on national television. I developed my biggest sports-based man crush since Derek Jeter. I can't remember when I got my first LeBron jersey (the home white), but I still wear it to this day. At some point that season, my father, God bless him, offered to get NBA League Pass so I dould watch all of LeBron's games. I immediately said yes, and the love affair truly began. The Cavaliers were horrible that year (Dajuan Wagner, anybody?), but that didn't matter to me...yet.
Starting in LeBron's second season (2004-05) I began to care more about the Cavaliers as a team. Maybe it was that scumbag Carlos Boozer lying to a blind guy and leaving town, maybe it was Big Z and the way he connected with the fans. Something made me adopt the Cavaliers as my new favorite NBA team. Watching an amazing talent like LeBron will do that to an impressionable mind.
Of course during that time I would still inwardly rejoice when LeBron had a good game, but the Cavs lost. But then something changed the first time I saw LeBron in person. I wish I could remember the exact date, but I know it was in either 2005 or 2006. I could check my livejournal to see, because I knew I was counting down to the date. I'd rather not, though (Broke down and checked - April 5, 2006: NY 96, CLE 94). Point being, I went with my brother to MSG to see the Cavaliers play the Knicks. We had nosebleed seats, but I was happy as a pig in shit. My boy, LeBron James, in the flesh.
The game itself wasn't that good (Qyntel Woods (!) started for the Knicks), and LeBron passed up a shot at the buzzer that could have tied/won the game. I was angry as all hell; not because LeBron messed up (that was part of it), but because the Cavs had lost a winnable game. It was then I knew it was Cavaliers first, LeBron second. The Cavaliers made their first Playoffs that season and won a series (over the Wizards). I was in.
I've watched as many of LeBron's games as possible. The results affect me a little too much (as my college friends can attest - sometimes I would break plans and not go out if the Cavaliers had lost earlier in the night). I've seen LeBron in person three or four more times, including the famous 52 point, 11 assist, 9 rebound game at MSG.
I was unable to watch LeBron's "48 Special" against the Pistons in 2007 - I was living with my aunt at the time, and she didn't have cable or satellite. I listened to the game on the radio and followed along with the gamecast. Even without actually watching the game, it was one of the most memorable experiences of my life. The subsequent dismantling the Cavaliers received from the Spurs in the Finals stung for a long time. Last season, I had ultimate faith that the Cavs would return to the Finals. But it was not to be. This year, again, I have ultimate faith in LeBron.
A friend of mine who is a die-hard Knicks fan asked me recently if I'll follow LeBron if he leaves Cleveland, meaning if I'll become a fan of whatever team LeBron lands on. I told him, no, I am a Cavaliers fan first and foremost. I'll remain loyal to my team. However, I don't know how honest of an answer that is. Ideally I wouldn't have to make that choice. But if I do, I don't know what will happen. I can't imagine ever rooting against LeBron. He single-handedly resurrected my interest in the NBA. I spend about half my free time thinking about LeBron. He'll always be my favorite player, for technical and sentimental reasons. He is the driving force behind this blog. He made me a Cavaliers fan.
Please, LeBron, don't make me choose between my favorite player and my favorite team.
Welcome To My New NBA Blog! (AKA I Hope Danny Ferry Reads This)
Hello World!
I am starting this NBA-themed blog because I am tired of having to limit my NBA and LeBron James related thoughts to the tyrannical character limits of Twitter (@boches). Not that my NBA-related thoughts are world changing, but I think I have something to say - a new voice that can only be found on this blog! That's silly, of course. And this is partly to satiate my own desire to just get my thoughts, feelings, interpretations, and reactions to my favorite sport and league out there somewhere, outside my own head. So with out further ado, my introductory post, why the Cleveland Cavaliers need to trade for Antawn Jamison:
For the sake of Basketball (capital B), the Cavaliers need to buck up and make this trade, whatever it takes. Clearly Zydrunas Ilgauskas will be a casualty in this deal (which is why hopefully the Wizards can put the "rivalry" of a couple years ago behind them and agree to an intra-conference trade - and then waive Big Z so he can return to the Cavs). If the Cavs have to give up JJ Hickson, so be it. I love how Hickson has evolved this season, but when an unpolished 21-year-old who can't make a shot outside 10 feet is your starting power forward, how deep can you really get in the Playoffs?
(Full disclosure: I am a Cavaliers fan; however, I was born in Maine (Celtics country), and raised as a Knicks fan. I'll discuss my conversion in a later post. Point being: I love LeBron James. It's probably a little unhealthy how much time I devote to thinking about LeBron, talking about LeBron, tweeting about LeBron, wishing I had a blog so I could write about LeBron. Since I truly started following the NBA (January 2004 - same month I got NBA League Pass not coincidentally) I have followed LeBron almost religously; it's not hyperbole to say he alone saved me from NBA-apathy. In early 2005, my girlfriend at the time told me that she feels bad for the woman I eventually marry, because she will have to understand that she will always be #2 to LeBron.)
So clearly I have a vested interest in the Cavaliers pulling off a trade for Jamison. But as a Basketball fan, I also have a vested interest. Don't we all, at the end of the day, want to enjoy this sport played at the highest level possible? In the same way that the Pau Gasol to the Lakers trade was good for Basketball (meaning it pushed a great team to elite team status, as well as raising Kobe Bryant's overall level of play), Jamison would push this Cavaliers team into a whole 'nother stratosphere. Yes, it is a case of the rich getting richer, and it could be argued that it throws off the competitive balance the NBA works hard to create. But look how quickly teams turn around in today's NBA: Memphis sucked from 1995-2003, then made the Playoffs three straight years (04-06), then won 68 games combined (22, 22, and 24) in the next three seasons, and this year already have won 26 games and are competing for a playoff spot in a ridiculously stacked conference. Same goes for the Former Sonics (I share most people's disgust with how the whole Seattle/OKC move went down - plus the Thunder is the blandest nickname this side of the Minnesota Wild): from several playoff berth at the beginning of the Aughts to bottoming out in 07-08 to fighting for a playoff spot with the best young nucleus in the Association. Point being, yes a Jamison to Cleveland deal makes the rich (the Cavs) richer and the poor (the Wizards) poorer, but maybe the Wizards need to bottom out before they can start ascending again - and in the weak East it shouldn't be too hard to pull oneself up by the bootstraps.
Focusing on the Cavs, this deal would give LeBron the stretch 4 he has been yearning for since 2003, and his first legitimate All-Star teammate (sorry Mo Williams, I love what you've done for the Cavs and I hope you continue to play with LeBron for the next 10 years, but you're not even the best point guard named Williams in the league). Jamison is averaging 20.9 points and 8.8 boards on .456 FG% for the 16-win Wizards. Clearly Jamison's points would go down in Cleveland, as I can't imagine he would be taking the 17+ shots he's averaging right now. But that's fine - the Cavaliers would probably expect about 16-18 PPG from him.
The way I see it, Jamison provides the two things most lacking from last year's team (I know I'm not breaking new ground here, but bear with me): the ability to defend the pick-and-roll, and a big who can shoot/create his own shot. LeBron has never played with a stretch 4 before, settling for Carlos Boozer (his rookie year), the combo of Drew Gooden and Anderson Varejao (and next few seaons), Ben Wallace and Andy (last year), and now Hickson and Andy. Not a single player there who can create his own shot (not that a team with a playmaker like LeBron needs bigs who can create space). Jamison is extremely offensively gifted, and would fit seamlessly into the Cavs offense.
As for defense, three of other main contenders for the title this year have athletic 4s that could give the Cavaliers problems in the playoffs: the Magic (Rashard Lewis), the Hawks (Josh Smith), and the Lakers (Lamar Odom). I know Jamison isn't the best defender in the world (his Defensive Rating of 109 this year is good for 4th on the Wizards, but would be last on the Cavs), but this athleticism provides a better chance to defend and contain the 4s that have hurt the Cavs in the past.
Beyond his effect on the court, Jamison would be an awesome locker room influence (I don't buy into the "chemistry is the most important thing" crap that stopped the Cavaliers from pulling a similar deal last year, when they had Wally Szczerbiak's expiring contract at their disposal). By all accounts, Jamison is a great guy and all his teammates love him. He has been able to connect with the Washington fans, and has apparently kept a volatile Wizards locker room from completely imploding. Plus, the Cavaliers need a little more veteran leadership. Right now, only Z (34), Anthony Parker (34) and Shaq (37) are older and more experienced than Jamison (33). Despite being in his 7th season (at age 25), LeBron still has some growing up to do (see: last year's Magic series with the handshake stuff).
Anywho, let's look at fun stuff, like potential lineups the Cavs could trot out if they grow a pair of testicles and pull of a trade for Jamison (and convince the Wizards to waive Z - I know I said I don't buy the chemistry stuff, but I can't imagine going for a title without Z in the middle).
In my dream, the Cavs playoff roster looks like this:
Starters: Mo Williams, Anthony Parker, LeBron James, Antawn Jamison, Shaquille O'Neal
Bench: Delonte West, Boobie Gibson, Jamario Moon, Jawad Williams, Leon Powe, Anderson Varejao, Zydrunas Ilgauskas. (Apologies to Danny Green and Darnell Jackson - in the future, guys.)
Killer roster, right? Hell and yes it is. Here are my favorite combos with this group:
Small ball: Mo, Delonte, AP, LeBron, Andy
Really small ball: Mo, Delonte, AP, Moon, LeBron
Deadeye shooters: Mo, Boobie, AP, LeBron, Jamison
Runners: Mo, Delonte, Moon, LeBron, Powe
Lockdown D: Delonte, AP, LeBron, Andy, Shaq
Big: Mo, LeBron, Jamison, Andy, Shaq (or Z)
Really Big: Mo, LeBron, Jamison, Shaq, Z
Really, Really Big: Mo, LeBron, Andy, Shaq, Z (ok that one is ridiculous)
Over 6'8": LeBron, Moon, Jamison, Jawad, Andy
I mean, that is sick. I hesitate to say unstoppable, but I think the Cavaliers would be the most well balanced team (the Lakers bench is weaker than people realize, I think, and the Hawks have the best top 6, but after that it's a crap shoot). Clearly having the most talented player on the planet helps.
So, Danny Ferry (or anyone working for the Cavaliers), if you stumble upon my humble blog, please please read this and consider the benefits of a Jamison deal not just for the Cavaliers and the city of Cleveland, but for Basketball.
I am starting this NBA-themed blog because I am tired of having to limit my NBA and LeBron James related thoughts to the tyrannical character limits of Twitter (@boches). Not that my NBA-related thoughts are world changing, but I think I have something to say - a new voice that can only be found on this blog! That's silly, of course. And this is partly to satiate my own desire to just get my thoughts, feelings, interpretations, and reactions to my favorite sport and league out there somewhere, outside my own head. So with out further ado, my introductory post, why the Cleveland Cavaliers need to trade for Antawn Jamison:
For the sake of Basketball (capital B), the Cavaliers need to buck up and make this trade, whatever it takes. Clearly Zydrunas Ilgauskas will be a casualty in this deal (which is why hopefully the Wizards can put the "rivalry" of a couple years ago behind them and agree to an intra-conference trade - and then waive Big Z so he can return to the Cavs). If the Cavs have to give up JJ Hickson, so be it. I love how Hickson has evolved this season, but when an unpolished 21-year-old who can't make a shot outside 10 feet is your starting power forward, how deep can you really get in the Playoffs?
(Full disclosure: I am a Cavaliers fan; however, I was born in Maine (Celtics country), and raised as a Knicks fan. I'll discuss my conversion in a later post. Point being: I love LeBron James. It's probably a little unhealthy how much time I devote to thinking about LeBron, talking about LeBron, tweeting about LeBron, wishing I had a blog so I could write about LeBron. Since I truly started following the NBA (January 2004 - same month I got NBA League Pass not coincidentally) I have followed LeBron almost religously; it's not hyperbole to say he alone saved me from NBA-apathy. In early 2005, my girlfriend at the time told me that she feels bad for the woman I eventually marry, because she will have to understand that she will always be #2 to LeBron.)
So clearly I have a vested interest in the Cavaliers pulling off a trade for Jamison. But as a Basketball fan, I also have a vested interest. Don't we all, at the end of the day, want to enjoy this sport played at the highest level possible? In the same way that the Pau Gasol to the Lakers trade was good for Basketball (meaning it pushed a great team to elite team status, as well as raising Kobe Bryant's overall level of play), Jamison would push this Cavaliers team into a whole 'nother stratosphere. Yes, it is a case of the rich getting richer, and it could be argued that it throws off the competitive balance the NBA works hard to create. But look how quickly teams turn around in today's NBA: Memphis sucked from 1995-2003, then made the Playoffs three straight years (04-06), then won 68 games combined (22, 22, and 24) in the next three seasons, and this year already have won 26 games and are competing for a playoff spot in a ridiculously stacked conference. Same goes for the Former Sonics (I share most people's disgust with how the whole Seattle/OKC move went down - plus the Thunder is the blandest nickname this side of the Minnesota Wild): from several playoff berth at the beginning of the Aughts to bottoming out in 07-08 to fighting for a playoff spot with the best young nucleus in the Association. Point being, yes a Jamison to Cleveland deal makes the rich (the Cavs) richer and the poor (the Wizards) poorer, but maybe the Wizards need to bottom out before they can start ascending again - and in the weak East it shouldn't be too hard to pull oneself up by the bootstraps.
Focusing on the Cavs, this deal would give LeBron the stretch 4 he has been yearning for since 2003, and his first legitimate All-Star teammate (sorry Mo Williams, I love what you've done for the Cavs and I hope you continue to play with LeBron for the next 10 years, but you're not even the best point guard named Williams in the league). Jamison is averaging 20.9 points and 8.8 boards on .456 FG% for the 16-win Wizards. Clearly Jamison's points would go down in Cleveland, as I can't imagine he would be taking the 17+ shots he's averaging right now. But that's fine - the Cavaliers would probably expect about 16-18 PPG from him.
The way I see it, Jamison provides the two things most lacking from last year's team (I know I'm not breaking new ground here, but bear with me): the ability to defend the pick-and-roll, and a big who can shoot/create his own shot. LeBron has never played with a stretch 4 before, settling for Carlos Boozer (his rookie year), the combo of Drew Gooden and Anderson Varejao (and next few seaons), Ben Wallace and Andy (last year), and now Hickson and Andy. Not a single player there who can create his own shot (not that a team with a playmaker like LeBron needs bigs who can create space). Jamison is extremely offensively gifted, and would fit seamlessly into the Cavs offense.
As for defense, three of other main contenders for the title this year have athletic 4s that could give the Cavaliers problems in the playoffs: the Magic (Rashard Lewis), the Hawks (Josh Smith), and the Lakers (Lamar Odom). I know Jamison isn't the best defender in the world (his Defensive Rating of 109 this year is good for 4th on the Wizards, but would be last on the Cavs), but this athleticism provides a better chance to defend and contain the 4s that have hurt the Cavs in the past.
Beyond his effect on the court, Jamison would be an awesome locker room influence (I don't buy into the "chemistry is the most important thing" crap that stopped the Cavaliers from pulling a similar deal last year, when they had Wally Szczerbiak's expiring contract at their disposal). By all accounts, Jamison is a great guy and all his teammates love him. He has been able to connect with the Washington fans, and has apparently kept a volatile Wizards locker room from completely imploding. Plus, the Cavaliers need a little more veteran leadership. Right now, only Z (34), Anthony Parker (34) and Shaq (37) are older and more experienced than Jamison (33). Despite being in his 7th season (at age 25), LeBron still has some growing up to do (see: last year's Magic series with the handshake stuff).
Anywho, let's look at fun stuff, like potential lineups the Cavs could trot out if they grow a pair of testicles and pull of a trade for Jamison (and convince the Wizards to waive Z - I know I said I don't buy the chemistry stuff, but I can't imagine going for a title without Z in the middle).
In my dream, the Cavs playoff roster looks like this:
Starters: Mo Williams, Anthony Parker, LeBron James, Antawn Jamison, Shaquille O'Neal
Bench: Delonte West, Boobie Gibson, Jamario Moon, Jawad Williams, Leon Powe, Anderson Varejao, Zydrunas Ilgauskas. (Apologies to Danny Green and Darnell Jackson - in the future, guys.)
Killer roster, right? Hell and yes it is. Here are my favorite combos with this group:
Small ball: Mo, Delonte, AP, LeBron, Andy
Really small ball: Mo, Delonte, AP, Moon, LeBron
Deadeye shooters: Mo, Boobie, AP, LeBron, Jamison
Runners: Mo, Delonte, Moon, LeBron, Powe
Lockdown D: Delonte, AP, LeBron, Andy, Shaq
Big: Mo, LeBron, Jamison, Andy, Shaq (or Z)
Really Big: Mo, LeBron, Jamison, Shaq, Z
Really, Really Big: Mo, LeBron, Andy, Shaq, Z (ok that one is ridiculous)
Over 6'8": LeBron, Moon, Jamison, Jawad, Andy
I mean, that is sick. I hesitate to say unstoppable, but I think the Cavaliers would be the most well balanced team (the Lakers bench is weaker than people realize, I think, and the Hawks have the best top 6, but after that it's a crap shoot). Clearly having the most talented player on the planet helps.
So, Danny Ferry (or anyone working for the Cavaliers), if you stumble upon my humble blog, please please read this and consider the benefits of a Jamison deal not just for the Cavaliers and the city of Cleveland, but for Basketball.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
