20 Second Timeout is the place to find the best analysis and commentary about the NBA.
Friday, March 14, 2014
New York State of Mind, Part V: The Phil Jackson Edition
Phil Jackson is about to get paid handsomely to put his money where his mouth is; Frank Isola of the New York Daily News reports that the New York Knicks are prepared to offer Jackson "approximately $15 million annually" to fix a dysfunctional franchise that has, in Jackson's words, a "clumsy roster" filled with mismatched parts and and with players who lack a championship mentality.
Amare Stoudemire, who will make $21,679,893 this season, and Carmelo Anthony, who will make $21,490,000 this season, are by far the two highest paid Knicks; they are the fourth and fifth highest paid players in the NBA, trailing only Kobe Bryant, Dirk Nowitzki and Gilbert Arenas, who was vastly overrated even before a combination of physical injuries and mental foolishness derailed his career (Arenas' contract is so ridiculous--he will be paid until 2016 even though he has not played a game since the 2011-12 season--that Arenas himself admits that it is probably the worst deal in NBA history). Jackson is far from enamored with Anthony or Stoudemire; in a 2012 HBO interview, he told Andrea Kremer, "Well, they don't fit together well. Stoudemire doesn't fit together
well with Carmelo. Stoudemire's (a) really good player. But he's gotta
play in a certain system and a way. Carmelo has to be a better passer.
And the ball can’t stop every time it hits his hands. They need to have
someone come in that can kinda blend that group together."
Jackson's coaching track record is impeccable. After leading the Albany Patroons to the 1984 CBA championship, he joined the Chicago Bulls as an assistant coach, eventually replacing Doug Collins as head coach in 1989. Michael Jordan, who many people consider to be the greatest basketball player of all-time, led the Bulls to the Eastern Conference Finals once in his first five seasons; Jordan--with a lot of help from Scottie Pippen--led the Bulls to six championships in the seven full seasons that he played for Jackson. Shaquille O'Neal, the most dominant big man of his era, made one NBA Finals appearance and got swept out of the playoffs five times in his first six seasons; O'Neal--with a lot of help from Kobe Bryant--led the Lakers to three straight championships in his first three seasons playing for Jackson. Critics often carp that Jackson has had the horses throughout his NBA career but it is indisputable that when he had the horses he won the races--and it does not seem likely that anyone else would have matched Jackson's standard of nine championships in his first 10 seasons of coaching Jordan and O'Neal.
Unfortunately for the Knicks, they are not hiring Jackson for his coaching prowess; they are hiring Jackson to run their personnel operation, an operation that has been a disaster for many years. It would be one thing if the Knicks brought in Jackson as a coach so that he could try to squeeze the most out of Anthony, Stoudemire, talented head case J.R. Smith and the rest of New York's motley crew but there are good reasons to be a little bit skeptical about what Jackson can do for this team at this time strictly in an executive capacity; it is difficult to picture Jackson traveling around the country scouting college games looking for young talent but young talent is exactly what the Knicks need: they will never win a title with Anthony as their best player or with Smith as his sidekick or with the oft-injured Stoudemire eating up salary cap space like termites destroying a house from the inside out. Jackson is a master at maximizing the talent on hand but he has yet to build a team from scratch--and perhaps that is why this New York opportunity has piqued his interest: if Jackson tears down this roster and builds a championship team from scratch he will add an improbable chapter to his already impressive legacy. It is also possible that Jackson will try to run the team from afar, cashing big checks while the Knicks continue to flounder; the key question is if Jackson is highly motivated to prove what he can do as an executive or if he is highly motivated to score one last big payday while also sticking it to the Lakers for jerking him around during their previous coaching search.
Jackson had a long-running, well-documented public feud with Jerry Krause when Krause was Jackson's boss in Chicago and Jackson also battled with Jerry West when West ran the Lakers, so it will be fascinating to see what Jackson is able to do if he takes New York's offer and puts on an executive's suit. Jackson's name as a coach became synonymous not just with winning games but with winning championships in groups of three (three separate three-peats, plus back to back titles in the midst of three straight trips to the NBA Finals near the end of his second run with the Lakers); the Knicks have made the playoffs each of the past three years--and they still have a chance to sneak in as the eighth seed this year--so Jackson's tenure in New York will be judged not on 50 win seasons or playoff appearances but rather on if the Knicks become a viable championship contender. Krause, West and the rest of the NBA universe will be watching this saga with great interest. My expectation is that if Jackson takes the job he will get rid of Anthony, Stoudemire and Smith as soon as possible so that he can construct a championship-caliber roster around a young, unselfish, versatile and tough-minded superstar--but if the Knicks fail to meet expectations then the fans and the media will pressure Jackson to pick up the coaching reins. Logic suggests that this will not end well for Jackson--unless James Dolan gives Jackson full autonomy and Jackson responds by being 100% engaged in the search for young talent--but it will be intriguing to watch what happens next.
In the summer of 2012, Phil Jackson called the Knicks' roster "clumsy." For quite some time I have been skeptical of the Knicks' rebuilding plan--or rebuilding plans: the Knicks seemed to put all of their eggs in the LeBron James basket (plan one) and then when it became clear that James wanted nothing to do with New York they acquired Amare Stoudemire and Carmelo Anthony, two All-Stars who do not have complementary skill sets (plan two). Stoudemire functions best in screen/roll sets that exploit his athletic ability and excellent hands, while Anthony favors isolation sets that permit him to go one on one. Stoudemire is injury-prone and after playing in 78 of 82 games in his
first season with New York he missed 76 out of 148 games the past
two years. Anthony is a big-time scorer whose teams tend to do well in
the regular season before flaming out in the first round of the
playoffs. The Knicks won one playoff game in the first two years of the Anthony-Stoudemire era, which is not much of a return on an investment in two max level contracts.
Did the 2012-13 season finally validate the Knicks' Anthony-Stoudemire
plan? New York posted a 54-28 record, second best in the Eastern
Conference behind the 66-16 Miami Heat. In A Tale of Two Cities: The Rise of the Knicks and the Fall of the Lakers, I explained how the Knicks got off to a fast start in the 2012-13 season:
One obvious difference is that Carmelo Anthony has
been very productive and efficient, posting the third highest scoring
average of his career, the best three point shooting percentage of his
career and the fourth best overall field goal percentage of his career.
He is still not a great rebounder, passer or defender but it looks like
he is in the best shape of his career and that he has committed himself
to playing hard on a consistent basis instead of in fits and spurts.
What caused Anthony to change? Coach Mike Woodson is holding Anthony
accountable at both ends of the court and it appears that we are once
again witnessing the Jason Kidd Effect, which may not be provable
statistically but nevertheless exists: every team that Kidd joins
becomes better and every team that he leaves becomes worse. Kidd is
mentally and physically tough, he is unselfish and he is a
defensive-minded player, four qualities that the Knicks have lacked for
many years. Kidd is only fifth on the Knicks in minutes played and in
his old age he has evolved from a dynamic point guard into a spot up
three point shooter but the impact of his professionalism is being felt
on and off the court. Simply put, the Knicks no longer play or act like
knuckleheads... Kidd will continue to be the consummate professional, as will fellow
championship ring owners Tyson Chandler and Rasheed Wallace, but it
remains to be seen if Anthony and J.R. Smith will be focused and
efficient for the whole season; it also remains to be seen if the Knicks
can maintain their extraordinary three point shooting and their
virtually error-free ballhandling. The Knicks are better than I expected
but I still am not convinced that Carmelo Anthony can be the best
player on a championship team. It will be very interesting to see how
far the Knicks advance in the 2013 playoffs.
I recognized that the Knicks had improved to some extent but I also questioned if the reasons behind that improvement were sustainable during the postseason. The Knicks did a decent job of maintaining their three point shooting prowess and they kept their turnover numbers low but Anthony went through a stretch in which he shot worse than .430 from the field in seven out of eight playoff games, finishing the 2013 playoffs with a .403 field goal percentage. Smith received a one game suspension in the first round, was ineffective when he returned to the lineup and he shot just .331 from the field during the postseason. Another important factor is that the Knicks had no answer for Father Time; saying that Kidd faded late in the season and during the playoffs would be a huge understatement: there is no doubt that his 40 year old heart and mind were willing but his body rebelled and he did not score a point in New York's final 10 playoff games. Scoring was never the most important part of Kidd's game but his inability to make a basket necessitated that the Knicks cut back his minutes, which diminished the impact of his leadership and toughness; in order to lead, a player has to be in the fray and not just offering wise words from the bench.
Other commentators provided much less measured analysis of the Knicks' regular season success, spewing hype about how great the Knicks are and about how Carmelo Anthony is an MVP caliber player--one voter even foolishly selected Anthony over LeBron James in the official MVP balloting. Hype does not win playoff games, though--and neither do flawed, "clumsy" rosters; the Knicks struggled to beat an aging, injury-depleted Boston Celtics team in the first round and then they got embarrassed 4-2 by the 49-32 Indiana Pacers in the Eastern Conference semifinals. So, this is what several years of rebuilding--including tens of millions of dollars spent on Anthony and Stoudemire--achieved: one playoff series win.
The Knicks' good 2012-13 regular season run did not at all justify the money
that they are paying to Anthony and Stoudemire. While the Knicks played better last season than they did when Anthony and Stoudemire first joined forces, it must also be noted that the Knicks benefited
from the injuries that took out several of the Eastern Conference's top
players, most notably Derrick Rose, Rajon Rondo and Danny Granger. Kidd's decline hurt the Knicks in the playoffs and now that he is retired it will not be easy for the Knicks to replace the intangibles that he provided during most of the regular season.
The New York Knicks essentially tanked multiple seasons because they mistakenly believed that they could woo LeBron James to become Captain of the Gotham Titanic. That quest famously crashed into the proverbial iceberg when James took his talents to South Beach and now it is clear that Phil "11 rings" Jackson will not be walking through the door to Madison Square Garden, either. Jackson recently told HBO's Andrea Kremer why he has no interest in becoming Coach of the Knicks: "...there's just too much work that has to be done with that team. You know? It's just not quite--it's clumsy. It's a little bit of a clumsy team." Kremer asked Jackson to elaborate and he replied, "Well, they don't fit together well. Stoudemire doesn't fit together well with Carmelo. Stoudemire's (a) really good player. But he's gotta play in a certain system and a way. Carmelo has to be a better passer. And the ball can’t stop every time it hits his hands. They need to have someone come in that can kinda blend that group together."
That analysis will sound very familiar to longtime 20 Second Timeout visitors; newer visitors can check out the three links at the end of this article to learn why no one should be surprised that James and Jackson both want nothing to do with whatever James Dolan thinks that he is building.
The New York Knicks essentially tanked multiple seasons in order to put together the poorly constructed roster that just lost 4-1 to Miami in the first round of the playoffs; instead of trying to build a competitive team from the ground up, the Knicks cleared cap space in a futile pursuit of LeBron James but after James predictably spurned New York the Knicks acquired two max contract players--Amare Stoudemire and Carmelo Anthony--who are not legit franchise players (Anthony has never made the All-NBA First Team, while Stoudemire earned his sole All-NBA First Team selection five years and several injuries ago). New York's overall payroll ranks sixth out of 30 NBA teams, yet all of that money has bought just a single playoff win--not a playoff series win, mind you, but merely a victory in one playoff game. That victory--obtained after Miami had already taken a commanding 3-0 series lead--ended New York's NBA record 13 game playoff losing streak that lasted for more than a decade; Anthony and Stoudemire were on the roster for seven of those losses and Anthony owns the worst individual playoff winning percentage in the past 20 years among NBA players who have participated in at least 50 playoff games.
Three years ago in New York State of Mind, I warned that despite all of the media buzz about the Knicks the team would not become a contender unless then-Coach Mike D'Antoni emphasized the importance of defense and unless the front office seriously upgraded the talent on the roster:
The Knicks have not had a winning record since 2000-01. They have been bad for a long time and it may take a
while before they are good again. No one should rush to judgment after D'Antoni's first season with the franchise but there are two
interesting dynamics to watch with the Knicks, namely what roster changes new team president Donnie Walsh makes in the next year or two
and whether or not D'Antoni is willing/able to coax a better defensive performance out of this team.
"Defense" may be a four letter word to D'Antoni but if the Knicks want to spell a certain 12 letter word
-- "championship" -- for the first time since 1973 then defense will have to become a part of their collective vocabulary, as should be
obvious by watching the teams who currently sit atop the Eastern Conference, Cleveland and defending NBA champion Boston.
A moronic member of the True Hoop Network responded to my article and simultaneously proved that he lacks (1) basic reading comprehension, (2) basic writing skills and (3) any idea of how to properly analyze basketball. I refuted his nonsense in New York State of Mind, Part II. "Stat guru" Dave Berri--who might as well be a THN member considering how often he is cited by True Hoop--then jumped into the mix, misquoting my article and citing his usual nonsensical "advanced basketball statistics" to allegedly show that the Knicks were in fact a team on the rise, an assertion that looks even more ludicrous now than it did when he first wrote it.
Kissing up to Henry Abbott may have generated page views for my antagonists but in the end all that means is that a larger audience had the opportunity to find out that those guys have no idea what they are talking about; in contrast, my predictions about the Knicks have been on the mark. Here are some of the key assertions that I have made about the New York Knicks in the past few years:
1) I pointed out that the much praised Mike D'Antoni actually posted a worse won-loss record in his first season as New York's coach than the much maligned Isiah Thomas did in his first season as New York's coach and I declared that unless D'Antoni emphasized defensive execution the Knicks would not become a legit contender.
2) I predicted that, contrary to breathless media speculation, LeBron James would not join the team that I referred to as the "Gotham Titanic":
It really looks like the Knicks are essentially tanking the 2009 and 2010 seasons in order to slash their payroll and have enough money to sign LeBron James and/or another big-time free agent--but why would an MVP-caliber player want to sign with a dysfunctional team? If there is one thing that James has learned after playing for Cleveland Coach Mike Brown it is the importance of defense--and that lesson was reinforced by James' Team USA experience when he witnessed firsthand Kobe Bryant's dedication at that end of the court.
How will the Knicks be able to justify to their fans the suffering of the 2009 and 2010 seasons if the Knicks do not sign an elite player in the summer of 2010? Moreover, even if the Knicks bring in an elite player they still would struggle to win more than 45 games without doing a major restructuring of the rest of their roster and a complete overhaul of their all-offense, no-defense/rebounding philosophy.
3) Some analysts gave the Knicks a puncher's chance to beat Boston in the first round of the 2011 playoffs, crowning the Knicks as the proverbial "team no one wants to face"--but I predicted that Boston would win and I dismissed all of the hype about the Knicks:
Has there ever been a more overhyped team than this year's New York Knicks? Yes, the Heat received too much hype but they eventually earned
the second seed in the East and they are legitimate championship contenders. The Knicks have been terrible for the better part of the
decade and they seemingly tanked the past couple seasons in order to free up enough cap space to sign LeBron James--who I don't believe ever
had the slightest intention of going to New York--but instead they ended up with Amare Stoudemire, who teamed up down the stretch with Carmelo
Anthony and Chauncey Billups to...drum roll please...lead the Knicks to 42 wins and the sixth seed in a weak Eastern Conference in which two of
the playoff teams don't even have winning records. It is mindboggling that Knicks' fans are still grousing about Isiah Thomas while acting as
if the current regime has somehow performed a great miracle.
Are we past the point of blaming Isiah Thomas for everything that goes wrong in New York? For better or worse, most of the players Thomas
acquired are no longer on the roster but--despite all of the breathless hype and despite two seasons of clearing cap space in a futile attempt
to lure LeBron James to the Big Apple--the 2011 Knicks won exactly nine more games than the 2007 Knicks did during Thomas' first season as their
coach. As much as some people rave about the Knicks you would never guess that three full seasons after Thomas' departure--and despite the
additions of Anthony and Stoudemire--the Knicks improved less in four years than the starless 76ers did in one year. Much to the chagrin of
some Knicks fans/"stat gurus," nearly three years ago I expressed serious skepticism about the Knicks' rebuilding plan and I remain far from convinced that the Anthony-Stoudemire duo will ever accomplish much more than provide ESPN's talking heads a lot of fodder for unfounded predictions of greatness that never quite become reality.
Yes, Chandler's defense helped a squad not previously known for playing good defense to win a title but the Mavericks have a defensive-minded coach and several other defensive-minded players (including Jason Kidd and Shawn Marion). That foundation simply does not exist in New York, so the Knicks will have trouble doing much damage in the playoffs, though I predict that for the next several years the "experts" will annually dub them the "team no one wants to face."
Can Jeremy Lin Really Save the Poorly Constructed Knicks?
Prior to the spectacular rise of Jeremy Lin from bench player about to be cut to international sensation, the New York Knicks were a sub-.500 team that lacked both style and substance; they were painful to watch because of their isolation-based offense revolving around Carmelo Anthony and Amare Stoudemire and because of their aversion to consistently doing the dirty work--rebounding and defense--that is essential to create a winning program. "Linsanity" briefly provided some excitement for the fans and some wins in the standings but now the Knicks are, to borrow the overused and yet entirely apt Dennis Green quote, "who we thought they were": an overrated and overhyped team.
The Knicks essentially tanked the 2009 and 2010 seasons to position themselves under the salary cap in order to make a run at LeBron James--but I never believed that there was a realistic chance that LeBron James intended to become captain of the Gotham Titanic. I expected him to stay in Cleveland--where he had a great chance to lead the Cavaliers to a championship--but in my 2010 All-Star Game recap I mentioned the only scenario that I thought could convince James to leave Cleveland:
"Despite all of the feverish speculation about James leaving Cleveland to play in New York or New Jersey, neither of those scenarios makes any sense; James understands that his resume will not be complete unless he wins an NBA title--10 or 15 years from now he does not want to be the butt of jokes on TNT a la Charles Barkley (with all due respect to the ring-less Round Mound of Rebound) and James is smart enough to realize that the New York and New Jersey franchises are not built to win championships. However, if James and Wade work out a way to play for the same team as a package deal then that team instantly becomes very formidable, assuming that the rest of the roster is not completely gutted to pay the two superstars. The only way that I see James leaving Cleveland is if the Cavaliers fall short of winning the 2010 title and he is able to partner with Wade in the aforementioned manner."
Cleveland's worst sports nightmare came to life in the months after I wrote those words--the 2010 Cavs fell apart in the playoffs as LeBron James quit and then James bolted to Miami to team up with Wade and Chris Bosh. Meanwhile, the Knicks--who apparently felt compelled to do something with all of that salary cap space they had cleared--signed Amare Stoudemire and prayed that he could be the franchise's savior. The 2011 Knicks feasted on a soft early schedule to start out 16-9 but they were barely above .500 (28-26) when they traded four players, three draft picks and $3 million in cash to acquire Carmelo Anthony, Chauncey Billups, Renaldo Balkman, Anthony Carter and Shelden Williams. Stoudemire, Anthony and Billups were supposed to comprise New York's "Big Three" to match the "Big Threes" in Miami and Boston but it took quite a stretch of the imagination to believe that New York's trio compared with the Heat's three All-NBA caliber studs or Boston's collection of future Hall of Famers. New York went 14-14 after the trade, including 14-13 when Anthony played. The media then portrayed the Knicks as the proverbial "team that nobody wants to face in the first round"--and the Boston Celtics made that assessment look foolish by sweeping New York, 4-0. Portland was also considered a "team that nobody wants to face in the first round" last season and in my 2011 Playoff Preview I wrote, "Someone should go through the archives and find out the winning percentages of such teams, because I suspect that most "teams nobody wanted to face" actually did not go particularly far in the postseason (I think that Carmelo Anthony's Nuggets received that title several of the years that they lost in the first round)."
Before the truncated 2012 season began many media members continued to hype up the Knicks as a potential Eastern Conference power, while I picked the Knicks to finish sixth in the East. The Knicks "amnestied" Chauncey Billups and limped to an 8-15 record without a legitimate starting point guard before Lin led the team to seven straight wins--but now reality has set in again and the Knicks are currently 18-23, clinging to the eighth playoff spot. The media, the fans and the "stat gurus" relentlessly blamed Isiah Thomas for everything that went wrong with the Knicks a few years ago but the Knicks were 33-49 in 2006-07, Thomas' first season as coach. Granted, those were hardly the franchise's glory days but in the subsequent seasons the Knicks exceeded that win total just once (last season) and they are currently barely above that winning percentage now.
"...there are two interesting dynamics to watch with the Knicks, namely what roster changes new team president Donnie Walsh makes in the next year or two and whether or not D'Antoni is willing/able to coax a better defensive performance out of this team.
'Defense' may be a four letter word to D'Antoni but if the Knicks want to spell a certain 12 letter word--'championship'--for the first time since 1973 then defense will have to become a part of their collective vocabulary."
News Flash: Teams Generally Perform Well When Their Leading Scorers Score at Least 30 Points
Some NBA commentators enjoy cherry picking numbers to support their favorite storylines; for instance, Mike Wilbon long ago fell in love with the idea that the L.A. Lakers' success is directly linked to Kobe Bryant attempting less than a certain number of shots. Wilbon articulates this sentiment with such conviction that you half expect Lakers Coach Phil Jackson to jump out of his special "throne chair" on the sidelines to tackle Bryant if Bryant is approaching Wilbon's magical number (a number that Wilbon seems to adjust from time to time to make sure that the winning percentages superficially correlate with his "theory"). After all, if the Lakers are all but guaranteed to win as long as their best player shoots less frequently--reread that again in case the crux of Wilbon's contention escaped you the first time around--then wouldn't Coach Jackson do anything in his power to stop Bryant from shooting? Do not be deceived by the fact that Jackson won six championships in Chicago with Michael Jordan capturing the scoring title each time; Wilbon is an ESPN-certified NBA expert and he has decreed that the secret to winning in the NBA is to take the ball out of the hands of your best player and distribute shots to less talented players who are not as willing and/or able to create their own shots under pressure.
Sarcasm aside, Wilbon's "theory" sounds less than convincing to anyone who is intelligent and thinks about the subject for at least 10 seconds. Field goal attempts are an odd way to evaluate a scorer, because FGAs can consist of "hand grenades" (shots fired up to beat the shot clock buzzer after a teammate passes the ball to a player right before the shot clock "explodes"), half court heaves at the end of quarters, late game shots launched in a flurry as a trailing team desperately tries to come back and other anomalies; the chicken-egg question that Wilbon never discusses is whether Bryant's "extra" field goal attempts cause losses (as Wilbon apparently believes), whether they are the result of Bryant picking up a heavier load in games that the Lakers are losing because his teammates disappeared or whether other factors are involved.
Rather than arbitrarily designating a certain number of field goal attempts to be good or bad, let's take a look at the NBA's top scorers this season and examine how their teams do when they have big scoring nights. No NBA player is averaging 30 ppg this season but all of the top scorers have had several 30-plus point scoring games, so that seems to be a reasonable cutoff point to designate a "big" scoring game--40 point games would provide a very small sample size, while 20 or 25 point games would just be "average" performances for these guys.
Here is a list of the NBA's top 10 scorers this season, including their scoring averages, their teams' records and their teams' records when they score at least 30 points:
1) Kevin Durant, 28.5 ppg. The Oklahoma City Thunder are 27-13 overall (.675) and 13-2 (.867) when Durant scores at least 30 points.
2) Amare Stoudemire, 26.0 ppg. The New York Knicks are 22-17 overall (.564) and 9-4 (.692) when Stoudemire scores at least 30 points.
3) Monta Ellis, 25.7 ppg. The Golden State Warriors are 16-23 overall (.410) and 7-4 (.636) when Ellis scores at least 30 points.
4) LeBron James, 25.4 ppg. The Miami Heat are 30-11 overall (.732) and 9-2 (.818) when James scores at least 30 points.
5) Kobe Bryant, 25.3 ppg. The L.A. Lakers are 30-11 overall (.732) and 9-3 (.750) when Bryant scores at least 30 points.
6) Dwyane Wade, 25.1 ppg. The Miami Heat are 30-11 overall (.732) and 10-2 (.833) when Wade scores at least 30 points.
7) Derrick Rose, 24.5 ppg. The Chicago Bulls are 26-13 overall (.667) and 6-3 (.667) when Rose scores at least 30 points.
8) Eric Gordon, 23.7 ppg. The L.A. Clippers are 13-25 overall (.342) and 2-3 (.400) when Gordon scores at least 30 points.
9) Dirk Nowitzki, 23.6 ppg. The Dallas Mavericks are 26-12 overall (.684) and 4-2 (.667) when Nowitzki scores at least 30 points.
10) Carmelo Anthony, 23.5 ppg. The Denver Nuggets are 22-16 overall (.579) and 5-4 (.556) when Anthony scores at least 30 points.
One could enlarge this survey by looking at more players and/or a longer period of time and one could break down the data based on opposing teams' winning percentages among the 30 point games but there is little reason to believe that a team--whether it is contending for a title or languishing at the bottom of the standings--does worse when its best scorer exceeds his scoring average. That is probably why teams tend to focus their defensive game plans on stopping elite scorers, which is also why lesser players can sometimes accumulate the gaudy field goal percentages that fool so-called experts (and stat gurus) into believing that teams should allocate field goal attempts based strictly on field goal percentages; earlier this season, a prominent NBA scout told me that a "stat guru" had once said to him that teams should "start the players with the five highest field goal percentages because field goal percentage is such an important statistic." The "stat guru" was completely oblivious to the reality that this would result in ludicrous lineups consisting of role players who have limited capabilities to create their own shots.
I know that every TV and radio talking head has a stack of statistics and facts placed in front of him before each broadcast plus a producer constantly talking to him in his ear; what I simply cannot fathom is why so many people on TV and radio say things that just do not make sense and then try to support this nonsense with faulty and/or misleading data. Is it really that hard to think logically, are media members so devoted to storylines that they consider to be "higher truths" that they make intentionally misleading statements or do certain people simply lose all sense of pride/self respect regarding their work once they have "made it" (in terms of receiving huge salaries)? Consumers should be disappointed that many of the people who get paid the most to provide commentary/analysis are so unprofessional about their work; paraphrasing a line from "Fiddler on the Roof," would it spoil some vast eternal plan if the large scale content providers hired more people who both understand the subject matter at hand (whether that subject is NBA basketball or anything else) and possess top notch writing skills? I have file folders that are packed with old articles that I have cut out from various newspapers and magazines because those articles contain interesting facts, perspectives and opinions--you can find some of them here--but far too much of what is published today is unreadable, let alone being worthy of being reread and savored.
Amare Stoudemire, Lamar Odom's "Lucky Game" and What it Means to be a Superstar
After Lamar Odom had 19 points and 19 rebounds as his L.A. Lakers defeated the Phoenix Suns 128-107 in game one of the 2010 Western Conference Finals, the Suns' Amare Stoudemire dismissed Odom's effort as a "lucky game." The Lakers went on to win that series and eventually capture the 2010 NBA Championship but during a red carpet interview at the ESPYs Stoudemire stuck to his guns when an L.A. reporter asked him about that remark:
Starting around the 1:36 mark in the above video, Stoudemire said, "I was just being honest. That's all. But they played great; they did a great job during the season. Congratulations to those guys and Lamar personally for winning another championship. It is a great accomplishment."
"Lucky" literally means "occurring by chance." How unusual was it for Odom to tally 19 and 19 during a 2010 game? He averaged a career-low 10.8 ppg and 9.8 rpg while playing in all 82 regular season games, scoring 19 or more points just eight times; the most rebounds that he had in any of those games was 13 (his season high for rebounds was 22 and he had just one other game with at least 19 rebounds). In 23 playoff games, Odom averaged a career-low 9.7 ppg and 8.6 rpg; the 19-19 game was easily his most productive contest (during the postseason he had two 17 point games--both against Phoenix--plus a 15 rebound game versus Utah).
Stoudemire's comment may have been ungracious and it may have been an unwise thing to say in the midst of a playoff series but--from a literal standpoint--it was quite true: a 19-19 game by Odom is truly something that happened "by chance."
However, in a game of skill nothing really happens purely "by chance." The skill set based reason that Odom had a wide open path to the hoop for layups and rebounds is that the Suns had to double team Kobe Bryant--who still scored 40 points on 13-23 field goal shooting--and then rotate a defender to Pau Gasol, who took advantage of the Suns' scrambling defense to notch 21 points on 10-13 field goal shooting. The Suns managed to create the worst of all possible worlds from their perspective: they neither slowed down Bryant nor corralled Gasol and in the process of focusing on those players they let Odom run amok.
Although the numbers mentioned in the previous paragraphs provide a rough draft version of what happened, this game--meaning both game one of the Lakers-Suns series in particular and the game of basketball in general--can only be completely and deeply understood by actually observing the action with an educated eye. Bryant played with great force, aggression and energy and his actions manipulated the Phoenix defenders like chess pieces being moved around by a grandmaster: Bryant created open shots for himself and his teammates and the disruption left in his wake helped Odom to snare a game-high seven offensive rebounds. Bryant's value is expressed not merely by his statistics but also by the impact that his actions had on both his teammates and on his opponents.
Contrast Bryant's approach with the by now notoriously indifferent way that LeBron James played during Cleveland's series versus Boston, particularly in game two and game five. Many people who watched those games--from Cavaliers' owner Dan Gilbert to sportswriters to casual fans--say that James quit. That is a very incendiary charge to make--it is the worst accusation that one can make about an athlete other than saying that he intentionally threw a game (throwing a game means purposely trying to lose, while quitting is simply not trying while being indifferent to the outcome). A player's shooting percentage, good or bad, does not really tell us whether or not he quit: a player can try very hard but have an off night (think Ray Allen during the NBA Finals after he set the single-game record for three pointers made and suddenly could not hit the broad side of a barn with a medicine ball) and a player can drift through most of a contest but score some buckets in a flurry to pad his statistics.
The striking thing about James' performance versus Boston in games two and five is how lethargically he played; he rarely attacked the hoop, which means he put no pressure on Boston's defense. If James had been injured and out of the lineup entirely or if the team had had some idea that he would just quit in the middle off the series then the Cavs could have run some offensive sets involving other players--but how do you just take the ball out of the hands of the reigning two-time MVP? The other Cavs' players looked confused and hesitant, waiting for James to be aggressive.
Most of the published comparisons of James' supporting cast with Bryant's supporting cast have been nonsense. Yes, Bryant had the benefit of playing alongside one of the NBA's 15 best players, All-NBA Third Teamer Pau Gasol--but during the 2010 playoffs Bryant also played alongside a one-legged center, a small forward who never quite learned the team's offensive system, a point guard who was older and slower than the starting point guards on the other elite teams, a sixth man who was terribly inconsistent and a bench that was so unreliable that earlier in the season Coach Phil Jackson said that their performances made him feel like vomiting. James' supporting cast was not perfect but it included three players who have made the All-Star team as recently as 2008 plus a fourth player who is a two-time All-Star; the Cavs' remarkable depth and balance enabled them to play "big" or "small" and to overcome injuries, trades and other disruptions en route to posting the league's best regular season record for the second year in a row.
People can crunch "advanced basketball statistics" as much as they want but the major difference between the Lakers and the Cavs during the 2010 playoffs is that Kobe Bryant played aggressively and thus maximized potential opportunities for himself and his teammates, while LeBron James literally acted as if he could not wait for the season to be over so he could rip off his Cavaliers' jersey and head for (what he presumes to be) greener pastures. The phrase "making one's teammates better" is a cliched, imprecise way of saying "Great players create openings and opportunities for their lesser talented teammates to do what they do well"--and Odom's "lucky game" is a perfect example of this dynamic. If James had played with more aggressiveness then it is much more likely that one or more of his teammates would have had a "lucky game" versus Boston; that does not mean that James should be held entirely responsible if some of his teammates perform below their expected levels but it does mean that when the best player on the team stops trying hard it is logical to expect that the efforts and productivity of his teammates will be adversely affected.
Kobe Bryant Adds to his Glittering Playoff Resume, Carries Lakers to Third Straight NBA Finals Appearance
"Was that Kobe or was that Michael?"--Phoenix Suns Coach Alvin Gentry
"Kobe's so good he he makes incredible normal for us."--Lamar Odom
Kobe Bryant capped off perhaps the best playoff series of his career (33.7 ppg, 8.3 apg, 7.2 rpg, .521 FG%, .432 3Pt FG%, .881 FT%) by pouring in 37 points on 12-25 field goal shooting as his L.A. Lakers defeated the Phoenix Suns 111-103 to win the Western Conference Finals four games to two. Bryant scored nine points in the final two minutes after the Suns had cut an 18 point Lakers lead to just three. The Suns did their best to encourage Lakers not named Bryant to shoot and most of them fired blanks, with a notable exception being Ron Artest, who poured in a season-high (regular season and playoffs) 25 points on 10-16 field goal shooting. Derek Fisher and Andrew Bynum chipped in 11 and 10 points respectively, while Pau Gasol had a forgettable nine points on 2-9 field goal shooting; memo to the "stat gurus," Spanish fans and others who keep insisting that Gasol is the Lakers' best player: Stop the madness! Gasol is a very skilled big man who generally thrives in a secondary role to Bryant but he is not a "franchise player" unless one expands the definition of that phrase to the extent that it has no real meaning. This is not a knock against Gasol, for there are very, very few true "franchise players." Amare Stoudemire led the Suns with 27 points but he shot just 7-20 from the field, grabbed only four rebounds and he had no assists for the fourth straight game--a truly staggering statistic. Steve Nash scored an efficient 21 points on 8-11 field goal shooting and he had nine assists and five rebounds while committing just two turnovers.
Bryant literally limped through the first few games of this postseason but he has been a different player since having his balky right knee drained late in the Oklahoma City series--or, rather, that procedure enabled him to resume being the best player in the game. Bryant has scored at least 30 points in 10 of his last 11 playoff games--and the one time he failed to reach that mark he had a playoff career-high 13 assists in the Lakers' 124-112 game two victory over Phoenix. Bryant has set a host of personal and/or league records:
He has tallied at least one 40 point game in five straight postseasons; the only other player who accomplished this feat is Michael Jordan, who had at least one 40 point game in eight straight postseasons (1985-92).
Bryant is tied with Hakeem Olajuwon for sixth on the all-time NBA list for 40 point playoff games (11); Michael Jordan leads the way with 38 and Jerry West ranks a distant second with 20 but the next three players are well within Bryant's reach: Shaquille O'Neal (12), Wilt Chamberlain (13) and Elgin Baylor (14).
Bryant's game six performance versus Phoenix marks the eighth straight time that he has scored at least 30 points in a potential closeout game on the road, extending a league record that he already held (Baylor ranks second with six such games).
During one stretch Bryant scored at least 30 points in six straight playoff wins, matching the NBA record held by Olajuwon and O'Neal (that streak was snapped when Bryant had 21 points and 13 assists in the aforementioned game two victory over Phoenix).
Bryant now has scored at least 30 points in 75 career playoff games, tying Kareem Abdul-Jabbar for second on the all-time list behind Jordan (109). West (74) ranks fourth, while Baylor (60) is fifth.
Bryant recently moved into fourth all-time on the NBA-ABA playoff career scoring list, trailing only Jordan, Abdul-Jabbar and O'Neal. If Bryant continues to score at or near his current pace and the Lakers have deep playoff runs the next two years then Bryant could pass Jordan during the 2012 playoffs.
Twice during this postseason Bryant has come within one rebound or one assist of notching his first career playoff triple double. His near triple double effort in game five versus Phoenix (30 points, 11 rebounds, nine assists plus four blocked shots) was his 33rd career 30-5-5 playoff game, moving him past Larry Bird for third on the all-time list. Jordan is the all-time leader in that department (51), with West ranking second (35).
Bryant hit six game-winning shots during the regular season but I still insist that Being a Clutch Player is More Significant than Just Making Clutch Shots. So much is said about who makes the most last second shots and who has the best shooting percentage in those situations--but such statistics are a bit deceptive if they are not placed in the proper context. Just looking at a player's field goal percentage on last second shots fails to take into account the time remaining when those shots were taken or the distance involved: does making or missing a half court heave really tell us anything meaningful about a player's ability to rise to the occasion in the clutch? It is much more significant to make a succession of winning plays in crunch time the way that Bryant did to close out the Western Conference Finals. For example, consider Bryant's missed game-winning field goal attempt at the end of game five versus Phoenix: the Suns double-teamed Bryant because he is so deadly and that extra defensive attention helped enable Artest to sneak in for the game-winning putback; statistically, that counts as a missed game-winning shot by Bryant and a made game-winning shot by Artest but the play was created by the effect that Bryant had on the opposing defense. Pau Gasol benefited similarly when Bryant missed a potential game-winning shot in game six of the Oklahoma City series.
Bryant's presence on the court and the completeness of his skill set distorts the defense and makes the game easier for his teammates; I have been saying this for years and we are seeing this repeatedly throughout the playoffs: the whole reason that the Suns played a zone defense in the latter stages of the series was to try to corral Bryant, a point that Coach Gentry made explicit when he declared that he would stop using his "girlie zone" if the Lakers stopped passing the ball to Bryant. Gentry did not mention Gasol, because elite teams do not focus their game plans on dealing with Gasol; you can bet that in the upcoming NBA Finals the Boston Celtics will concentrate on trying to contain Bryant and making other people hit shots.
The much discussed Lakers' frontcourt length is certainly an advantage but the Lakers' first and foremost advantage is Bryant's all-around skill set; just watch how many times an action starts with Bryant being trapped and ends with Gasol, Andrew Bynum or another Laker getting an easy shot.
LeBron James earned the regular season MVP with his outstanding performances over the 82 game grind but for the second year in a row Bryant is reasserting himself as the game's best player in the games that matter the most.
Phoenix can win if…the Suns are able to produce high percentage scoring opportunities in the open court by getting defensive stops and pushing the ball before the Lakers can set up their half court defense. Steve Nash must break down the Lakers' point guards off of the dribble in order to create open shots for his teammates and himself. Amare Stoudemire has to assert himself not only offensively but also defensively and on the glass. The Suns also need Jason Richardson to be a consistent scoring threat, forcing Kobe Bryant to expend energy defensively.
L.A. will win because…the Suns have no answer for Bryant, who averaged 27.5 ppg on .544 field goal shooting in four regular season games versus Phoenix. Bryant typically scores prolifically and efficiently versus the Suns: in 2008-09 he averaged 28.3 ppg on .467 field goal shooting against the Suns and in 2007-08 he scored 31.3 ppg on .537 field goal shooting versus Phoenix. The Lakers have won the regular season series versus the Suns 3-1 in each of the past three years.
The Suns' problems defending Bryant are compounded by the fact that it will also be difficult for them to match up with Pau Gasol and Andrew Bynum in the paint. If the Suns double team Bryant, then Gasol or Bynum will have a field day.
Other things to consider: Kobe Bryant sat out four of the Lakers' final five regular season games to rest his injured right knee but the time off did not cure whatever was ailing him and he clearly did not have the usual bounce in his legs when the playoffs started. Although he rescued the Lakers in game two of the first round versus the Thunder by scoring 39 points--including 15 in the fourth quarter--Bryant did not really hit his stride until game five of that series: the Lakers had an extra off day and the well rested Bryant asked for--and received--the responsibility of checking young Thunder point guard Russell Westbrook. Bryant's suffocating defense enabled the Lakers to win that pivotal contest and then they closed out the series behind his 32 points on 12-25 field goal shooting in game six.
Bryant seemed like the Kobe Bryant of old--as opposed to an old Kobe Bryant--as he averaged 32.0 ppg on .523 field goal shooting in the Lakers' sweep of the Utah Jazz, scoring at least 30 points in each game. Bryant is the only player to score at least 30 points in four straight playoff games versus the Jazz--and he has accomplished this feat twice. Bryant's 32 point performance in game four against Utah marks the seventh straight time that he has scored at least 30 points in a potential closeout game on the road, breaking the NBA record held by Elgin Baylor.
It cannot be a comforting thought to the Suns that Bryant will have had a week of rest prior to game one of this series.
Through 10 playoff games this year, Bryant is averaging 26.9 ppg while shooting .457 from the field, .375 from three point range and .790 from the free throw line. The Lakers are 6-0 when Bryant scores at least 30 points but just 2-2 when he scores 24 points or less. Bryant shot at least .455 from the field in five of his six 30 point games but shot .444 or worse from the field in three of the four games in which he scored 24 points or less. As I have insisted since the playoffs began, the key factor for the Lakers to be successful is for Bryant to average at least 26-28 ppg while shooting .450 or better from the field; those levels of productivity and efficiency by Bryant force opposing teams to tilt their defenses toward Bryant, opening up easy scoring opportunities for Bryant's teammates.
This may seem odd to say, but the Cleveland Cavaliers' premature ouster from the playoffs aids the Lakers' quest to win repeat titles. The Cavs--with their deep rotation of big guys--matched up better with the Lakers than any other playoff team in either conference and they wore down the Lakers during both regular season meetings. The Celtics probably match up better with the Lakers than the Suns or Magic but the Magic--who did not match up real well with the Cavs--will probably take out the Celtics in the Eastern Conference Finals. So, when LeBron James decided to spend game five of the Cleveland-Boston series wandering around aimlessly behind the three point line he changed the theme of the 2010 playoffs from "Win a ring for the 'King'" to "Win a ring for the thumb"--Bryant now has a great opportunity to capture his fifth championship, tying Lakers legend Magic Johnson and moving to within one title of Michael Jordan.
Phoenix can win if…the Suns play reasonably sound defense to complement their very productive offense (110.2 ppg on .492 field goal shooting in the regular season, topping the league in both categories).
San Antonio will win because…the Spurs are not only getting solid contributions from the "Big Three" of Tim Duncan, Manu Ginobili and Tony Parker but also from supporting cast players such as George Hill, Richard Jefferson and Antonio McDyess. During the regular season, the Spurs struggled to stay healthy and find good chemistry but they appear to be peaking at the perfect time.
Other things to consider: Good defensive field goal percentage has been one of the consistent trademarks of Coach Gregg Popovich's Spurs; they slipped somewhat in that regard the past couple years but with their key players healthy versus Dallas in the first round the Spurs held the Mavericks to .430 shooting. The Suns have become a better defensive team under the direction of Coach Alvin Gentry; last season they ranked just 22nd in defensive field goal percentage but they improved to 11th in that category this season, just ahead of the 12th ranked Spurs.
These teams have faced each other three times in the playoffs since Steve Nash joined the Suns, so in some quarters it is considered a big rivalry--but the Spurs won each of those series fairly convincingly (4-1 in the first round in 2008, 4-2 in the second round in 2007 and 4-1 in the 2005 Western Conference Finals). The dominant storyline in those series was that the Spurs proved that they could play well at any tempo while the Suns were only effective at a fast pace; another key factor was that the Suns rarely could get key defensive stops. Amare Stoudemire often puts up monster numbers versus the Spurs but Tim Duncan counters with statistics that are almost as good and he has a much bigger impact defensively overall than Stoudemire does. The Spurs' philosophy is to rarely double team star players, so a Stoudemire or a Dirk Nowitzki can post gaudy statistics against the Spurs but the Spurs stay at home on the other players, eliminating open three pointers and layups by members of the supporting cast. The Suns will need to get good production from someone other than Stoudemire in order to win this series. Even though the Suns have homecourt advantage I suspect that the Spurs will win without having to go the distance, probably in six games.
Less than one year ago, the Phoenix Suns led the San Antonio Spurs by 16 points in game one of their first round playoff series in San Antonio. The Suns were on the verge of swiping home court advantage from the reigning NBA champions. Then Tim Duncan--who had not made a three pointer all season--drained a huge trey to force a second overtime, the Spurs eventually prevailed and they went on to wipe out the Suns in five games. Fast forward to this year and it is Groundhog Day in San Antonio--the Spurs are on pace for yet another 55-plus win season--but the Suns are careening toward the Draft Lottery.
Here is a look at the sudden demise of what was once one of the NBA's elite teams:
The dramatic decline of the Phoenix Suns has not received the attention nor analysis that it deserves. The Suns won at least 54 games in each season between 2005 and 2008, advancing to the Western Conference Finals twice (2006 and 2007). Last season, the Suns acquired Shaquille O'Neal to match up with San Antonio's Tim Duncan and they went 15-5 down the stretch, including two wins against the Spurs, their hated rivals.
The Suns faced San Antonio in the first round and led by as many as 16 points in Game One but Duncan -- who shot 0-4 from three-point range during the regular season -- drilled a trey to tie the score at 104 to force a second overtime. The Spurs eventually won the game and then took the series in five.
The Suns had shown that they had enough talent to go toe to toe with the defending NBA champions -- yet just one year later the Spurs are on pace for yet another 55-plus win season while the Suns are headed for the draft lottery. How did the Suns descend in less than 12 months from being on the brink of seizing home-court advantage from the reigning NBA champions to being an also-ran?
General Manager Steve Kerr will probably be the scapegoat for the Suns' demise. Kerr certainly should be held accountable for his decisions but the real problem in Phoenix is that it is hard to figure out owner Robert Sarver's master plan, assuming that he has one.
Sarver repeatedly dealt away first round picks -- including Luol Deng, Rajon Rondo and Nate Robinson -- to save money, got rid of quality veteran big man Kurt Thomas -- the team's best post defender -- to cut costs and then after those economizing actions he reversed field and picked up the high-priced Shaquille O'Neal. The Suns have neither committed fully to doing everything necessary to win a title nor have they committed fully to tearing the team down and rebuilding.
They discarded coach Mike D'Antoni's "seven seconds or less" philosophy in favor of Terry Porter's defensive-minded approach but then they canned Porter barely halfway into this season. Interim Coach Alvin Gentry has employed the so-called "seven seconds or Shaq" game plan, a modified version of "seven seconds or less." The Suns scored at least 140 points in each of their first three games under Gentry, rolling to wins over the lowly Clippers (twice) and Thunder, but they have only gone 4-8 since then.
The Suns have made so many personnel changes in the past year that it is difficult to determine the exact impact of any one particular move. They traded Shawn Marion and Marcus Banks for O'Neal last year and this season they swapped Raja Bell, Boris Diaw and Sean Singletary for Jason Richardson and Jared Dudley. However, three things have been consistently true of all of the various iterations of this team:
* The Suns have a lot of individual talent.
* The Suns have never been committed to playing good defense on a consistent basis.
* As a group, the Suns have not demonstrated mental toughness.
It is embarrassing for a team with as much talent as Phoenix has to miss the playoffs. Two-time MVP (2005-06) Steve Nash is still productive, 2000 MVP -- and 2009 All-Star Game co-MVP -- Shaquille O'Neal seemingly has been drinking from the Fountain of Youth, Jason Richardson averaged at least 21.7 ppg in three of the previous four seasons, and 2007 Sixth Man Award winner Leandro Barbosa provides scoring punch off of the bench. Also, seven-time All-Star Grant Hill is still a solid player who is good enough defensively that he often defends point guards while Nash is assigned to slower-footed players. An eye injury has sidelined four-time All-Star Amare Stoudemire for the rest of the season but the Suns were hardly tearing up the league in the 53 games he played before he got hurt.
During ABC's telecast of Boston's 128-108 win in Phoenix, Jeff Van Gundy hammered home points two and three, declaring that Nash, Hill and Stoudemire's refusal to buy into Porter's defensive-oriented approach and give their new coach a reasonable chance to succeed will forever be a "blight" on their resumes. You can add O'Neal's name to that "blight" list, too, if you believe the report by ESPN's Marc Stein that when Porter was talking to the team, the Big Cactus gloated that things will be a lot different once Gentry takes Porter's job.
Stein also said that one of O'Neal's Miami teammates insists that when former Heat Coach Stan Van Gundy would instruct the team O'Neal would hold three fingers up, apparently referring to the fact that O'Neal then owned three championship rings compared to none for Van Gundy.
The idea that O'Neal respects authority and listens to his coaches is a crock and it is not a coincidence that bad locker room chemistry has been a defining characteristic of O'Neal's teams in Orlando, L.A., Miami and now Phoenix.
Van Gundy contrasted the Suns with their nemesis, the Spurs, by declaring that the Spurs are a "more balanced team" that "takes offense seriously, takes defense seriously and takes rebounding seriously -- and they would never run a coup on their coach." Later in the game, Van Gundy noted, "The Suns are basically complaining on every call right now and that mental weakness has been one of the reasons that they have struggled in big games."
The teams that have made it to the Finals in recent years are all significantly better than Phoenix defensively. Some of that undoubtedly has to do with coaching but the players have to be held accountable, too. Hall of Fame Coaches John Wooden and John Thompson have both said that the same basic athletic skills are required to be a good offensive player and to be a good defensive player, so the reason that some players are only proficient at the offensive end of the court has more to do with desire than anything else. That lack of desire and mental toughness are the defining characteristics of this era of Suns basketball.
The coaching change "honeymoon" may be over in Phoenix after the Celtics blitzed the Suns 128-108 on Sunday afternoon. The Suns fired Coach Terry Porter--replacing him with assistant coach Alvin Gentry--right before playing two games against the Clippers and one game against the Thunder. Phoenix scored at least 140 points while winning each of those games against hapless opponents but the defending champion Celtics were having none of that even though their defensive anchor Kevin Garnett missed the game due to injury. Phoenix' high scoring All-Star forward Amare Stoudemire also did not play due to injury but, based on what we've seen this season, whatever he might have added to Phoenix' total at one end of the court he very likely would have given up defensively at the other end of the court, so the outcome of the game would not have ultimately changed had Stoudemire suited up.
When a team gets rid of a coach literally in the middle of All-Star Weekend of his first season with the team, it is obvious that the organization made a huge mistake either in initially hiring him and/or in dismissing him so quickly. To his credit, Suns President Steve Kerr is neither hiding from the difficult questions nor shirking responsibility for his actions. Kerr admitted that he "put too much on (Porter's) plate" and "underestimated" how difficult it would be to try to transform the Suns defensively. He added that Porter is a good man and a good coach and said, "I really feel awful about (firing Porter) but the organization has to come first." Kerr believes that the Suns still have time to turn things around and make the playoffs.
While broadcasting the Magic-Heat game, Hubie Brown offered his take on Porter's ouster and the Suns' future: "There is a lot of pressure on their group (of players) out there that took a stand against Terry Porter and his coaching staff to go to the new style. Let's see how they deliver from now until the end of the season." Brown is not the slightest bit impressed by the Suns' three wins against inferior opponents and essentially said that this is put up or shut up time for all of the players who ran Porter out of town after half a season on the job.
It has been said that a picture tells a thousand words but it is also true that sometimes a few choice words can paint a very vivid picture. During the ABC telecast of the Boston-Phoenix game, Jeff Van Gundy and Mark Jackson offered some pointed comments about the Suns:
1) Van Gundy said that Steve Nash, Grant Hill and Stoudemire made no effort to buy into Porter's approach and give him a reasonable chance to succeed. Van Gundy declared that this conduct will forever be a "blight" on those players' resumes. Although that may sound extreme, it is important to remember--as Van Gundy later mentioned--that after last year's playoff loss several Suns' players conceded that the team had to get better defensively. Steve Kerr hired Porter specifically to establish a defensive mindset but the players rebelled against Porter and they did it in the worst possible way; instead of communicating with him and trying to understand why he wanted to do things a certain way, they simply sulked and gave half hearted effort. Van Gundy recalled that his mentor Pat Riley used to say that you have to be all the way in or all the way out; during the first half of the season, the Suns were halfway in, halfway out.
2) Van Gundy noted that the Spurs consistently beat the Suns in the playoffs because the Spurs are a "more balanced team" that "takes offense seriously, takes defense seriously and takes rebounding seriously--and they would never run a coup on their coach."
3) When ABC's cameras panned to Suns' assistant coach Dan Majerle, Van Gundy said, "Dan Majerle, at whatever age he is now, would be the Suns' best defensive player."
4) Several Suns players argued about fouls that replays showed were obviously correctly called. Van Gundy commented, "The Suns are basically complaining on every call right now and that mental weakness has been one of the reasons that they have struggled in big games." I have made that exact point several times: the Suns always have excuses when they lose and they are prone to making mental errors in crunch time, two clear indicators that they are a mentally weak, unfocused team. No one wants to hear about injuries, suspensions, foul calls or anything else. Do you think that the Celtics, Spurs, Heat, Pistons, Lakers or any other recent championship teams did not overcome various forms of adversity in order to reach the mountaintop?
5) Rajon Rondo had 22 first half points on 8-11 shooting and he finished with 32 points on 13-18 shooting. Nash guarded him some of the time but then the Suns kept switching Nash on to other players. During the second half, Van Gundy said, "They're just abusing Steve Nash, no matter who he switches on to." Nash is a wonderfully gifted passer and shooter but when objective historians look back at this era of basketball history they are going to be dumbfounded that a player who is so helpless at one end of the court is a member of the elite club of multiple MVP winners. Nash's inability to contain dribble penetration severely compromises Phoenix' defense; the Suns often try to counter this by hiding him defensively but then that forces Grant Hill or someone else to play out of position defensively. If you look at the recent NBA championship teams, the best player generally had a strong impact defensively and that filtered down to the attitudes of the other players on the roster. Nash does not have that kind of impact nor has his team ever had the right defensive mindset.
6) After one particularly galling sequence, Jackson said of Phoenix' defense, "That is embarrassing. Absolutely embarrassing."
Former Georgetown Coach and current TNT commentator John Thompson once said of Dirk Nowitzki that he is very mobile and athletic on offense so there is no reason that he cannot be very mobile and athletic on defense. The same reasoning applies to the Suns collectively: they move just fine at the offensive end of the court but unless they become completely committed to playing defense they will continue to experience postseason frustration.
TNT devoted a one hour pregame special to announcing this year's All-Star starters. Here is the list:
2009 East All-Star Starters:
G: Dwyane Wade G: Allen Iverson C: Dwight Howard F: LeBron James F: Kevin Garnett
2009 West All-Star Starters:
G: Kobe Bryant G: Chris Paul C: Yao Ming F: Tim Duncan F: Amare Stoudemire
Charles Barkley is on a leave of absence from TNT because of his well documented legal problem, so Gary Payton sat in his chair literally and figuratively, channeling the zany spirit that Barkley usually provides. Payton declared that neither Tim Duncan nor Kevin Garnett should be All-Star starters this year, nominating instead Al Jefferson and Chris Bosh respectively. Payton argued that being an All-Star should be about an individual player's production in the first half of the season, not how well or how poorly his team is doing. Kenny Smith was flabbergasted that a future Hall of Famer who played on a championship team would not put more of an emphasis on winning.
Chris Webber said that he agreed with Smith in terms of Duncan and Garnett being starters but that he disagreed with Smith a little bit on the issue of how much individual statistics should matter. Webber apparently still has not recovered from 1997, when Webber said that Tom Gugliotta made the All-Star team and Webber did not; Gugliotta averaged 19.2 ppg, 8.1 rpg and 3.9 apg over the course of that season for a Minnesota team that went 40-42, while Webber averaged 18.5 ppg, 9.5 rpg and 4.2 apg for a Washington team that went 44-38. Of course, there are two rather obvious problems with Webber's story: (1) He and Gugliotta played in different conferences at the time and thus were not battling for the same All-Star slots; (2) Webber made the All-Star team in 1997--and that was Webber's first trip to the midseason classic, so one would think it would stick out in his mind! What happened to "there's nothing like the first time"?
Bosh is averaging more points and rebounds than Garnett but Bosh is also averaging six more minutes per game. Garnett has the edge in field goal percentage and blocked shots. Really, though, this is not about the numbers; Garnett anchors Boston's defense in a way that does not show up in his individual statistics. I don't have a problem with Garnett getting the starting nod over Bosh.
There was a consensus that Allen Iverson should not be starting and I tend to agree with that but I understand why the voting turned out the way that it did; two of the other leading candidates--Devin Harris and Jameer Nelson--are playing at an All-Star level for the first time in their careers. The voting starts so early in the season that it is tough for relatively unknown players to break through.
Webber suggested that perhaps Shaquille O'Neal should have gotten the starting nod over Yao. Interestingly, when the TNT guys interviewed Yao he admitted that he still feels awkward about starting ahead of O'Neal in All-Star Games, mentioning that it felt strange to do so in L.A. in 2004 (when O'Neal was still a Laker) and it will feel strange to so in Phoenix this year now that O'Neal is a Sun. Yao graciously--if inaccurately--called O'Neal the greatest center of all-time. There have been years when O'Neal should have started over Yao but this is really not an issue this time: Yao is more productive and, even more significantly, he plays every game while O'Neal only plays in about 75% of the games.
Smith said that Carmelo Anthony should have been named a starter over Stoudemire but I disagree. Stoudemire is a more productive and dominant player, plus he has been healthy all season while Anthony has been out of the lineup.
There is an annual debate about whether or not the fans should be permitted to vote for the All-Star starters. My position on this issue, as I wrote last year around this time, is simple:
Some people get all worked up about who the fans pick but starting in the All-Star Game is largely a ceremonial honor; if you look in the NBA Register, no indication is given about whether a player started an All-Star Game or was selected as a reserve. The only problem that could arise with fan voting is if a player who does not even deserve to make the team gets selected but I honestly cannot ever remember that happening. Over the years, we've seen Dan Issel get a starting nod over Kareem Abdul-Jabbar and A.C. Green get more votes than Karl Malone, but Issel and Green were worthy All-Stars and Abdul-Jabbar and Malone still made the team as reserves. Basketball fans deserve the right to choose who will start in what is, after all, an exhibition game, and they have not abused this opportunity, unlike fans in some other sports in years past who stuffed the ballot box for hometown favorites who did not belong in the All-Star Game.
This year we came relatively close to having some starters who don't even belong in the game this season, namely Yi Jianlian in the East and Tracy McGrady and Bruce Bowen in the West, but late surges enabled Garnett, Paul and Stoudemire to claim those spots. As long as the fans vote for players who actually deserve to make the team everything is cool because the coaches will vote for the remaining seven players on each roster. Bosh will certainly--and deservedly--make the team but Jefferson will probably miss the cut because there are so many good forwards in the West who are playing for winning teams.
Next week we will find out who the coaches select to be the seven reserves in each conference. They are supposed to choose two guards, two forwards, one center and two wild cards but the problem is that in some years one position is much more stacked with All-Star level talent than the others. The TNT analysts announced their choices:
2009 East All-Star Reserves (analyst choices--not official):
Kenny Smith: Devin Harris, Joe Johnson, Danny Granger, Paul Pierce, Zydrunas Ilgauskas, Ray Allen, Michael Redd
Chris Webber: Harris, Johnson, Granger, Pierce, Redd, Rashard Lewis, Chris Bosh
The first thing that you should notice right off the bat is that Smith is the only one who adhered to the selection requirements by picking a center. He pointed this out to the others and Webber denied that this is a rule; Payton said that Bosh can slide over to center. Webber used to be teammates with Turkoglu and he calls him the Turkish Michael Jordan, so it is interesting that he went with Lewis over him.
My choices most resemble Smith's: Granger and Pierce at forward, Harris and Johnson at guard and Ilgauskas at center. There are many players worthy of being wild cards but this year I'd take Vince Carter and Mo Williams.
2009 West All-Star Reserves (analyst choices--not official):
Kenny Smith: Tony Parker, Chauncey Billups, Dirk Nowitzki, Shaquille O'Neal, Brandon Roy, David West, Pau Gasol
Chris Webber: Parker, Billups, Nowitzki, O'Neal, Kevin Durant, Carmelo Anthony, Al Jefferson
Gary Payton: Parker, Billups, Nowitzki, O'Neal, Roy, Jefferson, Paul Millsap
My ballot would look exactly like Smith's. I find it a little odd that in one segment of the show Smith said that Anthony should be the starter over Stoudemire but in this segment he left Anthony off of the roster.
Isn't it interesting that just three years removed from winning two MVPs--and in his first year not playing in Mike D'Antoni's uptempo system--Steve Nash is no longer even considered an All-Star, let alone an elite, top five player? I've said it all along and I'll say it again: 10 or 15 years from now, anyone who objectively looks back at this era of NBA basketball is going to be astonished that Steve Nash won his MVPs over Shaquille O'Neal (who should have won in 2005) and Kobe Bryant (who should have won in 2006). Nash has been an outstanding point guard but that page in the record book is just going to look silly to anyone who is being objective and is not caught up in side issues, bias or other distractions.
Isn't it interesting that every single one of Shaquille O'Neal's teams has had chemistry issues relating specifically to the Big Diesel? First it was Shaq and Penny in Orlando. Then it was--stop me if you've heard about this one--Shaq and Kobe in L.A. O'Neal did fulfill his promise to bring a championship parade to Miami--with more than a little help from Dwyane Wade--but when the Heat's ship began sinking O'Neal suddenly had health issues that magically disappeared soon after the Phoenix Suns traded for him, giving him a get out of jail card from the worst team in the league last season.
O'Neal has not even been in Phoenix for a full year and "Seven Seconds or Less" has already turned into "Days of Our Lives." I thought that O'Neal was petulant in Orlando, immature in L.A. and that he basically quit on the Heat but I must say that--based on what is publicly known--I don't think that the Phoenix drama is his fault, even though it revolves around what his presence on the team means in terms of tempo and shot distribution.
Steve Nash has openly questioned whether new Coach Terry Porter's slow down game plan will work; as an aside, with the Suns currently 11-9 and Mike D'Antoni's undermanned New York Knicks contending for a playoff spot in the East at 8-10, we may now know the answer to the question about whether Phoenix' success in previous years was due more to Steve Nash or to D'Antoni's system, a system which this season has vaulted journeyman point guard Chris Duhon to a place among the league leaders in assists.
Meanwhile, Amare Stoudemire is griping that he should be "that guy," the focal point of the Suns the way that Kobe Bryant and LeBron James are the focal points of their franchises.
You know that the world has been turned upside down when O'Neal is the mature voice of reason; he correctly said that the players don't need Coach Porter's permission to run--just get the rebound and go. O'Neal has been smart enough in Phoenix to understand that he would look like an idiot if he started demanding the ball the way that he did when Bryant was emerging as a star in L.A.; it seemed like the whole world was on the charismatic O'Neal's side at that time but everyone can see that O'Neal is in no condition to be a franchise player now. O'Neal is willing to rebound, defend and accept whatever low post scoring opportunities come his way, so the Suns should be glad that his arrival put an end to the rebounding problems that plagued them for years. As a TNT graphic showed during Dallas' 112-97 win over Phoenix on Thursday night, with O'Neal on board the Suns closed out last season on a 15-5 run; during those games they had a +3.9 rebounding differential and they averaged 112.0 ppg, which clearly proves that they can benefit from O'Neal's paint presence without having to slow down their fast breaking attack. They beat their perennial nemesis, the San Antonio Spurs, in two regular season games after acquiring O'Neal and seemed to have the Spurs handled in game one of their playoff series but when the Spurs came back to win that contest it apparently sucked all of the life out of the Suns--possibly even carrying over into their desultory start to this season.
Stoudemire scored a team-high 28 points versus Dallas and he attempted 21 field goals, 10 more than anyone else on the team. However, he only had five rebounds, he committed a team-high four turnovers and his Dallas counterpart, Dirk Nowitzki, was far and away the best player on the floor, scoring a season-high 39 points on 17-25 shooting while grabbing nine rebounds.
Stoudemire should be happy to play power forward alongside O'Neal, because both offensively and defensively O'Neal is really taking a burden off of him by matching up with the opposing team's biggest player. Remember how O'Neal pledged last season to help turn Stoudemire into the best power forward in the NBA? The problem is that Stoudemire is so focused on having a big payday in 2010 when he becomes a free agent that it seems like all he cares about is his scoring average. What about rebounding the ball, blocking shots and playing sound overall defense?
The ex-players on TNT and NBA TV are not at all sympathetic to Stoudemire's complaints. Chris Webber said that if he could have played with O'Neal and Nash then he would have won a ring; that led to a funny retort from Kenny Smith about whether Webber wanted to say something to former teammates Vlade Divac and Mike Bibby, who of course played the same positions alongside Webber in Sacramento that O'Neal and Nash respectively play in Phoenix. Webber also made the excellent point that unless you are averaging at least 10 rpg as a big guy you cannot say that you are the man. Charles Barkley echoed that last sentiment and added that a true franchise player never has to declare that he is the man; he simply dominates games and everyone else falls into line. Smith pointed out that Stoudemire is already leading the team in minutes and scoring and that the only reason his numbers are down from last year is that Phoenix is playing at a slower pace, hence there are fewer possessions.
Does Kobe Bryant have to tell anyone that he is "that guy" for the Lakers? How about LeBron James in Cleveland? Can you imagine Magic Johnson, Larry Bird, Michael Jordan or Julius Erving making such a statement during their primes? Often, it seems that people who talk about being "that guy" are in fact, not really "that guy" after all--such as Stephon Marbury, the self proclaimed best point guard on the planet. Amare Stoudemire is a very good player but he is already the focal point of his team's offense anyway so, as Smith noted, it is not clear what he is complaining about in the first place. Stoudemire is playing alongside two former MVPs and has a talented supporting cast with Grant Hill, Leandro Barbosa, Raja Bell and Boris Diaw, so if he wants to be "that guy" there is a simple solution: lead the Suns to the top of the standings. There is no question that the Suns have enough talent to be an upper echelon team; the question is whether or not they are willing to do the necessary work at the defensive end of the court to reach that status. It is much easier to complain and make excuses than it is to stay focused and work hard. If you are "that guy" then you set the tone for your teammates in terms of playing hard on defense, work ethic and overall intensity.
The Phoenix Suns successfully opened the Terry Porter era with a 103-98 victory over the San Antonio Spurs, their main nemesis for the past several seasons. Amare Stoudemire scored 22 points on 8-11 shooting and added eight rebounds, Leandro Barbosa added 18 points off of the bench and Shaquille O'Neal controlled the paint with 15 points and a game-high 13 rebounds. Steve Nash had 13 points and 13 assists. The Spurs--playing without injured starters Manu Ginobili and Fabricio Oberto--were led by Tim Duncan and Tony Parker, each of whom scored 32 points. Roger Mason (12 points) was the only other Spur who scored in double figures.
Under Mike D'Antoni's regime, the Suns focused on their high powered offense and only gave lip service to defense and rebounding but all of that is going to change now with Porter in charge: getting stops and controlling the boards are top priorities and only after those things are accomplished will the Suns look to run, provided that they have an advantage--otherwise, they will set up in the half court and take advantage of having O'Neal and Stoudemire as strong options in the post. Early in this game, ESPN's Jeff Van Gundy immediately noted that Porter had changed the way that the Suns defend various San Antonio half court sets: basically, the Suns are now defending side pick and rolls and middle pick and rolls by going under the screens, keeping the ball handler out of the paint and forcing the Spurs to make jumpers. Van Gundy wholeheartedly endorsed Porter's adjustments. This is only one game but it seems to me that Porter is also demanding that his team play straight up, man to man defense as much as possible, as opposed to getting involved in a lot of trapping, switching or cross matching (such as having Grant Hill or someone else guard Parker); perhaps now each Suns player will be held accountable for guarding his own man.
Van Gundy made another very cogent point by mentioning that the Suns' primary problem in recent seasons was not necessarily their initial defense but rather the way that they got dominated on the boards, thus enabling their opponents to get extra possessions. That is why it was so important for the Suns to pull the trigger on the deal that sent Shawn Marion to Miami in exchange for O'Neal; prior to acquiring O'Neal last season, the Suns were getting outrebounded by 5.9 rpg and had a 5-10 record against Western Conference teams with winning records. Shortly after the O'Neal trade was announced I wrote the following analysis:
For several seasons, Phoenix Coach Mike D'Antoni has tried to convince the world that the Suns could win an NBA championship without a dominant post player and without having the best player in the game (Steve Nash may have convinced the writers that he was the best player in the NBA but that was never the case and he was never the best player on the court when the Suns got eliminated twice by Tim Duncan's Spurs and once by Dirk Nowitzki's Mavericks). Historically, championship teams have been anchored by a great post player; the Jordan-Pippen Bulls were a notable exception and there have been a few other teams that won a title as an ensemble cast that neither had a dominant post player nor the best player in the league--but the Bulls and those other teams (2004 Pistons, 1989-90 Pistons) were tremendous defensive teams, something that has never been true of the Suns. Without Kurt Thomas this season, the Suns have struggled against any team that has powerful inside players and it was unlikely that the Suns could avoid a fatal matchup with one of those teams in the playoffs.
Adding O'Neal to the mix instantly makes the Suns a bigger, more physical team. He will improve the team's defensive rebounding and provide a solid option in the halfcourt offense when the Suns' running game gets slowed down. The other advantage of adding him to the roster is something that TNT's Kenny Smith talks about sometimes: it enables all of the players to return to their natural positions, most notably returning Stoudemire to his preferred spot at power forward. Of course, there are several notable downsides to this trade. The Suns exchanged their most active and versatile defender for a player who has always been disinclined to defend the pick and roll play and may actually no longer be able to do so physically. O'Neal's presence in the paint is worth something but his individual defense is not nearly as good as Marion's and if O'Neal continues to get in foul trouble then he will spend long stretches anchored to the bench instead of patrolling the paint. Though the positive spin is that the Suns are now able to put all of their players in their natural positions, one could also argue that the Suns are replicating the failed recipe used by the turn of the century Portland Trail Blazers: stockpiling "name brand" talent (O'Neal, Grant Hill) without regard for how well the players will actually be able to work together. O'Neal and Hill do not bring the off court baggage that some of those Blazers did but it is reasonable to wonder if what they do best truly meshes with the way that D'Antoni likes his teams to play and the style in which Nash has thrived for three seasons.
With O'Neal in the fold, the Suns went 2-0 versus the Spurs in the regular season and outplayed them for most of game one in the playoffs before falling apart at the end of that contest and then melting down in the remainder of the series. For the first time in the D'Antoni era, the Suns finally had the strength in the paint to match up physically with the Spurs but they still lacked the necessary mental toughness and defensive focus to beat the Spurs in a seven game playoff series. Porter's challenge is to transform the Suns into a tougher, more defensive minded team without sacrificing too much of their ability to score in transition. It will be interesting to see if the players will embrace this approach throughout the season and into the playoffs. Obviously, one game does not a season make, particularly considering that the Spurs were hardly at full strength.
While Ginobili's absence clearly hurt the Spurs at both ends of the court, they also missed Oberto's presence in the paint. San Antonio Coach Gregg Popovich has used the intentional fouling strategy--generally referred to as Hack a Shaq--previously but in this game near the end of the first half he resorted to it out of necessity when Duncan was on the bench and the Spurs simply did not have enough bigs to check both O'Neal and Stoudemire. Phoenix led 44-40 with 1:26 left when Popovich instructed his team to intentionally foul O'Neal rather than try to play post defense short-handed. I have always been skeptical of the effectiveness of the intentional fouling strategy: statistically, an NBA possession is worth roughly a point, so as long as O'Neal makes one out of two free throws the opposition is not really gaining anything over the long haul. However, a few months ago, I spoke with current Cavaliers assistant coach Hank Egan, who was a member of Coach Popovich's staff in San Antonio for many years. Coach Egan explained the rationale behind the "Hack a Shaq":
It's not just mathematics; it's people. People get discouraged--they can't get into their offense and they lose the flow of the game, so it has a disruptive effect if nothing else. You get a psychological effect--are they going to take this player out because they are worried that he is going to be fouled all the time? It may cost you a point but you are putting pressure on him to perform at the free throw line and hoping that he does not make anything.
It is worth clicking on the above link and reading the entire post to check out Egan's in depth explanation of exactly why Popovich uses the intentional fouling strategy: the bottom line is that this is rooted at least as much in psychology as it is in statistics. Considering that psychology is such a big part of this, it is interesting to note how this game began: right after the opening tip, Popovich had Michael Finley intentionally foul O'Neal, an acknowledgment of O'Neal's accusation that the strategy is "cowardly." Popovich and O'Neal enjoyed a good laugh but I think that--like all humor--there was a deeper, underlying truth present here; yes, the farcical early foul broke some of the tension and provided a moment of levity but it also planted the seed that no matter how much O'Neal whines and complains the Spurs will not be dissuaded from doing whatever they think they need to do to win.
During the telecast, Van Gundy endorsed the intentional fouling strategy because it prevents the Suns from taking advantage of their good three point shooters. Again, though, it must be emphasized that the average NBA possession is worth roughly a point, so if O'Neal makes half of his free throws and the Spurs run their offense at typical point per possession efficiency then they will not come out ahead.
After the intentional foul at the 1:26 mark, O'Neal made both free throws but Mason then drained a three pointer, so the Spurs gained a point on that exchange. The Spurs fouled O'Neal again but before he could shoot his free throws Porter got a technical foul for arguing about a non-call from the Spurs' offensive possession. Mason made that free throw and then O'Neal split his pair of free throws. Parker missed a runner and the Spurs fouled O'Neal again. This time O'Neal missed both free throws and Parker answered by making a runner. After the Spurs fouled O'Neal for the fourth consecutive possession, O'Neal made both free throws and the Spurs airballed a three pointer. Phoenix led 49-46 at the half, so the Spurs outscored the Suns 6-5 while employing the Hack a Shaq--but one of those points was a gift because of Porter's technical foul, so the net result of the strategy was a wash, as one would expect based on an NBA possession being worth roughly a point and O'Neal generally making one out of two free throws (in this case, O'Neal shot 5-8).
Fast forwarding to the end of the game, the Suns led 101-98 with :39 left when Porter removed O'Neal from the game; it is not clear if Porter based that decision strictly on matchups or if he wanted to avoid the possibility of the Spurs intentionally fouling O'Neal but if the latter is the case then this is an example of the psychological effect of the Hack a Shaq: it can influence a team to alter its lineup. With O'Neal out of the game, the Suns ran 23 seconds off of the clock before Raja Bell missed a three pointer. The Spurs now had the ball and a chance to either go for the tie by shooting a three pointer or else score a quick two and extend the game by fouling (which is not a Hack a Shaq but simply normal end of the game strategy when trailing when there are less than 24 seconds left on the shot clock). In last year's playoffs, Duncan made a three pointer late in the first overtime to send game one into a second overtime before the Spurs eventually prevailed but this time Duncan's three pointer was off the mark and Barbosa closed out the scoring by making a pair of free throws.
Although the Spurs shot 50.0% from the field, the Suns played good defense; as Van Gundy mentioned more than once, the Suns largely kept the Spurs out of the paint, forcing Duncan and Parker to make jump shots. The Suns enjoyed a 39-38 rebounding advantage. That may not sound like much but for a team that used to get outrebounded by a significant margin that is very significant.
It will be interesting to see how these themes--intentional fouling, Porter's emphasis on defense, the Suns' improved rebounding with O'Neal in the paint--play out during this season but the irony could be that by the time the Suns finally put together the right coaching staff and roster to beat the Spurs those efforts will be in vain because the Lakers are now the team to beat in the West.
"A work of art contains its verification in itself: artificial, strained concepts do not withstand the test of being turned into images; they fall to pieces, turn out to be sickly and pale, convince no one. Works which draw on truth and present it to us in live and concentrated form grip us, compellingly involve us, and no one ever, not even ages hence, will come forth to refute them."--Alexander Solzhenitsyn (Nobel Lecture)
"The most 'popular,' the most 'successful' writers among us (for a brief period, at least) are, 99 times out of a hundred, persons of mere effrontery--in a word, busy-bodies, toadies, quacks."--Edgar Allan Poe
"In chess what counts is what you know, not whom you know. It's the way life is supposed to be, democratic and just."--Grandmaster Larry Evans
"It's not nuclear physics. You always remember that. But if you write about sports long enough, you're constantly coming back to the point that something buoys people; something makes you feel better for having been there. Something of value is at work there...Something is hallowed here. I think that something is excellence."--Tom Callahan
