Post#153 » by kaima » Mon Jun 7, 2010 1:52 pm
This is not what I wanted it to be. Too limited in what it covers, and overall too discursive even in that limitation. Might be some errors, small or huge; it was bad enough researching and typing it, I really didn't care to proof-read it too closely. But, it was like quicksand, once I got in a certain amount of the way...
Kemp: 14.8 PPG, 10 REB, 1.4 AST, 1.4 STL, 1.8 BLK, 2.8 TO, 52% FG
Malone: 24.0 PPG, 10.4 REB, 2.0 AST, 1.2 STL, 0.4 BLK, 4 TO, 45% FG
Kemp shot a good percentage against Malone, but also took the fewest shots contrasted between his three series (5 games, 10.4 FGA). This points to good position defense before or as the fact, in Malone denying Kemp the space or area he prefers to shoot. Kemp kept his percentage high by not forcing the issue.
The Reign Man had an outstanding game 1 (29, 17) versus a mediocre night from Malone (24, 13), but after that Kemp never scored as many as twenty points, nor did he even hit his season average again, with games of 13, 4, 16 and 12.
On the other side, this was still a period where Seattle liberally, and often effectively, employed traps against Utah's precision offense. Other than getting caught in a less than ideal position by way of rotation, Kemp again did not directly try to hold or consistently guard Malone man to man.
Why did the traps work here when they didn't work nearly as effectively, or even get run, against the mid-90s Jazz? Gameplanning, for one. But it's just as arguable that Utah's surrounding personnel combined with the two stars was much more effective and complementary in talent in later years, allowing Utah to better read and break traps. After all, the Sonics' idea is to isolate, and yet Utah's entire offense was already feeding this in 93 with a very lacking cast around Malone.
Utah shot 31% from outside in this series, with 6.4 attempts per game. They made ten treys, with 5 by Stockton and 1 by Malone. Hilariously bad support.
The other key stat, from Malone at least, is TO rate. He had twice the number of TOs versus Assists in this series, and a terrible A/TO rate of 0.4. Quite clearly a sign of the traps' worth, and a deadly conflation for Utah on the basis of spacing.
They had no spacing, really. Utah had this problem almost every year pre-Hornacek, in that they have this dominant post presence but they do next to nothing to alleviate pressure on him from double teams because they have no shooters, thus creating a very bad paradigm as far as room to work in the post. My question is, how does it take management 6 or 7 years to figure this out? Tragicomic.
Kemp's assist rate was hardly better (0.5), while facing a far more straight-up, man to man defensive scheme from Malone in the post; but I also expect far less from Kemp than Malone.
Karl's schemes were already generally deadly. You mix those exponenents with an opponent that is lacking in role player shooting talent and you have a defense that can definitely focus on that selfsame opponent's main offensive weapon.
Still, Malone played against tough defenses all the time and put up stellar stats -- in 92 he went nuts on a very talented Portland team, as one example. Being at the heart of Karl's defensive philosophy, Kemp deserves credit.
But when looking at stats and specifics, there's no way you can say that Malone didn't overall handle Kemp. As usual.
Barkley: 26.1 PPG, 13.2 REB, 3.3 AST, 2.2 STL, 1.5 BLK, 2.8 TO, 45% FG
Robinson: 25.6 PPG, 11 REB, 3.5 AST, 1.6 STL, 3.3 BLK, 2.8 TO, 43.9% FG
DRob finally (well, ok, we're working backwards) has an impressive series against another star post player, albeit one who didn't have the size to check him.
Arguably played Barkly to a near-standstill. Though Barkley again came up huge to close it out.
The defensive argument, as far as team defense, is no more prevalent than what we saw from Seattle (about the same on team FG% at around 47, while creating slightly fewer TOs at 12.5 versus 14; pace was faster in the Sonics/Suns series, as that's how Seattle liked it; not much better on FG% than LAL against Phoenix, as they held them to 47.6%). Averaged about the same amount of blocks and steals as Kemp in the next series, but it seems that Barkley's shot was bothered more by Robinson/SA.
And yet even in that context, Robinson comes out slightly worse by the numbers. Yes, Phoenix's frontline of Mark West, Oliver Miller and Barkley bothered Robinson's shot (43.9%) more than he could bother Barkley's. Kemp managed to shoot almost 60% against them.
The Portland series is saved, to Robinson's side, by game 4. Offensively he again was bothered by a physical frontline. In this case, Buck williams, Mark Bryant, Kevin Duckworth and...Uncle Cliffy. Put up 19.25 PPG on 42% shooting.
That near-quadub finale really bails him out, but the offensive skillset ability is again showing its limitations in this series. Not that impressed with his playoffs, though I woouldn't argue with a supporter that said it was above average. It just depends how you take that, and what each side means.
Kemp: 13.6 PPG, 10.7 REB, 3.1 AST, 1.8 STL, 1 BLK, 2.3 TO, 42% FG 11.14 FGA
Hakeem: 23.1 PPG, 13.1 REB, 4.7 AST, 1.3 STL, 4.3 BLK, 4.1 TO, 52% FG
Perhaps the matchup. And another example of what a great match Kemp made with Karl's rotational traps.
Olajuwon wins the matchup, no doubt. Kemp was at least as bothered by Hakeem as Hakeem was by Kemp+Karl, but Kemp did bother Olajuwon, especially as the series wore on.
The impressive or important stats as far as outcome through this matchup show in Olajuwon's dwindling shot attempts (in the first five games, Hakeem attempted an average of 20.2 FGs; in the last two games he averaged 14), TOs (over 4 a game; had a very nice, relative to role and position, 1.5 A/TO ratio v Clippers in round 1; dropped to 1.1 against Seattle) and points off his scoring average from the regular season (a loss of 3). Much like Malone, Hakeem never really went off in this series.
Things like FGA and TOs tell us that Hakeem was being made atypically uncomfortable, wasn't getting the spacing or angles he liked; was, as portions of game time show, being pushed to spots on the floor where it was very hard to create positive results.
Kemp shot more in this series than against Utah, but even his good looks at the basket were bad. The normally efficient, if not consistently prodigious, Kemp averaged 42% FG in this series. Hakeem's presence was a constant concern, and not one that Kemp dealt with very well. But he did up his assist rate, going from 1.4 assists versus 2.8 TOs in the Utah series, to 3.1 assists versus 2.3 TOs in this one (an A/TO ratio of 1.3 versus the 0.5 he put up against Malone).
His highest scoring game was 23, never went over 20 in the six other games, while putting up 8, 12 and 14 point outings. Great job by Hakeem.
And then there's game six. 1 point on 2 shots. Again got himself in foul trouble, a constant issue attached to his mental makeup. Obviously was taken completely out of game 6 offensively; nothing came, not position, aggression or even a single make.
At the same time, he played well defensively, yet again. Helped, even in his limited time, to limit Hakeem a great deal. Dream managed 14 points in game 6, and if Kemp could have kept himself on the floor this series might have been over in 6.
But that's not much of a point because, again (and again and...), this was not a bizarre event for Kemp.
Another game where Hakeem had no FTs. This happened three times, and all three times the Rockets won. In those games, the traps were and were not effective, because the Rockets shot at a 44% clip from outside; in the losses they shot 33.3% on fewer attempts.
Kemp made himself an overall positive presence that was key in pushing the Sonics through to the conference finals. He was big in creating a game-shifting run in game 7; 5 minutes of work might have decided who was going to face Phoenix.
Hakeem didn't lose his matchup to Kemp, but Kemp may have been not only key in slowing Hakeem but also the series x-factor overall.
In two series, Seattle managed to hold two of the league's top 3-4 post presences 3 below their respective regular season averages. Impressive. Even if Shawn Kemp can't do these things without the system, can the system do them without him? At a 50/50 rate, Kemp deserves a lot of praise, even while being ostensibly outplayed.
Kemp: 20.6 PPG, 9.3 REB, 2.8 AST, 1.3 STL, 3.4 BLK, 3.4 TO, 59% FG
Barkley: 25.6 PPG, 13.8 REB, 4 AST, 1 STL, 0.4 BLK, 1.4 TO, 50.5% FG
Of the three superstars to face Seattle, Barkley has arguably the best overall stats. But the same can be said for Kemp.
Relatively speaking, Kemp went off in this series. He shot 59%, attempted 12.1 shots per game (most of the playoffs), and scored above his regular season average 5 times (when compared to his prior two series, he went over his average in every game against Phoenix). He also made himself a big factor defensively, having his best series on blocked shots easily.
Meanwhile, Barkley reached far greater heights individually in a couple games, but also had lower depths in others. Three times Barkley scored under twenty (between Olajuwon and Malone in the previous two series, this only happened once), while on the positive side he went for 40+ twice, with a game 7 of 44 and 24.
Barkley did a very good job against the Sonics' D, particularly when looking at passing. Averaged 4 assists and only 1.4 TO, for an A/TO ratio 2.8 -- a very strong number, for a PG. And to do it against Seattle's press, rotate and traps? All the more impressive.
Obviously, Barkley's best defense was offense, and when it mattered most he didn't disappoint by that metric.
But even with the outbursts of 40+ point games near the end, Barkley didn't create as much scoring personally, in the context of positional production through ratio, when compared to Malone and Hakeem (9.2 ratio betwen Malone and Kemp; 9.5 between Hakeem and Kemp). Three times Kemp outscored Barkley (game 1, 16-12; game 3, 19-16; game 6, 22-13), whereas he accomplished that once in 12 games against Malone and Hakeem.
Rebounding rate and ratio is an easy win for Barkley. Outrebounded Kemp 24 to 8 in game 7; was only outrebounded in two games in the series (game 4, 8-7; game 6 15-11).
In a micro-defining-macro sense, Barkley came up huge in the deciding game. Looking at the entire series, game by game, however, it's questionable as to how much better Barkley was against Seattle than his two superstar counterparts. Surrounding personnel was a big factor. I know, what a shock.
Anyway, my list:
1) Air
2) Dream
3) Chuck
4) Ewing
5) Malone
HM: Nique
Think Barkley was right there in the regular season. I'm not seeing a whole lot of evidence that Olajuwon was a lot better in the playoffs. Barkley may have been a bit better, actually. But the difference in the Kemp matchup, on defense and ratio, made me go with Dream.
Thought Ewing had a nice match between regular season and playoffs, though the Rik Smits matchup wasn't the most favorable. Would have liked to look at that along with the Bulls series, but...
Didn't think Malone would make my cut when I initially saw his playoff numbers. But Seattle was a very tough team, Malone still threw Kemp around, excepting game 1, and Robinson didn't do as well as I thought when I started analyzing the numbers. Malone's regular season was better, and his post-season was not strikingly worse than Robinson's. Outside team success, I don't see the argument for Robinson here; defense appears to still be overrated from this guy, and whatever he does defensively his lack of offensive skillsets tear down; partially exposed against Portland.
But honestly, as far as order, Jordan's the only vote I'm really confident in. So confident, no argument is needed.
