Retro POY '08-09

[Sedale Threatt]

Well, try to name one superstar who's ever won anything without decent support. You can come up with some good cases -- Olajuwon obviously comes to mind -- but for the most part everyone, even Jordan, needs help.

I don't discounting Shaq's contributions at all. And that's exactly the point -- when Wade had requisite help, he led his team to a championship. And I don't think anyone can dispute he was the leader of that team after what he did in the Finals.

Fast forward a few years, and his support his noticeably worse, and the team's performance has suffered...but it's because Wade is hogging the ball too much?

Sorry, I cannot agree with this line of thinking. Wade can try any number of approaches, and it won't change the fact that O'Neal is broken down, and Carlos Arroyo is not a starting NBA point guard, and Michael Beasely is horribly immature, and on and on and on.

[Silver Bullet]

Silver, some of the things you're breaking down, I could do the same thing with Robert Horry. Shaq helped Wade get over the hump but when a former 30 point scorer is averaging 13 in the finals, he's not having superstar impact any more.

I'll also mention that while Miami upset Detroit in '06, they got upset by Detroit in '05. Shaq was helping the team, but this wasn't a case of Shaq-teams being much better in the post-season than in the regular season, one year it came together properly, one year it didn't.

I agree with you that Miami doesn't beat Detroit without Shaq, they also don't beat Detroit without Wade, and the inability to beat a very good Detroit team without a decent supporting cast does not damn a player as something less than a superstar.

Come on man. You couldn't show me 30-20 games and 27-18 games by Horry, if you looked at every single game he's ever played.

Who else could've posted 30-20 in 2005-06 ? Well I'll tell you, Since 2005, only two people have put up 30-20 - and the other guy is not a big.

And you couldn't show me the teams winning every time Horry took more shots and the star took substantially less shots. I mean, you're just focusing on the play by play of the Finals. Look at everything else I put up in that post, and lemme know how you respond to that.

And I agree, Miami couldn't have beaten Detroit without Wade. But they could've beaten them with Kobe, Mcgrady, Carter and a bunch of guys - whereas, there is possibly only 1 guy you could replace Shaq with, and that is Duncan.

[Tim_Hardawayy]

Let's look at the pivotal game 6, against the Pistons - Shaq put up 28 and 16 in that game on nearly 90% shooting. No way can Wade get that from any other center in the league. And no way Wade wins that game on 4-15 shooting for 14 points. Lose that game and you're in Detroit for Game 7, and you've just bid your season Goodbye.

Wade played with the flu that game, it was speculated he may sit out right up until just before tipoff.

In the pivotal Game 3, Shaq put up 27 and 12 on 73% and had the whole Detroit frontline in foul trouble -

In Miami losses that series, Shaq had 20 and 9 on 58% - In Miami wins he had 23 and 11.25 on 70% shooting.

Meanwhile in Miami losses Wade had 28, 5 and 5, in Miami wins, Wade had 26, 5 and 5.
Moreover, in Miami wins, Wade only took 13 shots compared to 17 shots in Miami losses.

And Wade's flu game skews all of those statistics.

So what does that tell you ?

It tells me, that they wouldn't have gotten past the Pistons without Shaq.

No doubt. Generally, taking away a team's 2nd best player hurts quite a bit.

Moreover, they might not even have made it past the Bulls, without Shaq. In the pivotal Game 6, Shaq had 30 and 20 with 5 assists and 2 blocks. How many players in the league today, can put up that line ? I can't think of a single one.

Again, take away a team's 2nd best player and they generally don't go anywhere.

Then what happened in the Finals.
Game 3 - Miami is down 2-0, looking at a 3-0 deficit -
8:36 left in the game, Heat are down 12 points, all the momentum is with Dallas, they have scored 6 straight points. Miami is struggling.
How do they get back in the game ?

Shaq draws a double, kicks it out to an open Jason Williams, who nails the three.
Next possession down, 7:28 - Shaq makes a layup.

2:49 left in the game - Dallas leads by 5 -
2:31 Wade misses 3
1:50 Williams misses 3, Shaq gets the offensive rebound, goes down to the free throw line, calmly sinks both free throws.

And then how did they win the game ? Most people just remember the Wade foul, but with the game tied 95-95, it was Payton who made the clutch jumper with 9 seconds left to put the Heat up by 2. Had they gone down 3-0, it would've been game over.

You left out 12 points by Wade during that time frame. And no, most people don't remember the Wade foul, that was game 5.

[Silver Bullet]

Well, try to name one superstar who's ever won anything without decent support. You can come up with some good cases -- Olajuwon obviously comes to mind -- but for the most part everyone, even Jordan, needs help.

I don't discounting Shaq's contributions at all. And that's exactly the point -- when Wade had requisite help, he led his team to a championship. And I don't think anyone can dispute he was the leader of that team after what he did in the Finals.

Fast forward a few years, and his support his noticeably worse, and the team's performance has suffered...but it's because Wade is hogging the ball too much?

Sorry, I cannot agree with this line of thinking. Wade can try any number of approaches, and it won't change the fact that O'Neal is broken down, and Carlos Arroyo is not a starting NBA point guard, and Michael Beasely is horribly immature, and on and on and on.

But Wade didn't have adequate help - he had the Center who is known for winning titles or at least going to the Finals, given an adequate shooting guard.

Yes, he was slowing down, rapidly by then, but he was also clearly the apha-dog on the team. It was Shaq who sent Van Gundy packing the year earlier. How many 2nd options have that kind of a cache.

My point is, it is ridiculous to extrapolate that because Wade won a title with O'neal in a weak year, he can win a title given any adequate supporting cast - which is what everybody seems to be implying.

[Doctor MJ]

Silver, some of the things you're breaking down, I could do the same thing with Robert Horry. Shaq helped Wade get over the hump but when a former 30 point scorer is averaging 13 in the finals, he's not having superstar impact any more.

I'll also mention that while Miami upset Detroit in '06, they got upset by Detroit in '05. Shaq was helping the team, but this wasn't a case of Shaq-teams being much better in the post-season than in the regular season, one year it came together properly, one year it didn't.

I agree with you that Miami doesn't beat Detroit without Shaq, they also don't beat Detroit without Wade, and the inability to beat a very good Detroit team without a decent supporting cast does not damn a player as something less than a superstar.

Come on man. You couldn't show me 30-20 games and 27-18 games by Horry, if you looked at every single game he's ever played.

Who else could've posted 30-20 in 2005-06 ? Well I'll tell you, Since 2005, only two people have put up 30-20 - and the other guy is not a big.

And you couldn't show me the teams winning every time Horry took more shots and the star took substantially less shots. I mean, you're just focusing on the play by play of the Finals. Look at everything else I put up in that post, and lemme know how you respond to that.

And I agree, Miami couldn't have beaten Detroit without Wade. But they could've beaten them with Kobe, Mcgrady, Carter and a bunch of guys - whereas, there is possibly only 1 guy you could replace Shaq with, and that is Duncan.

I said "some" of what you mentioned could have been Horry stuff. I mean honestly, you break down "then Shaq calmly sinks both free throws", and then act like I'm talking about something else. You mentioned some things that were certainly well above Horry's pay grade, but my point with that statement is that you're clearly going overboard. You're looking too much at the nudge Shaq gave his team, and not looking enough at what Wade gave the team. I mean, Lakers don't win their title without Gasol, but that doesn't mean Kobe's not great.

[Doctor MJ]

But Wade didn't have adequate help - he had the Center who is known for winning titles or at least going to the Finals, given an adequate shooting guard.

Yes, he was slowing down, rapidly by then, but he was also clearly the apha-dog on the team. It was Shaq who sent Van Gundy packing the year earlier. How many 2nd options have that kind of a cache.

My point is, it is ridiculous to extrapolate that because Wade won a title with O'neal in a weak year, he can win a title given any adequate supporting cast - which is what everybody seems to be implying.

He had a Shaq that was in much worse shape than in '03 or '04, during which Shaq didn't win a title despite being with a prime Kobe.

[bastillon]

<your Celtic here> - Garnett falls off, and the team is still elite. Pretty amazing.

elite ? they pretty much struggled to get past the Bulls. if they were elite, you can call Bulls an elite team as well.

[Doctor MJ]

<your Celtic here> - Garnett falls off, and the team is still elite. Pretty amazing.

elite ? they pretty much struggled to get past the Bulls. if they were elite, you can call Bulls an elite team as well.

C'mon man. The team won 62 games. That's elite.

And struggling to get past the Bulls? Well they struggled to get past the Hawks the previous year. Are you going to call that title winning team non-elite?

[Silver Bullet]

<your Celtic here> - Garnett falls off, and the team is still elite. Pretty amazing.

elite ? they pretty much struggled to get past the Bulls. if they were elite, you can call Bulls an elite team as well.

They struggled to beat the Hawks, Cavs and Pistons in 08 too - that doesn't make the Hawks elite.

And the Bulls are a pretty fiesty playoff team to begin with, I don't know how you can assume they would've waltzed past them, even with KG. I would've loved to see a KG-Noah matchup though.

[bastillon]

<your Celtic here> - Garnett falls off, and the team is still elite. Pretty amazing.

elite ? they pretty much struggled to get past the Bulls. if they were elite, you can call Bulls an elite team as well.

C'mon man. The team won 62 games. That's elite.

And struggling to get past the Bulls? Well they struggled to get past the Hawks the previous year. Are you going to call that title winning team non-elite?

umm they won 62 games because they were winning pretty much 80% of their games with KG. point differential after Garnett's injury wasn't anything special. they were pretty much a median playoff team.

Celtics 08 didn't "struggle" to get past the Hawks. they had 14.2 efficiency differential in that round. that's about as dominant as 72 win Bulls in the regular season of '96.

[Doctor MJ]

elite ? they pretty much struggled to get past the Bulls. if they were elite, you can call Bulls an elite team as well.

C'mon man. The team won 62 games. That's elite.

And struggling to get past the Bulls? Well they struggled to get past the Hawks the previous year. Are you going to call that title winning team non-elite?

umm they won 62 games because they were winning pretty much 80% of their games with KG. point differential after Garnett's injury wasn't anything special. they were pretty much a median playoff team.

Celtics 08 didn't "struggle" to get past the Hawks. they had 14.2 efficiency differential in that round. that's about as dominant as 72 win Bulls in the regular season of '96.

I'll clarify: When I said "Garnett falls off", I don't mean playing without Garnett. I mean, Garnett clearly took a major step down in his playing, and the team was still elite.

Also I said "your Celtic here", I didn't say your Celtic couldn't be Garnett.

[bastillon]

fair enough. but my point about '08 C's-Hawks matchup remains. there was no doubt who the winner is gonna be in that series.

[tkb]

My final vote:

1. Kobe Bryant
2. LeBron James
3. Dwight Howard
4. Dwyane Wade
5. Chauncey Billups

[ElGee]

EDIT: Agree with your distinction about a missed rotation being clearly later than a split-second slow. Basically, in the simplest terms, if someone is wide open and they shouldn't be, that's what I'm talking about. The telling sign is usually a head turn, confused look, double-take, "where's my guy" pirouette...kind of like Lewis when he lost track of his backside. That, and defenders who stop moving when the rest of the team is scrambling and - VOILA! - a wide open shooter.

The problem with your rather specific discussion is that you have to keep in mind that the offense has always a small advantage, because the defense can only react. Marc Cuban made a good comment about that on the last stats conference at MIT, he said: "In basketball, the coach yells out the play and the defense still doesn’t know what to do."
And what you are calling "missed rotation" is mostly just good offense.

No, what I'm calling a missed rotation is a clear defensive error. One of my points all along is that the offense has an advantage -- it's an offensive game. I think that's something that is lost on people when they attempt to judge players on an some balanced offense-defense scale.

Top defenders aren't as valuable as top offensive players. There's one ball - great offensive players can choose to have that ball every time down, and as a result individuals can be the difference between an elite offensive and sputtering one. Defensive players can't choose to guard the ball on every possession. Thus, the impact of elite defensive players is smaller. Even smaller depending on position. (By the way, this is not to minimize individual defensive upgrades or matchups within a team or series. For example, if San Antonio loses either Bowen or Duncan, it's going to make a difference in a 7-game series against Dallas. It's just not worth 20-points a game for 82 games.)

I see this issue most present in discussions with someone like Steve Nash. First of all, there is little information to suggest Nash is a terrible defender, other than his skin color and floppy soccer hair. His on/off numbers and individual metrics aren't too bad. His opponents don't suddenly become all-stars when he plays them. And on the film I've analyzed of him, he does a fairly decent job of keeping his man in front of him, which to me is the primary defensive job of the point guard. So he can't shut down opposing stars -- who can?

Based on my research, ~28% of guarded shots are taken against point guards. They're rarely in the lane rotating to protect the hoop. Most point guards aren't one-on-one scoring point guards. Heck, even unguarded shots, from drive and kicks, passing out of double-teams and rubbing off screens, usually aren't taken by points guards. Yet people treat Nash's defensive limitations -- he is clearly not a very good defender -- as something that somehow offsets how many points he generates on offense. As if replacing him defensively with, say, Russell Westbrook, would net Phoenix more than a point or two per game.

On the flip side, I'm struggling with Dwight Howard's value. ~41% of guarded shots are taken against bigs. Howard may be in on more shots than an average big, given he plays alongside a "tall" forward (Lewis) and his length and athleticism allows him to defend more around the rim. Orlando's defensive numbers in the paint (volume and FG% against) certainly reflect this, and I don't know who else to credit but Howard. Clearly, there is something to him "anchoring" the defense that provides great impact and allows Orlando to consistently be an elite defensive team.

But I'm starting to believe the value of that contribution is overrated. In other words, it's not equal to a 20 ppg high-efficiency scorer. Orlando is still an offensively strong team, and has been during this period. If we removed a solid offensive player or two, and forced Dwight to be the primary offensive option on a team with below average offensive efficiency, I'm not sure Orlando wouldn't simply be a middle of the pack club. The Magic offensive ratings the last 3 years: 111(7th), 109 (11th), 111(4th).

When I watched their run to the FInals in 09, the boost in play wasn't Dwight Howard's defense (Dwight did have some monster offensive games), but the Magic's 3-point shooting. In other words, a really good supporting cast playing even better, getting contributions from everywhere. In the second and third round, Orlando shot an otherworldly .462% as a team from three-point range in 8 wins. (In the losses, .314%). That was 5.5% better than in their regular season wins. Those points made a huge difference in a bunch of close games. They closed G1 in Cleveland 7-11 from 3. THey were 17-38 in game 4. 13-21 in G7 against Boston.

Furthermore, it was Turkoglu and Lewis who kept torching Cleveland with their pick and roll. In other words, Dwight played better in the playoffs, but I'm not sure how valuable he was in the first place -- he had a great team, and I see the supporting casts improvement as the explanation for the Finals run.

[Sedale Threatt]

But Wade didn't have adequate help - he had the Center who is known for winning titles or at least going to the Finals, given an adequate shooting guard.

Yes, he was slowing down, rapidly by then, but he was also clearly the apha-dog on the team. It was Shaq who sent Van Gundy packing the year earlier. How many 2nd options have that kind of a cache.

My point is, it is ridiculous to extrapolate that because Wade won a title with O'neal in a weak year, he can win a title given any adequate supporting cast - which is what everybody seems to be implying.

And my point is, it's ridiculous to blame him for Miami's struggles -- especially for "ball hogging" -- when in fact he's playing for a crap team. Or any other star player who plays at a high level while the rest of the team sucks. That's the only reason I weighed in here.

I'm not saying Wade could win a championship with any supporting cast. But I'd be willing to guarantee one thing -- give him one that's good enough, comparable to what Kobe had last year or James has now, and he's going to be in contention just about every year.

I mean, it's not like that championship team was even oozing with talent in the first place. They had a quality, but aging, center, and a solid corp of veteran role players led by Alonzo Mourning.

Look at the playoff PERs, the only guys who showed up during the playoffs were Wade, Shaq and Mourning. As is the case with virtually every championship team, they got timely contributions from numerous sources.

But I defy you or anybody else to say what he did over the final four games of the Finals wasn't the most critical contribution, but a huge margin.

[bastillon]

But I'm starting to believe the value of that contribution is overrated. In other words, it's not equal to a 20 ppg high-efficiency scorer.

isn't it ? so you actually think that removing 20 PPG high-eff scorer will make you worse by 20 pts and not force other players to shoot more ? if anything, I think it's the other way around. help D, especially one that prevents easy buckets is crucial. teams are shooting like 65-70% from the paint and they force a lot of free throws and offensive rebounds from that area as well. that's why Dwight's value is extremely high on the defensive end. great scorer on the other hand, can be replaced by significantly worse player, not necessarily making his team much worse, because of the redistribution of shots. now higher usg% means lower efficiency but the difference isn't as big to offset the advantages of a great post defender... unless you don't have a creator at all, or you're simply losing an all-time player on offense like Magic.

Furthermore, it was Turkoglu and Lewis who kept torching Cleveland with their pick and roll. In other words, Dwight played better in the playoffs, but I'm not sure how valuable he was in the first place -- he had a great team, and I see the supporting casts improvement as the explanation for the Finals run.

yeah, improvement... wonder how, because their numbers weren't actually better (not to mention that's illogical in the first place, they weren't young players who would improve). what I think you're overlooking here is how much impact Dwight had on their offense. defenses either collapsed on him (pick and rolls, double-teams or simply roaming in the paint) or fouled him, making it much easier for his teammates to play.

I like putting things in perspective when all is said and done. Alston and Lee were infamous members of the team that had this historical streak going on. Turkoglu... well, he didn't really help the raptors. that's majority of his supporting crew. I don't think they were that good at all. they were quite bad actually, but Howard made them look great.

[ElGee]

But I'm starting to believe the value of that contribution is overrated. In other words, it's not equal to a 20 ppg high-efficiency scorer.

isn't it ? so you actually think that removing 20 PPG high-eff scorer will make you worse by 20 pts and not force other players to shoot more ? if anything, I think it's the other way around. help D, especially one that prevents easy buckets is crucial. teams are shooting like 65-70% from the paint and they force a lot of free throws and offensive rebounds from that area as well. that's why Dwight's value is extremely high on the defensive end. great scorer on the other hand, can be replaced by significantly worse player, not necessarily making his team much worse, because of the redistribution of shots. now higher usg% means lower efficiency but the difference isn't as big to offset the advantages of a great post defender... unless you don't have a creator at all, or you're simply losing an all-time player on offense like Magic.

Furthermore, it was Turkoglu and Lewis who kept torching Cleveland with their pick and roll. In other words, Dwight played better in the playoffs, but I'm not sure how valuable he was in the first place -- he had a great team, and I see the supporting casts improvement as the explanation for the Finals run.

yeah, improvement... wonder how, because their numbers weren't actually better (not to mention that's illogical in the first place, they weren't young players who would improve). what I think you're overlooking here is how much impact Dwight had on their offense. defenses either collapsed on him (pick and rolls, double-teams or simply roaming in the paint) or fouled him, making it much easier for his teammates to play.

I like putting things in perspective when all is said and done. Alston and Lee were infamous members of the team that had this historical streak going on. Turkoglu... well, he didn't really help the raptors. that's majority of his supporting crew. I don't think they were that good at all. they were quite bad actually, but Howard made them look great.

I'm not sure why you're equating this to removing a scorer and losing all of his points per game? We don't see 20-point differential swings with any player in NBA history. How large do you think his influence is as a help defender? http://hoopdata.com/oteamshotlocs.aspx

re: "improvement" - I think this might be a language issue? Improvement meaning they played better. I don't see Howard as creating a whole lot of extra shots suddenly for his teammates in rounds 2 and 3. In G1 vs. Cleveland, he setup his teammates for one shot (a layup). I'm just not seeing some huge effect from Howard where he's creating open shots for his teammates. He averaged under 2 assists as well (in wins during the season he average 1.6). Not a big fan of assists but we'd see a jump in that stat if he were suddenly creating open shots for all these players, no?

[bastillon]

re: "improvement" - I think this might be a language issue? Improvement meaning they played better. I don't see Howard as creating a whole lot of extra shots suddenly for his teammates in rounds 2 and 3. In G1 vs. Cleveland, he setup his teammates for one shot (a layup). I'm just not seeing some huge effect from Howard where he's creating open shots for his teammates. He averaged under 2 assists as well (in wins during the season he average 1.6). Not a big fan of assists but we'd see a jump in that stat if he were suddenly creating open shots for all these players, no?

I wasn't talking about inside out type of creating. that was only the case against Cleveland. I was talking about Magic's system depending largely on Howard's ability to draw defenders rolling to the basket. entire defense collapses on him, leaving 3P shooters open. that's why Turkoglu was seen as a great player at the time, despite the fact that he wasn't anything more than good off player with awful D. this type of impact isn't captured by the boxscore yet if you ask any Magic fan if that was the case, they'll tell you the same thing.

[Doctor MJ]

My own initials

Funny that "The" is a first name in Norway. I'd never have guessed.

On a similar note, you've always been "Doctor Magic Johnson". Correct?

Multiple meanings. Meant to reference Erving, Magic, Jordan, and those are my initials.

[Doctor MJ]

'08-09 Results

Code: Select all

Player             1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th Pts   POY Shares
1. LeBron James     23   3   0   0   0 251   0.965
2. Kobe Bryant       3  17   6   0   0 179   0.688
3. Dwyane Wade       0   5   6  13   1 105   0.404
4. Dwight Howard     0   0  13   9   3  95   0.365
5. Chris Paul        0   1   0   4  14  33   0.127
6. Dirk Nowitzki     0   0   0   0   6   6   0.023
7. Tim Duncan        0   0   1   0   0   5   0.019
8. Carmelo Anthony   0   0   0   0   1   1   0.004
   Chauncey Billups  0   0   0   0   1   1   0.004