The only person who knows what LeBron wants to do is LeBron. I'm guessing he will allow himself to be wooed by Chicago, Cleveland, Dallas, Miami, New Jersey, New York and Washington. He won't want to play for the Clippers, for a lot of reasons (no. 1 being the bat-shit crazy owner, and no. 2 that he'd be second fiddle to Kobe in LA).
I also see him ending up with a team like the Celtics or Atlanta, teams that already have the pieces in place to win and the pieces to do a sign and trade with Cleveland.
Whichever team he decides is the best fit, the remaining free agents will fall in once he makes a decision. So, if he waits til September to make a decision, some guys will get screwed (like Bosh, Boozer, Nowitzki, Rudy Gay, D-Wade, Joe Johnson). I think the likelihood of James and another max player ending up on the same team is low, simply because these free agents are not at the point in their careers where they'd be willing to be the second banana. It's one thing for LeBron to give Kobe a run for his spotlight in LA, but another thing entirely to share the spotlight on the same team.
There's really no way this would happen, but let's say that the Celtics do somehow land the big fish. Who would they trade? ESPN.com's trade machine isn't a good buoy because it's based entirely on the money working out, not common sense. Ray Allen would be a good trade piece, as would young guys like Tony Allen, Nate Robinson and Big Baby Davis. Then you'd have a starting five of Perkins/Garnett/James/Pierce/Rondo. The starters would have to score 75+ points every game, because the team would have no bench after Rasheed Wallace. The key would be that LeBron, Rondo and Perkins would terrorize the Eastern Conference for the next five years.
If, much more likely, LeBron goes to the Knicks, and Wade goes to the Nets, the Atlantic Division will be enjoyable to watch, with more than half of the teams capable of posting winning records (yes: Celtics, Knicks, Nets; no: Toronto, Philadelphia).
The "LeBron Stays in Cleveland" scenario gained steam yesterday with the Cavs firing Mike Brown, the winner of the Worst Coach of a Good Team award nearly three years running. With Brown out of the picture, does Avery Johnson or someone like Stan Van Gundy drop what they're doing and woo LeBron to stay?
And speaking of free agent coaches, if Doc Rivers voluntarily ends his tenure in Boston and assistant Thibodeau gets a head coaching gig somewhere else, how many minutes pass before Ainge is on the phone to Kevin McHale?
Monday, May 24, 2010
Thursday, May 13, 2010
Why the Cavs Will Lose: The Magical Disappearance of Antawn Jamison
If you look at the history of the NBA, the truly elite teams had more than one superstar on their roster. The Celtics of the 1950s and 1960s are great examples, as are the Knick teams of the early 1970s, the 76er teams of the early 1980s, the Laker and Celtic teams of the mid-1980s, the Piston teams of the early 1990s, the Bulls teams of the 1990s, and the Laker teams of the early 2000s. Conversely, the teams that fell short routinely had a weaker lineup.
I bring this up because not only am I fascinated with the Empty Numbers Theory (something I made up), but I'm convinced that this year's Cleveland Cavaliers team is not an elite team and, as currently assembled, has no shot of winning this or any championship.
First, the Empty Numbers Theory: A good or even great player on a weak team will put up inflated statistics simply because there's no one else on the team to do it. Even bad teams put up 70 - 100 points a game, and those points have to come from somewhere. Performing well on a bad team can have two results: either the player accepts it and plays to pad his stats, or he becomes so motivated to win that he lobbies hard to change his situation.
(The opposite of the Empty Numbers Theory is the Dwight Howard Effect – mediocre players who put up inflated statistics on great teams because of a once-in-a-generation type of teammate (for example, the presence of Dwight Howard on Hedo Turkoglu's stats).)
League history is littered with stars putting up empty numbers on bad and mediocre teams. A great current example of this is Antawn Jamison. When he was on the Wizards, he averaged over 20 points a game for five years. But how many games did those Wizard teams win? Over the five-year period, Jamison's Wizards squads put up a high yearly win total of 45 games (2004-2005), and a low of 19 (2008-2009).
We all know what happens when a Dwight Howard Effect player moves to a situation where he's more of a focus (see Turkoglu on the Raptors), but what about when an Empty Numbers guy joins a good team?
I think it goes back to that player's mindset: he either is playing for the stats or is playing to win. I don't know how Jamison approaches the game, but because he hasn't really shown himself in this Cavaliers/Celtics series, I would have to say he hasn't changed his mindset from his bad-team days and is playing for the stats. And that will cripple the Cavaliers' chances of beating the Celtics.
Now, about this year's Cavalier team. The big problem is that they are built around LeBron James. This in and of itself is not a problem; James is a bona fide superstar. If the team wasn't built around his game, heads would roll.
But there are problems with his game that he hasn't addressed, ones that hold him back from establishing himself as a winner in a league that desperately wants him to be a winner. For one, he disappears when his team is down (unlike Dwyane Wade). Second, he isn't automatic from the free-throw line (unlike Kobe or Durant). Third, his presence on the floor doesn't make his teammates better (unlike Dwight Howard). LeBron James is mortal, and that really hurts his current team – and, unless he improves his game, any future team he's on.
Which comes back to my original point: teams need more than one superstar to be elite. Look at the great teammates: Cousy, Sharman, Jones and Russell; West, Baylor and Chamberlain; Frazier, Bradley and Reed; Kobe and Shaq; Jordan and Pippen; Bird, McHale, Parish and Dennis Johnson; Magic, Kareem and Worthy; Hakeem and Drexler; Garnett, Pierce, Allen and Rondo. James and ... who?
I bring this up because not only am I fascinated with the Empty Numbers Theory (something I made up), but I'm convinced that this year's Cleveland Cavaliers team is not an elite team and, as currently assembled, has no shot of winning this or any championship.
First, the Empty Numbers Theory: A good or even great player on a weak team will put up inflated statistics simply because there's no one else on the team to do it. Even bad teams put up 70 - 100 points a game, and those points have to come from somewhere. Performing well on a bad team can have two results: either the player accepts it and plays to pad his stats, or he becomes so motivated to win that he lobbies hard to change his situation.
(The opposite of the Empty Numbers Theory is the Dwight Howard Effect – mediocre players who put up inflated statistics on great teams because of a once-in-a-generation type of teammate (for example, the presence of Dwight Howard on Hedo Turkoglu's stats).)
League history is littered with stars putting up empty numbers on bad and mediocre teams. A great current example of this is Antawn Jamison. When he was on the Wizards, he averaged over 20 points a game for five years. But how many games did those Wizard teams win? Over the five-year period, Jamison's Wizards squads put up a high yearly win total of 45 games (2004-2005), and a low of 19 (2008-2009).
We all know what happens when a Dwight Howard Effect player moves to a situation where he's more of a focus (see Turkoglu on the Raptors), but what about when an Empty Numbers guy joins a good team?
I think it goes back to that player's mindset: he either is playing for the stats or is playing to win. I don't know how Jamison approaches the game, but because he hasn't really shown himself in this Cavaliers/Celtics series, I would have to say he hasn't changed his mindset from his bad-team days and is playing for the stats. And that will cripple the Cavaliers' chances of beating the Celtics.
Now, about this year's Cavalier team. The big problem is that they are built around LeBron James. This in and of itself is not a problem; James is a bona fide superstar. If the team wasn't built around his game, heads would roll.
But there are problems with his game that he hasn't addressed, ones that hold him back from establishing himself as a winner in a league that desperately wants him to be a winner. For one, he disappears when his team is down (unlike Dwyane Wade). Second, he isn't automatic from the free-throw line (unlike Kobe or Durant). Third, his presence on the floor doesn't make his teammates better (unlike Dwight Howard). LeBron James is mortal, and that really hurts his current team – and, unless he improves his game, any future team he's on.
Which comes back to my original point: teams need more than one superstar to be elite. Look at the great teammates: Cousy, Sharman, Jones and Russell; West, Baylor and Chamberlain; Frazier, Bradley and Reed; Kobe and Shaq; Jordan and Pippen; Bird, McHale, Parish and Dennis Johnson; Magic, Kareem and Worthy; Hakeem and Drexler; Garnett, Pierce, Allen and Rondo. James and ... who?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)