I like basketball. I enjoy watching it and I especially enjoy playing it. I derive enjoyment because at its best it is a constantly moving game of team work and cooperation. I would call it almost elegant when skilled players work together to score or defend. I have often critiqued players or moments when they do not live up to my ideal. Here then is a list of of my basketball pet peeves named after notable players.
The Kobe Bryant complex- Lets start here because it is perhaps the best known of my pet peeves.
Good Kobe: I will not debate that for several years Kobe Bryant has been the best all around basketball player. His skill is truly formidable. He is quick, agile and has the ability to drive past most players and since his jump shot is so accurate it is very hard to stop him from scoring. Oh and by the way he is a terrific defender.
Bad Kobe: Where is the cooperation? Kobe Bryant is always the best player on the floor and he knows it. It takes more than the best player to win a basketball game. The Kobe Bryant offense infuriates me. You might say that the Lakers were so lacking talent that Kobe taking 40 shots a game gave his team the best chance to win but you'd be wrong. All NBA players are elite athletes who have dominated at every level until the NBA, thats how you get to the NBA. Its not like Wilt Chamberlin vs 4th Graders. Team basketball is a better strategy and even allows less talented teams to beat more talented teams on a consistent basis.
The Steve Nash complex: Here is a pass-first team player. Just check the upward tick in his team mates statistics compared to their statistics when not playing with Steve Nash to see how a player who isnt gifted with top end athleticism can impact the game by getting his team mates involved.
Bad Steve Nash: Looks lost on defense. Just watching him pathetically chase the guy he should be guarding, constantly getting lost in traffic, often losing his man altogether drives me up the wall. It doesn't even look like he's trying out there.
The Swing Offense: Please try to score. Thats what you should be doing every second that you are on the offensive side of the half court line. Passing the ball around the perimeter for 10 seconds does not count as trying to score. Wisconsin wins games because they play great defense and rebound well, not because of the swing offense.
6 comments:
http://stuffwhitepeoplelike.wordpress.com/2008/01/18/4-assists/
In my hurry I forgot one.
The Dirk Nowitzki Complex: Dirk is a player with great size which he uses to grab rebounds and launch impossible to defend jumpers.
Bad Dirk: Dirk has two moves. The aforementioned jump shot which is a thing of beauty and his ability to barely protect the ball while moving in the general direction of the hoop until someone fouls him and he pretends like he was in the act of shooting. Im not going to be responsible and look up statistics but I would guess Dirk has the highest ratio of points from free throws to total points in the league. Maybe Im just annoyed by how much fouling goes or because I hate watching free throws.
I agree with you about Wisconsin basketball.
I'm sure you're not surprised that I partially disagree with you about Kobe(as I am a huge fan of both him and his team). As we have seen, Kobe Bryant is willing to share the ball(averaging 6.0 assists/game this season in an anti-assist triangle offense) when he is confident that his teammates will be able to make plays. However, I believe that the fact that he is competitive results in increased pressure from both himself and his teammates to take over a game when nothing else is working.
I think your view is based upon the following line of reasoning:
(1) When Kobe shares the ball with his teammates, the Lakers win.
(2) Therefore, the Lakers will win only if Kobe shares the ball with his teammates. (Or, equivalently, the Lakers win because Kobe shares the ball with his teammates).
The problem is that this reasoning is unjustified. For example, an equally plausible account is that:
(1) If his teammates perform well, Kobe shares the ball with them.
(2) If Kobe shares the ball with them, the Lakers win.
(3) Therefore, if Kobe's teammates perform well, the Lakers win.
Notice that it is not necessarily the case that they will not win if his teammates do not perform well. But if they do not perform well, he will not share the ball with them - most likely because he feels that sharing the ball with poorly performing teammates does not give the Lakers the best chance to win.
I think this analogous to that rather elementary argument NFL analysts always make about running the football. They are that there is a statistical correlation between running the football and winning games. Therefore, they conclude, if a team wants to win games, they should develop a game strategy around running the football. However, an equally plausible analysis that explains the correlation is that teams who are winning games run(perhaps to run out the clock/wear down the defense) and losing teams pass(to use less time and have the potential for greater yardage gains). Last year, however, we saw teams with a pass-first strategy(e.g., the Packers, the Patriots) who were able to win many games.
Along the same reasoning, we have seen that teams such as the Cavs and the Lakers are able to win with one star player taking the majority of the shots. The best strategy depends upon the game situation. I will concede that, in general, a team-focused strategy results in more wins. However, it is sometimes the case that a player(like Kobe or Lebron) gives his team a better chance to win if he takes the majority of the shots, especially when his teammates aren't stepping up.
My argument is not when Kobe shares the ball the Lakers win therefore the Lakers will win only when Kobe shares the ball. It is in fact 1) When Kobe does not share the ball the Lakers cannot win (the Championship) 2) Therefore Kobe must share the ball in order to have a chance at winning (the Championship.)
Its not just about assists, its about team mates sharing the load and forcing the defense to guard all five players on the court. There can be no debate that the Lakers teams of which I am speaking were not talented enough to win the Championship, however Running a Kobe Bryant Offense is conceding the point and reduces the season to a contest to see what Kobe's highest scoring game will be. Sure the Lakers could make the Playoffs but you cannot expect all the players to adjust and play a team offense in the post season.
A team's goal is not always to win the championship. You have admitted that the past few years, the Lakers have not had the talent necessary to win a championship. Therefore, their goal should be to do the best they can possibly do.
They got to the playoffs with Smush Parker on the starting roster. I think the strategy was pretty effective.
Kobe and the Lakers come back from being down 20 points in the second half. Who's Fundamental, now?
Post a Comment