It's a fun contest they have kids play. Be the Mayor or Chief Of Police for a day. They'll go around as everyone pretends they're in charge to humour them. In the movies they take it to the next level and the winner will start making major decisions that, by god, save the town from inevitable disaster.
So what if the job was NBA commissioner and instead of a movie it was reality? Here's what I'd do. Not reducing the schedule to 40 games. No huge changes. I've previously made lists of big ways to fix All Star, the NBAtwice and the useless discipline system. These are just small changes that would be felt across the NBA.
1.Mic Players And Refs
Why Can't An NBA Player Swear
Like A Hockey Player
I want to hear everything. This really only works with the near removal of fines for things players/refs say. Is it worth it? Yes. When I watched HBO's epic series, 24/7 - The Road To The Winter Classic I was constantly thinking one of three things. First, the supreme intensity and entertainment value of hockey at it's best. Nice come back NHL. Second: what if the NBA was not so paranoid about it's image that it let the game be a man's game again. Third: what if they actually let us see that raw, real hoop at the highest level for what it was always supposed to be?
I'm sick of NBA Cares. I want trash talk and stares.
2. Get Rid Of Homer Announcers, And Loosen Up The Heavies
Reggie Kind Of Sucks At His New Job
But He's Clearly Not Being Himself
Every once in a while when you watch feeds or downloaded games, they forget to flip a switch and you catch announcers talking when they don't know it's on. It's better. They give their real opinions instead of the postured ones. Their banter is better. (Reggie warned Kevin Harlen not to give him a golden shower during one game). Their analysis is better. Let them loose off the leash. Let them be themselves.
That would improve things. Removing Homer announcers would entirely change how the game is portrayed. Homers in general suck and the Homer Booth only creates more of them when they actually take something that Stacey King says seriously while openly cheer for the Bulls. Tommy Heinsohn also deserves strong mention. Get rid of all of them and replace them with real people who actually know how to call a game. Speaking of which...
3. Hire Gus Johnson To Call Everything
Gus Isn't Screaming, He's Calling
His Own Demise... With Excitement
If Marv Albert is the greatest hoops announcer ever, then Gus is #2, except Gus is actually #1. No one. No. One. Calls an exciting game better then Gus Johnson. He elevates how the sport of basketball is perceived by a brain processing it. I've mentioned in this space before how Gus Johnson got me excited calling the ball boys wiping up sweat after a foul. I looked up fully expecting them to do something miraculous and laughed at myself.
It's time for the NBA to hire this guy to call huge games and the playoffs. Announcers are all trying to be the next Chick Hearn. "Hand down man down" pretty much means nothing and we have to get back to people who actually get into what they're watching. I don't care about how the Van Gundy brothers used to play in their driveway. Why not put Dick Vitale beside Gus Johnson? Could you imagine how much better the Bulls/Celtics classic series would have been with them? How could this not make the NBA product better?
4. Remove All Canned Music From Stadiums, Only Organs Allowed
Humber Gardens: Home Of The
Corner Brook Royals Where My Dad's
Organ Rocked Fans Into A Frenzy
When I was a child, my father would take me to see the Corner Brook Royals play hockey in my sparsely populated home town. We didn't have to pay to get in. Why? Because my dad played the organ for all the hockey games. When they won the national title in 1986, they made sure to bring him with them.
Why?
Because in sports, organs matter. To this day, 25 years later and after he passed on, people still contact me about their memories of my father. He'd get them going to another level they didn't think possible a minute before. I sat beside him seeing him work an entire stadium on a PA I still own today. He'd see that the team was sluggish and knew what songs to play to get the crowd going for one last boost in the 3'rd. Musicians feel crowds, gather their energy, and feed it back in like an amplifier circuit. The Pussycat Dolls just suck.
I remember watching MJ, Reggie et al do some of their most amazing feats without fireworks or the latest pop sensation playing on speakers while the game was on. NYC still has that organ and I noticed it like an old friend I hadn't seen in a decade these past playoffs. It's still awesome and rockin MSG. Everyone agrees so I'd put them everywhere. Thanks for the memories Dad! Organs matter.
5.Buy The NBA On NBC Theme Song
It's just better. Yes, it was written by an enormous douche John Tesh, yes, he spent years wasting a nation's brain cells on Entertainment Tonight, but we'll give him this, he wrote the best sports theme song ever. So just shell out NBA, spend what it takes. Get the theme song from NBC and force everyone to use it. It's called branding and unfortunately you sold out the guys who branded the NBA better then anyone to ABC's Survivor money. It's not too late though and everything has it's price. Get the song and every opening to every game is instantly better. Fact.
Watch The 2009 ABC Finals Intro With
Roundball Rock And No Editing: Amazing!
6. One Ring To Rule Them All
Or one ring of announcers? Just out-right hire the announcers and broadcast staff from all the networks. Take some control over how the NBA product is packaged and published. Why are we listening to Magic say just about nothing in the NBA finals when TNT's crew is so much better? It's silly we listen to Mark Jackson when Marv Albert is alive. Just find a way so that the best people covering the game are there when it matters. Make it part of the TV contracts that networks have to share guys and make the best product possible for the good of all.
7. Let The Refs Give Interviews
If Refs Could Explain This Conversation Maybe
People Could Understand Why Their Horrible
Calls Ruin Games Instead Of Judge Them For It
Of all the baffling rules the NBA has this is the cake. Why not let officials give interviews after games? I'm sure they're grown men who won't buckle under the pressure and embarrass the league... the players do a good enough job of that. If a ref made a bad call he can explain what happened and 9 times out of 10 it's going to make sense. Let them defend themselves instead of just getting killed in the press along with the NBA's image. If they can just explain the thought processes maybe people will understand more. Ref's will also instinctively be more motivated to get calls right if they know they have to explain themselves after. It's just so black and white.
8. Provide Better Stats
If Derek Fisher Leads
The League In Charges For The
10'th Time And There's No
Stats, Does Anyone Care?
The work for many unpublished stats is already done and sitting in the NBA's databases. All they need to do is release it. Not even release, they just need to display it. Use it.
Take drawn charges. We see them in the play by play, but you have to go to hoopdata.com for a list of leaders. There's a plethora of other stats that are MIA. Quarterly stats? Open shot percentage? Shot contests? Hockey assists? All these things invariably matter but the NBA just doesn't seem bothered to acknowledge, record and publish the information.
When they do, it's going to look quite stupid in years to come, much like not having the shot blocking numbers from Bill Russell or Wilt's career looks today.
It's not from a lack of interest. It's not from a lack of resources to do these tasks. If some behaviour on a basketball court helps teams win and can be quantified, we should have stats on it. Derek Fisher gets almost 0 love from a statistical ranking because he does things that don't go in box scores. He's maybe the best player in the league over the past 10 years at something very important but is just seen as a role player.
9. Add A 4 Point Line
Why not? If you hit a shot from behind half court or even 35 feet it should be worth more simply because it's exponentially harder. It's more spectacular. As I see it, anything that helps a desperate team get back in it when they are on the ropes should be a go. Could you imagine how intense a 5 point play would be to swing a game?
When I went to ABA games in Halifax they had a great rule. Force a TO in the back court and a light went on. If you made the basket on the ensuing possession you got an extra point. Leads were not as safe and players D'ed up to win because even if they were down 10 points, they knew they were in it. Desperation creates drama.
10. Make The Court Bigger
They Dropped The Cages, Why Keep The Floor?
I'm a little surprised this has never been experimented with before. The court is not designed with a specific purpose. It's an arbitrary 50 feet wide. Even if there was a method to this it's long since become irrelevant. Players have become incredibly bigger, stronger and faster. The space may have been good for people with peach baskets, maybe it even suited the guys in the 50's, but for much too long the game has been cramped into either end of the court.
When the NBA adopted the 3 point line in 1980 rather then sensibly widen the court since players would now be spaced out more they shortened the line on the sides. The result: players have 3 feet on either side of the court to work in. Why? Is this better? The elite athletes of the NBA can cover this distance in 2-3 steps. They never really get a chance to get going in any half-court set slowing down the action and making it easier for weaker athletes to defend. Not even to mention, this style of play is largely responsible for so many injuries that hamper the marketability of the game.
Widening the court will give players more room to operate and open things up for the most athletic/talented players. It creates an all around more exciting experience. Instead of getting trapped in the corner we'll see split double teams and widened passing/attacking lanes for better ball movement and so many more vicious assaults on the rim.
Of course. this is not the movies, and I'll never be commish of the NBA, but it does not stop me from playing the what if game. I still often wonder why the NBA is so reluctant to experiment with even minute changes to improve things for all. David Stern loves to talk about the tradition of the game, but in reality I think he's just a pretty unimaginative guy who's more about the NBA's books then the game itself. The only change he's gone after, The New Ball, blew up in his face because it was actually just a marketing gimmick they'd put no thought into.
Bad Movie, Good Idea
It's likely to never happen, but I've never understood why teams, owners and the league office are so bloody content when they are sitting on such a base of talent. Why not shake things up a little and make some harmless changes? Why not have a commish for a day contest? Haven't they ever seen Little Big League?
The Dallas Mavericks are champions of the basketball world! They defeated the evil Miami Heat in 6 games to take the 2011 title on Miami's own floor! Dirk Nowtizki led a team of role players against a team with 2 and a half superstars and came out victorious! Dirk is the best scorer in the league and the best closer in the league! He should have been the league MVP! He's a top 15 player of all time!
Wait... what?
Are people listening to what they are saying? Does that last bit sound right? Let's look into it.
Before the playoffs if you were to take a poll of reasonably educated NBA fans where would Dirk rank? I personally would probably have him between 25 and 30, and I think the general population would probably have him around there or possibly slightly lower. Now what did he do in the playoffs to warrant the huge bump in the rankings...
He posted a PER of 25.2. A very good mark to be sure, a full 1.5 points better than Lebron James, and only 1.1 below Dwyane Wade. But wait, was this PER (which does a decent job of summarizing offensive production while factoring in pace and minutes played) affecting the huge jump in how people ranked him? I don't think so. He topped his 25.2 mark in 5 previous playoffs, with marks of 27.5, 26.8, 26.3, 28.4, and 28.3 in '04, '06, '08, '09, and '10 respectively. Now with the exception of 2006 (reached finals, 23 games total) and 2009 (second round, 10 games total), the samples were all rather small, but it looks from that data that Dirk did not exactly reach some new level in these playoffs. In fact, Dirk significantly outperformed this PER's in each of the past 2 years, so we shouldn't have been surprised by how he played this postseason. For the record Dirk also had 4 years where he had a PER higher than 25.2 in the regular season, so we have seen him play at this level for quite some time.
Now of course, PER isn't the all determining stat. So let's look at some other numbers. Dirk posted a stellar TS% of 60.9% in the playoffs, largely due to an absurd 175/186 performance from the free throw line. However, Dirk significantly outperformed that mark in the previous 2 playoffs, with marks of 63.5% and 64.3%. He had a reasonable EFG% of 51.4%, but once again he achieved higher marks the previous 2 years, and also in 2003. So yes Dirk definitely shot better than he normally has in the playoffs in his career, but he actually took a step backward from recent playoffs.
What about raw numbers? His 27.7 points per game was the second best mark of his career, topped only by his 28.4 in 2002. So good for him. However his 8.1 rebounds per game tied for the lowest mark in his career, and was far below his career playoff rebounding average of 10.4. Now some of that is clearly due to finally having a solid rebounding center in Chandler beside him, but it's still not an overly impressive performance. Also, despite having probably the best shooting supporting cast of his career, he averaged only 2.5 assists per game, which is right around his career playoff average, and worse than his numbers in his previous 3 playoffs.
Now of course people will say “Who cares how great he was playing in the first round in past years, it's all about what you do in the finals!”. Alright then, let's look at the finals. 26 points, 9.7 rebounds, 2 assists, under a block and a steal, 41.6% from the field, 36.8% from 3, almost 3 turnovers per game. What about those numbers screams “Oh my god Dirk is amazing!”?. Nothing. Now he was truly special from the free throw line, shooting 45 for 46. He grabbed only 2 offensive rebounds all series, compared to 14 by teammate Shawn Marion and 24 by Tyson Chandler. Heck Barea doubled his offensive rebound output. And yes, he closed some games out, namely game 6, when he went 5-6 in the last quarter to seal the ring, but people will conveniently ignore that Terry carried the Mavs for the first 3 quarters of the biggest game of the year while Dirk was busy going 4-21. Really, Dirk was the deserving Finals MVP, but was he even the best player, with Wade going for 26.5/7/5.2 with 1.5 steals, 1.5 blocks on a stellar 55% shooting while averaging slightly fewer turnovers and having a much bigger defensive impact? I don't think so.
Now, while coming up huge in the finals would be nice, it's not really necessary. Dirk's first 3 rounds were truly spectacular at times. The number of comebacks he led was astounding. His shooting in game 1 of the WCF was legendary. He came up clutch time and time again in these playoffs, as he has done for years. If there is one reason that people think so much more highly of Dirk, it's because this postseason helped erase the (entirely false) notion that he is a choker.
And this leads to the next problem; our society's tendency to associate the success of a team with the performance of the individual. For Dirk, a championship validates every thing he has worked hard for, it vanquishes the demons left over from that horrible loss in '06. For us, a championship validates nothing. Or at least, that's how it should be. Dirk didn't win the title, the Mavericks did. Was Dirk extremely important? Of course he was. But there is no way they win the series without the enormous contributions of Jason Terry (who probably hit more clutch shots than Dirk in the finals), Tyson Chandler (who seemed to outrebound the entire Miami team at times), Jason Kidd (who hit so many huge threes at the most crucial times), Shawn Marion (who forced the league's best player to have his worst series in years), JJ Barea (who carved up Miami's D despite all logic that would tell us that's impossible), Deshawn Stevenson and more. Heck Brian Cardinal was huge in game 6. So yes Dirk was huge, and he, along with his teammates, earned this title. But here's the ridiculous logic people use. Dirk played pretty well in the finals, he got great help, and they win, so now Dirk is a true champion, a winner, and all those other great things. This is what happened. Now suppose Dirk plays at the same level, but now suppose Bosh shot 7-16 instead of 4-16 in game 2, which we all know he was fully capable of doing since he was missing open shots, and now game 2 is a 4 point win for Miami instead of a 2 point win for Dallas. Now suppose Terry doesn't catch fire in the first half of game 6. With Dirk shooting 1-12 the Mavs are probably in a 10 or 15 point hole and might never recover. And just like that, the Larry O'Brien trophy is headed East.
Now obviously that is a purely hypothetical situation, and far from reality. But did Dirk's impact on the game change in either scenario? No, it did not. Yet the situation changed completely, and possibly the winner of the series. Yet one scenario results in Dirk being thought of as a clutch hero and the other as an unreliable choker? I fail to see the logic behind that reasoning.
It's a flaw in our general way of thinking, and the media doesn't help. What sounds like a better story? “Dirk has a solid series as Mavs beat the Heat”, or “Dirk leads Mavs over Big 3 and cements his legacy”? It's not a contest, the second sounds better, and is also a much easier story to write. In today's world stories must be catchy, and to do that writers often tend to produce material that is usually exaggerated, and frankly quite often wrong.
So those statements at the beginning of the post (Dirk is the best scorer in the league and the best closer in the league! He should have been the league MVP! He's a top 15 player of all time!), are all statements I have heard several times since the Mavericks won the title. Let's quickly examine each.
First off, best scorer. Per 36 minutes he average 24 points on a True Shooting Percentage of 61.2%.. Very good numbers. He does have a case for this one, although Durant, Melo (the most versatile scorer), and Lebron all have a good argument as well.
Best closer? I think he probably wins this one. There are other players with an argument, but when you consider the stats, and look at how dominant Dallas becomes down the stretch because of his play, I'm not sure anyone beats him out, at least not for this year.
League MVP? Now this is where is starts getting silly. Dirk was not the league MVP. Granted, he probably deserved better than the 6th place finish he got. I feel he was certainly more valuable than Kobe, and probably more so than Durant too. But no he was not the league MVP. He did not mean more to his team this year than Dwight Howard or Lebron James, both of whom deserved it more than Derrick Rose, but that's an argument that has been addressed many times (for the record I think Dwight was the MVP). Dirk had a very good season, and I'm not a “stats tell the whole story” guy by any stretch, but 23 points and 7 rebounds per game with average defense does not an MVP make when Dwight is averaging 23 and 14 on 60% shooting with incredible defense, or when Lebron is being... well Lebron. Dirk had a very good regular season, and a great playoffs, but this is just a case of people placing too much value on the results of the playoffs. Dirk was not the regular season MVP.
And finally... Dirk is a top 15 player of all time.
Wait...
Hold up...
Are you serious?
WHERE DID THIS COME FROM?
Look I'm a Dirk fan, I've been one since around 2001. I defended his performance against the Warriors in 2007. I defended him when people said he was mentally or physically soft, when the reality was that getting beat by the Spurs isn't something that warrants excuses. I defended him when people said his defense was horrible, or that he was a choker...
But I will not defend this. Dirk is not a top 15 all time player. He's great, but here's a quick list (in no real order).
That's 20, quite easily. Even if you don't agree with all 20, there are numerous other arguable ones, such as Karl Malone, Pippen, Walton, Iverson, Nash, Pettit, Reed, Ewing, Drexler, Mikan, Robinson, Kidd, Cousy, and screw it, Lebron. Even if you throw out the old guys because, let's face it, they just weren't as good at basketball, there are still easily 15 guys who are better than Dirk. And you know what, there's more that I'm forgetting.
Dirk is terrific, he's a transcendent scorer, a dependable clutch player, and by all accounts a beloved teammate. But he lacks certain things that most of those players in that upper echelon possess, such as a dominant impact on the defensive end. Or some other skill to fall back on when his shot isn't falling (in game 6, when he was busy going 4-21 through 3 quarters, what else was Dirk doing to try to impact the game? Not a whole lot). He's not a great rebounder for his size (I don't care how far away he is from the basket during the offense, no 7 footer should only grab 2 offensive rebounds in a 6 game series). He's an incredible player, but to get into that top 15 or so players of all time, you need to be nearly perfect. Dirk is not.
It will calm down in a few years. People will look back on this year's playoffs, and they will remember that Dirk was consistently cool under pressure, that he delivered when they needed him, that he submitted a few truly memorable performances, and that he found redemption. And we will think back, and compare it to the other great runs in history, and realize that while Dirk was special, in the grand scheme of things it wasn't as magical as it seems in the moment. And nobody except the most die hard of Dirk fans will still be making these ridiculous claims.
Unless of course, he does it again. And if there's one thing we've learned in these playoffs, it's that Dirk is fully capable of proving people wrong.
Durant Scores More On Average, But There Is
Nothing Average About Russell Westbrook
By: Jeremy Graham
Can you be the league MVP if you are not even the MVP of your own team? That's the question facing Kevin Durant, the chic pick at the beginning of the year to bringing home the hardware. Kobe's getting older, Lebron's taking his talents to South Beach, and Chris Paul's on a “lottery team.” It's KD team, and his time to win 10 straight MVPs.
With the playoff run and the international grind Durant is starting slow. I still don’t know if he would be the most valuable player to the Sonics, yes I am calling them the Sonics. (ED: FCP says "Damn Straight!" :) ) Right now, and maybe in the foreseeable future, Russell Westbrook is unquestionably the best, and most important player on his team.
This Play Defines The Sonics Success Against LA Last Year, Not Durant's
Double take expected; I almost can’t even believe what I am writing. How can I say that a combo guard who wasn’t supposed to even be a PG can be better than Kevin Durant? Simple! In the time they have played together Westbrook has progressed much more than Durant. Westbrook was never intended to be the full time point guard yet he wanted it so bad he told the franchise "I'm your guy" and took the bull by the horns. Westbrook has progressed so far that he is now arguably a top 5 PG in the league.
I know, top 5 is alright but you have to be top 3 to be elite. After Chris Paul and Deron Williams you can play musical chairs with Nash, Rondo, Rose and Westbrook so today's "arguably top 5" is really yesterday's elite. Durant may be a top two or three player at SF, depending on how you rate Carmelo, but SF does not have the depth of the PG position in the NBA. There are four different categories to rate players on, scoring, rebounding, passing and defense. Right now I think that Westbrook is outshining Durant in all four.
Scoring
We Feel You Seattle
This is like the Kobe vs Lebron debate for who is a better scorer. Talent or Production, what to choose? Durant is, of course, the more talented scorer from anywhere on the court. He resembles Vince Carter with the way he can stroke the 35 foot three when he wants to. Westbrook is a little more modest and is relegated to inside 20 feet. Despite this Durant€ is less efficient. He scores more than Westbrook, which looks great, till you dig a little deeper.
Durant is currently shooting 42% from the field and only 31% from the the arc. For a recently appointed “best offensive player in the game,” those numbers are lacking. Westbrook isn’t lighting it up either, shooting only 3% better at 45% but when you shoot as much as both players do it adds up. By getting his buckets closer to the basket Westbrook takes higher percentage shots for better efficiency. Some say Durant gets to the line and shoots so well the easy points compensate his poor shooting nights. Good point, except Westbrook is getting to the line just a touch less and is shooting just a tad lower. For now Westbrook is the best scorer on the Sonics. Will this last all year? Perhaps not, but it's the case so far in 2010 and could continue.
Rebounding
Even Blake Griffin Can't
Keep A Good Dunk Down
It also looks like Durant is the better rebounder on the surface. He does average more per game. But he plays a position where rebounding is part of the job, whereas at PG rebounds are a bonus. Westbrook doesn’t think along those lines. He is one of the best rebounding guards in the league.
Not just from the point but of all guards. Durant pulls down 6.6 RPG and Westbrook pulls down 5.5 out of a non-rebounding position. You have to look at the offensive glass as well. Westbrook averages almost 2 offensive rebounds a game, Durant doesn’t even average 1. Durant is phenomenal, but that reeks of low effort. A PG should not be cleaning the offensive glass better than your SF. It's not how basketball works. Is it a paradigm shift in the league towards a new uber athletic PG? Perhaps... Some day Durant is going to be pulling down 10 rebounds a game, he may even hit the offensive glass. Right now though, Westbrook has him beat by a country mile.
Passing
It's Okay Ramon Sessions,
No One Else Saw It Coming Either
It goes without saying that a team's PG the better passer when compared to a SF. For the sake of this I will focus ball control. For a jump shooter that puts the ball on the floor intermittently Durant frankly turns the ball over far too often. His TOs are as high as Westbrook without running the offense. Westbrook performs the main ball handling duties putting him in position to turn it over much more often.
Advanced stats appear to disprove this. Durant does have a higher usage rate and a lower turnover percentage. Does that mean that he holds onto the ball better? Nope, it sure doesn’t. Durant has a higher usage rate because he puts up more shots, not because he has the ball in his hands more. More shots should equal fewer turnovers. Next you might say, “Well Durant plays more minutes, of course his turnovers are higher.” Good point! Until you see they both average 3.5 TO per 36 minutes. In time Durant will protect the ball and drop more dimes. Presently, Westbrook is his superior.
Defence
PG's Get Higher Then Their
Centers For Blocks Now???
It does win championships as they say. Durant has turned himself into a very decent defender after a mostly lost rookie year. Westbrook has been a very good from day one. I am not saying Westbrook is better because of history, I am saying he is better... because he is.
Durant's length/smarts put him in position to steal the ball 1.5 times, and block about a shot, per game. Not only that but he plays solid man and team D at a more important defensive position. Westbrook may play a less important defensive role than Durant but he plays his role better. With the influx of excellent to elite PGs it's becoming more important to have a good defender at the point.
Just ask the Heat. Westbrook is able to defend elite guards without much help and gets at least 2 take aways per game and tips many passes that don't make box scores. Durant may have a slight advantage in blocks, but steals nearly always result in a change of possession. Defense is hard to judge, especially statistically and when comparing different positions, but you have to give the edge to Westbrook. All without mentioning that Westbrook can guard both guard positions very well.
Come MVP voting Durant may very well pull ahead of Westbrook and be the best player for the Sonics. His numbers very well could sky rocket. He has all the talent to do so. A few questions should still arise at that time. Will Westbrook have the better numbers? Will it matter if he does, or will Durant win the MVP because he was supposed to be? And can you be the MVP if someone on your own team is outperforming you?
Yet Another Highly Evolved Fan - More Visible, Check! Or: The NBA, Where Class Happens!
Part one listed the four conceptual fan eras of pro hoop. You can read it here. This covers the intangibles of how fandom has changed continuously over the span of those eras.
Quality of actual play since the 50's has seen dramatic growth it is dwarfed by that of the fan. Casual fans today possess knowledge about basketball that's grown astronomically past the point of even GM's from older eras.
Not that fans are inherently 'better': the environment has changed. Following hoop and knowing anything about it has just evolved. Consider these 4 factors pushing fandom to the next level. 1. NBA Availability/Visibility
In the early 1950’s the fan experience existed at the stadium, on the radio and in the newspaper. 1 in 10 people actually owned a “picture box”. I've often heard “You weren’t there, you don’t know what it was like!” Not really true: here's a revelation: people who say that were not there either.
No one was. Who really followed The League. A stadium holds 10-20,000. Catching a random NBA game on TV, if you were lucky enough to have one, was almost 0.
This Is Exactly How My Father Described Watching Sports When He Was Young... He WAS Ther
Perhaps you saw Lakers vs Celtics or the ‘game of the week’. How many people tuned into the 1950’s warriors/clippers match up to see 1950’s Joe Alexander pad his stats in garbage time? Short answer: 0. Today: lots.
By the end of the 50’s more then 9 in 10 homes had a television. Fair enough but no difference. Circa 1964 all we have of the most famous game ever is a picture of Wilt with a piece of paper someone had written ‘100’ in black marker. Oh, a radio call of the last 3 minutes someone recorded in their dorm room that was released 30 years later. And the 1000's of anecdotes by fans claiming they were there at Madison Square Garden when Wilt scored 100!!!! The irony is thick.
Its the most exhausted and tired reason driving 1,000's of Wilt is the best arguments. Its inconsequential if Wilt is not the Greatest Of All Time (GOAT), or that his game is not the best in NBA history. Its possible. The point is no one who makes those claims saw it and therefore anything spoken about it is a pure fabrication.
I'm betting the people who arrogantly pull rank and say "You weren't there man!" are not even slightly aware that the oldest entire recorded event is game 7 of the 1963 finals. That means Bill Russel's prime is evidenced by inflated stats and anecdotes because the vast majority of his career has only been seen once, if at all, by the smallest percentage of the population.
People had no choice but to make things up to fill in coverage gaps. 95% of the league was not available. Talking sports meant telling creative stories about the few games you saw or about how your fave player won an arm wrestling contest. ESPN classic games 'are' the things they watched. If they did actually see a game they didn't watch it again for 30 odd years until ESPN classic replayed them.
Impressions were garnered from a single viewing, with no instant replay, with no casual post-game re-examination, then reinforced by discussion of memories and unverifiable facts. Chinese telephone is not exactly a bastion of accuracy.
This Is All Anyone Has Seen Of Wilt's 100 Point 'MSG' Performance (wink!). Is Holding A Sign Grounds For Being The GOAT?
All games are now recorded/broadcast nationally. All big plays are on 24 hour highlights and you tube within minutes. Every game is available for down load and is tivo'ed to be reviewed by fans who are not depending on their emotions/memory to form ideas. They want what happened. Not impressions of what happened.
I re-watched Rocky 1-2 decades after I saw it the first time. I was amazed I had forgotten that Rocky didn't beat Creed. Memories of emotional moments are an incredibly poor substance for a basis of anything factual. Today's fans can refresh their memory 100's of times compared to someone in the 50's who didn't even have instant replay. Its not even close.
2. Data Collection
Basketball opinions have bias created by attachment to the players/teams people think about. Without data its incredibly difficult to formulate an informed opinion on any topic because you will naturally lean towards the result you want. Entire careers for ESPN's John Hollinger and Houston's GM, Darryl Morey come from beating back that bias. More then anything else a solid statistical basis combined with traditional opinions can propel an idea about sports from homer fanboying and actual insightful observance. Using data properly is integral to any understanding of sports.
The less data you have the more narrow your perspective. You have to rely on flawed human experience for more of your analytical foundation. Combine this with point 1. You are one of the lucky few who had season tickets in Philly. You saw games: you have a great opinion. But without season splits do you really know if the home production of Wilt is equal to his road production? Not really. I bet you not a single home fan of Wilt's ever made the concession "granted, I've only seen him play at home." It probably does not enter an fan's brain in the 1950's as the home/road concept came from stats. Even if Wilt played better on the road the opinion is weakened by home play dwarfing other influences.
Lack data narrowed what fans considered when they thought about sports. Points, dimes and boards only scratch the surface. It was not until 1973/74 that the NBA even started to record blocks and steals. Per 36/48 mintues, PER, all splits, head to head stats, rebound percentages, assist to turnover ratios, adjusted plus/minus, win shares and a plethora of stats just did not exist in older eras.
There is still an abysmal lack of defensive stats. Steals... and thats all. Tomorrow's fan will be able to base their opinions on things like blow bys, open shot percentage, altered shots, contested shot percentage, drive rate, points per pass, forced double teams, unforced turnovers, shot contests, shot contest percentage, step back defense, show/hedge percentage. For all the stats that we have today on older fans, I'm convinced tomorrow will have at least twice on us. And their stats will be much more relevant to showing exactly why a player is valuable.
Nash Can Score Consistantly From The Whole Floor, AND, I Can Prove It
I can show you exactly how Steve Nash shoots from anywhere on the court for any of his splits. He's amazingly consistent from every spot on the floor and his shot chart shows that definitively. Jerry West was a great shooter, but can it truely be shown. No.
The best someone can factually say is "I guess we'll never know, because that information does not exist." Which is no knock on Jerry West, we don't know so he gets the benefit of the dobut, but it is a damning indictment of 50's/60's fan sophistication. Thinking their players are great, but its based on intangible memories of unquantifiable events. If we learn anything from stats its that what we think from watching the game can often be grossly bias without us even intending to be. How many times have you looked at a box score of a player you don't like to be surprised he's shot 60%? If you formed opinions in an era with 0 stats, that bias had 0 counters, and raged on unchecked.
3. Data Availability
Having data is nothing without access. Growing up a witness to the birth of the internet you have an acute appreciation for life before and after. In elementary school if you wanted to learn about anything it took a trip to the library. You find right right volume of the encyclopedia and if the subject was around long enough it was covered in your edition. The process could take hours. Today accessing that data takes less then three seconds, or however long it takes me to type the name in and hit enter.
Fill In The Blank: Basketball Reference Is To The Sports Alamanac What The Calculator Is To The ____________
In the 50s and 60s, access to stats were limited to what was reported during broadcasts and printed in the newspapers. A sports almanac was handy but really a collection of the former two sources. I know this because during the 80's when I started watching ball, its all I had.
My own NBA almanac still sits at home on my shelf dog eared from years and years of use. I used to sit studying records of players like Wilt and Russell as I learned the history of the game for hours. I'm guessing it was even more limited in the 50's and 60s with a comparatively limited sources of stats to put in such books.
I Learned lots, but all past tense. Real time, even simple shooting percentages from current seasons: forget it. If your paper published those stats (unlikely) and the player was not in the top 10 (who cares) you're limited to points, assists and rebounds per game. No pace, minutes played or any of the other ultra relevant per game stat factors.
Fast forward. www.basketball-reference.com. What kind of season is LBJ really having to win MVP. I can call up the total number of games shooting over 50% he's had. Compare it with other players in history. 30 seconds. Career field goal % compared to this season. 5 seconds. Head to head matchups vs Shane Battier to see how he is under that pressure, then compare to how Kobe deals with Shane. Then compare those stats to how he plays against a weaker defensive team like the Suns. 1-2 minutes. That's just one site. There is also 82 Games, Database Basketball and many others.
Access/stats have not so much as increased, the magnitude sky rocketed to the point that the significance of stats used in the past is truly approaching 0. Almost meaningless. You could get away with making statements so long as lots of people agreed with you. Since it would take a few hours, days, weeks or months to gather/generate information to challenge a general statement (say, that West was a better shooter then Bird) opinions were created/rejected/accepted with little to no verification.
For the above, the answer would be based on something like number of big time shots they made. Not that even but the ones they remembered, big time shots being useless as an indicator in the first place. Without the numbers and 10 minutes of math on paper to make even cursory adjustments theres nothing else. Would a shooter like West be at the level he's considered today if B-Ball Reference existed when he played? Its an interesting question.
Bird/Magic: Best On The Planet, Millionaires: As The Writer Of A Nearly Undread Blog I Would Own Them Like Children In Any Stats Conversatio
Consider Magic's often recounted stories about how he could not wait till the next morning paper to see how Larry Bird did. If Magic can get updates sent to his cell phone every time players make a play in real time during the game. Magic at millions in the 80's can't afford the same stats available to a homeless person today. Its changed THAT much.
GMs did not even have that access. No one did. People seriously need to think about the signifigance of homeless people having better information then Magic Johnson.
4. Expansion/Sophistication Of Sports Media
Dedicated sports reporting was attempted in the early 1980s. ESPN was scoffed at as a gimmick. What could you possible discuss about sports for 24 hours? Detractors missed. Deeper analysis would not bore but challenge us to keep up. Supply fed back into demand. Fans learned more, fans wanted more and these two institutions formed an ever expanding symbiotic relationship.
Previously, newspapers paid beat reporters to take quotes, go on road trips, and shadow the team reporting their insights. That's how people related to their team. Today every game is followed by a press conference and players are sending tweets to fans at half time. The middle man is being replaced with direct communication to those interested in how they do their jobs.
These are real people like us. Mark Cuban, to my total surprise, responded to a random e-mail I sent regarding the great Seattle Stern/Clay Bennet Gang Rape. He has his faults... but he's easily one of the best owners in sports. Modern fans don't want middlemen, they want to sift information themselves.
Marv's Biting Play By Play Is Great As Ever, But Now His Booth Is Backed Up By Authority
The result: career announcers like Marv Albert are paired with completely qualified coaches like Jeff Van Gundy, Doc Rivers, Doug Collins and Hubie Brown. With them are all time great players like Reggie Miller and Marc Jackson giving insights that are over the head of even recent fans.
Isiah and Magic's failed booth attempts had much to do with timing. Fans would not understand the details/lingo so they were caught in endless chatter about 'running the right lanes' when you know he had to hold back how to break a match up zone on the break.
Its evolution. Steve Kerr, now GM of the Suns, was having advanced basketball conversations for fans before running an NBA team. Van Gundy and Jackson can now pull up a 360 degree camera still, move players around in 3 dimensions showing a play it it's natural environment, reset, roll tape, and fans see the real time play.
Casual fans who had never even seen a play diagram were getting confused by x's and o's in the announcer's hen scratches with a light pen. Comprehension of a pick/roll was considered advanced. With educated fans dribble jabber is now replaced with serious discussion of what makes and breaks games.
5. So Whats the overall result?
Today's average/slightly above average NBA fan comprehends advanced concepts like defensive hedging/shading/funneling, intricacies of complicated sets like the Triangle or the flex/princton offesne. Defensive advantages of zones and presses that were glossed over in the past as merely 'double teams'.
In the front office matters fans are actively aware of the Collective Bargaining Agreement to the point where they can create totally feasible trades that make sense on the court and on paper. They're acutely aware of scouting reports from college to the high school level, player contract details and can make educated guesses on the moves of every team in the league for the next 5 years.
Discreet knowledge of all sorts of medical knowledge regarding specific tendons, liniments and joints is common. Details of how to solve many issues with arthroscopic and micro-fracture knee surgery and the estimated recovery times specific injuries will have. Fans know Wade tore his labrum and it's much more serious then Kendrick Perkins's rotator cuff who can play through the pain. Rotoworld will report on each player's status daily.
Meet Daryl Morey - Computer Geek, Never Played, NBA Fan, 0 Experience, Best GM In The Game
Many fans today could actually do a reasonable job of running an NBA team. Darryl Morey went from having a computer science degree and a few years working with the celtics to uber success as the GM of the Rockets. He destoryed his tenured counterparts by stealing player after player in the draft. I'm pretty sure his friend Bill Simmons actually has a much deeper understanding of the league then many running/and or playing in it.
Modern fans are not 'better' then older ones per se. No change in dedication. Its obvious in 1960 didn't benefit from these advantages. My dad watched the games I PVR through store windows and thats not his fault.
You still have to consider how ideas and thoughts work though. Once a person believes something its very unlikely to change and the longer ago that idea was formulated the more its encased in mental cement.
If that idea is based on a relative lack of information something has got to give. Its not even that those opinions are wrong but more the people who hold them are not sure why they are right, or think they are.
Being sure has changed over time. You could say something and back it up with an anecdote of a game you attended. All there was to challange it was yet more anecdotes. Ironclad arguments didn't really exist. They somewhat do today though in a sports universe who's perspective expands with every game played and you tube upload.
Remember to be kind. Even though the most hard core era fan axioms appear merely casual in modern times our own time is coming. What fans can digest is only being discovered. We want a more intelligent informed approach. There is demand and it will once again drive supply.
At Some Point You Just Have To Accept: Things Have Come A Long Way :)
In years to come I'm not going to enjoy talking sports with my kids. My MJ will be my father's Wilt. They'll wonder why I can't just 'show' why MJ was the best defensive player in the league. I won't be able to show that, there is nothing to show, and they'll tell me that's okay, when they run a defense/MJ tag search on all his games ever played and see his top 100 rated defensive plays ever, he looks like he might still be an ok player. Then they'll add "but he played before Asian people even played in the league." They'll be right: 60 years old, this sport and league is still in it's infancy.
Part of me wants to be the good guy. Just smile when someone who's 60 remembers their heroes a little creatively. Their rose colored era glasses are more of a time warp to when being a fan had a little more 'fanaticism' for your team and a little less 'understanding' of the game. Fandom is changing. The rate of that evolution is increasing continuously. While I'll be sad to realize one day everything I think now is fit for the pit I appriciate the legacy of just 'getting better' and welcome it. I seriously can't wait to see whats coming next.
I'm not going to pretend that Dwight Howard is not getting attention. He's slated to win DPOY and discussed in the MVP talk but not nearly the way he should be. The Magic won 59 games this year, good for third in the east with a PG who was never taken seriously, going down, and replaced with a playground baller turned pro. The team features other such 'stopper staters' as Rashard Lewis, Jameer Nelson/Raefer Alston and Mickael Pietrus. Orlando Magic defensive rating: #1.
With the Celtic's latest KG news the Magic have to be considered favorites to reach the eastern finals: Philly/Chicago/beat up Celtics can't be considered a bigger challenge then Detroit/Miami/Atlanta, right? Not when the Magic have handed it to the Greens all season.
The media has anointed him 'most dominant big in the league'. Right? The magic came together as a team and he's getting all the credit he deserves. Right?
Wrong. I follow the league. Dwight Howard is the center piece of my (first place, rock!) fantasy team. I check his box scores nearly every time he plays. In a recent ESPN MVP writer's poll he got paltry results... 1 second-place vote, 2 third, 10 fourth, 1 fifth.
I follow daily yet I was not aware of his progress. The capacity of the leap is astounding. I took a look, and a double take, at the numbers. This year is not a campaign for most dominant player in the league. This year is the start of a campaign for most dominant big in history. This includes you, Big Shaqtus.
Three disclaimers.
1. I'm not comparing Dwight to Shaq Daddy today. This is Shaq in his prime vs Dwight before he enters his.
2. I realize rules have changed recently increasing things like scoring. But its also made it harder for bigs to defend and board. Move over league history. Dwight is here and will be most dominant ever.
3. Only having access to stats from 1986 on I know this leaves players out of the mix. Honestly however basketball before this time was a different game. Sorry if it offends you but Wilt and Russel would not be anywhere near the players they were after 1986 on. That's my opinion I suppose, and I cede that on sheer dominance, Wilt would blow Dwight away on these lists, but I literally don't have the resources to show that era's stats or I would. So this is really just about the more modern era of ball. On with it!
Edit: One more disclaimer. Got into a discussion on a forum about this post and a litany of incredibly angry ball fans appeared to be mortally insulted that I could suggest Shaq was anything but the most dominant player ever and Dwight his little bitch. So people should note (or perhaps you know, just read the following definition that should have taken care of this in the first place) that I don't actually claim Dwight is better then Shaq. Nor do I think he's better, greater or more acomplished then Shaq. He's too young to be compared at that level.
I claim he's more dominant which is a measure of how good you are in relation to your peers and I back it up fairly well. Shaq was great and dominant but played in an era with peer big men who were periodically above him, below him and close to him. So, to the edumacated among us, here's a place you can get help and I have some great Dr. Seuss books... lets continue.
Nature's Version Of Dwight Howard
Dictionary.com says
Dominate: –verb (used with object) 1. to rule over; govern; control. 2. to tower above; overlook; overshadow: A tall pine dominated the landscape.
Stats too often focus on a single category over a season and miss the forest for the trees. Its how a player combines all cats in a single game that counts. I define center dominance as points, rebounds and blocks. Comparison is not really what the dictionary wants here either. He must dominate the landscape as the mighty pine. So, lets compare Dwight, one player, to the entire league, of 432 of players.
First up, a double double. For bigs it only indicates you are doing your job. Its not dominant. If you block 5 shots in the process however you're starting to own the paint. How many games is Dwight's mark?
10/10/5 Club
Years Pro
Player
Pos
10/10/5 Games
1
NBA
A
32
2
Dwight Howard
C
14
3
Marcus Camby
F
5
4
Andris Biedrins
C
3
5
Tim Duncan
F
3
6
Chris Andersen
F
2
7
Yao Ming
C
2
8
Josh Smith
F
2
Not so great Dwight. The entire league has 18 more 10/10/5 games while you only have 14. Never mind that its 3 times number 2 Camby, nearly 5 times Duncan/Biedrins and 7 times everyone else. It takes the next 5 top players in the league to equal your total Dwight. You can't dominate a girl scout.
Dwight's Response: 10 points nor 10 boards are anything to get excited about. I'm all man now so get those child stats outta my house.
We'll oblige the big fella. Lets add 5 boards to that total.
10 points, 15 boards, 5 blocks
Rk
Player
Pos
Games
1
Dwight Howard
C
10
2
Entire NBA
A
4
3
Andris Biedrins
C
1
4
Marcus Camby
F
1
5
Tim Duncan
F
1
6
Al Horford
C
1
Once the numbers reflect raw pwnage inside, Howard more then doubles the entire NBA's production. Individuals only have 1 such game a piece. Lets keep going, but its not fair to list them anymore. Sorry Timmy... you didn't make the cut. Just to show whats happening with Dwight Howard vs. the world the numbers have to be increased.
15/15/5
Years Pro
Player
15/15/5 Games
1
Dwight Howard
8
2
NBA
2
20/20/5 Games
Years Pro
Player
20/20/5 Games
1
Dwight Howard
2
2
NBA
0
4 times the whole NBA in 15/15/5 games? INSANE! Did you notice? In the 20/20/5 club of "I am center, hear me roar" Dwight Howard is putting up infinity percent more then the rest of the league. Infinity percent, times two, to be precise.
Which leads us to history. For a BIG the 20/20 personifies the separation of good and great. The marker of a truly dominant player. Dwight is on pace to own the record for most 20/20 games in about 1.5 years. Maybe sooner as he is still developing. The top of the 20/20 list looks like this.
Years Pro
Player
Pos
20/20 Games
1
Charles Barkley
F
37
2
Hakeem Olajuwon
C
35
3
Shaquille O'Neal
C
34
4
Kevin Garnett
F
27
5
Dwight Howard
C
23
People Are As Close To Howard As AI Is To Making This shot
Considering potential, time remaining and all that jazz, there are no active players who are realistically close. Al Jefferson has 20/20 skills except in his fifth year he only has four 20/20 games to 23. Big Al is preobably the closest to compete!
By the time Howard is done wreaking his brand of havoc he could easily have 60 of these games. Unheard of in the modern era of basketball.
To put it yet another way: only 9 players have topped Dwight Howards 9 20/20 games this season, wait for it, in their entire cumulative careers. And none before they were 23.
As I write this Howard is not yet finished his fifth year of pro ball. He already has more 20/20's then this bunch in their whole lifetime. Be sure to note the number of years each player took, multiply by 'star power' and consider how in less then 5 years he's overtaken them.
Years Pro
Player
Pos
20/20 Games
16
Charles Barkley
F
37
17
Hakeem Olajuwon
C
35
16
Shaquille O'Neal
C
34
13
Kevin Garnett
F
27
5
Dwight Howard
C
23
22
Kevin Willis
F
22
11
Tim Duncan
F
19
16
Patrick Ewing
C
18
13
David Robinson
C
13
19
Karl Malone
F
12
17
Dikembe Mutombo
C
9
18
Chris Webber
F
9
12
Marcus Camby
F
7
20
Moses Malone
C
7
20
Robert Parish
C
7
7
Yao Ming
C
3
15
Alonzo Mourning
C
2
7
Arvydas Sabonis
C
2
Sabonis gets a pass. Had he played in his youth he would have torn the NBA to pieces. He was so good that the NBA would have been an entirely different era with different players winning championships.
Years Pro
Player
Pos
20/20 Games
78
Mike Dunleavy
G
1
Mike's Typical Day In The Paint
Mike Dunleavy also gets a pass cuz Mike Dunleavy is a FREAKING GUARD! Have you seen him? He's a rail. "BIG WOW" to you Mike Dunleavy!
Can I repeat again that he is only 23 years of age??? 50 or 60 20/20 games is actually Dwight's low mark. At 25 he should be sitting neatly at 40 and first place all time. Should we expect 80? 100? If his body can keep up like TD's (who had a 20/20 this year at 34) 100 20/20 career games might be his ceiling with 60-80 being his likely result.
Forget scoring. For a center points are the easy work. Focusing on boards alone Dwight is 10'th all time in 20 rebound games. Here's the list.
Rk
Player
Pos
Games
1
Dennis Rodman
F
159
2
Dikembe Mutombo
C
52
3
Charles Barkley
F
48
4
Ben Wallace
F
41
5
Hakeem Olajuwon
C
40
6
Kevin Garnett
F
36
7
Shaquille O'Neal
C
35
8
Kevin Willis
F
35
9
Marcus Camby
F
33
10
Dwight Howard
C
31
Yes! 159 More Excuses To Put Up Weird Dennis Rodman pics
Props to the Worm. Maybe the most under-rated player of all time and the undisputed best pure rebounder ever. I digress: that's another column. He didn't put up points or blocks like D12.
What should be noted is that at age 23 Dwight is in 10'th place with 9 more 20 board games then Duncan and 10 more then Ewing. If he continues having 10 20 board games a season (like this one) he'll pass everyone except Rodman before he's 25 and again just entering his prime.
That's historically. Measures of domination are not against history but by outperforming peers. Why can we safely assume that baring injury he's going to continue pulling down 20's so frequently? Lets look at the list of active players who have had even 1 20 board game and is under 30. No offense to TD et al, but they're in the twilight of respective brilliant careers. This is the competition.
Rk
Player
Pos
Games
5
Dwight Howard
C
23
25
Chris Kaman
C
5
28
Dirk Nowitzki
F
5
29
Carlos Boozer
F
4
32
Al Jefferson
F
4
36
Amare StoudemireF
4
44
Yao Ming
C
3
46
Emeka Okafor
F
3
49
Andrew Bogut
C
2
50
Chris Bosh
F
2
51
Tyson Chandler
C
2
61
Zach Randolph
F
2
72
Nick Collison
F
1
87
Al Horford
C
1
90
David Lee
F
1
96
Troy Murphy
F
1
There's not a lot of competition there. Only 16 have even one 20 board game and #2 is 25'th all tim with 5 of them. When you consider that most of them are closer to 30 then 25, much less 23, and most of them have already started to break down, the list is actually shrinking and this league is Howard's. A few other views to consider.
The 15/15/5 club, active and under 30, is a small club.
Rank
Player
Pos
Games
1
entire league:
A
17
2
Dwight Howard
C
12
3
Emeka Okafor
F
6
4
Yao Ming
C
5
5
Chris Kaman
C
2
6
Andris Biedrins
C
1
7
Tyson Chandler
C
1
8
Al Horford
C
1
9
Josh Smith
F
1
Lets talk blocks. (3 times fast!) D12 vs. the league. Starting at 3/game: everyone has a game with a block or two. It goes without saying: Howard is in first place for every row until you factor in the league thing. I factored in fluke games for this one. If a guy has a solitary >5 block game in an entire season that's a statistical burp; not a peer of Dwight Howard. I included some percentages on who owns what as well.
x Blocks
Howard
Entire League
Non-Fluke Games
# Of Others
# Of Non-Fluke Others
DH's % Of Total Games
DH's % Of All x BLK Games (Non Fluke)
% Of DH Games With x BLKS
% Of 432 Who Can't
% Of 432 Who Can't Or Fluke
3
42
879
830
167
112
5
5
53
61
74
4
24
312
268
100
56
7
8
30
77
87
5
15
103
72
52
19
13
17
19
88
96
6
8
33
20
21
7
20
29
10
95
98
7
2
11
7
7
3
15
22
3
98
99
8
2
4
0
4
0
33
100
3
99
100
9
1
1
0
1
0
50
n/a
1
100
100
10
1
0
0
0
0
100
n/a
1
100
100
I'm not sure what is more astounding considering any position is totally capable of having a few blocks in a game; that 5%/8% of all 3/4 block games or 30% of all 6 or more block games (non-fluke) in a league of 432 players are his.
x Boards
Howard
Entire League
Non-Fluke Games
# Others
# Non-Fluke Others
DH's % Of All x-Board Games
DH's % Of All x-Board Games(Non-Fluke)
% Of DH Games With x BLKS
% of 432 Who Can't
% of 432 Who Can't Or Fluke
10
63
2041
2005
200
170
3
3
80
54
61
11
59
1440
1379
186
130
4
4
75
57
70
12
55
990
942
147
99
5
6
70
66
77
13
51
679
645
117
83
7
7
65
73
81
14
45
435
401
95
61
9
10
57
78
86
15
34
284
259
75
50
11
12
43
88
83
16
23
169
145
54
30
12
14
29
88
93
17
19
118
100
42
24
14
16
24
90
94
18
17
75
57
36
17
18
23
22
92
96
19
14
45
28
26
9
24
33
18
94
98
20
10
27
16
18
7
27
38
13
96
98
21
6
13
7
9
3
32
46
8
98
99
22
3
9
3
7
1
25
50
4
98
99.7
23
2
5
3
2
1
29
40
3
100
99.7
Again, whats most impressive? He's responsible for almost 40% of the non-fluke 20 board games and 46% of the non-fluke 21+ board games or that half the league is not even capable of having one 10 board game while Howard has 63 of them. That's a 75% chance every night. Maybe its a nearly 60% chance he pulls down 14 boards, every, single, night. There is no player like this today. There are very few players like this in the past. Once Dwight Howard actually reaches his prime there will be no player in history like this.
Last point. Lets consider something other then stats. In the ESPN voting page I linked to one of the writers said "Dwight needs to improve at the offensive end. 20 ppg won't win MVP." Being a good offensive player is not always about putting the ball through the hoop and its not always about being the player to have the ball right before another player scores.
Dwight's presence inside demands a constant double team/team defensive strategy. Opponents collapse on Dwight which gets easy open looks for others. Go inside, the defense collapses, pass back out and swing it to the weak side for a great look. That IS the Magic's offense. Anyone paying attention when watching realizes that Howard is involved in nearly every single scoring play. Free looks and open lanes for everyone aboud and thats because of him... not Hedo and Lewis.
He's been so effective he made perennial laughing stock Jameer Nelson an all-star. The fact he scores 20 PPG only indicates his willing attitude to work within the structure of the offense to create the best opportunity to score points instead of getting his. He's happy playing for 59 wins despite downgrading his point (and losing his bench point) then for 50 and 30 PPG.
Howard is ranked 7'th or 8'th on mock MVP ballots behind players like Billups, Kobe, Pierce and Brandon Roy. I challenge anyone doing so to look at these numbers and honestly tell me he's not top 3. Dwight is unmistakeably on a historical tear starting this season and ending approximately 5-10 years later when micro fractured knees meet kryptonite edged scalpels. If they hold off till then he'll also shatter nearly every important stat for a big man in the modern era of basketball. In many cases, doubling the current all time mark. The Magic have the best defense in the league and not because #12 is really entertaining in the dunk contests. Its time for people to take notice. Superman has landed.
