Don't Fix Something That Isn't a Problem
A post like this has always been floating around in my head, but I guess Michael Wilbon's post-lottery piece finally gave me the inspiration to put pen to paper:
Watching the draft lottery last night in the ESPN studios, Magic Johnson, considering the Wizards' personnel and what they might pick up in the draft if they keep their pick, said, "Who's your point guard?"
My answer, of course, was, "Gilbert Arenas?
"Magic: "Okay, let me try this again: Who's your point guard?"
Okay, I get it. Arenas, which I've been saying for some time now, shouldn't be the starting point guard. It's one thing for me to say it; it's another thing for Magic Johnson to say it. If Magic says the Wizards should have a pure, set-up-his-teammates point guard to run the offense, I'm listening.
Of course, we all know that the most common criticism with Gilbert's game is that he shoots too much and doesn't do enough to get his teammates involved. It's a nice thing to tell the kids as you drive in a lesson about being a good teammate and all that fun stuff, but the reality is that Gilbert's ability to run the offense has never been the problem with the team.
If Gilbert's playing style was holding the offense back, we'd see the proof in the team's offensive efficiency. In the last three years that Arenas was healthy, the Wizards finished 10th, 6th, and 3rd in offensive efficiency. Sure, they never finished first in any of those years, but they certainly performed well enough on the offensive side of the ball to be a legitimate contender. All three of those years, Arenas piloted the offense to top-10 status and twice the Wizards finished with a more productive offense than the eventual champion. Call me crazy, but if there's an aspect of the game that you're doing better than the eventual World Champion, then maybe it's not a problem.
That's not to say that there still aren't things that could get better. No offense is flawless, but shaking up the roster by moving Gilbert to the two so the team can have a pure point guard misses the team's true problem: Defense. Kelly Dwyer did an excellent job in this post of summing up the attitude that so many of us have to defensive side of the ball:
I don't understand it, "it" boggles the mind, I can understand the impetus behind the omissions but that doesn't excuse the laziness that results: most mainstream media outlets outright refuse to discuss defense.
Or, more specifically, they'll mention defense one time for every ten times that they mention a team's offense doing well, a team's offense faltering, a team not having enough basketballs to go around, a team not going to a certain player enough, a team giving too many shots to a certain player, a team playing unselfishly offensively, a team playing selfishly offensively, a team playing hesitant offensively, a team not being aggressive enough offensively, a team shooting too many threes, a team without a low-post scoring presence, a team that hasn't had time to get on the same page offensively ... you get the idea.
And it's half the game. I'm not going to perpetuate the pointless stereotype that says "defensive wins championships," (defense and offense in concert, not sure if you've heard, win championships in reality), but it's half the bloody game and it gets 1/15th the air and print time that offense does.
Admittedly, Gilbert is just as guilty as anyone else for why the Wizards have struggled so mightily on the defensive end. But unless the Wizards can bring in a big point guard (Tyreke Evans, anyone?) moving Gilbert to the 2 would make the Wizards smaller in the backcourt which would likely lead to even poorer defense and there's no guarantee that the Wizards would even get better on the offensive end, considering that they're a pretty good offensive outfit as it is. Rather than trying to bring in a player to make an offense that's already superb better, let's focus on targeting someone who can raise the defense to a similar level.
23 comments
|
3 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Thank you
I’ve been getting increasingly irritated at the revisionist history in assessing Gilbert Arenas. People have forgotten how he and the team actually performed when he was healthy. My observations about his game were 1. he wasn’t a ball hog. 2. the offense was MUCH better 3. Antawn and Caron still got their shots and stil got their 20 points a game l 4. Gil worked well as the point guard but also worked well with Larry Hughes or Antonio Daniels beside him 5. Gil could do much better on defense
I agree with this
But, when Magic Johnson says something, you should at least consider it. (Though you might also ask Magic who the point guard on his team is — you know, the team that’s the favorite to win the champsionship.)
A true point guard looks for others first, then for himself. Gilbert usually looks for himself first, then others. I think Gilbert has all the skills to be a very good true point guard. All it will take is the switch of that mindset/prioritization, and at the end of last season, it sure looked like he at least has the capability to look for others first, and how the offense hummed when he’s on the court. We’ll see. I think I true point guard INSTINCTIVELY looks for others first, and I don’t think Gilbert will ever have that. But that doesn’t mean he can’t be a great point guard in the NBA.
And then we’ll see about the other end of the floor.
Just because Magic Johnson says something doesn't necessarily make it true
Even if he was the best “pure” point guard on his team. Kareem Abdul-Jabaar isn’t walking through that door.
You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.
so true
Besides: Isiah Thomas was more of a scoring PG (and in some ways, so is Tony Parker) Both have rings.
Meanwhile, “pure PGs” like Nash and Kidd are still waiting for theirs.
I think Nash is always looking for his shot. As he should. As should any great shooter.
by MR on Jun 1, 2009 10:53 AM EDT up reply actions
I think
The media has made up this invisible barrier…..
If a PG averages over 8 assists per game, regardless of how much he shoots or doesn’t shoot – he’s labeled a “pure” Point Guard.
“Pure” Point Guards:
Chris Paul 11.0 assists 16.1 shots per game
Deron Williams 10.7 assists 14.5 shots per game
Steve Nash 9.7 assists 11.5 shots per game
Jose Calderon 8.9 assists 9.5 shots per game
Jason Kidd 8.7 assists 7.6 shots per game
“Shoot-First” Point Guards:
Devin Harris 6.9 assists 15.0 shots per game
Baron Davis 7.7 assists 14.5 shots per game
Tony Parker 6.9 assists 17.5 shots per game
Gilbert Arenas (05-06) 6.0 assists 20.1 shots per game
Gilbert Arenas (06-07) 6.0 assists 20.9 Shots per game
So – to be considered a “Pure” point guard, Gil just needs to shoot 4 or 5 fewer shots, and get 2-3 more assists per game.
Bullets Forever - where "Dagger ! " happens......
Career numbers
Here are the career numbers for some of the best Point Guards ever:
Magic Johnson 11.2 assists 13.9 shots per game
Oscar Robertson 9.5 assists 18.5 shots per game
Isiah Thomas 9.3 assists 16.2 shots per game
John Stockton 10.5 assists 9.1 shots per game
Gary Payton 6.7 assists 14.0 shots per game
Bullets Forever - where "Dagger ! " happens......
I am one of those in favor of moving Gilbert to the two
Because it’s my belief that the lack of a conductor of the orchestra really reveals itself as a problem in the playoffs. There efficiency in the regular season is excellent, but does it really translate to the playoffs. I am not convinced of that. To me having someone to conduct the orchestra is what you have to have to go through (I reserve the right to take this statement back if the Gilbert we saw at the end of this season is the Gilbert we see next season).
But your overall point is correct, this team is a superb offensive team and making Gilbert move to two doesn’t correct this teams defensive problem. Better coaching, a healthy Haywood, more McGuire and maybe a trade can do that.
"Would you like to shoot me now or wait till you get home." --- Daffy Duck
by George Templeton on Jun 1, 2009 12:49 PM EDT reply actions
But
We haven’t even had Gil in the last two playoffs – so how would we even know?
Getting buckets since 2003.
by Icantfeelmyface on Jun 1, 2009 1:35 PM EDT up reply actions
Right
1st playoff series with Gil as “conductor:” 2nd round.
2nd playoff series: narrow 1st round loss, and that was with a bench that prominently featured Michael Ruffin.
3rd series: no Gil.
4th series: injured/rusty Gil for half the series.
Oh, and I know it was only two games, but Gil put up double-digit assists in both of his appearances this season. the guy can move the ball and involve his teammates. He’s great at the half-court fast break outlet pass. I’d move him to the 2 if we could score Rubio, but besides that I totally agree that it’s defense, not offense, that we need.
But can Gilbert as a score-first PG get us to where we want to go
I know other score more pass not as much PGs have won the title but I am not sure Gilbert can. I am of the opinion that he can’t (one which I will take back happily if the Gilbert we saw at the end of this season will be the one we see next year).
I will always worry about Gilbert taking too many shots at the end of our possessions (especially heat check shots in the first 8 seconds of the shot clock).
"Would you like to shoot me now or wait till you get home." --- Daffy Duck
by George Templeton on Jun 1, 2009 4:48 PM EDT up reply actions
I Came Across This Article Recently
http://www.82games.com/ilardi1.htm
It has probably been linked to before. It was written in 2007, after Gilbert’s last season when he was mostly healthy. The author, Steve Ilardi, was discussing how adjusted plus/minus works, and why it is an accurate statistic for measuring a player’s overall impact to his team. It factors in, among other things:
… the impact of each player on his team’s bottom line (scoring margin), after controlling statistically for the strength of every teammate and every opponent during each minute he’s on the court.
He goes on to state how similar statistical methods are used to isolate single factors to scientific processes. He then presents his top 20 list of the “best” players in the NBA that season. Dirk Nowitzki won the MVP award that season, but only finished 11th on this list. Guess who came in at #4, behind only Garnett, LeBron, and Duncan? You can probably guess.
Bottom line: the Wizards don’t need an upgrade at point guard to win a championship. Assuming they make the necessary upgrades to the other positions, they only need Gilbert to be the old Gilbert.
"It's OK for the Bullets to trade baskets, as long as they can score on their end." -- Words of wisdom from Phil Chenier
by cuppettcj on Jun 1, 2009 1:07 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Saying we need to upgrade at point guard over Gilbert...
is even more of a waste of mental energy than saying we need to upgrade over Antawn at the 4 with Amare or Boozer…
Ya gotta start by fixing the REAL problems… As of now we are not even close to competitive at the 2-guard position and we lack a strong, aggressive PF/C to back up AJ and Brendan. Implicit in those statements is that in the near term, NY, DS, AB, DSong and JM are not going to fill that bill… Two of the younger players in this gang of five should probably be kept, and one of the older ones will wind up being a 9th man… The other two, plus the expirings and the #5 are the opening ante in the search for the missing pieces.
Now, let’s go back to point guard, and think about President Obama’s suppport for Tyreke Evans. Should the Malloofs pass on the Presidential advice, that means the 5 pick goes off the trading table and is replaced in the trading arena by the 32 pick and the suddenly expendible Critt (who must be getting pretty frustrated about always being on the move, but there is always the happy fate of Chauncey Billups to cheer him up).
Thinking about it this way leds to the inevitable conclusion that the 5 pick really, really, really is going to get traded. To get something of high value, you have to give up something of at least marginally higher perceived value, and none of our tradeable players is in that category, absent the 5 pick being part of the deal.
I disagree with this
To get something of high value, you have to give up something of at least marginally higher perceived value, and none of our tradeable players is in that category, absent the 5 pick being part of the deal.
I’d place Blatche and McGee above the fifth pick in this draft in value.
You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.
Soory Mike, you are right... I should have specified...
that McGee was not among the two youngr players I was thinking of a trade bait.
Blatche MAY be better than any fifth pick in this draft BUT I do not think he is perceived that way.
Trade vaue is in the eye of the behoder… The Lakers saw something in Kwame Brown that made him PERCEIVE he was worth trading Caron for.
It's a guessing game
But I really do think Blatche is highly valued. He’s cheap, remarkably skilled and still very, very young. It’s possible teams are scared off by his rap sheet, but history shows that even the biggest malcontents are valued if they can play. There have to be plenty of teams out there who believe Blatche can play.
You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.
Could be....
Then it is simply a matter of seeing if Blatche is highly valued by a team that has someone we really would like to have….
I think his weakness is more than his rap sheet, though, Mike. He has bypassed every opportunity to build his strength, and he cannot keep his head in the game for sustained periods of time. I don’t think he is a malcontent or a locker room cancer (in fact he seems to have a nice sense of humor… remember the milk quote from the Cavs playoff series in 2007-08?), but he is just sorta out there in Dray-land…. If Flip thinks he can communicate with Dray, then good on him!
Ideally
Dominic McGuire and Nick Young continue to improve and become our Starter and bench Shooting Guards (in that order)…
If Dominic continues to improve his outside jump shot; which he shot a not-to-terrible 43% last year; and adds the 3-point distance – He could be a very solid starting SG… His length, athleticism and defensive intensity could be a real asset on a team that needs perimeter defenders. The Wizards don’t need a lot of scoring from the starting SG slot anyway.
If Nick can continue to improve his defense – which was starting to show dividends by the end of last year – He can be that Offensive spark off the bench.
Maybe then the Wizards can concentrate on getting some Defensive help for Haywood down low – in my opinion, a much more dire need than an upgrade at SG.
Bullets Forever - where "Dagger ! " happens......
I agree on placing higher priority on the big body...
but I think we need a quality 2-guard because the window on the big 3 is closing and we just do not know whether Young and Mcuire will be ready enough soon enough (Courtney Lee gives me some hope on this socre though!) and I am concerned that Stevenson’s back problems are chronic.
If they’re trading for another starter it makes most sense to grab a shooting guard, and perhaps that’s their best hope for a championship in the next year or two. They just need to make sure it’s a real upgrade otherwise they’re better off not making a trade. Frankly I’d be content going into the season with McGuire, Young and Stevenson (assuming he returns to form) sharing minutes at the 2.
If they’re keeping the draft pick, Grunfeld really should go for the best player availabe, whatever the position. Getting the #5 pick was a dissappointment, but their chances of getting a solid NBA player with the pick will diminsh even more if they let team needs distract them too much.
by Johnnie Futbol on Jun 1, 2009 4:21 PM EDT up reply actions
Regarding our defense
Our problem on defense is we have never bought into our defensive schemes as a team. The good thing is, one player or coach could change all of that in theory if the defensive intensity is there and gets imparted on the rest of the team (like Garnett/Tom T. did in Boston for Ray Allen and Paul Pierce).
We have always had people gamble for steals, out of position, confused about switches, not box out on defense, and completely ignore the 3-point shot. This was intensified even more without Brendan Haywood to anchor the middle. Once one person breaks the chain on defense, it hurts the team way more than someone doing it on offense. The reason why offense is always talked about is because it is easy to place the blame on guys missing shots, but on defense it is not always apparent who is making the mistake, unless they just blatantly get beat to the basket.
And Gilbert Arenas is a point guard, regardless of what Magic Johnson says. He’s a very good one at that.
Dear Diary, JACKPOT!!!!!!!!!!
by Evander holyfield on Jun 2, 2009 1:49 AM EDT reply actions

by 

















