TBTEW: Point Guards 26-30

Introduction

30. Stephon Marbury: Starbury holds the distinction of being one of the most maligned athletes of his generation. Much of the criticism is warranted; he was never a good defender, he probably dominated the ball a bit more than he should have, he wasn't especially efficient, and his teams never won all that much.

But let's focus on what he could do. You don't average 19 points and 8 assists over a 13 year career without doing something right, and Marbury could certainly create shots for himself and for his teammates. It's also not true that he always lost; he was the leading scorer (and assist-er) on the 44 win 2003 Suns.

What I consider his most impressive performance occurred on the 2004 Knicks, who he joined through a midseason trade. The Knicks were floundering, at 14-21, when they traded for Marbury, and promptly went 25-22 the rest of the way. That does not seem particularly impressive, but when you consider that the Knicks' other four starters come playoff time were Nazr Mohammed, Kurt Thomas, Tim Thomas (who was replaced by an old Penny Hardaway after he was injured in Game 1 against the Nets), and Shandon Anderson, I think Marbury deserves a lot of credit for keeping that group near .500.

29. Jimmy Jones: The best point guard of the ABA. How good was he? I don't really know. He had some statistically dominating seasons in the early years of the ABA, especially 1969, when he averaged 26-6-6 while leading the league in FG% and PER. He wasn't a one year wonder, averaging 19-5-5 over 7 ABA seasons, and improving on those numbers (and efficiency) in the playoffs.

An efficient scorer, Jones is a difficult player to evaluate because I don't know how his impressive statistical output would have translated to a superior league. It is easy to point to his lack of success in the NBA as proof that he simply dominated a weak league, but it should be noted that he didn't reach the ABA until he was 23, had his best year at 24, had a decent season on a per minute basis in his first NBA season, 1975, and started to decline rapidly when he hit 31-in an era when quick guards did not age well. So, how good was he? I'm still not sure, but the ABA's best point guard deserves a mention here.

28. Doc Rivers: Doc will probably be remembered as a coach more than a player, but he was a very good player as a pass-first point guard in the 1980s. Rivers may be underrated now because he never received big minutes (and put up big statistics), always less than 33 a game, but per minute stats reveal a prolific passer and tough defender.

I was surprised by how much Doc Rivers resembled his protégé, Rajon Rondo, statistically. From 1986-1988, Rivers' best three seasons, he averaged 15 points, 11 assists, and 2.3 steals per 36 minutes, which is pretty close to what I think Rondo can achieve. Add that to decent rebounding and a surprisingly good ability to draw fouls, and you have all the makings for a great, unheralded point guard.

Unfortunately, Rivers fell off after those three years, and only averaged 27 minutes a game over his career, preventing him from climbing any higher on this list, but it should be remembered how great he was for those few years.

27. Andre Miller: He's never been great, but he's been good for a long time. His best season was probably 2002, when he averaged 17 and 11, winning the assist crown, but almost a decade later he was anchoring an overachieving Blazers team, without missing a beat in between (okay, there was that year with the Clippers he wasn't so great, but I think "being on the Clippers" counts as extenuating circumstances).

In making these ratings, I generally favored peak performance over longevity, but quietly consistent performance over a whole decade should be recognized. And I know I didn't realize how many good seasons Miller had strung together until I made these rankings, and I suspect I'm not the only one. I think part of it is that he's always played out of the spotlight. He left Cleveland before LeBron got there, and then swapped teams with Iverson in the Denver-Philly trade, both times ending up on the team with less media attention. Plus he played for the Clippers.

26. Fat Lever: Lever is the other end of the spectrum from Miller. He only had four good years, but they were a great four years. From 1987 through 1990, he averaged 19 points, 9 rebounds, 8 assists, 2.5 steals, and only 2 turnovers. That's right, over a four year period, he almost averaged a triple double, was one of the best defensive guards in the game, and never turned the ball over. If he could only shoot, there would have been no holes in his game. As it was, he gave us four great years of unorthodox domination and someone we could compare to Rajon Rondo while making ourselves feel smart. And isn't that enough?

The Best There Ever Was

Lists, especially of the "who's best" variety, are one of the easiest ways to spur conversation and argument, especially when talking about sports. Sometimes it seems that is all they are good for, but there is a possibility that a list, in this case about basketball, will make one think about how they evaluate players, what skills are valuable, and will teach one more about the history of the game.

With the justification behind me, in an attempt to start blogging regularly I will be ranking the top 30 historical players at each position, with commentary and musings on where unranked current players are projected to end up in these lists. I will include current players in the actual rankings, but only current players whose historical position is somewhat stable. You won't really go wrong if you use the 2003 draft as a cutoff point, even if I don't always follow it. I am starting with point guards, the first installment of which will be posted later tonight.

Shallow Thought Of The Day, Vol VIII

Did you realize that Magic Johnson and John Stockton peaked at the same time? By Win Shares, Magic's best 5 year stretch was 1987-1991. By the same measure, Stockton's best 5 year stretch was 1988-1992. (This is one of the reasons that the 1988 Lakers-Jazz WC Semifinals deserves to be remembered much more than it is.)

The Intriguing Nets

When Mikhail Prokorov bought the Nets, there was hope that the team would make a big splash in free agency. That didn't happen, but the Nets have almost completely turned over their roster after last season's 12-70 debacle, and they added another piece in this week's four team trade.

Last year, the Nets top ten players, in terms of minutes, were Brook Lopez, Courtney Lee, Devin Harris, Terrence Williams, Chris Douglas-Roberts, Yi Jianlian, Trenton Hassell, Josh Boone, Jarvis Hayes, and Keyon Dooling.

This year, that list will probably be something like; Brook Lopez, Troy Murphy, Devin Harris, Anthony Morrow, Travis Outlaw, Terrence Williams, Jordan Farmar, Derrick Favors, Kris Humphries, and Quintin Ross.

That means that the Nets have effectively traded Lee, CDR, Yi, Hassell, Boone, Hayes, and Dooling for Murphy, Morrow, Outlaw, Farmar, Favors, Humphries, and Ross. Just upgrading all of that replacement level talent would be enough to catapult the Nets out of the East cellar, but what intrigues me is how this talent fits together, especially on the offensive end.

Now, this team will struggle defensively, although Lopez and Williams certainly have the potential to become very good defensive players. However, this team has the following offensive assets. 1) A skilled 7 footer that can control the paint (and averaged 19 PPG on efficient shooting as a 21 year old sophomore). 2) A point guard that can get into the lane at will, and draws a lot of fouls. 3) One of the best stretch fours in the league. 4) The best pure shooter in the NBA. Add to that another forward who can hit the three (Outlaw), a guy who should be deadly in transition (Williams), a decent backup point guard (Farmar), and whatever Favors turns out to be, and the Nets have the makings of a good offensive team.

Aside from replacing the offensive "contributions" of the departing Nets, the newcomers (Murphy and Morrow especially) should open up the offense considerably for Devin Harris and Brook Lopez. New Jersey finished 29th in 3 point percentage last year, and the appearance of a dangerous perimeter game should mean fewer double teams for Brook Lopez (especially with the opponent's power forward needing to chase Troy Murphy around the perimeter), open up more lanes to the basket for Devin Harris and Terrence Williams, and give the Nets a deadly drive and kick game.

It is difficult to make the case that the Nets will be anything more than a 35 win team that could sneak into the last playoff spot in a top heavy East, but their newfound offensive firepower could transform New Jersey, the worst offensive team in the league last year, into an entertaining team, and make them a more attractive destination for next year's star free agents (barring a lockout, of course).

Great Players, Small Minutes

Typically, great players receive 35-40 minutes a game. However, there are exceptions, All-Star caliber players who, for whatever reason, received lesser minutes. These players tend to be underappreciated since they don't put up big (conventional) numbers, but while they were on the court, they had few peers. Here are three of the best.

Manu Ginobili. Per 36 minutes-19 points-5 rebounds-5 assists-2 steals. Ginobili is the king of this category, with a career high of 31 minutes a game, and a career average of under 28 minutes a game, despite ridiculous on-court productivity. As a shooting guard who has never averaged 20 points a game, he is generally not viewed as a superstar, but his all around game compares favorably to the other top shooting guards of his era. Why has he never garnered bigger minutes? A combination of durability concerns, and Popovich's apparent belief that San Antonio is best served by having one of its two stars on every unit (for instance, this past year, San Antonio's top 35 lineups used either Duncan (and/)or Ginobili). This results in less overall minutes for Ginobili, but in a configuration that makes his minutes more valuable to the Spurs.

Arvydas Sabonis. Per 36 minutes-18 points-11 rebounds-3 assists. Sabonis is one of the NBA's greatest "what-if" stories. The big Lithuanian didn't come to the NBA until he was in his thirties with leg and feet problems (the main reason he played more than 27 minutes per game only once during his NBA career), but was still a highly effective player with the Blazers during the late nineties. He was famous for his passing, but also was an efficient scorer, excellent rebounder, and good defender. Despite playing his best ball overseas, Sabonis' rate and advanced stats are similar to that of Hall of Famer Bob Lanier, providing a clue to his effectiveness.

Bobby Jones. Per 36 minutes-16 points-8 rebounds-3.5 assists-2 steals-2 blocks-56% FG percentage. Was Bobby Jones a star? The answer may tell you more about the person answering the question than about Bobby Jones. On the one hand, it seems ludicrous to label a player who averaged 12 points and 6 rebounds for his career a "star". On the other hand, he was a great defender who did everything well (except for outside shooting), and managed to be selected to 4 NBA All-Star games, plus an appearance in the 1976 ABA All-Star game as a member of the league-best Denver Nuggets (he probably would have made the All-Star team anyway that year). If you favor players who can create their own offense, you probably won't think much of Jones. If you are enamored with defense and efficiency (as I am), then he's a Hall of Fame level player on a per minute basis (consider this comparison to current players, focusing on rate and advanced stats). Despite his effectiveness, he only played more than 30 minutes a game three times in his career, and only once in the NBA, where he spent 10 of his 12 seasons. The main reason for his lack of playing time, which mainly occurred after he joined the Sixers, was that Philly had a stacked frontcourt, with coach Billy Cunningham needing to find enough playing time for Jones, Julius Erving, Caldwell Jones, Darryl Dawkins, and Steve Mix. This led to Jones' minutes being limited, and his eventual role as sixth man extraordinaire (for which he won the NBA's first sixth man of the year award in 1983).

Has This Happened Before?

The obvious parallel to the James-Wade-Bosh superteam assembling in Miami is the Wilt-West-Baylor Lakers of 1969-1972. That triumvirate was only around for one year, 1969, as Wilt missed almost all of 1970 with an injury, and Baylor played a combined 11 games in 1971 and 1972 before retiring. The main difference between those two teams is age-all three players were in their thirties by the time the team was put together, which led to declining performance and injuries, a fate that doesn't seem likely to happen to these Heat (unless Wade falls apart due to injuries).

The short answer to the question, "Has this happened before?" is no. However, there is one team from the NBA's prehistoric era that bears a passing resemblance to these Heat; the 1956 and 1957 Philadelphia Warriors. In those two seasons, the Warriors had the NBA's two best offensive players, Neil Johnston and Paul Arizin, little depth, and weak interior defense. In 1956, the Warriors rode the league's best offense* to the NBA's best record (45-27). They fought past the scrappy Syracuse Nats** in the Eastern Finals, and then blew past Fort Wayne in the Finals. The Warriors fell back to 37-35 the next year with the loss of Tom Gola (the team's third best player), and the arrival of Bill Russell in Boston, making the division quite a bit tougher. They fell to the Nats in the first round of the playoffs, and Neil Johnston would decline the next year, ending the team's "run".

All of which is to say, a team with two superstars and little interior defense has won a title, but the last year it happened was Bill Russell's senior year at the University off San Francisco***. I'm not counting the Heat out (the additions of Haslem, Miller, and Z make that roster even more formidable), but that fact has to encourage the Lakers.

*The Celtics scored more points per game, but that was a function of tempo (read: Cousy). The Warriors were much more efficient.
**This was an interesting team in the mid-50s. They had one superstar and a bunch of scrappy guys (Paul Seymour, Earl Lloyd, George King) who couldn't shoot, but played defense and won a surprising amount of the time.
***With the possible exception of the Lakers during the last couple Showtime championships (on the defensive front, they were much deeper than this Heat team).

Winning

"If you fix your mind on the goal of winning and stay honest with yourself, you'll come to realize that winning isn't about right or wrong, or the good guys and the bad guys, or the pathway to good life and character, or statistics. Winning is about who has the best team, and that's all."-Bill Russell (Second Wind* page 123)

All of which is to say that I agree with this rant. According to the winningest player of all time, winning is about having the best team, and who am I to argue? Anyway, LeBron did the "right" thing if he wants to win, even if he went about it in the most annoying manner possible.

*I can't recommend this book highly enough.