A Win-Lin Situation?: How Jeremy Lin Will Always Be a Success, Even If He Fails
Yeah, I know…I tried to avoid the cheesy “Lin-ization” of a word for the title of this article, but it is difficult to do. Especially, if I want a modicum of traffic. Plus, it is better that my original idea of replacing every instance of “in” throughout this article with “Lin.” But that thought made my Lintestines hurt.
Anyway, I have avoid jumping onto the bandwagon of writing about the impact and awesomeness of Jeremy Lin. I mean, writers and sports talk show hosts and television analysts have salivated over the Harvard product enough. So, why add to the stack? Well, because I have nothing better to do.
Over the past two weeks, Jeremy Lin has gone from being an obscure player on a sinking team to an international star that has helped the Knicks rise like a phoenix. His explosion on the scene surprised almost everyone associated with the NBA. While Houston Rockets’ general manager Daryl Morey stated that the team “should have kept” Lin, he followed that up with the logical statement that he “did not know that [Lin] was this good.” Most agreed that the talent was there to be an NBA player, but few knew he was going to explode like this. Truth is that he was anonymous to most. And while I knew who he was — my wife is Taiwanese, after all — I am not going to pretend that I knew either. Kevin Martin said it best:
I couldn’t tell anything about him. . . . He was cut [with the Warriors]. We cut him. That should tell you something. … It’s pretty amazing. We and the rest of the league are pretty stunned.
But look at his numbers both pre- and post- Mike D’antoni’s epiphany and you can see just how stunning it is.
|
GP |
Min |
FG% |
3Pt% |
FT% |
Reb |
Ast |
TO |
Ast/TO |
Stl |
Pts |
|
| Pre-Star |
9 |
6:02 |
48.14 |
0.00 |
84.53 |
1.11 |
1.89 |
0.89 |
1.50 |
0.33 |
3.56 |
| Post-Star |
9 |
38:43 |
52.96 |
34.16 |
69.64 |
3.78 |
9.22 |
5.89 |
2.40 |
2.22 |
25 |
| TOTAL |
18 |
22:23 |
49.70 |
32.30 |
73.60 |
2.44 |
5.56 |
3.39 |
1.64 |
1.28 |
14.28 |
In addition, he is shooting 15 shots more than over those previous nine games in obscurity, and getting to the free throw line an average of eight time a game (versus just over two times a game pre-star). Of course, minutes have a ton to do with that. But his production has been outstanding, especially when you consider the new burden on him for minutes. Not only that, remember that he only played in nine of the Knicks first 22 games! And in a couple of those games, he was actually down in the D-League.
But Lin’s sudden rise to stardom has not gone over well with everyone. Certainly, Kobe Bryant took a dig at him prior to the Knicks’ game against the Los Angeles Lakers, but that was Kobe being Kobe; not praising anyone. But, the angles have been everything from questioning the system to invoking race. And all, of course, miss the point.
For example, Jason Terry’s notion that Lin is a “system” guy ignores the fact that many players flourish because of the system in which they play. Terry himself benefits from Dallas’s rotation system that allows him to be a spark off the bench, garnering minutes equal to those of starters. Ben Wallace was a defensive menace for the defensive-minded Detroit Pistons, while teams like the Denver Nuggets produce players with lots of transition points because of their style of offense. In each case, teams implement “systems” and bring in the players to run those systems. In other words, those players have the necessary skills to run that “system”; very few players in the NBA are so talented that they can dominate regardless. We call those players “superstars.” Lin is NOT a superstar, but neither is Terry.
And then you have Floyd Mayweather’s nonsense about Lin’s race. When he is not ducking Manny Pacquiao, apparently Mayweather is busy taking shots at Lin and taking a stand “on behalf of other NBA players” [I did not know Mayweather was a basketball player]. Does “race” have something to do with the hype? Sure. But, it is because of the rarity of an Asian-American player in the NBA; not because of his ethnicity alone. But the attention from the media is beyond race, as we are talking about a player waived by two teams, on the verge of being waived by a third team, and whose career was rotting on the Knicks’ bench.
Mayweather is upset because what he sees is a non-black man doing what black men are “known” to do. That, and Money May’s apparent fear of Asians. That is all he sees. What the rest of us see is a man finally getting a chance after so many rejections; a story not just of an Asian man or a black man, but one of many people just looking for that one opportunity.
Additionally, as has been mentioned on sports talk radio, that this is playing out in New York City is what also makes it relevant. Had Lin received his opportunity with Golden State or in Houston, it would not have been this big. Maybe it would be newsworthy for a few days, but not to this extent. I mean, it is the reason why Lin is headlining ESPN.com and Yahoo! Sports, while the San Antonio Spurs’ current 10-game winning streak and Kevin Durant’s 51-points are relatively obscured.
Regardless of the reason, Lin’s ascension has been incredible. And his game against the Dallas Mavericks — arguably the best defense that he has faced since taking over the Knicks’ point guard position — helped solidify his place in the league, as well as wash away the bad taste from the loss to the New Orleans Hornets on 17 February. Tuffy Rhodes he is not (although Rhodes did have a stellar career in Japan).
But, eventually, Lin’s production will slow down. It may not go to 10 points a game, with four assists every night. But his production will plateau. And it is difficult to imagine that the Knicks can maintain this pace. Remember that New York was out of playoff contention just two weeks ago, battling the New Jersey Nets for the Atlantic Division’s basement!
Will that team return? Maybe not. The Knicks are feeding off of Lin’s energy. Or, more appropriately, the Madison Square Garden crowd is energized with Lin in the lineup, which in turn energizes the Knicks. But this momentum will slow. And when it does, will the MSG crowd turn on Lin and blame him if the Knicks fail? Will Lin eventually “fail”?
I say no. And the reason is as simple as tonight’s game. Tonight, the Knicks take on the team that kick-started Lin’s rise — the New Jersey Nets. But, more importantly, it is apparently going to also signal the return of Carmelo Anthony. And THAT return is why Lin will still be viewed as a success, even if the Knicks fall to pieces as the season progresses.
Keep in mind that Lin and Anthony have only been on the floor for long stretches of the game once — 4 February’s game against the Nets. In other words, they truly played together in Lin’s first significant game. In that game, Anthony struggled from the field, going 3 for 15 from the field for just 11 points. Lin shot 10 for 19 for 25 points. That means that those two players accounted for 40.97 percent of the shots attempted and 35.1 percent of shots made. Add in Amar’e Stoudemire’s 6 for 11 game and that is over 54 percent of attempted shots and 51.4 percent of made shots. But, that percentage is far lower than a typical game from the Miami Heat trio of Chris Bosh, LeBron James and Dwyane Wade. In other words, there appear to be enough shots for them all.
But, if Lin plays the role of a “true” point guard, then his facilitation should work well with Stoudemire and Anthony. That 4 February game has been the only one were all three played together. Since that time, the Knicks have won with only Lin on the floor and they have won with Lin and Stoudemire on the floor. Tonight represents the first time since Lin’s ascension to starter that all three will be on the floor. What if the Knicks fail?
Well, one only has to look at the variables, combinations and outcomes. Without Lin (Stoudemire + Anthony), the Knicks were 8-15 on the season. With Lin only (and counting the 6 February game against the Utah Jazz, since Anthony left early with his groin injury), the team was 4-0. With Stoudemire back in the lineup (Lin + Stoudemire), New York is 3-1. So, at this point, the Knicks have been successfully with Lin as the starter versus the times without Lin starting.
Now, of course, the only game where the Knicks’ new Big Three played was a game where Lin did not start. So, tonight should mark the first time that all three have played together where Lin was the starter (assuming Anthony is not eased back in as a bench player). What happens if the success ends? Who is to blame?
Well, the answer is going to fall on the variable that was lacking during this current run — Anthony. Even if Lin has double-digit turnovers or shoots less than 30 percent from the field, the inclusion of Anthony into the lineup is going to shift the blame from Lin to Anthony. Lin will be heralded as the guy who got the Knicks rolling and back into playoff contention. Anthony will be the one crucified for the Knicks’ failure to maintain that momentum. Lin will be the unselfish energizer, while Anthony will be the equivalent of a black hole on the basketball court.
Anthony does demand a lot of shots, as he is averaging 19.6 shots per game this season. The problem is that we do not even know how the Knicks will be with Anthony back in the lineup. Maybe Anthony has not played with a “true” pick-and-roll point guard, but he has certainly played with PGs that dish the ball. Andre Miller, for example, averaged 8.2 assists per game when Anthony averaged 19.7 shots (26.5 PPG) in 2005-06. In 2007-08, Carmelo shot an average of 19.2 times per game (25.7 PPG) with Allen Iverson dishing out 7.2 assists per game (while also scoring 26.4 PPG on an average of 19 shots).
But Anthony has become so vilified as a “ball hog” and a selfish player that there is a tendency to believe that he is incapable of “sharing” the ball [all the while ignoring that the role of most small forwards is to score points rather than create assists]. This also ignores that fact that Carmelo is fifth among all forwards in assists per game and has finished in the top 10 in assists among small forwards in four of his eight previous seasons (and top 15 in all eight).
And personally, I do think that Anthony can coexist with Lin. But, if the Knicks do indeed sputter, the blame will be on Anthony and his “inability” to be a team player, rather than on Lin’s shortcomings.
In other words, Lin will be seen as a hero regardless of how the rest of the season plays out. For Anthony, he can only pray that the momentum continues. Otherwise, it will be his head the Knicks faithful will be after and not Lin.
Lockdown After the Lockout: The Scoring Dip in the NBA’s 2011-12 Season
I have not been paying a lot of attention to the NBA this season. In part, it has been because of the lockout. Also, my favorite player is busy playing in Russia (Andrei Kirilenko). And, I have been busy moving [which also explains the dearth of articles and the lack of updates to the U.P Top 23].
Nevertheless, I catch an NBA game every now and then and I do see the scores online. And something crazy is going on in the NBA. No…I am not referring to “Linsanity”; I am referring to the low scores in the NBA this season.
While certainly the lockout and labor dispute can be blamed, there still appears to be a trend this season where not only are scores low, but also there appear to be more blowouts. It could be conditioning and the impact of back-to-back-to-back games, but nevertheless scoring — the highlight of basketball — appears to be lacking.
For example, this season there are currently (as of 14 February 2012) four teams averaging under 90 points per game – Toronto Raptors (88.2), Detroit Pistons (87.2), New Orleans Hornets (87.1), and the Charlotte Bobcats (86.1). You have to go back to the 2005-06 season just to find a team that averaged under 90 points per game [Portland Trail Blazers - 88.8]. The Bobcats’ average is the lowest since Toronto (85.4) in the 2003-04 season. Just for comparison, the highest scoring NCAA team is the North Carolina Tar Heels, which average 83.5 points per game, but do so in eight fewer minutes.
[Side Note: in 2008-09, Virginia Military Institute outscored the lowest-scoring NBA team 93.8 to 93.6. In 2006-07, VMI outscored 22 NBA teams!].
On the high end, the Denver Nuggets are the highest scoring team in the NBA by averaging 103.9 points per game. This is followed by the Miami Heat (103.4) and the Oklahoma City Thunder (101.2). These are the only three teams averaging over 100 points per game. Denver’s average is the lowest high mark going to the 2002-03 season (Dallas Mavericks – 103 PPG). The number of teams scoring over 100 points is the fewest since 2003-04 (two teams).
But how does the trend compare overall? Let’s take a look at the last few seasons to see if a pattern exist, or is it just a consequence of the lockout-shortened season. It should be noted that the statistics that I gathered for the 2011-12 season were obtained last Thursday (9 February 2012) and therefore covers 372 games through 8 February. The total data goes back to the 2006-07 season.
First, let’s see how much scoring is down. Through 13 February 2012, the average points per game for all teams is 94.7. Over the study period, that is the lowest, although as will be noted later that is NOT the lowest since the 1976 merger. But average for all teams does not tell us too much. What about how much the winning team is scoring, versus how much the losing team is scoring?
On average, winning NBA teams in the 2011-12 season are scoring an average of 100.52 points per game while losing teams are scoring an average of 88.88 points per game. Over the study period, these are the lowest numbers for average points per game. Winning teams this season are scoring on average 4.68 points fewer than over the previous five seasons. Losing teams are doing slight worse, averaging fewer than 5.37 points per game compared to the last five seasons.
| Season |
Games |
Avg Win |
Avg Loss |
| 2011-12 |
372 |
100.5161 |
88.87634 |
| 2010-11 |
1230 |
104.8463 |
94.25447 |
| 2009-10 |
1230 |
105.9846 |
94.90976 |
| 2008-09 |
1230 |
105.422 |
94.47967 |
| 2007-08 |
1230 |
105.6756 |
94.17073 |
| 2006-07 |
1230 |
104.0472 |
93.43171 |
The highest score by a team was 129 by the Miami Heat; that is by far the lowest over the study period (144 in 2010-11 is the next closest). The lowest score in 2011-12 was 56 points by the Orlando Magic. That, however, is not the lowest (54 points in 2007-09, as well as a tie in 2010-11).
In terms of breaking down the scoring by amount scored, only 3.23 percent of winning teams in 2011-12 scored more than 120 points in their wins. This is the lowest over the study period (2009-10 is the highest with 11.38 percent of winning teams scoring over 120). Most winning teams in 2011-12 score between 90-99 points per game (41.13 percent), which is on average 15 percent more than any other season over the study period (the next closest is 2006-07 with 28.05 percent). Typically, based on the previous five seasons, most winning teams score between 100-109 points (on average 35 percent of all winning scores fall in this range).
At the other end of the spectrum, 1.61 percent of winning teams scored between 70-79 points in their victories. Over the previous five season, the percentage of winning scores falling in this range never topped 0.5 percent!!! To put this in perspective, through 352 games in 2011-12, there were six winners scoring between 70-79 points. That is equal to or greater than any of the previous five seasons!!!!! Additionally, so far during the 2011-12 season, 7.26 percent of winners scored between 80-89 points…the highest over the study period.
|
POINTS SCORED BY WINNING TEAM, by POINT RANGE and SEASON |
||||||||
| Season |
Games |
> 120 |
110-119 |
100-109 |
90-99 |
80-89 |
70-79 |
<70 |
| 2011-12 |
372 |
3.23% |
11.83% |
34.95% |
41.13% |
7.26% |
1.61% |
0.00% |
| 2010-11 |
1230 |
9.35% |
23.41% |
34.88% |
25.45% |
6.50% |
0.41% |
0.00% |
| 2009-10 |
1230 |
11.38% |
22.20% |
36.67% |
25.37% |
4.07% |
0.33% |
0.00% |
| 2008-09 |
1230 |
9.84% |
22.85% |
36.34% |
24.39% |
6.18% |
0.41% |
0.00% |
| 2007-08 |
1230 |
11.14% |
25.04% |
34.23% |
22.60% |
6.50% |
0.49% |
0.00% |
| 2006-07 |
1230 |
8.05% |
20.57% |
36.42% |
28.05% |
6.59% |
0.33% |
0.00% |
As for the losing teams, a similar pattern emerges. On the low end, 2.96 percent of losing teams in the 2011-12 season scored fewer than 70 points in their loss, far exceeding the averages over the previous five seasons. The 11 games where the loser scores fewer than 70 points is more than in each of 2010-11, 2009-10, and 2008-09 seasons! Losing teams score in the 70-79 range 13.44 percent of the time. Most losing teams in 2011-12 score in the 80-89 point range (35.75 percent). Over the previous five seasons, most losing teams score between 90-99 points in their losses (35.48 percent of the time).
On the high end, no losing team in 2011-12 scored over 120 points. While that might seem extremely rare — and to be fair it is rare — it does happen 1.61 percent of the time. Only five losing teams in 2011-12 have scored in the 110-119 range (1.34 percent of the time), compared to an average percentage of 7.04 percent of the time over the last five seasons.
|
POINTS SCORED BY LOSING TEAM, by POINT RANGE and SEASON |
||||||||
| Season |
Games |
> 120 |
110-119 |
100-109 |
90-99 |
80-89 |
70-79 |
<70 |
| 2011-12 |
372 |
0.00% |
1.34% |
13.71% |
32.80% |
35.75% |
13.44% |
2.96% |
| 2010-11 |
1230 |
1.38% |
6.75% |
22.28% |
35.77% |
25.69% |
7.72% |
0.41% |
| 2009-10 |
1230 |
1.22% |
6.83% |
22.85% |
37.97% |
25.37% |
5.20% |
0.57% |
| 2008-09 |
1230 |
2.28% |
7.15% |
21.06% |
33.58% |
26.75% |
8.62% |
0.57% |
| 2007-08 |
1230 |
1.71% |
8.54% |
19.51% |
35.93% |
24.31% |
8.29% |
1.71% |
| 2006-07 |
1230 |
1.46% |
5.93% |
21.06% |
34.15% |
26.67% |
9.51% |
1.22% |
If you combine the data from above, typically a winning team scores between 100 and 109 points, while a losing team typically will score between 90-99 points. However, for the lockout-shortened 2011-12 season, we see a complete jump down to a lower point range for both winners and losers; winners now fall in the 90-99 range and losers are in the 80-89 range. Given that the numbers were fairly stagnant but trending towards more scoring (for both winners and losers), the drop this season is not part of a longer trend and therefore does seem to be caused by the lockout.
Now, what about blowouts? Are there more blowouts this season when compared to the previous five seasons?
The average point differential in 2011-12 is 11.639 points, which is the highest over the study period. But the difference between this current season and the previous five seasons is minuscule. In fact, the 2007-08 numbers are quite close to this seasons differential (11.504 in 2007-08). The average point differential over the last five NBA seasons is 10.946. So the 2011-12 season seems to generally fall in line with the previous seasons.
In fact, if we breakdown the point differential into ranges, most games tend to fall in the same range. Over the study period, most games fall in one of two ranges: 6-10 points and 11-20 points. In 2011-12, 30.47 percent of games were between 11-20 with 29.92 percent of games between 6-10 points. The 2007-08 and 2006-07 seasons had percentages similar to this current season, while the other three seasons (2010-11, 2009-10, and 2008-09) had slightly more games in the 6-10 point range than the 11-20 point range. So, in this case, the 2011-12 season is no different than previous seasons.
However, it is when we start to look at the extremes that the current NBA season separates itself from previous seasons. Over the last five years, one-point margins of victory occurred in four percent of NBA games. However, this season, one-point wins are only occurring 2.15 percent of the time. At the other side, the percentage of margins of victory between 31-40 points is close to double the average over the previous five seasons (3.76 percent in 2011-12 versus an average of 2.02 percent in previous years).
If we define a blowout as margins exceeding 20 points, then 15.32 percent of games this season would qualify as a “blowout” versus an average of 12.24 percent over the last five seasons (second highest is 14.39 percent in 2007-08). If we define a blowout as margins exceeding 30 points, then the percentage of games in the 2011-12 season that are blowouts would be 4.03 percent (versus an average of 2.42 percent).
|
MARGIN OF VICTORY, by POINT RANGE and SEASON |
||||||||
| Season |
Games |
1-pt |
2-5 |
6-10 |
11-20 |
21-30 |
31-40 |
>40 |
| 2011-12 |
372 |
2.15% |
23.92% |
29.03% |
29.57% |
11.29% |
3.76% |
0.27% |
| 2010-11 |
1230 |
4.63% |
24.07% |
30.57% |
29.84% |
8.46% |
2.03% |
0.41% |
| 2009-10 |
1230 |
4.07% |
21.46% |
31.54% |
30.73% |
9.51% |
2.44% |
0.24% |
| 2008-09 |
1230 |
3.50% |
24.23% |
30.98% |
29.59% |
9.27% |
1.95% |
0.49% |
| 2007-08 |
1230 |
3.09% |
22.52% |
28.05% |
31.95% |
11.87% |
1.95% |
0.57% |
| 2006-07 |
1230 |
4.88% |
25.45% |
28.46% |
29.19% |
10.00% |
1.71% |
0.33% |
What is this telling us? Simply put, there does tend to be fewer close games and more blowouts, but not exceedingly so. Most games still tend to fall in the middle ranges (6-10 and 11-20) and the average margin of victory is not far off of the average.
What does stand out is that scoring in general is much lower. But if the lockout is to blame, how is it truly translating on the court? Sloppy play? While turnovers per game are at the highest since 2006-07 (15 per game this season versus 15.1 five seasons ago), it is not far off the trend (average turnovers per game since the 2000-01 season is 14.55). More personal fouls? Actually, the average number of personal fouls per game is at the lowest since the merger in 1976 (20 fouls per game). So, it is not necessarily sloppy play.
But, if we look at field goal shooting — the heart of scoring — we can see part of the problem. The average field goal percentage across the league this season is 44.3 percent. That is the lowest since the 2003-04 season, when it was 43.9 percent. Not surprisingly, the 2003-04 season had the second-lowest scoring average since the NBA-ABA merger (93.4 points per game). The lowest since the merger? The 1998-99 NBA season, where teams average 91.6 points per game. That season also had the lowest field goal percentage since the merger — 43.7 percent. At the current rate, the 2011-12 season will have the third-lowest points per game average and the fourth-lowest field goal percentage since the merger. Low free throw shooting also leads to lower scoring (intuitive, i know, but worth noting).
The 2011-12 season does share something in common with the lowest-scoring season; the 1998-99 season was also a lockout-shortened season. Thus, the lockout does indeed seem to have an adverse effect on field goal shooting, which in turn affects scoring. Additionally, both lockout-shortened seasons had more back-to-back games and the atypical back-to-back-to-back games. So, does the three games in a row really matter?
Well, unless I overlooked a series, back-to-back-to-back games have occurred 18 times for 17 teams (the Denver Nuggets have had it twice). In those series, two teams have gone 3-0 (Chicago Bulls and the Oklahoma City Thunder); seven teams have gone 2-1, eight teams have gone 1-2, and only one teams has gone winless (Detroit Pistons). In other words, it is split right even with nine back-to-back-to-back sequences producing winning records and nine producing losing records. Teams are also 10-8 on the back end of that series.
In terms of scoring, it is also not clear if such grueling games decrease scoring as the three days progress. The average score on the third game of the back-to-back-to-back is 95.3 points, with the high being 109 and the low being 78. The average for the opening game of that series is 96 points (high 112 and low 74); so the difference is marginal. The toughest game may actually be that middle game, where teams average 92.7 points per game (112 the high and 78 the low).
In four cases, the team gradually improved their scoring (or equaled the first games score in the third game), whereas a team gradually decreased its scoring only once (Orlando Magic). In most cases, the scoring simply fluctuated with the highs and lows in the three straight games occurring in any of the three games. And, in seven series, the team scored more points in that third game — even in losses — than in the first game.
So, in the end, it appears that the general fatigue and rustiness affects shooting and therefore scoring more so than the grueling back-to-back-to-back games. Of course, the increase in back-to-back games plays a role in this, as does the fewer days off. Hopefully, for NBA fans used to high-scoring games, this is only a temporary, one-season setback.
If previous precedent prevails again, scoring will return next season!
