Espn Insider Request

[Guest Squawker]

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/playoffs/2011/insider/columns/story?columnist=hollinger_john&page=PERDiem-110510&action=upsell&appRedirect=http%3a%2f%2finsider.espn.go.com%2fnba%2fplayoffs%2f2011%2finsider%2fcolumns%2fstory%3fcolumnist%3dhollinger_john%26page%3dPERDiem-110510

[Admin]

Heading into the home stretch of the second round, we still have two series that are in genuine doubt, tied at two games apiece.

And in each, we have a polarizing player whose decisions have become a focal point for fans and analysts alike.

In the East, Atlanta and Chicago are all square heading into Tuesday's Game 5 in Chicago, owing in equal parts to a brilliant Game 4 from Josh Smith and brutal Game 2 from Josh Smith.

And out West, Oklahoma City and Memphis evened up after Russell Westbrook scored 40 points in the Game 4 triple-overtime thriller ... and after his choices made him a target for the Thunder's offensive meltdown at the end of the previous game.

In both cases, the two players seem to be battling themselves as much as the opponent. For years, Atlanta's coaches have pushed Smith to stop settling for jumpers and use his athleticism to attack the rim, while Westbrook's decision-making -- and in particular his willingness to call his own number -- has made him a lightning rod for criticism.

So let's look at what's really happening with each.

In Smith's case, it's one shot in particular that has made him a target -- the catch-and-shoot mid-range J that he oh-so-slowly lofts toward the rim while the locals groan in anticipation of a brick. Those of you new to Hawks basketball should know that has been going on for a couple of years now, and the crowd's groans are nothing compared to those of the coaching staff.

By now most people have seen that Smith is 1-for-the-series on jump shots (he made his first one in Game 4), but that wasn't what happened in the regular season. In fact, Smith threw a new wrinkle into the debate this year by actually making enough jump shots to make it a non-terrible choice in the right situations.

Unfortunately, he doesn't seem to know when those are. When Smith shoots and there's only a couple seconds left on the shot clock, that's an appropriate choice. When there's 18 on the shot clock, however, it's a much more questionable decision.

Smith shot 39 percent on long 2s this season according to hoopdata.com, which is significantly better than he's done historically and not far off the league average of 40 percent ... but also significantly worse than he shoots near the basket (68.9 percent). Smith also took two 3-point tries per game and converted only 33.1 percent. As this season wore on, smart Atlanta fans began to realize that the increased success on jumpers was only encouraging him -- ultimately, to his and the team's detriment. Ergo, the groaning as he winds up.

Overall, he averaged long six jump shots a game, and only 4.4 shots at the rim. Even doing so, he was a pretty good player, but the frustration is that he could be so much better. This is especially true going against a slower and turf-toe hobbled Carlos Boozer. In Game 4, when he took 16 shots in the paint and only six from distance, he owned the second half.

Yet the real loss is not in what he can create for himself, but in what he can do for others. Smith is a far better passer than most acknowledge; when he's attacking, Game 4 showed what kind of an all-weather force he can be. Smith's True Shooting Percentage this season has hardly budged even as he's taken more jumpers, but his Assist Rate fell sharply. (The TS% is also a bit misleading -- a big chunk of the reason it's unchanged is that his free throw percentage improved dramatically, which has little to do with his shot selection.)

Along the same lines, it's why it was so disappointing to see Smith backslide in this department under Larry Drew. Under Mike Woodson in 2009-10, Smith took 3.0 long jump shots per game and 6.7 shots at the rim, plus he had essentially abandoned taking 3-pointers, trying only seven all of last season. Not coincidentally, he set career highs in shooting percentage and PER.

Although he criticized Smith in the press after Game 3, Drew has generally given Smith a longer leash than Woodson did on shooting jumpers. Smith has used it to strangle himself at several junctures.

Thus, heading into Game 5, one can only wonder which Smith will show up -- the aggressive, attacking one that destroyed Boozer in Game 4, or the meek jump shooter that showed up for the first two games?

For Westbrook, it's a more complicated debate. He can create his own shot at any time and generally can create pretty decent ones. Although he's not a great outside shooter, at the end of the shot clock, his ability to rise up and reliability get a clean look is valuable.

The "complicated" part comes because he plays with the league's most potent scoring weapon in Kevin Durant. Westbrook's Usage Rate was higher than Durant's this season, which on the face of it appears ridiculous, because Durant was so vastly more efficient with his shots. Durant's TS% was 58.9, while Westbrook's was just 53.8, a shade below the league average of 54.1.

Additionally, there's the undeniable fact that Westbrook's decisions are often less than optimal. This has become particularly apparent in two of the Thunder's three playoff losses -- a close loss in Denver in Game 4 of the first round, and the overtime loss to Memphis in Game 3. In both instances, Westbrook's imperfect instincts at the point guard position led to some questionable shot-pass decisions.

And this is where the Thunder's basketball people all chime in and say: Whoa. Wait a minute.

Westbrook is 22. He had hardly played point guard before coming to the NBA. He is not a natural at the spot by any means but, compared to where he was two years ago, he's improved his decisions by leaps and bounds. And -- especially when James Harden isn't in the game -- he has to make virtually every decision on every trip. As Thunder coach Scott Brooks pointed out after Tuesday night's game, the point guard and the coach become magnets for criticism when the offense fails, and that's particularly true when so much of it is in Westbrook's hands.

Another aspect that gets far too little attention, and has really become apparent to me in the two rounds I've spent covering the Thunder in these playoffs, is how frequently plays called for Durant break down. In those situations, Westbrook is basically forced to improvise a shot -- sometimes a poor one -- because he's often the only other Oklahoma City player on the floor who can reliably generate a halfway-decent look.

Despite all that, there's an unquestionable tension in his game, a fight between the yin of aggressively using his athleticism to take over the games and the yang of getting the rock to Durant. I've seen him try to take over games that Durant had already taken over. I've also seen him tilt too far the other way (though admittedly less often), and ignore a promising matchup because he's trying so hard to be a "true" point guard.

Either way, he can't win. Not unless Durant takes 65 shots and Westbrook plays like assistant coach Mo Cheeks, which has no chance of ever happening.

But because he controls so much of the action, he can be the driving force behind victory, as he was in Game 4 (check out the superb baseline drive-and-kick for a Harden 3 at the end of the second overtime; Westbrook scored or assisted on all 10 Oklahoma City points in that stanza), or a major impediment to it, as he was at the end of Game 3.

And in that sense, he and Smith are the focal points in the upcoming Game 5s. Each has enough ability to win the game single-handedly for his team ... and each is capable of enough spotty decisions to lose it. The next 48 hours are so interesting precisely because we're so genuinely curious as to which of the two alterative outcomes will prevail.

[niremetal]

By now most people have seen that Smith is 1-for-the-series on jump shots (he made his first one in Game 4), but that wasn't what happened in the regular season. In fact, Smith threw a new wrinkle into the debate this year by actually making enough jump shots to make it a non-terrible choice in the right situations.

Unfortunately, he doesn't seem to know when those are. When Smith shoots and there's only a couple seconds left on the shot clock, that's an appropriate choice. When there's 18 on the shot clock, however, it's a much more questionable decision.

Smith shot 39 percent on long 2s this season according to hoopdata.com, which is significantly better than he's done historically and not far off the league average of 40 percent ... but also significantly worse than he shoots near the basket (68.9 percent). Smith also took two 3-point tries per game and converted only 33.1 percent. As this season wore on, smart Atlanta fans began to realize that the increased success on jumpers was only encouraging him -- ultimately, to his and the team's detriment. Ergo, the groaning as he winds up.

It's really, really remarkable. I'm pretty convinced that the only person in the entire universe who thinks that Josh isn't making a terrible decision every time he hoists up a perimeter is Josh himself. His coaches, teammates, opposing players, former players, retired coaches, reporters, pundits, commentators, fans, journalists, the Hardy Boys, my dog Skip, aliens monitoring Terran communications from the vicinity of NGC 253...EVERYONE is saying that he's being a royal idiot and that he'd be an infinitely better player if he just cut out that part of his game and instead focused on dominating in the paint. So who is he talking about when he says things like "I’ve been a pretty good perimeter shooter this whole season. If people have been here all season they know I’ve done it all year." ?!?!? Who are these "people" who have been encouraging this mindset in Smoove? Are they in some undisclosed location near Abbotabad? Because I've never heard, seen, nor smelled a person who thinks those are good shots.

/rant.

Edited May 10, 2011 by niremetal

[Admin]

It's really, really remarkable. I'm pretty convinced that the only person in the entire universe who thinks that Josh isn't making a terrible decision every time he hoists up a perimeter Josh is Josh himself. His coaches, teammates, opposing players, former players, retired coaches, reporters, pundits, commentators, fans, journalists, the Hardy Boys, my dog Skip, aliens monitoring Terran communications from the vicinity of NGC 253...EVERYONE is saying that he's being a royal idiot and that he'd be an infinitely better player if he just cut out that part of his game and instead focused on dominating in the paint. So who is he talking about when he says things like "I've been a pretty good perimeter shooter this whole season. If people have been here all season they know I've done it all year." ?!?!? Who are these "people" who have been encouraging this mindset in Smoove? Are they in some undisclosed location near Abbotabad? Because I've never heard, seen, nor smelled a person who thinks those are good shots.

/rant.

I imagine that it all goes back to that shooting coach he hired in the off-season that told him to just shoot them and not worry about the consequences. I'm fairy convinced that the guy is heavily involved in Scientology as well.

[99PROBL3MS]

Everytime he shoots a very questionable jumpshot, I will think about Barkley wearing the helmet to protect himiself from Josh Smith's ill-advised jumpshots.

[TheTruth]

Under Mike Woodson in 2009-10, Smith took 3.0 long jump shots per game and 6.7 shots at the rim, plus he had essentially abandoned taking 3-pointers, trying only seven all of last season. Not coincidentally, he set career highs in shooting percentage and PER.

Overall [this season], he averaged long six [sic] jump shots a game, and only 4.4 shots at the rim.

Forget all star, Josh would arguably be an All NBA player if he played consistently like he did in 2010 under Woodson's last year or Game 4 against the Bulls. Because when you combine that efficiency with his shot-blocking and passing ability, it is hard to match. The only thing holding him back in that form would be his subpar rebounding for his size and athleticism.

And even if he never made any of those teams, he would make us an infinitely better, offensively crisper, and less turnover-prone team. Josh will NEVER be a good offensively player if his long jump shot attempts outnumber his shots at the rim.

Let's just hope we can get the Good Josh for two more wins in this series.

Edited May 10, 2011 by TheTruth