Bleacher Report - Articles by Marty McFly

Ricky Rubio, Thriving On a Second-Hand Reputation

Marty McFly — Sun, 21 Jun 2009 09:28:09 -0400

The biggest name, at the moment, when it comes to the 2009 NBA draft, is Ricky Rubio, a Spanish point guard, with years of experience playing professional basketball in Europe. Everyone seems to know his alliterative, catchy name, even casual fans.

He's projected to go at number two in the draft, right after Blake Griffin, an impressive power forward from Oklahoma University.

Even so, I'd wager more basketball fans, when you take the casual ones into account, know Ricky Rubio's name, much more than they do Blake Griffin's, on account of all of the media attention he's received.

Rubio's name has been big, in basketball, for quite a few years, mainly as the result of some extraordinary performances in the 2006 Under-16 European championship tournament, during which he had an oft-mentioned 51 point game, against the Russian under-16 national team. Rubio went on to lead the Spanish under-16 team to a championship. He's been riding that accomplishment, ever since.

According to most analysts, Rubio's greatest asset is his floor vision and high basketball IQ. Whenever the name Rubio is mentioned, these are the two qualities emphasized and elaborated upon, with no concrete examples or stats, only one awe-aspiring and thrilling adjective after another.

Besides having personally watched him play in the ACB, a professional basketball league in Spain, on numerous occasions, and not being impressed, these qualities that supposedly make him the second overall selection make me most skeptical about Rubio's potential for stardom in the NBA.

These oft-mentioned qualities bear some simple questions, for Rubio's supporters. What exactly is meant by high basketball IQ, insofar as his numbers and production are concerned? What is meant by floor vision, and, again, how has this quality been quantified?

You see, it's just so much easier for folks to assign a player these fluffed up qualities, than to point at stats and actual production. With Blake Griffin, in contrast to Rubio, a stats guy or girl can point at rebounds, points, assists, etc., in support of his potential for success in the NBA.

Rubio, on the other hand, creates a dilemma, in that there is a huge disparity between the amount of praise that he has received and his actual production.

Of course, certain things can't be seen on the stats sheets: the intangibles. In making my analysis of Rubio, I have taken this into account. The things he does, which aren't seen on the stats sheets, however, aren't, as I see it, generally positive.

Watching Rubio in the ACB and Euroleague, one can see that he lacks speed, explosiveness, can be turnover prone: losing his dribble, walking into double teams, etc. He also has trouble knocking down jumpshots, sometimes even when left open.

Mind you, this is against inferior competition. Some of the easy, soft layups that he drops in, from time to time, against his ACB opponents, would, in my opinion, be swatted out of the building in the NBA.

Much has been made of Rubio's '08 Olympics outing, during which many of his supporters claim he "held his own" against "the world's best," while playing behind Jose Calderon, the extremely talented Toronto Raptors point guard.

Well, first of all, that phrase is sort of loaded. If you take "the world" to mean each country sending its best players out to compete against those of other countries, you'd be right to say that he did "hold his own" (another loaded phrase) against "the world's best." If, as I do, you take "the world's best" to mean the world's very best players, regardless of national origin, that's the NBA.

Besides, Rubio's Olympic numbers: 28% shooting, 4 ppg, 3 assists, 4 rebounds, 2 steals, were mediocre, some might say poor and unbalanced, to the point of showing he'd create a liability, at point guard, for whatever NBA team chooses him. This is very similar to his ACB and Euroleague stats: 10 ppg, 39% shooting, 2.2 assists, 3.0 turnovers and 2 ppg, 30% shooting, 2.8 assists, 2.4 turnovers, respectively.

Most Spanish basketball fans know he's not going to meet expectations. They like the kid, but they also believe he's not ready for the NBA and want him to remain in Spain for a few more years.

It's the NBA, its analysts, GM's and fans, who have never actually watched Rubio, who only have second-hand knowledge of him, that believe him to be much more than he is, or will be, at least in the near future: the best point guard coming out of this draft.

The irony is they don't really seem to know what he does: all we hear about is court-vision, basketball IQ and "exploits" that, outside of his big under-16 51 point game, aren't cited. It's very likely that fans will

Since Michael Jordan, Dwyane Wade Has Been the Most Jordanesque

Marty McFly — Sun, 14 Jun 2009 03:59:51 -0400

The question of who is currently the best player in the NBA was a hot topic, up until the long-awaited, so-called dream series, between the Cavs and the Lakers, was deferred, or even permanently ended, by the Orlando Magic's high-powered offense.

Still, candidates nominated, by most, including the most casual of fans, as well as the most respected journalists, which makes it a questionable assertion, include, almost exclusively, LeBron James and Kobe Bryant.

Both players will likely continue to be considered as the best in the league by those to whom we cede authority over something every intelligent NBA fan is equally as capable of determining.

NBA legend, Jerry West gave a frank, intelligent analysis of why he believes LeBron James to be the best in the league, comparing his abilities to those of Michael Jordan, "His Airness," in a recent interview with Reuters:

"Michael Jordan was the best defensive player in the league, but he was also the best offensive player," said West. "It wasn't a one-year fluke, he proved it over time.

"LeBron James will do the same type of things because he's getting better. He's a much more effective shooter. When's he's making his shots from the outside, you can't play him."

"He's just too big, too strong, too quick. And he has incredible body control. But more than that, he's a great teammate. You can see his teammates love him."

On Kobe Bryant, West said the following:

"Even though it's hard for me to be objective, because I brought Kobe to Los Angeles, I do think LeBron has surpassed Kobe as a player."

This is as intelligent of an analysis as you're likely to get from the media, and, again, it comes from someone who actually knows the game. My only issue with it is what has bothered me when studying other, lesser proposals: no mention of Dwyane Wade.

In West's case, to be fair, he's not being asked, or at the least isn't expected, to discuss more than two players: LeBron and Kobe.

So, this is more about the state of mind of the various sports journalists and analysts out there, than about Mr. West and who he happened to discuss. Just ask yourself, "would this West story be that big if Mr. West chooses Wade over both LeBron and Kobe?"

What we have to ask ourselves is how the common practice, by sports analysts, of only bringing up Bryant and James, when it comes to this topic, be reconciled with the recent history of playoff basketball, during which only one player has played in a Jordan-like fashion: Dwyane Wade.

As stated, by West, in his interview with Reuters, it is undeniable that the Cavs rely heavily on James, and, without him, they would not be a top tier championship contender.

However, the fact that LeBron is of utmost importance to his team does not necessarily equal with the analysis that LeBron is the greatest player in the league and comparable, in anyway, to Michael Jordan.

Jordan comparisons are an old, tired, and failed, practice. Of late, Jordan comparisons have been made between "His Airness" and only a very few select players. In the past, however, guys like Grant Hill, Penny Hardaway, Vince Carter, even Shareef Abdur-Rahim, were compared to Jordan.

I think that it's safe to say, as those players approach the end of their careers, or already have, that these comparisons were poorly made: these players were not as dominant, in any facet of the game: scoring, clutch, leadership, defense, to the degree that Jordan was.

What's to say that the current crop of "Air-Apparents" are not also being wrongly compared to Jordan?

If you look at LeBron James, for example, most of his postseason appearances have been sub-par. He also disappears, at times, during playoff games (especially) and is prone to faltering under pressure.

During Zyndrunas Ilgauskas' prime, he had a solid partner with whom to win a title with. In fact, during many seasons when LeBron James played poorly, "Big Z" was at the top of his game, giving every big man he faced a run for his money.

Kobe Bryant is a more compelling comparison, he chews gum while he plays, he moves and shoots like Jordan, something that gives this long-time Knick fan painful flashbacks.

However, Kobe goes through spells where he disappears, heavily defers to others, in a way that, as legendary as Kobe is, was not characteristic of Jordan in his prime.

In addition, Kobe Bryant, when achieving success, has always had high caliber players to team up with: Shaquille O'Neal, of course, after which the Shaq-less Lakers became a perennial eighth seed.

After years of failure, the Lakers acquired a player that's a legitimate first option, in the NBA: Pau Gasol, and the Lakers returned to prominence.

In contrast, Michael Jordan played in series that saw his team, the Chicago Bulls, matchup against Patrick Ewing, Shaq and Alonzo Mourning with players like Luc Longley and Bill Cartwright.

John Paxson was put up against Isiah Thomas. Jordan, and sometimes Pippen, was the only star that his team had.

Still, whilst surrounded almost exclusively by role players, Jordan managed to overcome teams from what's possibly basketball's greatest era, insofar as talent is concerned, to win six championship rings.

The only player who, though given no mention as of late, performed Jordan-like heroics against a great team, i.e. the Mavs, during the Mavs-Heat 2006 NBA Finals, is Dwyane Wade.

Down 2-0, and about to fall down further, during each subsequent game, Wade's heroics and unstoppable fourth quarters, along with a few mistakes on the part of the Mavs (Jordan also benefited from those in his storied playoffs performances), led the Heat to shock the world by sweeping the next four games, winning Miami its first NBA championship, ever, in 2006.

If the question is who's the best in the league, Wade needs to be in that conversation. Three years ago, it's him, hands down. Right now, after injury problems and Shaq's departure, he's still in the conversation, but it's not clear-cut.

When it comes to filling Jordan's shoes, if actions speak louder than gimmicks and marketing, he arguably should be the most heavily considered candidate for the most Jordan-like player, since Jordan.

Even if he never again plays like he did against Dallas, I argue that it's the most Jordan-like that any player has played, when in a do-or-die playoff predicament, since Jordan.

Dispelling the "Pau Gasol Is Reformed" Myth

Marty McFly — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 05:34:51 -0400

During, and after, the 2008 NBA finals, played between the Boston Celtics and the Los Angeles Lakers, Pau Gasol was tagged as soft and as the primary cause of the Lakers' fall to the Celtics.

He was labeled as such, despite having outplayed Marcus Camby and Kenyon Martin, during that season's first round matchup between the Lakers and the Denver Nuggets, followed by his complete domination of Carlos Boozer, during the 2008 second round matchup between LA and Utah, and a competent performance against Tim Duncan during the 2008 western conference finals.

During this year's NBA playoffs, during the series between Utah and Los Angeles, Gasol either matched Carlos Boozer or outplayed him, in all but one game. He also overcame the physicality of rising star Paul Millsap.

In succeeding rounds, he outplayed Luis Scola, Carl Landry, and the rest of the Rockets' bigs, on both ends of the court. He also outplayed, in almost every statistical category, the bigs of a Nuggets team, whose players, Chris Andersen, Kenyon Martin and Nene, were considered tougher than the Lakers' bigs, leading many to choose Denver to come out of the west.

His exceptional play against hardmen of this caliber has either been disregarded or, as I happen to believe, is unknown by the many superficially knowledgable sports analysts that tell the majority of fans what to think.

Now, they want us to believe that Pau Gasol, at almost 29, in one year's time, after over a decade of playing professional basketball, all over the world, has gone through some sort of metamorphosis: he was soft, for over ten years, never pumped his fists or showed emotion, until now.

This thought itself is ludicrous. The fact that they'd like informed fans to believe this is insulting.

Though it can't be quantified, except through actual observation, i.e. watching games and not just repeating what's popular, Pau Gasol has, throughout his career, yelled out in excitement, pumped his fists, given his teammates high-fives, after either executing big plays or seeing them do so. The passive, unemotional Gasol is a myth.

He's done this since his days in Memphis, when, intrigued by his great play against my Knicks, I decided to follow the Grizzlies' progress in the league, after he played a great power game against my New York Knicks.

During that game against the Knicks, he threw down dunk after dunk, against Eddy Curry and the rest of the Knicks' frontline. After each one, he let out a primal scream. It's a tradition with him, I would later discover, not something new.

In addition to a supposed change in his personality, Gasol's statistics for the 2009 playoffs: 18 ppg, 11 rebounds, 2 blocks, have been used to point out some sort of supposed existential transformation, from his past to what he's doing now. However, in 2008, he averaged only one point less, than he does for this year's playoffs. He also averaged the same number of blocks and only 1.7 less rebounds. Essentially, the slightest variable, such as teams played against, minutes played, lineups, number of games played, etc. could be affecting the small difference between these numbers.

Still, even if you gave no consideration to these variables, the stats are not different enough to warrant the Gasol metamorphosis theory.

Instead of exclusively, and cynically, looking at Gasol's performance, during the 2008 NBA finals, let's look at what the entire team did. According to stats posted on nba.com, Kobe Bryant shot 40 percent from the field, during the 2008 NBA finals: this is 7 percent less than he is currently shooting and a bad percentage for a primary player, who is likely to take a large number of shots, to shoot at.

The Laker point guards, Derek Fisher, Jordan Farmar, and Sasha Vujacic, combined to average only 5.3 assists, per game. Kobe averaged five, on his own. Gasol and Odom averaged six, combined, on their own.

In addition, the Lakers' point guards took far too many shots, poor ones, at that, and too early in the shotclock. They failed to move the ball, excluded key players, Gasol being one of them, from the offense and turned Los Angeles into a team without an intelligent game plan. This all, having been coupled with Phil Jackson's sometimes inappropriate calm, led to the series loss.

So far, according to nba.com, Kobe Bryant is shooting 47 percent, and Gasol is receiving 13 touches (so far), per game, far more than the nine per game that he logged in last year.

If Gasol receives limited touches, as was the case during last season's finals, when he complained about it to no avail, and Kobe shoots 40 percent from the field, while the Laker point guards devolve to streetballers, chucking up shots, with no interest in strategy, would the Lakers be up 2-0? Would they even be 1-1 with the Magic?.

Folks, trust your gut. If you don't think Gasol is soft, because you've watched him carefully, by actually watching Laker games, and have not seen evidence of softness, it's because he isn't.

If you think he's changed, from soft to tough, just because the analysts say so, at almost age 29, after years of playing pro basketball, inject some common sense into that thought and consider exactly what that implies.

It makes no sense, when you weigh the entire body of work, not just his part in the Lakers' failure against Boston. It also makes no sense, when one looks at the history of basketball, for a big man to be transformed so far into his career.

As Pau said himself, after game two (between the Magic and Lakers), when asked about having shed the soft label: "the media try to find reasons why things happen. I think I played pretty tough throughout the playoffs. We had a couple of games that we just couldn't or didn't compete as hard as Boston did, and we got labeled soft.

"This year, bottom line, we're playing tougher, we understand what it takes to go get the championship."

An intelligent, comprehensive and perceptive analysis, Pau. It's too bad that the humility and common sense necessary to understand your comment is so lacking in the world of sports journalism.

NBA Finals: Gasol Just As Heroic As Howard

Marty McFly — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 14:48:48 -0400

Yes, Pau Gasol, like Dwight Howard is, was once considered a superhero, albeit at the local, small-market (even smaller than Orlando) level.

When he first arrived in Memphis, the Spaniard's exciting style of play, passion and aggression—for which he is often given no credit—catapulted the Grizzlies from a perennial league laughing stock to a perennial playoff team, despite the lack of a strong second option on those Grizz teams.

Still, during Pau's tenure with the organization, the Grizz became a respectable team, outperforming Kobe Bryant's Lakers during two consecutive regular seasons: 2004-05 and 2005-06.

In 2007, the Lakers made the playoffs, while a Grizz team that had an injured Pau Gasol on its inactive roster, was unable to break in. However, Kobe's team still lost, during that run, to the Phoenix suns, four games to one, in the first round.

Those Grizz teams were tough, fundamentally sound, etc., but they lacked an additional piece, one that would have given those teams the tandem needed to get to the next level. Mike Miller wasn't it, and neither was Shane Battier.

Enter Kobe Bryant. An improbable trade, and two guys that needed one another, equally, were brought together. Two players that were in the same boat, unable to carry their teams with the insufficient help surrounding them, had been brought together.

Since Gasol's arrival, and the founding of the Gasol-Bryant duo, the Lakers' win percentage has skyrocketed, from barely over .500 to nearly .800. However, Gasol's role in this progress is often ignored, not comprehended or forgotten.

Unfortunately, most fans do not know any of these stats, because the media generally reports on the Lakers in such a way that it seems like Bryant does it all by himself. In addition, many fans, rather than truly studying the sport, get their information from a sports media that is generally focused on everything that's superficial about the game: cool nicknames, appearance, popularity, etc.

The truth is that, like Howard, Pau Gasol has been a basketball savior, resurrecting a franchise (the Griz) that had never been graced with success. However, unlike Howard, Gasol never got real help during his time with the Grizz. Certainly not all-star caliber help, like the sort of help that's been given to Howard.

Howard, during his team's second-round Boston series, like Gasol in the Western Conference finals against the Nuggets, went to the press with his grievances. Both big men wanted their respective teams to take advantage of what they could do inside.

Both (Howard more so than Gasol), were criticized for going to the press. In each case, however, their initiative made their teams much more effective and saved them from elimination.

There's no question about it, this series will be won and lost in the middle.

The Magic believe in Howard, who will be acting upon the guidance of Magic assistant coach and NBA great Patrick Ewing. The Lakers, especially their point guards, don't seem to believe in Gasol as much, which should be of concern to Laker fans.

If the Lakers revert to last year's finals performance and decide not to look for their inside players (the true cause of last year's Lakers collapse), opting for one-on-one basketball, wild shots and three pointers, they will do assuredly lose.

In this case, Phil Jackson's stoic, passive nature, in the face of Derek Fisher's or Sasha Vujacic's recklessness, would simply enable a repeat of last year's finals.

Heroes are defined by their willingness to stand up for what they believe in, as much as for what they can do physically. This series will be as much about a battle of wills, as about a battle for position in the low post.

Who will be more vocal about receiving touches and making plays, for himself and others? Who will believe most in teamwork and sacrifice? The answers to these questions will determine who wins this series.

In the middle, Pau Gasol and Dwight Howard are closely matched: both average within three points of one another, both average two blocks and high field goal percentages, and both average a double digit rebounds.

More so than play, however, winning it all might just come down to who, between Howard and Gasol, most embodies heroism, in the form of passion, vocalization of what they feel they need from their coaches and teammates and will power.

Logic Dictates That Lakers Will Defeat Nuggets

Marty McFly — Sun, 17 May 2009 21:52:44 -0400

Recently, NBA legend Charles Barkley, during NBA broadcasts on TNT, has been proclaiming that the Nuggets are the best team in the NBA. Other analysts have touted the Nuggets as the only Western Conference team that could beat the Lakers. With the long-term memory problems suffered by most sports analysts, who simply often parrot whatever it is they hear, sending whatever superficial facade of the original comment is left down to those naive enough to take such commentary seriously, no one should be surprised.

In the spirit of the renewed popularity of the exclusively logical Vulcan people, whom inspired this article's title, if one takes an intelligent, logical look at this match-up, the matter of last year's sweep of the Nuggets, by the Lakers, comes up and must be discussed, when it comes to this year's contest. The main difference between that matchup and this one is that Allen Iverson has been replaced, on the Nuggets' side, by Chauncey Billups. Billups, undoubtedly, is a brainier, more selfless point guard than Allen is, can run an offense better, and, because of his ability to impact a game in so many different ways, is more of an impact player, as opposed to a stats machine, though he can fill it up, too.

There are other changes to what the Nuggets look like, right now, but those are nominal: Birdman and Nene are candidates for being the pieces necessary for the Nuggets to get to the next level, but that is mitigated by the fact that the Nuggets had other competent players, Marcus Camby, for example, in their place, when they were swept by Los Angeles, last season. The Nuggets have acquired Anderson, which people are truly overrating, mainly, in my opinion, because of the novelty, and attention-grabbing nature, of his appearance (we all know how common it is for people to put appearances above substance).

The Nuggets' leader, Carmelo Anthony, is much improved, as far as his ability to rise to the occasion in the playoffs, in clutch situations, is concerned. However, when taken into consideration with the Lakers' sweep of the Nuggets last year, one that has seemingly been forgotten by the mainstream media, and his tradition of vanishing in the playoffs, can he be relied upon to rise to the challenge the Lakers, not the fading Mavs or the one-dimensional Hornets, will pose? One would hope so, but it makes sense to hold off on any assertions that Carmelo will take down the formidable Lakers, led by Kobe Bryant and his second-in-command, Pau Gasol, a player who dismantled the Nuggets' front-line, in last year's playoffs, until he shows us that his inability to elevate his game for the playoffs is truly a thing of the past and that his exceptional play of late is to be a motif, in his career, from now on.