I don’t like to do this, but I have nothing substantial on my mind - at least not sports-related - to write about tonight, so I’m going to go with the potluck / grab bag approach on a couple of small items.
First off is the “stunning” Antawn Jamison interview in which he declares that, in retrospect, the Cavs’ team chemistry wasn’t as good as they thought it was.
This is not at all surprising to me.
No, my opinion has nothing to do with the Cavs’ team chemistry itself - but it does have everything to do with the Cavs’ perception of their own team chemistry after they lost a series in the playoffs.
Chemistry is a dubious thing to measure, and I’m not entirely convinced that it has any effect on the outcome of a game. Smart basketball decisions and successful plays win games; getting along with your teammates at dinner does not. It shouldn’t be shocking that good teams always claim to have great chemistry and bad teams do not. In the Boston series, the Cavs were a bad team. It’s no wonder Jamison would now think that the chemistry was flawed.
Second on my list of topics is the flood of predictions I’ve been reading about the NFL. Here’s the thing … unless you’re in the coaches’ room and know exactly how a team is going to utilize its players in a variety of schemes against a variety of opponents, you have no idea what is going to happen. Even the coaches themselves don’t have a complete concept of what will happen because their opponents are spending every waking minute hiding their real strategies. Throw the importance of and unpredictability of the injury problem in to the mix, as Tim so astutely pointed out yesterday, and nobody can really predict much of anything.
I understand why websites and talk shows feel the need to make predictions - what else can they do when they have to talk endlessly about everything to fill up airtime and create blog traffic? - but the amount of time and energy that is spent on arguments that, by nature, can’t be resolved at the point they are occurring (how do you win an argument about the future?) is probably beginning to have a negative effect on the U.S. economy.
Third, I had a quick thought after listening to Tony Grossi’s podcast on Cleveland.com earlier today. Dan Labbe, the host of the podcast, made reference to the Browns winning games by controlling the ball…
Now, if you remember any of my posts from last year’s NFL season, I absolutely despise terminology like controlling the ball and managing the game. Statistics like time of possession are completely worthless. Who cares how long an offense holds the ball? All that really matters is whether they score points or not. The only way controlling the ball could lead directly to a victory is if, let’s just say, the game is tied at the half. The Browns get the ball to start the third quarter and then institute a 29 minute drive. They score a touchdown, go up 7 points, and then the opponent doesn’t have enough time to go the length of the field in an attempt to tie the game.
When was the last time you saw a 29 minute drive?
Yeah, that’s what I thought.
Fourth and finally, I wanted to comment on Shaq’s recent complaint about Mo Williams taking too many shots last season. Shaq made a point of saying how happy he was to be on a team - the Celtics - where guys didn’t worry about shots … before proceeding to bitch about how many field goal attempts he got with the Cavs.
Aside from pointing out the hypocrisy that was inherent in Shaq’s comments, I thought we should take a look at the actual numbers.
Per 40 minutes last year, Shaq took 14.9 shots.
Per 40 minutes last year, Williams took 14.5 shots.
That’s right, Mo actually took less shots than Shaq on a per minute basis.
Shaq’s complaining then stems from his inability to understand rudimentary statistics. If another player averages 34.2 minutes per game (Mo) and you average only 23.4 minutes (Shaq), you’re probably going to have less shots per game than the other guy. That doesn’t mean you’re actually taking less shots in the time that you’re on the floor.
Shaq’s comments then are really just another example of why a class like “how to understand and interpret statistics” should be taught in high schools all over the country.
Having said that, Mo’s eFG% (2’s + 3’s) was 53.5% and Shaq’s was 56.6% so maybe Shaq could have gotten a couple more looks.
And thus ends tonight’s grab bag of thoughts. Come back next time to grab again.
