http://myespn.go.com/blogs/truehoop/0-45-42/Memo-to-a-Young-Baller.html Interesting post on Kevin Durant: the conundrum that is his lackluster plus/minus impact on the floor relative to his teammates, his annoyed response ("whateva"), and a video analysis breaking down his game. So here's the question. Was Durant just a very skilled player last year who, being young and relatively inexperienced, wasn't able to bring it all together to positively impact the scoreboard? Or was he legitimately very good, and his teammates are what held the team back from breaking 30 wins? A_3PO, when you have time, I'd like to hear your thoughts on it.
I can add something to this, but not in the form of stats, just logic and experience from playing D-1. Durant is a very good player, but he's not a transcending type of guy that can lead a team solo. In fact, there is only a couple of guys like that in the league and there has always been only a couple, but since they're the best player, they get the max. Durant is the kind of guy like alot of players who have suffered from instability in the front office and being surrounded by alot of guys that are trying to figure it out. Thats why it ammuses me when the gay v battier thing comes up and people talk about how battier is a winner and all rudy does is put up good numbers on a sorry team. When you look at it, when shane and gasol got to memphis, they were terrible the first 2 yrs with a assortment of coaches and just bad basketball. Hubie Brown comes in, adds a couple of vets and a identity and all of a sudden the team starts winning. He leaves, The Czar takes over and they continue. Gasol is hurt, a couple players are traded and now the team is stuck again and have changed coaches. To me, Durant is in that same track with gasol, brand, and guys like that who are very good players, but need other very good players to make the team very good. Whereas u can look at a guy like Roy who got his team to .500, then 50+ wins in a few yrs and they traded away their most talented player in zach and hasnt reaped benefits of having full, productive seasons out of 2 high lotto pick in oden and bayless. People can say alot of things about carmello, but carmello has been in the playoffs and led his team their earlier than a guy like Durant and its not like before hey had killer teams either. For yrs, i've argued that the term franchise player has been given out too easily. To me, if you can swap the guy on another team, would they be instant contenders? For yrs, the only 2 i could say that was true for was Shaq and Duncan recently. I thnk you couldve taken any teams best player and swapped them with those 2 and they're contenders. Today, i really only see 1 and that Lebron. Durant, until he proves he can lift his teammates, he's in the danny granger category. Thats not a bad place to be, kinda like brand was for yrs, but still a hellava player. Franchise players dont win 20 games a yr under any situations.
The problem I have with that is the fact that Brand, for all the weirdness from Krause about how he was too undersized to be a good defender in Chicago, was a fantastic defender in both Chicago and LA. And his box score stats (high levels of steals and blocks) added to that. Gasol I think played quite well defensively for Hubie and Fratello's Grizzlies teams. And Gasol, Brand (in 2006), and Roy all had something Durant does not -- a damn good, playoff-worthy, surrounding cast. That said, yes, Durant has major issues in just about every area besides nailing high percentages of jumpers. I wouldn't go as far to call him a perimeter version of Eddy Curry -- his turnover rate isn't nearly as bad, same with his rebounding rate, which makes his PER much better -- but he's close. I'd kill a man to get him on my team, but he has a LOT to work out.
He's 21, defense and passing will come. This article is ridiculous and uses statistics but doesn't explain the major flaw in +/- numbers.
Durant isn't conducive to winning basketball at this point. I think thats obvious. Shareef Abdur-Rahim maximum basically... the same kind of problem a young KG, Dirk, and Carmelo had/have. That team needs Westbrook to turn into a leader and tone-setter. Only then will Durant meet his true value.
Good stuff. We need more of this kind of analysis. I expect KD will work on his PnR weaknesses and improve. It's hard to argue with the numbers, but I would take KD on my team in a heartbeat. He will have a special NBA career.
Not that pre-season games matter but Kevin Durant is doing pretty good right now: 30 pts 10-14 fg, 9 rebs, 2 assists, but 6 turnovers in 3 quarters
I would trade any player on the rockets for Durant. The guy will figure it out since he is a hard worker and has freakish athletism. Defense is a team thing and OKC just doesn't play good D as a team because of experience and lack of any presence in the middle. Their bigs are Collison and Krstic for god sake.
Denver got more than Carmelo in his rookie year. But they also gained a solid starting PG in Andre Miller, Camby played 50 more games, and (last but not least) they lost Juwan Howard before Melo's rookie year. No Juwan is mega-addition by subtraction.
How did I miss this great thread? I like this thread because it is rather counter intuitive to the massive amounts of fans who have this weird thing for shooting percentages. It's only one part of the game. People seem to like to dumb down the league and say that if player A has great shooting percentages then player A is great, and if player B has poor shooting percentages then player B is a poor player. Kevin Durant is not a great player. He is a great shooter. He has very little court vision and even if he sees the play i'm not sure he has the passing ability to get the ball in the right spot in every situation. Also, with his length and athleticism defense should be a cake walk. For a guy who has the height advantage every time he steps on the court, his post game is very weak. He's actually a good rebounder but since he plays so far away from the basket his team doesn't get that benefit. Playing near the basket is a very underrated skill. Defenses would much rather KD float around the three point line than post up. Even if he drills that 3 in someone's face he isn't breaking down their interior defense forcing multiple players to help, finding cutters, and creating wide open jumpshots. I laugh when I see people say he's going to be right behind Lebron this year or next year...but then I remember those are the same people who say Dirk is better than KG. The ones that only see shooting percentages.
KD tweets like a 16 year old girl. Durant's body still has a lot of filling out to do and he has a mindset that's young for his age (life has been a cakewalk so far), so I'm not that critical of him. Great scorer already, and has the tools to improve other facets of his game over time.
Worst case scenario is he develops into one of the league's top 3 scorers. Will he be Lebron? I doubt it but if you have a guy who can fill the basket up shooting a high percentage then you have a chance to win every night. Again, that is the worst case scenario. With this kid's attitude, work ethic and feel for the game he could be much more than that.
While not unmentioned, the major flaw with +/- is that it is a stat that must take into account 9 other people on the court. Durant has problems on the court defensively that his team isn't built to handle. For his rookie year, Durant was very inefficient for most of the season and was easily the reason they were losing. For his second season, Durant does not make his teammates better. I think he could make different teammates better. They don't cover for his weaknesses. Kyle Weaver is a much better player than Oklahoma City realizes and he tends to play with starters when Durant is out. He played a lot when Durant was out which happened at a nice soft spot in the schedule. Durant is still a young player.
