Braess's Paradox and "The Ewing Theory"

In simple terms, this "theory" means that everyone steps up their game when the star player is out. It's happened to the Rockets several times.

---All those times when Deke had to replace Yao, Deke was able to turn back the clock, and probably made our defense better than when Yao was playing.

---Last season when Tmac went out, Wafer stepped up his game and had a stretch of about 10 games where he averaged about 20 points.

---Before Rafer was traded, Brooks sometimes had to start in place of Rafer when he went out. One of these games was against Chris Paul, and Brooks successfully held Paul in check while having a great offensive game.

---And of course, in the playoff series against the Lakers, every player stepped up their game. Scola's low-post game showed flashes of dominance, Chuck Hayes successfully played center, Brooks turned into a scoring machine, and everyone in general played with more energy.

But this theory doesn't always work. It always depends on the team and how good the "non-stars" fit into the team once the "star" player or any primary player is gone.

---I remember during the 2008 playoffs when Rafer couldn't play the first two games against Utah. Bobby Jackson had a hard time being the starting point guard because he wasn't a true ballhandler and playmaker, and we lost both games.

---Or during the 05/06 season, when both Tracy and Yao went out, players like Keith Bogans, Stromile Swift, and David Wesley were not good enough to sustain our team. The ceiling for those players were limited role players.

The players that replace the "star" must be good themselves. When the Rockets were healthy, Brooks, Wafer, and Deke all had to stay within their bench role. But in reality, their capabilities were much better than the limited role they were given. So when given the opportunity for a green light, they were able produce.

Also, IMO this theory works best during a short period of time. Like last season, Wafer's production dropped off after awhile. And it's logical to conclude that if Mutombo were to be our permanent center, his weaknesses would be exposed. This theory is also unpredictable. Considering the Lakers series from games 4 - 7, each game was a blow-out at some point in the game, 2 games for the Rockets and 2 for the Lakers.

 

interesting... you can find parallels of this theory in real-life

 

Interesting article but probably a little bit over-quantified especially since basketball is less of numbers game than say, baseball is. That Bill Simmons article he linked to was great though especially with his application of the Ewing Theory to the Drew Bledsoe Patriots and tennis without Pete Sampras.

 

Or basically he vastly overrated Bledsoe since he was an NE homer, and Drew's replacement happened to be one of the great QB's of all time, many times better than Bledsoe ever as.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't Ewing theory about his Georgetown team, not the Knicks? Everyone thought their team would be horrible without him but they exceeded all expectations.

 

Awesome bump! I only glossed over this orginally, but you could be right. I hope the team can maintain.