The Suns were better before they got Shaq.
The Blazers are better after ridding themselves of Zach Randolph (and the Knicks are much worse).
The Rockets are (small sample size) undefeated since Yao went down.
Last week I wrote that, during the Cal game, the Huskies were a better team without Jon Brockman. Saturday, Brockman went to 0-7 for his career against the Cougars--and once again, the Huskies looked better without him.
And I'm wondering if they've got a better chance to win the Pac-10 tourney if Brockman doesn't play.
Yeah, I know--Brockman averages 18ppg and 11rpg. How will the Dawgs replace that production?
Consider this: Zach Randolph averaged 24ppg and 10rpg for the Blazers last year. This year, with pretty much the exact same team, they are winning a lot more.
Now, I should say that I don't mean this as a slam on Brockman. It just may be that he's one of a dying breed.
Suns coach Mike D'Antoni notoriously didn't like big men. His Suns seemed to do fine without them. But now he's got Shaq and his team is floundering--they've gone from first in the Western Conference to sixth, and with ninth-place Denver only 4.5 GB, the Suns could conceivably miss the playoffs altogether.
And Yao, well, the Rockets streak started with him, but without him they aren't just winning, they are blowing teams out--their average margin of victory is 17 points.
We Seattle fans know that what's worse that losing a center is spending 20 years looking for one...Tom Burleson, Alton Lister, Rich King, Benoit Benjamin, Ervin Johnson, Jim McIlvane, Calvin Booth, Jerome James, Sene, Bob Swift--all disastrous acquisitions made in search of a big man that, maybe, they never needed.
I'm not sure when NBA teams decided that you needed a big guy in the middle to win...during the Bill Russell era? The Kareem era?
But evidence increasingly points to the contrary--that unless you have a tremendously talented big guy (like Russell or Kareem or Tim Duncan) you are saddling your team with a large body who clogs up the middle and prevents your guards from penetrating, who gets beat down the floor, who limits your versatility on defense.
It will be interesting to see how the Huskies do tonight with Brockman's 20 or so touches per game redistributed among (presumably) Quincy Pondexter, Matthew Bryan-Amaning, and Venoy Overton. I expect you'll see a faster game, a higher-scoring game--in short, a game more suited to the talents of the players that Lorenzo Romar recruited.
My instinct tells me that the Huskies will surprise in this tournament (though my instinct also told me that the HoRam deal was a good one).
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
Brockman, Z-Bo, Shaq, Yao, and the Curse of the Big Man
Posted by
Seth
at
1:35 PM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)

3 comments:
Very interesting...although I'm not sure the Huskies are proving your point right now.
In terms of big men in the NBA, I think Jordan is the exception that proves the rule--can you name a single title-winning team of the last 30 years, besides the Bulls, that didn't have a very good/great center?
I know hindsight is 20/20, but think they might not have given up 15 rebounds had Brockman been in there? Might that have made the difference?
The end of the game last night was excruciating, and maybe Brockman would have made the difference, but I'd rather watch the Dawgs be a decent team that plays aggressive, high energy offense than the feed the big style they've played the last two seasons.
Post a Comment