Jump to Comments

Last night’s victory over the Pistons in Detroit was a solid win. This is Detroit’s 5th loss in a row so it would be empty posturing to act as if this is a statement game. But the Pistons have consistently gotten the best of us during the regular season in recent years and, although they have struggled since the Iverson/Billups trade, AI has given us problems over the course of his career as well. Let me put it another way: We just lost two in a row to Toronto and New York. A win over Detroit feels good.

This game is an ideal opportunity to discuss exactly how we should be handling ball-dominant players. Iverson may be a prolific scorer (his 31 points last night are certainly nothing to scoff at) but I am not concerned about the points he is putting on the board; I am concerned about whether those points are a fluid by-product of an offensive scheme well executed. Last night they weren’t.

Iverson’s characteristic ball dominance has created problems for this Piston’s offense. The Piston’s offensive production always blossomed out of the fact that all 5 of the 5 guys on the floor were committed to selfless play. A team-oriented attitude has been the rule. Iverson’s willingness to create for himself has changed this dynamic drastically. Since trading Billups to the now-surging Nuggets, several players on the Pistons are scoring less points per game.

I wrote that before our first game against the Pistons this season. In that game, AI had a respectable 19 points. More importantly, Rip Hamilton had 16; Tayshaun Prince had 15; and Rodney Stuckey had 10 (19-36 collectively). Iverson’s aggresiveness did not displace the effectiveness of the other members of the Pistons’ backcourt.

But last night, AI’s approach seemed to suggest it was a zero sum game: Every shot someone else took was a shot he didn’t get to take. How did this effect the production of the rest of the backcourt? Rip had 4 points; Stuckey had 2; Prince had 8 (6 of 23 collectively). It’s easy to say the Pistons just had a bad shooting night. But as you watched their shots clank off the rim, patterns emerged. It was clear to me that AI had gone off-script, or that their may not have been that detailed of a script in the first place.

When Sheed, Rip, and Tayshaun are all better 3-point shooters, why is AI taking the shot to tie at the end? When AI drives baseline and gets caught in a sea of shot-blockers, he doesn’t kick it back out or look for the open man on the opposite block. He dribbles in a circle and puts up an awkward shot in a highly congested lane. Some defensive strategists suggest that when facing a brilliant scorer the most important thing you can do is get the ball out of his hand but Pop has a different approach. If you are facing a player who can consistently create his own shot, give him just enough wiggle room to shoot, and shoot often. Let one man put on a show, just as long as the other 4 are made ineffectual by it.

N.B. I was taking a quick look back at the box score and noticed that, despite Iverson’s 31 points, he had a +/- of -3. If you’ve been reading the New York Times lately you know what a powerful indicator of true productivity +/- can be.