The Yglesias Awards

Everyone's dying to know my picks for the big NBA end-of-the-regular-season awards, right? Defense Player of the Year is, I think, pretty simple -- Kevin Garnett is the anchor of what's not only the best defensive team this season, but actually one of the best defenses of all time. So there.

Tradition dictates that Rookie of the Year should go to Kevin Durant for taking the most shots and thus acquiring the highest points per game average. But I think that's kind of bogus, and as a Durant fan I want to keep the pressure on him to actually shoot accurately and re-acquire some of his rebounding prowess from college. So I say Al Horford. Carl Landry is clearly some kind of basketball god but he didn't play in enough games.

Coach. I hear a lot of talk about Byron Scott who is, in fact, a good coach. But I think you need to give this award not to the "team many underrated in the preseason" but to a coach who faced some clear coaching challenges. In my view, that's Rick Adelman who's steered the Rockets past Yao Ming's injury.

Most Improved: Chris Paul. He's improved a lot!

Plus it's a consolation prize for Paul, because the Most Valuable Player is Kobe Bryant. As is well known, the MVP award is handed out on a highly arbitrary basis. Thus, LeBron James is ruled out for his team being too middling even though nobody thinks this is his fault. Similarly, the best player on the best team always deserves a hard look but Kevin Garnett hasn't scored the requisite 20 points per game. It's down to Kobe and Paul and it fundamentally comes down to Paul being younger and how "it's Kobe's time." So he wins.

That said, I do think every sportwriter who criticized KG's lack of "leadership" or some other BS during the past couple of years when the Timberwolves were bad owes him a personal apology. It's almost as if even the greatest players can only succeed with some good teammates.

UPDATE: Oh, yeah, sixth man. Obviously, that's Manu Ginobili.

Comments

Wohoo! I think it's been pretty clear that Horford deserves RoY. He's averaging almost 10 ppg, 10 rpg, and 1bpg while playing fewer minutes and not having the offense revolve around him. He should improve with age and more playing time. Plus the Hawks finally made the playoffs, even if it is just a ceremonial opportunity to get raked by the Celtics.

Seriously, when was the last time the 1-8 matchup was so one-sided? Bulls-Bullets in the late Jordan years?

Posted by Nicholas Beaudrot | April 15, 2008 4:36 PM

Does the NBA still hand out "sixth man award" and "comeback player of the year"?

I haven't followed enough, so I would say Josh Childress for sixth man, but there's almost certainly a better pick somewhere. And no clues whatsoever on comeback.

Posted by Nicholas Beaudrot | April 15, 2008 4:38 PM

Matthew, you can't hand out Yglesias Awards. Don't you know that Sullivan has a copyright on the name?

Posted by Khaled | April 15, 2008 4:38 PM

Don't let the early season gunning distort your image of Durant, for the 2nd half he scored 21 PPG on 47% shooting, pretty impressive especially when you consider how little help he had.

Posted by Eric k | April 15, 2008 4:40 PM

On Durant: I think it was Rashard Lewis who said that Durant would suffer by not having any strong vets to guide him during his rookie year. Clay Bennett has made a concerted effort to alienate the Seattle fan base in order to move the Sonics and has left the team a scrapheap of rookies and expiring contracts.

Scola is sort of my pick for ROTY, but I'd have a hard time really calling him a rookie.

Posted by ben | April 15, 2008 4:41 PM

Don't let the early season gunning distort your image of Durant, for the 2nd half he scored 21 PPG on 47% shooting, pretty impressive especially when you consider how little help he had.

Posted by Eric k | April 15, 2008 4:43 PM

For the 4,000th time: contrary to what you write (and have written before), Garnet played with a very good player years prior to decamping to Boston. Stephon Marbury.

Yes, Marbury is one of the 50 greatest cry babies in the history of the NBA, but the Garnett/Marbury tandem had about as much potential as anything in the late 90s.

An argument could be made (and was made at the time) that the two young-'uns had the potential to be the Stockton/Malone of a new generation. And, yeah, both fresh-faced T-Wolves could do things well beyond the Utah legends.

So the whole Garnett never played with anyone good before joining the Celtics just isn't true.

It's bleeding ignorant, frankly.

Also, sportswriters have been pretty sympathetic to Garnett and what he's had to make do with in the cold of Minnesota.

Posted by Jayson Williams' parole officer | April 15, 2008 4:43 PM

There' a reason why Bill Russell has always named Garnett as one of his favorite players to watch, and it wasn't because he knew he'd end up in Boston.

Posted by Will Allen | April 15, 2008 4:43 PM

I agree with these picks except I think Scott deserves coach of the year. Who was picking them to finish in the top half of the West? No one that I can remember. They were considered to have a shot at the 8 seed.

Sixth Man- This is the easiest pick of all. Manu Ginobli was arguably one of the best five players in the league this year.

Comeback- Chris "The Birdman" Andersen. The first player to successfully come back from an Ecstasy addiction. Way to go Birdman!!

Posted by Stacy | April 15, 2008 4:45 PM

I think it's been pretty clear that Horford deserves RoY. He's averaging almost 10 ppg, 10 rpg, and 1bpg while playing fewer minutes and not having the offense revolve around him.

I agree. He's also who I predicted would win it, in the NBA predictions thread on this blog way back when.

Posted by Freddie | April 15, 2008 4:48 PM

The Celtics are the best defense of all time? Are you sleeping with Bill Simmons.

Let's see: The 91-92 Bulls, the Bad Boy Pistons, the Riley era Knicks, the late 80's/early 90's Jazz, especially when Mark Eaton played were all much, the 73 Knicks were all much much better. These teams didn't play in one of the worst conferences of all time in all of professional sports, the 2007-2008 NBA Eastern Conference, nor did these teams play in an era diluted by expansion and the explosion of gifted but immature and fundamentally undeveloped talent. I mean, you defense is going to look good when almost a quarter of your schedule consists of the Bulls, the Knicks, Charlotte, Milwaukee and the Heat.

Posted by Shine | April 15, 2008 4:49 PM

Jayson Williams Parole Officer,

You are omitting one key fact, Marbury may have talent but that never translated into winning basketball, every team he's been on gets better when he leaves, Minn, NJ, PHO, porbably soon the Knicks.

Posted by Eric k | April 15, 2008 4:49 PM

Parole Officer,
He also played with Cassell and Sprewell. They were a #1 seed in the West and lost in the Conference Finals.
Also, I want to revise my earlier statement. Ginobli was one of the top 7 players in the league this year.

Posted by Stacy | April 15, 2008 4:51 PM

Stacy,
I agree with your statement about best defenses, but I don't agree that the league's talent is diluted in any way. Yes, it would be even better with fewer teams, but overall, the talent level is the highest its ever been. To think otherwise suggests a nasty case of nostalgia.

Posted by Stacy | April 15, 2008 4:56 PM

Marbury could have been a great player, had he desired to be one. He forced his way out of Minnesota because he couldn't stand the thought of being the 2nd most important player on a team.

Posted by Will Allen | April 15, 2008 4:58 PM

Sorry, that was supposed to be directed at Shine. I'm just really into myself.

Posted by Stacy | April 15, 2008 4:59 PM

But the Garnett-Marbury teams were occasionally pretty good! They prove your point!

Posted by Nicholas Beaudrot | April 15, 2008 5:05 PM

Eric K.,

I couldn't agree more.

Jayson Williams often talks of his rage at having to deal with Marbury and he blames it for oh so much that went wrong with the Nets and, yes, for that horrible Jersey night with the Globetrotters, the shotgun and the limo driver.

But two facts remain: Marbury was a fantastic talent and would've seemed the perfect match for Garnett. Matt doesn't know what he's talking about.

Stacy,

I bow to no one in my respect for fearless Sam Cassell, but it's not clear he and the then aged Sprewell really represented that Paul Pierce level of talent.

Marbury not only did -- he, unlike Pierce, is a point-guard! (Who better for Garnett who skirted the 3, 4 and 5 spot like no one before?) He was the perfect match. The dream compliment. A brilliant, very young, incredibly talented point-guard! Jagger to Garnett's Richards! Stockton to his Malone! Laverne to his Shirley! Oh, what could've been?

Matt has somehow convinced himself that Garnett never played with anyone good before the Celtics and that sports-writers weren't sympathetic to his plight in Minnesota. Neither is remotely true.

Sportswriters -- guys and gals who unlike Matt (or this humble officer of the court) actually know what they're talking about and aren't just gleaming hoops facts from other media and the few games they catch -- have been very sympathetic to Garnett throughout his career. Of course, acknowledging this rather simple fact would ruin Matt's schoolboy fantasy where he's the one bold white guy who recognizes the controversial African-American talent when others just knocked the man. (Matt doesn't want to hear that Garnett wasn't controversial, just respected. That destorys this lame-o masturbatory "progressive" sports-fan bit.)

Granted, it's not up there with bashing Megan McCain for not being in uniform with her brothers fighting in a way Matt wanted (Matt's most ignorant comment of the week and, God willing, year) but it's still pretty ignorant and oddly pathetic.

Posted by Jayson Williams' parole officer | April 15, 2008 5:30 PM

Normally your basketball insight makes me wanna puke. To someone that played through college, you miss wide of the mark on most attempts, especially when evaluating players.

But hey, you can't score if you don't shoot eh? This time, however, you got pretty close to what I expect from the NBA. Even with the 'it's Kobe's time so he wins it'.

Posted by Brian | April 15, 2008 5:36 PM

Parole Officer,

Can I have the name of your weed man? That must be some good shit.

Story from when I lived in Minneapolis: during the strike, KG and Marbury would sometimes show up at Northwest Athletic Club for a litte noonball run to keep in shape and what not. Now the games there are the usual collection of college kids/recent grads, decent rec-leaguers and total tools.

So before one game, Garnett gathers his team in and does a little huddle "let's go dogs, let's win this one, Ubuntu" (okay, I made the last part up, but basically yeah).

Meanwhile, to the opposing team, Steph says "throw me the ball. I'm a trained professional."

I feel this story though possibly apocryphal, says it all.

Posted by Pooh | April 15, 2008 5:38 PM

Brian, the basketball threads here actually tend to be pretty good - as Ezra would say MY's commenters is smarter than he are on this subject.

Amazingly, Al even makes sense in them. Though Petey remains a raving loon.

Posted by Pooh | April 15, 2008 5:45 PM

I think the whole idea of "Most Valuable Player" is too ambiguous to begin with. It should just be changed to "Most Outstanding Player" and be done with it. To suggest that the MVP should go to the best team's best player is absolutely ludicrous. The only people who should be able to enter this discussion are Kobe, LeBron, and CP. I also don't think LeBron should be penalized for playing on a mediocre team. I know this could be discussed for hours, but I just wanted to get that out there...

Posted by Ted2 | April 15, 2008 5:53 PM

Though I think that you are correct that Manu Ginobili will win the sixth man award, Travis Outlaw should get some consideration. If nothing else he was good enough this year that announcers and commentators stopped calling him Bo.

Posted by Tiparillo | April 15, 2008 5:56 PM

Pooh,

I don't buy your story. The real Marbury of that era would've said something like "Throw me the ball. I'm a trained professional. Ask my Mom if you don't believe me!"

I'm thus calling apocryphal.

Don't be so gullible, dude. No mom -- no Li'l Marbury story.

That's why he fled the Windy Cities, you know. For his mom.

And, yeah, all my points remain. Sportswriters have always respected Garnett. (In part for not being like Marbury.) The mainstream media too. When the NY Times mag did a story on highschool players going straight to the pros they talked about Garnett and how well he'd done, but they argued that he was such a talent and such a mature, class guy that it wouldn't be fair to expect other young players to live up to his high standard.

Posted by Jasyon Williams' parole officer | April 15, 2008 5:57 PM

Is there any award more ridiculous than the 6th Man Award?

Basically, you are rewarding a guy for being not good enough to start on his team, and lucky enough not to play for one of maybe 20 other teams where he *would* start...

Posted by McKingford | April 15, 2008 6:00 PM

"Windy Cities." [sic] Twin Cities.

Eh, it's all the same when you're just biding your time for the Knicks job.

Posted by Jasyon Williams' parole officer | April 15, 2008 6:02 PM

McKingford,
It is definitely a little ridiculous. But c'mon, Manu Ginobli is not NOT starting because he's not good enough. He's the best player on the Spurs this year, and COULD start for any team. Although I'm not sure if this makes it more or less ridiculous.

Posted by Ted2 | April 15, 2008 6:08 PM

Sportswriters "actually know what they're talking about and aren't just gleaming hoops facts from other media and the few games they catch"??? Come on. I read Peter Vescey, so I know this isn't true.

Matthew's picks aren't so bad. I'd pick Kobe too, although in reality Garnett should be the MVP just for starting the whole ball rolling by accepting the trade to Boston.

Oh, and while Manu is clearly the 6th Man of the Year under current rules, those rules are asinine. Who cares whether you start the game on the bench or not - he plays the 3rd most minutes on the team! I'd change the qualifications so that the only players who are eligible are players who are not among the top 5 minutes played on each team. I'm not about to go through all the teams to see who qualifies under that criteria, but I see that Leandro Barbosa does, and I think that he might be a good choice given that PHX has such a thin bench with only him as a scoring threat off the bench.

Posted by Al | April 15, 2008 6:19 PM

Ted2, I'm quite sure you *do* know this makes it much, much more ridiculous.

Posted by McKingford | April 15, 2008 6:24 PM

Yes, yes I do.

Posted by Ted2 | April 15, 2008 6:29 PM

I will apologize to Garnett when he is holding a trophy. I just don't buy that his "super intense face" has anything to do with superior effort and leadership skills. In fact, I think those physical maifestations of his "intensity" can be negatives at super important moments.

The fact is Boston is great because a great team has been assembled. Ray Allen is great, Pierce is great and healthy, Rondo is emerging as a really great player, and they have other great pieces and a defensive minded coach. I am not sure how much Garnett had to do with putting that together.

Posted by MP | April 15, 2008 6:40 PM

I seem to remember an NBA coach saying that the best way to improve your defense was to acquire a really good, energetic defensive player. It shames everyone into playing better. It also helps if that player is a maniacal alpha dog, like Jordan. Pierce needed Garnett the way Amare needed Shaq.

I agree though, that nothing about Garnett is vindicated until we see him play in the playoffs, where EVERYONE is intense.

Posted by nolaboyd | April 15, 2008 7:00 PM

Again no love for the Pistons. Hater.

Posted by joejoejoe | April 15, 2008 7:05 PM

PHX was so dumb to give up Rondo.

Posted by nbt | April 15, 2008 7:29 PM

Matt: "Everyone's dying to know my picks for the big NBA end-of-the-regular-season awards, right?"

No.

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | April 15, 2008 9:46 PM

"they have other great pieces and a defensive minded coach"

Doc Rivers is not a defensive-minded coach. The assistant, Tom Thibodeau, is, and there's a running debate about how much credit he deserves for Boston's defensive success (though he obviously deserves some).

But basically everybody in the world having anything to do with the team or following it as a reporter or closely as a fan says that Garnett has had a huge impact on the team's attitude and, for lack of a better word, culture. I think they're right.

Posted by C's fan | April 15, 2008 10:05 PM

Manu's obviously the best player off the bench, but he's one of the top 3 players on the team. It's almost as lame as calling Duncan a 4.

Posted by ben | April 15, 2008 10:08 PM

Matt, it's about time you got back to the subject. For a basketball blog, you sure spend a lot of time on politics.

Shine, the Celtics tore apart the Western teams this year. Devastated them. And they beat them with defense. As good as the Big Three are, and as under-rated as Rajon Rondo is, they don't win when they don't play great defense. "One of the best defenses of all time" is absolutely right.

That doesn't guarantee a championship, but in my book Garnett is MVP for changing the culture in Boston. And Doc Rivers is coach of the year for getting every member of the team to buy into the philosophy of A. not looking past the next game, B. making the extra pass, C. playing smart, swarming defense all the time, and D. sacrificing personal stats for a shot at the championship.

Posted by Walter Crockett | April 15, 2008 10:50 PM

This middle-aged Celtics fan and atheist almost wishes there were a god - at least a basketball god - so I could thank it for Kevin Garnett.

I think Paul Pierce must be the happiest guy on the planet these days. It would be great to see these two amazingly dedicated, intense, long-suffering players share a championship together. If they manage it it would be my favorite Celtics championship yet, and that's saying a lot.

I'd also like to go out on a limb and predict that Rondo is at the beginning of what will be a Hall Of Fame career. I'm not sure I've ever seen a point guard with his combination of height, hops, and quickness. He's filling in the gaps in his game each month, and it's been great to watch.

Posted by MoeLarryAndJesus | April 15, 2008 11:52 PM

It's almost as if even the greatest players can only succeed with some good teammates.

This also applies pretty well to Kobe, who people like to bash, but has seen some truly atrocious play from a lot of teammates.

Posted by gswift | April 16, 2008 12:46 AM

It occurs to me that your continuing comments about the NBA are, in essence, an effort to show that you are not an elitist. Sort of equivalent to going to a bowling alley.

Posted by Barry | April 16, 2008 12:46 AM

Giving Manu the award is just throwing it away. He should be starting. He's the best player on the team at his position. Kyle Korver or somebody interesting who really is a bench player should get it.

Al has a good point about KG, but Kobe has been just an amazing, amazing player for about a decade. KG already has one and I think that matters. In 10 years people are not going to remember which players were good in which season, they going to say, "Hey KG won 2 and Kobe won zero. That's pretty dumb."

Durant took a lot of shots and didn't shoot a high percentage. So what? The team was horrible. The other team didn't have to guard more than 2-3 players at a time. Durant is not as great as Bill Simmons thought he would be (isn't it funny that the guy spent a year being emotionally invested in getting Durant, and ended up getting something about 5 times better?), but he's still better than Al Horford.

Horford gets 10 and 10 a night. Durant gets twice as many points at 42% FG (which is about as good as some established stars like Iverson or Kidd), pluss gets 4 reb and 2 assists while shooting 87% from the line. It's not really close.

Posted by Colatina | April 16, 2008 1:27 AM

Bruce Bowen will have retired never having won the DPOY. Instead, for the last six years, it has been Ben Wallace four times, Marcus Camby, and Ron Artest. Say what you will about Bowen, that's basically criminal. To not have won even once, the signature perimeter defender of his era.

Posted by Eric | April 16, 2008 9:48 AM

I really like the choice of Adelman as coach of the year. Good call, that.

Garnett already got one MVP award he didn't deserve, so that is enough for one career. Cassell was a perfect fit with Garnett because he didn't mind deferring the first 44 minutes, and absolutely wanted the ball during the last four minutes, which is the exact opposite of Garnett.

I think we should have a Troy Murphy memorial award for the player who puts up enough stats for a terrible team that you actually think he might be pretty good until you watch him play for about four possessions. And, in a monumental upset, Troy Murphy wouldn't even get this award for the first time in his career because now he just completely sucks, and I propose Al Thorton.

Posted by Curtis | April 16, 2008 9:51 AM

All this talk about KG being some paragon of virtue just bugs me. Sure, he is one of the best players in the NBA. But don't buy into the hype that he's a good guy, he's not. The Timberwolves had no choice but to trade him because he was starting to become a cancer on the team.

Posted by Edward, the mad shirt grinder | April 16, 2008 10:39 AM

Considering the way you broke down who should win s=which award, I can't find an argument here. I think you hit it right on the head. Of course, the NBA has their own agenda, so we'll just have to wait and see. But for the time being, I'm down with your picks for the NBA's post season awards.

BTW, the Western Conference playoffs are gonna be sick this year. Who cares about the East? The West got it going on this year. Every match-up in the West has potential for upsets by lower ranked teams. This years playoffs made get the T.V. numbers the NBA has been missing for past few years. I think viewership will go up for this years NBA playoffs.

Posted by Hot Rod! The Rowdy One | April 16, 2008 12:06 PM

Considering the way you broke down who should win s=which award, I can't find an argument here. I think you hit it right on the head. Of course, the NBA has their own agenda, so we'll just have to wait and see. But for the time being, I'm down with your picks for the NBA's post season awards.

BTW, the Western Conference playoffs are gonna be sick this year. Who cares about the East? The West got it going on this year. Every match-up in the West has potential for upsets by lower ranked teams. This years playoffs made get the T.V. numbers the NBA has been missing for past few years. I think viewership will go up for this years NBA playoffs.

Posted by Hot Rod! The Rowdy One | April 16, 2008 12:08 PM

Considering the way you broke down who should win s=which award, I can't find an argument here. I think you hit it right on the head. Of course, the NBA has their own agenda, so we'll just have to wait and see. But for the time being, I'm down with your picks for the NBA's post season awards.

BTW, the Western Conference playoffs are gonna be sick this year. Who cares about the East? The West got it going on this year. Every match-up in the West has potential for upsets by lower ranked teams. This years playoffs made get the T.V. numbers the NBA has been missing for past few years. I think viewership will go up for this years NBA playoffs.

Posted by Hot Rod! The Rowdy One | April 16, 2008 12:08 PM

Stacy:

Never has the NBA been more athletically talented, yes. But come on, the NBA has been diluted with athletic players with no fundementals and one skill specialists. Ben Gordon thinks he's worth $50 million, should start with one overarching skill, he heats up quickly. Twenty years ago there was a similar player who never sterted and didn't complain about not starting and who actually player defense. His name was Vinnie Johnson.

Walter Crockett and MoeLarryandJesus:

In the 18 games against the top nine teams in the West, the Celtics held opponents under 90 points only three times (on one of those times was a 85-77 loss to Phoenix). Imagine their defensive stats if they had to play 36 games against these teams.

Rondo for the Hall of Fame? I love it when Boston teams are decent and their fans get obnoxiously cocky. It only makes the inevitable choke job so much more satisfying.

Posted by Shine | April 16, 2008 12:56 PM

Rondo for the Hall of Fame? I love it when Boston teams are decent and their fans get obnoxiously cocky. It only makes the inevitable choke job so much more satisfying.

Inevitable choke job? Yeah, the Celts have a history of choking all right. 16 times.

Posted by rochrist | April 16, 2008 1:38 PM

The last time the Celtics won the title, the Royals were defending the World Series. Just noting ....

Posted by Curtis | April 16, 2008 2:18 PM

The last time the Celtics won the title, the Royals were defending the World Series. Just noting

The issue that was being addressed was choking. You'd be hard pressed to find any choking in there. Some really bad teams, sure. But bad teams don't choke, they just suck. When the Celtics have been good, they've won. A lot.

Posted by rochrist | April 17, 2008 1:09 AM