The Point-Fourward: Who Exactly Thinks What Now?

Four points I’m thinking about the NBA Finals…

1. Sports often give us a micro-example of macro human phenomena. We can talk about sports with the same passion with which we would talk about religion or politics, but with a conviviality that those other topics customarily lack (okay, there are some soccer hooligan riots that would suggest otherwise, but you know what I mean). We can learn about the machinations and influences of the modern media age in an arena that is inherently less toxic.

There was an article recently in the The New Yorker titled “Why Facts Don’t Change Our Minds”. It tackles how confirmation bias and social pressures essentially ruin a brain’s ability to recalibrate an opinion when given new information. The initial strong beliefs that come mostly from a “collective knowledge” are incredibly stubborn. We think that “we got this”, that we know how something works because it is so ubiquitous in our lives.

Sloman and Fernbach see this effect, which they call the “illusion of explanatory depth,” just about everywhere. People believe that they know way more than they actually do. What allows us to persist in this belief is other people. In the case of my toilet, someone else designed it so that I can operate it easily. This is something humans are very good at. We’ve been relying on one another’s expertise ever since we figured out how to hunt together, which was probably a key development in our evolutionary history. So well do we collaborate, Sloman and Fernbach argue, that we can hardly tell where our own understanding ends and others’ begins.

In general, it is a good thing. One doesn’t need to put one’s hand on the stove to know it’s hot. One need not invent the smartphone to be able to read this fine website. A delegation of power is great assuming a person recognizes that a culture’s accumulation of knowledge doesn’t make that individual the expert in all things.

The NBA Finals are full of narratives that have been established from a multitude of histories. This “common knowledge” about players, teams, coaches, etcetera, becomes a sort of gospel that is very difficult to deconstruct. When the national media are constantly echoing the same information and calling it basketball coverage, it can get difficult to discern which narratives are based on new and relevant information versus those based on tired information recycled from the past.

Obviously, every old piece of information isn’t trash. In the phrase “conventional wisdom”, one shouldn’t ditch the wisdom part in an adolescent moment of disdain for all things conventional. But if we have a desire to truly advance our understanding, we need to have the courage to question the masses while respecting the masses’ contribution to our individual knowledge base.

2. Let’s take a look at a couple mass sports media assertions about the Finals and see if “they are who we thought they were!” 

“Steph Curry is healthy this year and is making amends for last year’s Finals.”

Anyone who reads Cavs: The Blog knows that I will rarely let an opportunity pass to rip apart the idea that Curry was injured during the 2016 Finals. He wasn’t. Curry was dead tired because the Cavaliers diligently ran him through screen action on almost every offensive play. He got straight pounded.

This year, the Cavs have not employed the same strategy. Maybe they are saving it. Maybe the desire to get out on the break has undermined their ability to seek out Curry’s defensive shortcomings. Or maybe the players are simply not focused enough to remember the gameplan. For whatever reason, the Cavs haven’t targeted Curry with the same intensity. In Zach Lowe’s great article detailing the Cavs offense, he states:

Curry guarded the screener on only five pick-and-rolls in Game 2, down from 13 in the opener, when the Cavs largely aped the game plan that won them the title last season, per STATS SportVU data provided to ESPN.

That is rather stupid on the Cavaliers part. The reason Curry looks healthier than he did last year is because the Cavs haven’t destroyed his legs by making him guard. Yes, the Warriors have more firepower and defensive flexibility with Durant out there, but as long as Curry is on the floor, the Cavs MUST go at him.

It doesn’t really matter if it isn’t quite as successful on a possession by possession basis. It is more important to wear him down over a (hopefully) long series than to worry about one particular break opportunity. That is how Curry’s rhythm got thrown off enough for people to question his health.

Quick aside: It is interesting that no one is mentioning Kyrie Irving’s ankle turn as a reason for Irving’s lackluster play. I don’t think that is the reason, but you smell what I’m cooking.

3. A similar plan should be used against Kevin Durant. Though he has filled out his frame since his early days in the league, he still doesn’t have a tremendously strong base. Durant did have a nice block against Love in the post, but Love got one to go earlier.

Regardless of outcome, the Cavs need Durant to use energy banging low against Kevin Love. They can’t allow Durant to relax off ball by letting him guard a player that is neither shooter nor banger. That frees him to play to his strengths without exploiting his literal weakness. Which brings us to the impetus of this piece.

“Iman Shumpert is a good defender and has done a decent job on Durant”

I flat out refute this statement. In Shumpert’s rookie season, he was dubbed a great defender and that designation has stuck with him over the duration of his mostly below average defensive career. Shump looks the part when he gets into his defensive stance. He makes enough well-timed strips of the ball to lend credence via highlight to his reputation. Still, Shump isn’t a plus defender and often is the main culprit on blown team rotations.

Add in his irresponsibly poor offense, and I would rather bench Shump for the series than increase his minutes. Let’s take a quick play-by-play look at the beginning of the second quarter for his “great” contributions in Game 2.

11:25  Shump bodies up in the mid-post and Durant misses. He’s the Durant stopper. Hooray. Macro bias confirmed!

11:09 Shumpert makes a totally unnecessary swipe at Ian Clark who is 25 feet from the basket even though Kyrie is there in decent position. There is no threat. Durant leaves Shump in his dust on a slow roll to the hoop making poor Kyle Korver cover for him thus leaving David West wide open to drill his pet mid-range jumper. This is not the result of good offense. It happens only because Shump reaches for no discernable reason.

Directly after, Durant gets to roam around like Bill Russell because he knows Iman can’t hurt him. The Dubs basically triangle triple cover Kyrie who turns it over.

10:39 Next possession. Clark sets a lazy screen for Durant on the right wing. Shump confuses Kyrie by not hard-trapping, switching or making any strong decision. Durant rises for an easy pull-up jumper with Shumpert and Kyrie both in no-man’s land.

10:04 The possession after Frye gets blocked at the rim, Shump gets the ball. Decides he shouldn’t make a single pass. He dribbles 12 times before getting blocked by West at the cup. He is then lazy getting back in transition. He needs to search out the nearest most threatening Warrior. He doesn’t find Thompson who drills a three for the Warriors giving them a 7-0 run to start quarter. All at least partially, if not wholly, because of one Iman Shumpert.

4. The Cavs haven’t gotten anything out of J.R. Smith yet, but playing Shumpert bigger minutes is not the answer. He is a false narrative. Despite what he clearly believes, Iman is closer to Mo Williams on defense and Tony Allen on offense than the other way around.

J.R.Smith is likely to play better at home in a better atmosphere. Yes, he has made some poor plays, but he has also been the victim of some awful calls. In this situation, I am more confident in the conventional wisdom of the decent player having a bounce back performance than a wild hope for Shumpert competency.

If you are simply determined to change the lineup, it should be Kyle Korver for Tristan Thompson. Slotting Korver on Draymond Green might lure Green into playing hero ball out of the post. Korver is a brilliant help defender and tougher in the post than one might think. He isn’t going to make the silly mistakes that doom a defense from the start.

Offensively, he could miss 10 shots in a row and the Warriors would still respect his jumper, opening the floor for driving lanes that don’t exist with Shumpert and/or Thompson on the floor. Zaza Pachulia wouldn’t be able to defend a lineup featuring that much shooting. Love has played very well at center. Tristan can guard(sag off) Iggy when the subs come in.

Bonus: “The Warriors are Unbeatable”

I wonder if people reread the obituaries written for the 2016 Cavs before repeating themselves this year. The Warriors might be unbeatable. The Cavs might make another amazing comeback. What you think right now probably has more to do with what you feel than what you know. Like in everything else, we think we know more than we do. In my very biased opinion, the series is far from over.