When Push Comes to Shove

-Does defense still win titles? -Can the Suns get it done this time? -Does Lebron have what it takes? (Funny you should ask)

You heard it until it just became fact: "Defense wins championships." Then someone forgot to tell the Heat. Of course, when Pat Riley flipped the script, trading blocks for buckets, he was taking cues from the godfathers of run, the Suns. Now, both teams' successes have even more crews revving to go up-tempo. But slow down, guys. Are you really sure gritty, not-in-my-house playoff D has gone the way of the leather ball? (The Heat still did have Shaq.) Two of The Mag's own, Ric Bucher and Chris Palmer, had strong, differing views on the state of the game. We set them up in the cradle of all great basketball debates: the barbershop, in this case The Shave in Beverly Hills. That way, they'd both come out looking good.

So two sportswriters walk into a barbershop …

What's going to win a championship this season, offense or defense?

RB Well, if we go by last year, it's offense. After Miami fell short two seasons ago, Pat Riley went out and got all offensive players. He wanted to be able to score when he didn't have Shaq on the floor. Stan Van Gundy preached defense and that didn't get it done, so Riley looked around and said, "You know what? That Phoenix deal is working." These days, if you attack the rim, you're either going to get the bucket or the refs are going to send you to the line. Riley figured he had to get more guys who could dribble-penetrate. Jason Williams, Antoine Walker, James Posey … you're talking all slashers, guys who can handle the ball and go to the rack.

CP True that. But J-Will was probably their biggest defensive liability. In all of their wins, where was he in crunch time? Not on the floor. They knew he couldn't make any stops when they needed them, so they kept him on the bench.

RB J-Will was still playing 30 minutes a game. And they won a championship. So they must have done something right.

CP I love this whole "offense wins championships" thing. It's just not true. Look at the guys who have won it all in the past few years. Larry Brown, who taught Pop, who taught Avery … they've all won with a defensive philosophy that's been handed down from coach to coach to coach.

RB Wait a minute, when did Avery win a championship?

CP Freudian slip. He's going to win one this season.

RB Uh-huh. You're living in the past. All I can tell you is, look back to the 2001-02 season. The best defensive team in the league was the Lakers, and they won the championship. The best offensive team was the Sonics, and they were bounced in the first round of the playoffs. Last season, the Suns and the Heat were 1-2 in offensive field goal percentage. The Heat won it all, and the Suns went to the conference finals. Who were the best defensive field goal percentage teams?

CP I'd have to say the Bulls …

RB … and the Rockets. You're talking about one team that didn't make it out of the first round and another that didn't even make the playoffs.

CP I've got a number for you: The last team to give up over 100 points a game and win a championship was the 1994 Rockets.
RB Nice—sneaking that in while I'm getting barber's mist in my eyes.

CP The Bulls are a bad example. Even if a team plays the best defense in the league, it's still going to need way more to win a championship.
The Bulls need experience. Now that they have Ben Wallace, they'll win the Central.

RB Who cares about winning the division? The simple fact is, the league has changed. Zones are allowed now, and refs are calling the game differently. If you have guys who can put the ball on the floor and attack, you're going to score.

Specifically though, what impact does the zone defense have on the way the game is played?

RB Well, it certainly tests the theory of the importance of defensive rebounding for fast breaks, because zones don't inspire solid boardwork. But I expect more fast breaks, because your perimeter players are never down on the baseline. That means more chances for them to bolt. Also, the zone's purpose is to force a team to shoot jump shots, which results in longer rebounds, which leads to more chances to catch a guard who forgot to rotate back and cover.

CP Not so fast. Teams tend to swing the ball around the perimeter against a zone, leaving two or three guys standing around. There's always a safety valve. That guy's j-o-b is to get back, and if he doesn't, he's coming out—simple as that. Now, say there's a turnover in the lane. Against a man-to-man defense, chances are two or three players on the fast-breaking team won't be in your field of vision. You can't guard players if you don't know where they are. They're gone. Filling lanes, leaving you trailing, finishing with a dunk. Zone is the secret break stopper.

RB Am I getting paid extra for this tutorial? A zone's whole purpose is to allow you as many smaller, quicker offensive players on the floor as possible. How can that be a detriment to the fast break? Besides, zones are still new, and it will take time for offenses to have the patience, precision and teamwork to move the ball to get a quality shot. Case in point: Team USA circa 2002 to 2006. Defensive rebounding has very little to do with the uptick in fast breaks. The real fastbreaking teams are getting down the floor in a hurry even after made baskets. Having a quick point guard isn't the reason, either. The Spurs, Pistons and Hornets were all decent rebounding teams, and all had point guards who could push it. Their breaks were nothing to write home about. Playing bigs who are gazelles and having multiple players who can lead a break is what the Suns introduced that everyone is copying.

CP I think the Pistons actually introduced that a year before the Suns and with far better results. But they got those results as much by making stops and creating turnovers as by running the other team out of the gym. Those are still the two best ways to start a break. Trying to run off of made baskets is impossibly difficult and usually works only if the other team has poor transition D. If that made basket is a jump shot from the top of the key or the wing, you can forget running, because the shooter is already backpedaling.

RB The Pistons were 19th in scoring and 12th in shooting last season. Running teams don't score that little or shoot so badly. But never mind that. If my big can beat your big from baseline to baseline, I don't care if your shooting guard drains it and is back to stop my point guard. I still have a potential 2-on-1, or a 3-on-2 if I outlet quickly. Good up-tempo teams don't always score breaking off of made baskets, but they try, testing the transition D. They attack the rim knowing the slightest bump and—tweet!—they're going to the line. And yes, Detroit introduced the concept of playing long athletes at power positions rather than lumbering hulks, but Larry Brown didn't run them. That's why they were so ecstatic when Flip Saunders came along and unleashed them—in the regular season.

CP You'd be hard-pressed to find a coach who doesn't go into camp with a defensive-first philosophy.

RB I'll tell you what, even the Lakers have decided they need to play more up tempo. This is Phil Jackson, who plays the Triangle, who always wants to walk it up, who wants to have total control.

CP Outside of Kobe, who is his best defensive player?

RB Probably Mo Evans right now.

CP And everyone in the room is going, "Who is Mo Evans?" Point is, if Phil says he's going to run, it's because he doesn't have the guys to play defensive ball. He has to try to run.
The Heat's offensive guys are all still there. So are they repeating?

RB No. The difference between the Heat and the Mavericks at the end of the day was that the older guys—Zo, Shaq, Gary Payton—knew it was their last, best chance. Shaq's problem isn't that the NBA has changed as much as Father Time has changed him. Until about three years ago, he could beat you with his quickness and strength. When was the last time you saw him spin on somebody and flush it?

CP All the more reason for Miami to play a slower, more D-oriented style. But I agree, the Heat will not repeat. Shaq can't get up and down anymore.

RB This season, it's going to be somebody out of the West. I'm going to say right now—because I'm in a barbershop and I got a guy wearing a hat and that'd make anybody nervous—I'm going to say the Suns are going to get the job done. Heck, if Raja Bell hadn't gotten hurt, they would have won a title last season and this whole question about whether offense can win championships would be a moot point. They're going to seal the deal this time, if Amaré Stoudemire gets back to being himself …

CP … which he will not. I was in Vegas in July for the USA Basketball tryouts. I saw him get pinned on the rim off a drop step. So how is Phoenix going to get by Dallas, a way better defensive team?

RB Because the game has changed. You don't have to be a great defensive team to win a championship anymore, you just have to be able to play some defense—especially when you can outrun your opponent down the floor.

CP I wouldn't say the game has changed just yet. Miami is the first team in a long time to win a championship thinking offense first—and they still had Shaq in the middle. Let's wait until that happens a few more times.

RB The bottom line is that it never happened before, and now it has.

CP And I'm going to go on this: Dallas will win 65 games this year. They can come at you in waves, but they have that in combination with something no other team in the league has: a defensive minded coach, a defensive point guard and a defensive center. You cannot go through them. You're a GM. You're building a team to win. Who is the first person you're picking?

RB Am I trying to win this year? You're trying to win within the next three seasons.

CP I'll give you the first and second players. The first is LeBron James. You've got to be a nut not to take him. He plays inside, and he plays outside. The second player I'm going to take is Dwight Howard, the next great big man.

RB For the next three years, Kobe Bryant and Tim Duncan. You can crate them up and send them off after that, but both still get up and down the floor. The game is changing, and these guys will only benefit from that. Together, they'd be unstoppable.

Shifting gears a bit, who is the most efficient offensive player in the league right now?

CP That's easy. That's going to be LeBron James, without a doubt.

RB LeBron is a great, freakish talent. He still hasn't figured out how to harness it, though. The most efficient player is Steve Nash, without question. This is not even a conversation. Steve Nash takes every player and bumps up his ability at the offensive end.

CP I love that about Steve Nash.

RB So why didn't you go to him first?

CP Because his mantel is bare. Why have we not seen …

RB … so is LeBron James', but you were pretty quick to hop onto him as the best.

CP I wouldn't be ashamed to have a bare mantel after three years, as opposed to 10. If Nash is so efficient, he should be doing more with the players around him. He's got the best second, third and fourth options in the league, and he didn't make the Finals. And do I have to tell you why? Their style of play won't get them there.

RB Those guys are not bad, but were they that good before Steve Nash showed up? And how were they regarded when they were playing with Stephon Marbury and Penny Hardaway?

CP So you're saying Steve Nash made them?

RB I'm saying Steve Nash has a lot to do with the success they've had. If LeBron James were on the Suns, would they be in the conference finals?

CP Yes. If Steve Nash were with the Cleveland Cavaliers …

CP Absolutely not. What is Steve Nash going to do for Damon Jones or for Larry Hughes to get that team in there? They'd run all day and get nowhere.

RB I don't know if they'd get to the conference finals. You build a team to take advantage of what Steve Nash is capable of doing. The bottom line is he took Boris Diaw. We didn't even know who Diaw was, and now you're talking about him as one of the best scorers in the league. Steve Nash didn't have anything to do with that? Come on, man.

You can tell a lot about what teams think they need to win by who gets picked up during the season. So which big name is going to move this time?

CP One already did move. Ben Wallace.

RB And Chicago made a big, big mistake.

CP Chicago made a mistake? How?

RB Because paying him what they are paying him—and they are paying him for what he has done, not what he's going to do—is going to cost them. I don't know if it's Ben Gordon. I don't know if it's Kirk Hinrich. I don't know if it's Chris Duhon. I don't know if it's Andres Nocioni. I don't know if it's Luol Deng. But it's going to cost them at least two of those guys. The greatest thing the Bulls have is their depth. At the end of the day, what does Ben Wallace give them that puts them over the top?

CP He's not going to really improve their defense, numbers-wise, because Chicago already had the best field goal percentage allowed. He'll help them start the break. They haven't had a guy—Tyson Chandler wasn't that guy—to grab the board and get it out to Gordon or Hinrich.

RB And that would be them pushing it on offense, would it not?

CP Yeah, but they need a defensive guy to start it.

Print Article . Email Article. Subscribe to The Magazine