I promise this circles back to basketball.
My sister was a very good long-distance runner for Dartmouth. Some of her best friends are her former teammates: guys and girls who can reel off 5-minute miles as easily as I can empty a bag of mini Reese’s. A few months ago, I joined some of them to run the Philadelphia Rock ‘N Roll Half Marathon. The night before, we were eating the customary Italian dinner — carbo loading! — and we went around the table to share our goal times. A few of the very best runners in the group started talking about pace and how to achieve the desired result. Although it seems like common sense, they explained some things about internal pace that relate very much to basketball.
Here’s a summary of what was said:
Let’s say the goal pace was a 5:05 mile. They explained that the most crucial check point was going to be the 5-mile marker: if they weren’t within a few seconds of a 5:05 pace at that marker, there was little to no chance to make the goal time. Let’s say they started slowly in an attempt to “rest” and “save energy” and therefore ran the first five miles at a 6-minute pace. They explained that there wasn’t a direct correlation between energy spent and energy saved. That is to say, just because they ran the first five at a 6-minute pace, saving 55 seconds of energy, that wouldn’t mean they were then capable of running the last five at a 4:10 pace, picking back up those 55 seconds. Doesn’t work that way. The amount of effort required to make back the lost seconds of pace — to “come from behind” — took a much more drastic toll on the body. Maintaining a trained-for pace came much more naturally, and at less of an energy expense to the mind and body.
In other words, come-from-behind victories, even in running, are much more difficult. They’re possible, but you can’t execute them repeatedly, and each time you do, you’re tapping into a special reserve. Similarly, these runners never felt comfortable when they hit the 5-mile marker too far under the pace time. Inevitably, it would be a sugar high: they would crash during the race’s most grueling part, miles 7-10. (Or, for us basketball players, the “third quarter.”)
The Sixers need to maintain pace better. Here are the scores at the end of their four first quarters so far this season: 26-15 (behind), 25-18 (ahead), 29-22 (ahead), and 25-19 (behind). That’s bi-polar. Over the course of the season, playing too many games on either end of the spectrum isn’t a recipe for success.
Doug Collins needs more stability from the first unit. You can’t effectively game plan if you’re unsure what each unit is going to give you. The NBA’s best teams can go into a game saying, “OK, we know — give or take — we’re going to get X amount of production from our starters.” Occasionally, the starters might explode for big-time points, or the starters might have an off night, but if you looked at a large sample size, you’d see consistent production. We can’t say the same thing, yet, about the Sixers’ starting unit (but to this point Lou Williams has provided so much scoring that it hasn’t become a huge issue).
As the season progresses, the margins are going to become slimmer.
Also, as we wrote in the third blog post of the season (Why 34 Wins Is More Likely Than 40), the trade of big man Marreese Speights was inevitable. I understand the thought process of “Speights was the No. 16 pick of the first round, so why would two second-round picks be enough?” But what became the reality of his situation in Philly — and what I tried to write time and again last season — is that there were too many other factors keeping him from being an effective player under Collins — and on the current roster. The Sixers don’t need a little-defense scorer on the second unit: that’s why they have Williams. I know it’s easy to get caught up in Speights’ bright moments: the pretty outside jumper and a few of the thundering dunks. But the reality is, he couldn’t dance. He could score. He could shoot. He’s probably a killer 1 on 1 player. But none of it was in rhythm to the other players on the floor.
Also, here’s my essay from Monday: “One on One.”
–Kate
Kate, you are spot on. This was a major problem at times with the first unit last year. They would dig a hole and then the bench would have to dig them out. I think one of the big keys this season has been the lack of production of Meeks. He needs to make some early buckets and so far this season it hasn’t been happening. He is getting open looks, but not converting. It would be nice to see him break out of that slump tonight. If he continues to be a non factor that really stifles the first units offensive production. The 2nd thing I have noticed, is something that you wrote about earlier and that is the production of EB. So far this season his legs have looked dead. As you know I am a huge EB fan and I am getting concerned that he fell of the cliff from last season. I am hoping it is juts a veteran player who needs to get into game shape, but he hasn’t been hitting his shots or capitalizing on his early open opportunities. Hopefully we will see breakout games from both players tonight.
In regards to Speights he was another bad move by Ed Stefanski. The kid had some offensive tools, but he had a poor work ethic and just couldn’t seem to find a way to learn the system. While everyone else has bought into what coach was asking Mo just couldn’t get it. He was a nice kid and I hope maybe a change of scenery will help him, but if he doesn’t get a work ethic he will be out of the league soon. Lesson learned for GM’s, don’t draft a kid who had a poor work ethic in college and expect him to change once he becomes a millionaire.
On another note, do you think the fact that the Sixers didn’t add a player in the deal was done to free up cap space at the end of the season to resign Hawes? With Noc coming off the books, that would free up 10.3 million or the number that it most likely will take to sign Spencer if he continues to play at this level.
Good article. The Sixers have 2 starters that have given them almost nothing these first four games in Brand and Meeks. Lou, Young and ET are all playing better than either Brand or Meeks and it’s not close. I just wonder how much longer Collins can roll Brand out there at tip-off with him being so ineffective. At least Meeks is theoretically spacing the floor, I don’t know what Brand is doing besides aging 10 years since last season. Then again, what other options are there at the 4? Vucevic? Could he play forward? Or Thaddeus, who is really about 6-6 and overmatched physically by probably every starting PF in the league.
Hey Kate,
Love your stuff, and I subscribe to this blog. Keep up the good work.
One small note, though. Bipolar refers to a disorder that includes severe bouts of mania followed quickly by depression. People who have been diagnosed bipolar spend their entire lives trying to manage those swings in mood. I imagine a person who has been diagnosed bipolar might be offended by the word being used in a negative way to describe a basketball team that has shown inconsistency in its first-quarter play over a four-game stretch.
Not a huge deal. Obviously, it’s your blog, so you can tell me to hit the road.
Keep writing about Sixers basketball! Love your take.
Thanks!
re: the first unit production – et needs to start.
i understand using meeks as a starter for floor spacing, having a solid second unit, it only matters who finishes the game, etc. etc., blah blah blah, but meeks is not a starter. the team is better when et is in there, and if you want to come out of the gate strong, then et should start. gordon busted meeks’ butt tonight.
the fallacy of the meeks should start argument is that if you want the best unit in there to finish the game, why wouldn’t you want the best unit in there to start the game?
And yet they managed to pull it off again after a slow start. Meeks was still a black hole but it looked like EB might be rounding into shape.
The place where I think your analogy breaks down Kate is that running is a solitary pursuit while basketball is a team sport where the opponent is also expending energy in parallel, but not necessarily at the same pace as you. That’s another independent variable that can effect your ability to surge or change your pace despite a poor showing at the start. Not to say slow starts are in any way desirable.
So glad to have discovered this blog! We were missing the great voice that you’d built up at Deep Sixer and on the Sixers beat over the past few years.
Well, the Sixers did not find a solution to this last night, but they came away with another win. I think Josh has the key point: basketball is a team sport. What has consistently happened over the first five games is that as one unit struggles, another unit picks up at a sprinter’s pace. Last night’s 4th quarter featured 5 guys going at top speed while the opponent’s 5 couldn’t keep up. The Sixers go 8 starters deep (+ Meeks), and Collins has done a great job managing everybody’s minutes so they’re fresh all the time. Which means that when the late 3rd or 4th quarter comes along, and other teams are starting to slow down, this team sprints. They’re more like a race horse who sits in 8th place the whole race and then slingshots around the back turn and passes everybody easily. I expect to see more come-from-behind victories throughout the season, because that’s how the team is built.
Although I can’t help but feel that benching Meeks for Turner or Lou at this point is justified. Let Meeks regain his confidence against another team’s bench. He’s clearly way off right now and needs something to help jumpstart him
Are you sure those were “mini” reeses Kate??? This is a different year with the stoppage but I think the Knicks are the nba version of the Eagles. A lot of hype – disappointing results. Your thoughts?
I hope Meeks snaps out of it, but at this point between ET and Lou and I don’t see how many minutes Meeks will be playing. I would like to see ET start at this point and he shows he has a knack for scoring the ball and for finding the open man. Was nice to see EB bounce back and play with a lot of energy last night. Slow start or not, last night was an impressive win and as coach said it was one that good teams pull out.