The Sports Guys Weighs In On the Wiz

It took a decade, but ESPN's Bill Simmons is putting out his NBA Preview. This go-around he's doing a fourth-parter (the first part came out today). I can't really complain since he did have to take care of his new baby (like a father should) but I still think he needs to post a pic of his kid as proof.

Anyway, Part I includes a review of the Wizards (he does keep his tradition of going from worst to best) where he pulls no punches. Sure, as a partisan Wizards fan I could skip over such commentary, but then I wouldn't be a fair, opened-minded individual. So here goes:

I picked the Wizards to miss the playoffs for three reasons: Gilbert Arenas' lingering knee problems, an improved Eastern Conference, and contract years for two of their top three (Arenas and Antawn Jamison). You know what happens when two of the three best guys on a struggling team are in contract years? Everyone starts gunning for their own stats and the situation turns nastier than the first 30 minutes of "Eddie" right before Whoopi Goldberg took over. And even then, you might be able to get away with some selfishness as long as everyone's playing defense, but the Wiz have been abysmal defensively for three years and counting. So what's left? Why does anyone think this is a playoff team?

If the Wizards keep losing, Gilbert will take a pounding from the purists for the wrong reasons (he's too candid and too much of a self-promoter) and not the right ones (he doesn't play defense or make his teammates better). I always judge players by one simple question: Would I want to play with them? And I'd be miserable playing with Gilbert Arenas. He could still save the Wizards season by either A.) moving to shooting guard and becoming a pure scorer, or B.) getting his teammates involved at the expense of his own scoring (something he did in the victory over Atlanta on Sunday). But that's the frustrating thing about Gilbert: He wants to play point guard and he wants to score 35 points a game. You can't do both. True point guards such as Steve Nash and Chris Paul understand instinctively how to sacrifice their own scoring to get everyone else involved, then look for their own offense only if their teams need it. Gilbert seems to get this sometimes; other times, he just says "screw it" and goes for himself. And that doesn't work if you're trying to win a title. We have 51 seasons of evidence to back this up.

In response to his analysis, I say this:

1. Jamison is probably the last star player to be gunning for stats. Anyone who's eyeing to snatch him from the Wizards (and really, who's that) would have only needed to see his performance during last season's playoffs against Cleveland. He gave his all. And combine that with his stint in Dallas, well, I don't think this guy needs to "advertise."
2. The Wizards have been "abysmal defensively for three years and counting." I can't argue that. But strangely enough, their formula still got them into the playoffs (so to answer Bill's question, "The reason they're thought of as a playoff team is because they've averaged over 100 pts during those three years"). I think the reason these guy never gave playing defense the "Umph" they needed was because they were winning. Had they been losing, we'd have James Posey and Shane Battier instead of DeShawn Stevenson and Roger Mason right now. Maybe.
3. Everyone inside the Beltway will criticise Arenas for the "right" reasons. Simmons needs to check the sports discussion threads on the Washington Post sometime. Then he'll understand. But I have to challenge him on one point here: Jared Jeffries and Larry Hughes seemed to be more productive when they were here with Arenas then where they are now. And I have to pull out the "professionalism card" here: rookies aside, any grown man who needs another person to hype them up, to make them better, doesn't deserve to be in the NBA. Padding the stats of a one-dimensional player is one thing, but being Dr. Phil is another.
4. I also agree that Arenas would be better off either being a true point or a true scoring guard. Here's the problem: (1) He's too small to be a full-time 2-guard, (2) he's too turn-over prone to be a full-time point guard, and, most importantly, (3) that's not how coach Eddie Jordan runs his offense. He's said from Day One that he has "two guards, two forwards and a center." His ideal team has virtually interchangeable players for the backcourt and frontcourt. I can't remember the last time he's used the words "small," "point," "power" or "shooting" when describing the positions. That's why the whole "Brendan Haywood has more than four double-doubles but it's not January" storyline is so intriguing.
5. Lastly, out of those 51 seasons, I do remember a small scoring guard who played alot at point winning the NBA title (how many has Nash won again?) Of course, his team played waaay better defense.