First round should set tone for newcomers in the East

NBC Sports

First round should set tone for newcomers in the East

After a wild finish to the regular season, the playoffs are finally here.

The East will send someone other than LeBron James to the Finals for the first time since John Wall was drafted No. 1 overall in 2010. With some fresh new faces and nagging injuries, we’re going to learn a ton about these teams in the first round. 

So what are the big questions for each series? What are my picks? And why am I a total wimp?

For those answers, let’s get right into it.

(Click here for my Western Conference Playoff Preview.)

No. 1 Milwaukee Bucks vs. No. 8 Detroit Pistons

Will Blake Griffin’s knee cooperate enough to make this interesting?

It’s a shame that Griffin’s left knee isn’t right. Griffin is one of the game’s few complete offensive players, averaging 24.5 points, 7.5 rebounds and 5.4 assists on the season. The only other player to average those numbers this season? Bucks All-Star Giannis Antetokounmpo. But that’s not all. Griffin made more 3-pointers this season than any big man in the league (189). Read that sentence again. The game done changed.

The Bucks know first-hand how good Griffin can be when his wheels are working. Back in December, Griffin delivered a triple-double on Milwaukee and almost pushed the game into overtime before a last-second 3-pointer rimmed out. That was one of Detroit’s four losses against the Bucks this season, which doesn’t bode well for the Pistons’ chances. (Tough luck for Detroit: if Charlotte had won on Wednesday, Detroit would have faced Toronto, a team it has swept in three games this season).

Griffin’s knee is causing him so much discomfort he missed Detroit’s season finale that sealed their fate. If he gives it a go, he’ll have his hands full. Per tracking data, no player forced more turnovers while matched up with Griffin this season than Antetokounmpo, who could very well win Defensive Player of the Year this season. The Bucks like to send an extra man to double Griffin in the post and force him to pass out of tough situations. With their All-Star ailing, this is a nightmare matchup for the Pistons. 

No. 2 Toronto Raptors vs. No. 7 Orlando Magic

Can the Magic lull the Raptors to sleep again?

On paper, this is an upset in the making. The Raptors just couldn’t put the ball in the basket against Steve Clifford’s squad this season. Here are Toronto’s point totals in the four games: 93, 87, 98, 121.Only once did they look like the Toronto Raptors that sported a top-five ranking in offensive efficiency. The Raptors split the season series 2-2, but were outscored by 30 points, their worst total point differential against any opponent.

So why am I not picking the upset? One, I’m a wimp. But also, the presence of Marc Gasol (acquired at the trade deadline) and Kawhi Leonard (acquired at the Spurs’ summer sale) could make Orlando’s apparent advantage completely disappear. In the Feb. 24 loss against Orlando, Leonard sat for load management. On Apr. 1, the Raptors ran up a 20-point lead in the fourth quarter before both teams called off the dogs. Both Gasol and Leonard played in that one. With Gasol and Leonard on the floor, the Raptors outscored the Magic 72-48 in 24 minutes. Yeah, that duo matters.

You get the sense that Leonard and Gasol are just warming up. Orlando, on the other hand, clawed their way to the postseason and almost never took a night off. Evan Fournier, Nikola Vucevic, D.J. Augustin and Terrence Ross all played at least 80 games this season. Aaron Gordon and Jonathan Isaac played 78 and 75 games, respectively. Slackers.

In pure Clifford fashion, the Magic play the safest brand of basketball you’ll find. They boast the ninth-lowest turnover percentage, sprint back on defense to limit transition points (only the Bucks surrendered fewer transition points this season, per Synergy Sports) and rank dead-last in free throw attempts. On one hand, relying on the whistle is not a smart tactic in the postseason (see: Toronto DeMar DeRozan). But the Magic need easy points where they can find them against this monster Raptors defense. This could be a pitcher’s duel.

No. 3 Philadelphia 76ers vs. No. 6 Brooklyn Nets (Schedule)

How much will we see Ben Simmons, point-center?

With Joel Embiid’s left knee still nagging him, Philadelphia has some interesting options for backup center. It speaks to the team’s confidence level at that position and in Embiid’s health that they picked up Greg Monroe off the scrap heap to bolster a backline that also features Boban Marjanovic, Amir Johnson and rookie Jonah Bolden. 

But the most tantalizing choice on the menu might be their point guard, Ben Simmons. At 6-foot-10 and 230 pounds, Simmons can size up with both Brooklyn centers, Jarrett Allen (listed at 6-foot-11 and 237 pounds) and Ed Davis (6-foot-10 and 225 pounds). It’s not a look that Brett Brown goes to often; Simmons played the center spot defensively for about six percent of his time on the floor, per Cleaning The Glass data. 

Simmons at center has worked to some degree in spots during the regular season. With Mike Scott inserted for Embiid in a tweaked starting lineup, the 76ers have outscored opponents 90 to 81 in 39 minutes of action across 11 games. Not a large sample size, but it’s a start.

Once Embiid returns to the court, it’s important to remember that the Sixers’ starting lineup has only played 10 games together, but it boasts the best net rating of any projected starting lineup this postseason at plus-17.6 per 100 possessions, according to data. One of those 10 full-squad games came against Brooklyn in a 13-point win in Philly’s favor back in late March. Embiid had an absolute field day on Allen that night, rendering the Nets center unplayable. Overall, Embiid tallied 39 points, 13 rebounds and six assists in just 28 minutes, forcing Brooklyn coach Kenny Atkinson to go small with 6-foot-7 Rondae Hollis-Jefferson up front in the second half. 

We could see a lot of small-ball in this series. With Embiid’s knee acting up, Simmons at point-center could be a thing this postseason, and I’m here for it.

No. 4 Boston Celtics vs. No. 5 Indiana Pacers (Schedule)

Was Boston’s regular-season dominance a fluke?

The Celtics put together a head-scratching regular season that probably raised the collective blood pressure of the New England faithful. But through the noise, one thing is crystal clear: Boston absolutely shredded the vaunted Pacers defense. 

Despite losing Victor Oladipo with a knee injury halfway through the season, the Pacers were a nasty defensive outfit led by Coach of the Year candidate Nate McMillan. Few could have predicted that they would finish top three in defensive efficiency behind Milwaukee and Utah. Nonetheless, the Celtics had their way against them, scoring a blistering 117.6 points per 100 possessions against the Pacers, a figure so high it is Boston’s best against any of the playoff teams.

How’d the Celtics do it? They don’t play into Indiana’s hands. The Pacers have by far the best pick-and-roll defense in the NBA, holding opponent ball-handlers to just .761 points per play, according to Synergy Sports technology. Big men on rolls didn’t fare much better either. Once you navigate past the pesky web of Darren Collison and Cory Joseph, you’re met by Thaddeus Young, Myles Turner and Domantas Sabonis. Get caught in that gauntlet and life won’t be easy.

But the Celtics aren’t a heavy pick-and-roll team; only six teams ran fewer pick-and-roll plays per game this season. Instead of routinely running high ball-screens, the Celtics like to derive more of their offense in transition, flinging the ball around the perimeter and running off-ball actions to get open looks. 

Their diverse offensive approach worked like a charm against the Pacers. After meandering to 101 points back in a Nov. 3 loss in Indiana, Boston’s point totals against the Pacers were 135, 114 and 117 -- all wins. Not a single Celtic scored more than 30 points in any of those games, underlining a collective effort by a deep squad. In fact, all seven of Boston’s’ top shooters (by field goal attempts) in games against Indiana shot 50 percent or better. 

With Oladipo sidelined, the Pacers don’t have a current or former All-Star at their disposal, and the Celtics have three -- Kyrie Irving, Gordon Hayward and Al Horford. Marcus Smart’s absence will be felt, but keep in mind that the feisty guard shot just 5-of-22 from the floor and made only four 3-pointers in the regular-season series against Indiana, and the Celtics still blew the doors off of the Pacers.

Indiana admirably clawed their way to a 16-18 record since Oladipo’s injury, but Boston has starpower, regular-season dominance and the experience of a deep playoff run in their rear-view mirror. This is an upset if the Celtics need seven games to finish off the Pacers.

Follow me on Twitter (@TomHaberstroh) and bookmark for my latest stories, videos and podcasts.

Is Rockets' James Harden really having the best scoring season ever?

NBC Sports

Is Rockets' James Harden really having the best scoring season ever?

James Harden is doing some crazy stuff this season. The former Sixth Man of the Year is nearly averaging an unfathomable 40 points per game. He just scored 60 points in a little more than 30 minutes of game action and hasn’t scored fewer than 25 points in a game since opening night. Defenses are now trying to trap him before halfcourt.

Is he the best scorer of this generation? Probably. Three straight scoring titles would cement that status.

But is he the best scorer ever? Well, that gets a little more complicated. We could simply list the best scoring seasons by points per game and leave it at that. But as you’ll see below, that would be short-sighted.

Why? Let’s start at the basics.

Harden is currently averaging 39.5 points per game. If it holds, that would rank third all-time on the scoring leaderboard for a season. The only name above him? Wilt Chamberlain, who of course sees your 40 points per game and raises you 50.

Case closed. Chamberlain is the best scorer ever, with the best scoring season ever, right? 

Not so fast. Let’s zoom out and look at the top 20 scoring seasons in NBA history. 

Notice anything odd? Hint: Look at the season column. Yeah, that’s a lot of of the 1960s. Eleven of the top 20 scoring seasons of all time came within an eight-year span. What’s up with that? 

Chamberlain, Elgin Baylor and Rick Barry were incredible scorers, to be sure. But it has to be mentioned that they played in an era where teams regularly took over 100 shots per game. In an eight-team league playing at a crazy-fast pace, and in which Chamberlain was one of three 7-footers playing in the league, the NBA was ripe for an outlier season. 

Though we didn’t have a complete picture in the box score (turnovers didn’t become an official stat until 1973-74), we can get a pretty good idea of how “fast” the league was in that season by using Basketball Reference’s best estimates. We find that Chamberlain’s team, the Philadelphia Warriors, played a whopping 131.1 possessions per game, the fastest of the eight teams. The slowest team, the Chicago Packers, played at 122.9 possessions per game. Even taken as a ballpark figure, that’s a Formula 1 race car compared to the speed of the modern era.

If you thought today’s pace-and-space era was fast, the back-and-forth NBA of the 1960’s leaves them in the dust. The fastest team this season, according to Basketball Reference tracking, is the Washington Wizards and they churn out 105.2 possessions per game. To put it in perspective, the slowest team in 1961-62 played almost 18 additional possessions per game than today’s fastest team.

That’s almost an entire quarter’s worth of extra hoops in which to rack up points. You might be asking yourself, “Well, what what happens when we take that same top 20 and adjust for pace?” 

Good question! I tweaked the per-game numbers by normalizing it to a 100-possession environment. Players that played on a slow team (below 100 possessions per game) will get a boost and players that played on a fast team (above 100 possessions) will have their numbers fall back down to Earth a bit. 

After making this adjustment, we get an entirely new leaderboard. Lakers fans, you might want to sit down for this one.

Holy, Kobe Bean Bryant! After adjusting for pace, Bryant’s 2005-06 campaign floats to the top of the list, up from his previous spot of 11th-best. It’s one thing to average 35.4 points per game, but it’s another to do it while playing at a snail’s pace. In Phil Jackson’s return to the Staples Center bench after a one-year hiatus, the Lakers barely cleared 90 possessions per game, over 40 fewer possessions per game than Chamberlain’s record-holding ‘61-62 campaign.

A comparison between Bryant’s 81-point game and Chamberlain’s 100-point game -- the two highest-scoring individual performances in NBA history -- further illustrates the difference in eras and playing styles. In Chamberlain’s infamous 100-point outing, the Warriors fired up 118 field goal attempts, which is 30 more scoring opportunities than the Lakers had when Bryant went for 81. (Chamberlain’s Warriors scored 169 points in that game, which was only the sixth-highest scoring game in NBA history at the time. Again: Pace.)

Bryant has always been considered one of the best scorers of all-time, but he happened to rule during the NBA’s Deadball Era, in which point totals slumped across the board. The 2004 Lakers scored 68 points in an entire Finals game for crying out loud. Under the terms of our exercise, Bryant would average an extra 4.4 points per game simply by adjusting to a pace of 100 possessions per game. 

And Harden? He’s still near the top of the list. His current season is docked 1.8 points per game because the Houston Rockets have stepped on the accelerator this season with Russell Westbrook on board. The Rockets’ pace, according to Basketball Reference tracking, sits at 104.9 this season, up from 97.9 last season with Chris Paul running the point. By this measure, Harden’s season is almost a mirror image of last season’s scoring campaign.

More importantly, even through this new lens, Harden’s ‘19-20 scoring binge is still not superior to Chamberlain’s monster '61-62 season, but the gap is smaller. Once we put the era’s pace into context, Harden and Chamberlain are less than one point per game apart. If Harden’s season average surges to 40.3 points per game, that would put him on par with Chamberlain in adjusted points per game. (He’d need to finish at 40.6 and 40.8 raw points per game to catch Jordan and Bryant, respectively).

Is Harden having one of the best scoring seasons ever? Most definitely. It’s right up there with the legendary scorers in NBA history. If he starts regularly putting up 42 points a night in this environment, he’d have the best scoring season ever in my book -- better than Wilt’s 50.4 season -- but it’s hard to see Harden pulling that off. Then again, no one saw a Sixth Man of the Year averaging nearly 40 points per game, either.

Follow me on Twitter (@TomHaberstroh), and bookmark for my latest stories and videos and subscribe to the Habershow podcast.

Can Karl-Anthony Towns and Joel Embiid handle life as a guard?

NBC Sports

Can Karl-Anthony Towns and Joel Embiid handle life as a guard?

Karl-Anthony Towns held the ball while Rudy Gobert, the two-time Defensive Player of the Year, guarded him tightly. The pair of 7-footers weren’t wrestling in the paint like traditional centers would. On this late November night, they were 25 feet away from the basket, and Towns was stuck.

Enter Jeff Teague, the Timberwolves’ nominal point guard. He shuffled over to Towns and instead of asking for the ball, the 6-foot-3 ball-handler set a screen -- that’s right, set a screen -- for the 7-foot center. That misdirection prompted another. Using the pick would have meant Towns had to dribble to his right in the direction of his dominant hand. Instead, Towns juked right-to-left, dribbled hard past the arc with his opposite hand and abruptly shifted into reverse for a stepback 3-pointer, displaying the quick footwork of a ballerina set in fast-forward.

“Karl is the modern-day NBA big,” said Minnesota Timberwolves president of basketball operations Gersson Rosas on the latest Habershow podcast. “He was one of the major reasons, if not the major reason why I took this job.”

Towns is currently taking more 3-pointers and making a higher percentage of those shots than Stephen Curry did in his 2014-15 MVP season. But it’s not just the shooting that jumps off the page. Watch the NBA on any given night and you’ll witness seven-footers like Towns running pick-and-rolls, shooting 3-pointers and zipping around the floor like they’re six-footers. 

Giannis Antetokounmpo, whose towering dimensions appear to be designed in an NBA laboratory, has pounded out more dribbles this season than Devin Booker and Bradley Beal, per player tracking data. LeBron James is the size of Karl Malone and leads the NBA in assists. Luka Doncic, behind James on the assist leaderboard, stands 6-foot-7 and 230 pounds, roughly the same as Xavier McDaniel -- only heavier.

Other skilled giants like Nikola Jokic, Joel Embiid and Anthony Davis often play outside-in, not inside-out. It’s clear that the guardification of NBA bigs has taken over the sport. What’s not clear is whether their enormous bodies can handle it.

* * *

Athletes around the world are bigger, faster and stronger than previous generations. Last month, Eliud Kipchoge of Kenya ran a sub-2-hour marathon, clocking in four minutes faster than the world record set a decade ago. The average weight of NFL offensive linemen in the 1970s was 249 pounds compared to today’s weigh-in of 315 pounds. In 1999, Tim Isaac became the first man to bench press over 800 pounds (802 to be exact). Today, that record is 1,102 pounds, belonging to a man named Tiny Meeker.

Oddly enough, the NBA hasn’t gotten appreciably bigger or taller, on average. The average NBA player, according to Basketball Reference tracking, is actually an inch shorter and seven pounds lighter than they were in 2010-11. But NBA players have gotten markedly more athletic, allowing giants to move like hummingbirds. 

In the eyes of Dr. Marcus Elliott, the load management conversation has skipped over this critical piece of the puzzle. The founder of P3 Peak Performance labs in Santa Barbara, Calif., Elliot and his sports science team are at the core of a global movement trying to keep professional athletes healthy. What Elliott sees from his vantage point is a fundamental shift in how NBA players are moving.

“The game has just gotten so much faster and more athletic,” Elliott says. “You can’t do apples to apples to the NBA 20 years ago.”

Elliott isn’t basing his opinion on anecdotal evidence. Over the past decade, the P3 staff has assessed the biomechanics of hundreds of NBA players -- 58 percent of the players on opening-night rosters, P3 says -- and one trend keeps popping up. 

“All of the athletes are improving their athleticism, but the rate that our bigs are improving is much faster than the guards and perimeter players,” Elliott says.

As part of the biomechanical assessments that P3 delivers to its NBA clientele, P3 leads off with an “Athleticism” score that measures an athlete’s ability to move vertically and laterally. Recently, P3 crunched the numbers and analyzed how these scores have changed over time for two groups: “bigs” and guards/wings. Before 2016, the average “big” received an Athleticism score of 62. Since 2016, however, the average big’s Athleticism score jumped to 69, an increase of seven points. Over the same window, guards and wings have improved their Athleticism score by just three points, less than half that of their towering teammates.

“A decade ago, if we had a 7-foot guy come in that had decent skills, that’s an NBA player,” says Elliott. “Now, if we have a 7-foot guy who comes in and he’s not athletic, we don’t know if we have an NBA player.”

Elliott remembers when Andre Drummond came into P3’s lab several years ago and shocked the staff with his other-worldly metrics. They analyzed his movements in every direction and his scores were remarkably consistent with NBA athletes who weighed 100 pounds lighter than him. He was, in essence, a big who moved like a guard.

“Drummond was a unicorn, but there are a lot more of these unicorns now,” Elliott says. “They’re not really unicorns anymore.”

Before Drummond, it was Derrick Favors, who at one point ranked near the top of P3’s leaderboards in just about every category.

“Pretty athletic big that we got in 10 years ago,” Elliott says of Favors. “These guys stood out. Now, it’s status quo. We expect them to be athletic and move laterally and be overall big movers. They were the exception 10 years ago.”

Now, it’s the rule.

* * *

What is driving the athletic surge in tall players? Elliott points to two factors: the increasingly global nature of the NBA and sheer economics that have incentivized players to pay closer attention to training.

As the NBA sets up academies in India and Africa, the selection pool of NBA athletes is ever-expanding. The league’s international bridges were evident when Antetokounmpo and Doncic trained together this offseason at P3’s sports science lab. Antetokounmpo, or “The Greek Freak,” is the son of Nigerian immigrants and a native of Athens. Doncic, meanwhile, is a 6-foot-7 point guard from Slovenia and the son of a professional basketball player who was born in a small town on the Solvenian-Italian border with a knack for churning out pro soccer players. If not for the international explosion of the sport, it’s entirely possible this season’s two MVP frontrunners could have put the ball to their foot rather than in their hand.

With international exposure of the league growing and TV deals in China, Europe and North America leading to a salary cap boom, NBA players are richer than ever. The average NBA player makes $7.7 million compared to $2.9 million in 2000, while the top NBA salary is Stephen Curry’s $40.2 million compared against Shaquille O’Neal’s $17.1 million in 1999-00. The increased wages make the NBA an even more desirable goal for the best athletes in the world, while also giving the ones that do make it more resources to sharpen their athleticism. The record income then trickles to secondary trainers, nutritionists and chefs, whose primary jobs are to keep players in top shape. 

“The overall selection pool has gotten so much bigger and the incentive to have a career is so much bigger,” Elliott says.

That career is also more demanding on the body. After hovering around 90 possessions per game for much of the late 1990’s and early 2000’s, league-wide pace this season exceeded 100 possessions per game for the first time since 1988-89. The rise of the 3-pointer and emphasis on pick-and-roll defense has required bigs to be more perimeter-oriented. 

“When we started assessing NBA players back in 2009, if you asked most NBA bigs, what they wanted to improve, 10 out of 10 would say their vertical jump,” Elliott says. “The majority of bigs we get in now say they want their lateral movement to improve.”

That mobility comes at a cost. To Elliott, the constant chatter about load management and minutes restrictions overlooks a key point: what’s happening in those minutes. Players are objectively covering more ground in today’s NBA than in years past. Last season, players collectively ran 3,139 more miles than they did in 2013-14 despite the season length and game regulation time being held constant.

But Elliott thinks that only scratches the surface.

“That’s a pretty big change,” Elliott says, “but I really think where you’re going to really see the load of these guys is these ballistic accelerations, both negative and positive,” Elliott says. “How fast they stop, how fast they change direction, how fast they go. It’s these super high intensity stop-and-go’s that are really destructive.”

* * *

As a leader in the space, Elliott has grown tired of the complaints about load management. He jokes that it’s become a dirty phrase now. 

The NBA’s most influential media voice, Charles Barkley, hates it. Michael Jordan reportedly told his Hornets players they’re paid to play 82 games. When asked if rookie R.J. Barrett was being overworked, New York Knicks head coach David Fizdale said “we gotta get off this load management crap” and referenced Latrell Sprewell averaging 42 minutes per game one season (Sprewell averaged 43.1 in 1993-94).

To Elliott, the focus on minutes misses the point. 

“There’s this constant back and forth about ‘when we played …’ ‘when we played,’” Elliot says. “I don’t think that people have given enough attention to how different the game is compared to when they played 20 years ago. These athletes are so much more ballistic and across the board more athletic. These are amazing systems driving super, super hard.”

The pace-and-space era of the NBA is putting increased demands on the bigger athletes. To Elliott, taller players face more injury risk simply because their bodies haven’t been optimized for movement patterns. A 7-footer can get by at younger levels simply by being tall, rather than being an efficient mover. But once they get in the NBA, those movement patterns can catch up to them.

“I still think that NBA athletes are a ways away from being optimized,” Elliott says. “We don’t get many athletes that have as much slack in their system as NBA athletes do. That’s one of the reasons that the game is going to get that much more powerful and more ballistic. NBA players have more slack in their physical development in almost all the professional athletes that we assess.”

Elliott says that track athletes that come through P3 are at 99 percent of where they could be athletically, leaving only 1 percent of space to improve, or “slack” as he calls it. Each percentage point can be the difference between college and Olympian grade. “They don’t make it out of high school at 90 percent.”

NBA players, on the other hand, aren’t nearly as mechanically optimized, settling in at typically 80 percent in his view. “It’s still a skill-dominant sport,” Elliot says.

The slack can be costly. Elliott recently presented new research at Harvard Medical School that studied the biomechanics of 481 NBA subjects and used granular kinetic data to predict whether a player would have a significant knee injury (ACL, MCL and meniscus) that would require surgery in the next year. The P3 machine-learning algorithm was able to predict 70 percent of those major knee injuries simply by looking at how a player moves.

“The load being placed on them is so close to what they’ll be able to manage,” Elliott says, “If they have a screw loose, something probably breaks.”

Elliot wouldn’t reveal the names of his NBA subjects in the study. But it’s safe to say that high-profile knee injuries in recent years to DeMarcus Cousins (torn ACL), Kristaps Porzingis (torn ACL) and Zion Williamson (torn meniscus) were likely due, in part, to some underlying breakdown in the kinetic chain -- whether it was how aligned joints were when the player landed or the balance of force between right-to-left and left-to-right. Simply put, injuries are not 100 percent a product of bad luck.

“Doesn’t matter what size your engine is, if your brakes and suspension are crap, you’re toast,” says P3’s director of biomechanics, Eric Leidersdorf, who has the build of a high school soccer player. “You can have an engine like mine or an engine like Zion Williamson’s, it won’t matter at that point.”

For years, Elliott has wanted to get LeBron James in his P3 facility, just to witness the kinematic system that’s allowed James to perform at this level for so long. Now officially listed at 6-foot-9 and 250 pounds, James is the ultimate guard in a big’s body. In his age-35 season, James is averaging a career-high 11 assists per game while averaging 25.6 points and 7.4 rebounds. His durability is the stuff of legend, never missing more than 10 games in any stretch of his career until last season when he suffered a groin injury on Christmas. (James was playing on by far the fastest team of his career, pace-wise). 

But more important than genetics, James famously invests seven figures per year on body optimization strategies and personally employs a staff that includes a professional biomechanist, multiple chefs and masseuses. He regularly uses cryotherapy, hyberbaric chambers and NormaTec recovery sleeves to stay healthy.

It’s a lesson that Elliott hopes will inspire other premiere athletes to take extra care of their bodies, especially the bigs that have progressed largely because of their size.

“The speed of the game and the load on these players, something has to give,” Elliott says. “It’s a game that’s so hard on these players’ systems, playing 82 games at this speed that it’s played now, it’s so hard on these guys’ systems. When mechanics are messed up, they’re not going to survive.”

Elliott doesn’t see the NBA slowing down anytime soon. When asked what kind of impact those ramped-up velocities will have on the largest of human bodies, Elliott isn’t so sure.

 “I don’t know long-term,” Elliot says, “what it’s going to do.”

Follow me on Twitter (@TomHaberstroh), and bookmark for my latest stories and videos and subscribe to the Habershow podcast.