JaVale McGee is sort of a seven-foot anomaly. He's taller than most players on the court, but he's not exactly a rebounding machine. Most of that is of his own doing, as he's often out of position or more worried about going for put-back dunks or highlight plays.
But recently, there have been signs that the 22-year-old McGee may be modifying his game to be more effective. McGee, who's now in his third season, did something in the last few games that he had not yet done in his professional career: grab 10 or more rebounds in three straight games. He almost made it four games, but he only had nine rebounds against the Raptors on Nov. 16.
In the Wizards' most recent game, a loss to the Pistons, McGee snatched a career-high 16 rebounds and a stunning eight offensive rebounds. In his last four games, McGee has 47 rebounds -- and 24 of them have been offensive boards. That's impressive.
After the Pistons game, McGee received praise from both Gilbert Arenas and Flip Saunders. Here were there quotes, via The Washington Post's Michael Lee:
"He played great basketball," said Arenas . . . "He stuck to his principles. He made it easy for himself, he was getting offensive rebounds, waiting for the offense to come to him and he didn't try to do too much to get him taken out of the game like usual. He showed that if he plays the right way, he is effective out there."
[...]
"By far, his best overall game," Saunders said.
Considering how critical Saunders has been of McGee, that's a strong compliment.
It's still early in the season, but here's a quick look at how McGee's rebounding numbers stack up to his two previous seasons.
Year
Min
Reb
Off
08-09
15
3.9
1.6
09-10
16
4.1
1.5
10-11
27
7.8
3.5
A couple things first: 1) Minutes were rounded up or down, 2) "Off" = offensive rebounds, and 3) McGee played 75 games in his rookie season, 60 games the next, and has played 12 games so far this season. So, yes, it's still a small sample size for the potential new McGee. Still, though, he is grabbing offensive rebounds at a much better rate, which likely has to do with him playing more minutes. But his improved minutes and stats are also aided by better stamina and conditioning, which he should be credited for as well.
Right now, McGee is averaging 8.8 points and 7.8 rebounds while shooting 59 percent from the field. All of those numbers would be career highs.
Now that was an absolutely brutal week -- maybe my worst yet. Here's what went wrong: 1) The Ravens had the lead in the final minutes but lost on a last-second drive; 2) the Colts won by six instead of seven; 3) the Texans were headed for overtime before the Jaguars hauled in a Hail Mary pass to win; 4) the previously winless Bills won by two instead of three; and 5) the Jets and Browns looked like they were about to tie before the Browns choked and gave up a game-ending touchdown after whiffing on a few tackles. The Giants also lost at home to the Cowboys despite being 14 points favorites.
So yeah, that really sucked. But just like the Redskins after the fiasco at FedEx on Monday night against the Eagles, I've got to keep moving. Unless I was Albert Haynesworth, of course. Then I could just fall down and give up. But no, I won't do that.
DOLPHINS (-1) over Bears
Forgot to throw this in before. Thanks a lot, Dolphins.
STEELERS (-7.5) over Raiders
Tom Brady and the Patriots moved the ball up and down the field against the Steelers defense last week, but I seriously doubt that Jason Campbell and the Raiders can duplicate that effort. It's not that the Raiders are a bad team -- far from it. They're 5-4 and actually have a better point differential (+47) than the Steelers (+38), thanks to a few blowout wins over the Broncos and Seahawks. Also, the Steelers and Ravens are both 6-3, and the Ravens travel to Carolina to face the Panthers, which should be a cakewalk for Baltimore. The Steelers need to keep pace with the Ravens, and they also probably aren't happy with how they looked last week on Sunday Night Football. Look for them to get things rolling again this week.
JETS (-7) over Texans
It looks like Matt Schaub is going to play after an injury scare earlier in the week, but how can anyone trust the Texans at this point? They haven't won since Week 6. That's a long time. The Jets, on the other hand, keep winning, but they're not winning big. In fact, they haven't won by more than 10 points since their Week 4 38-14 win over the Bills. Well, I think that stretch ends this week, primarily because the Texans have a dreadful defense. The Jets should be able to put up plenty of points, and their defense should pressure Schaub all game long.
Ravens (-12) over PANTHERS
There's simply no way anyone can side with Carolina. Right?
TITANS (-7) over Redskins
Except for the debacle on Monday night against the Eagles, the Redskins have been a competitive team this season. But with LaRon Landry and Carlos Rogers both expected to miss this week's game, the Redskins and their already-struggling defense are in big trouble. If they can manage to keep this game within 10 points, I'll be extremely surprised.
Lions (+7) over COWBOYS
I find it hard to believe that Jason Garrett has the ability to change the entire culture of the Cowboys locker room, but they did look impressive last week in beating the Giants. Still, they are 2-7 for a reason, so it'll take another win or two -- or at least another week of solid effort -- before I start to take them seriously again.
Packers (-3) over VIKINGS
This line seems too low, doesn't it? But who knows, maybe the 3-6 Vikings will make one last stand at home to at least make things interesting. But I doubt it.
Bills (+5) over BENGALS
A 1-8 team travels to take on a 2-7 team -- not exactly the best game of the day, is it?
JAGUARS (-2) over Browns
I was tempted to take the Browns, but losing Josh Cribbs this week is a huge problem for them. Then again, despite having a 3-6 record, the Browns (-10) have a better point differential than the 5-4 Jaguars (-54). That's something to think about, at least.
CHIEFS (-8) over Cardinals
The Chiefs should have no problem feeding Jamaal Charles, with some carries to Thomas Jones thrown in. Hopefully that doesn't end up the other way around.
SAINTS (-11.5) over Seahawks
The Saints just had a bye week and are getting healthier, and they're also playing at home. The Seahawks, on the other hand, just aren't a very good team; I don't care if they have a winning record or not.
RAMS (+3) over Falcons
Like the Packers-Vikings game, this line also seems a little too low. Unlike that game, though, I'll actually side with the Rams this week, for no apparent reason. Maybe that's why I'm having such a hard time picking games this season.
49ERS (-3) over Buccaneers
With Troy Smith under center, the 49ers are 2-0. And no, I never thought I would write that sentence.
PATRIOTS (-4) over Colts
The Patriots (7-2) are firing on all cylinders lately. Meanwhile, the Colts are 6-3 and are still obviously a threatening team, but something just seems a little off about them. I guess it's all Pierre Garcon's fault.
Giants (+3.5) over EAGLES
Seriously, who knows?
Broncos (+10) over CHARGERS
I have no concrete reason to pick against Philip Rivers, but Antonio Gates will probably be out again. Ten points also seems a little high, but maybe that's just me.
The college basketball season is only about two weeks old, but the now 3-1 Terps learned a lot about themselves last night in a 79-70 loss to No. 4 Pittsburgh. Primarily, though, they learned two things: 1) They're going to be competitive this year, and 2) they really, really need to improve their free throw shooting.
In the nine-point loss, Maryland was a dreadful 14-30 (46.7%) from the line. That's 16 points left on the board, and even if the Terps had made just half of those, that's still eight important, potential points. The entire team contributed to the poor shooting, but the two biggest culprits were Jordan Williams (2-7) and James Padgett (0-5). Williams's struggles at the line are frustrating, but he brings so much else to the table that it's hard to complain too much about it. Padgett, on the other hand, hasn't done much else to this point in his career as a sophomore, and he really needs to make those shots when given the opportunity to do so. At one point, Gary Williams seemed to express some frustration towards Padgett right before a TV timeout after he missed two more free throws, but that also could have been for a missed defensive assignment, or maybe something else. It wasn't clear. Still, the point remains the same: Stop giving up free points.
Maryland forced 16 Pitt turnovers -- and only had eight themselves -- so that was a positive, along with shooting a better percentage than Pitt from the field (48.2% to 46.3%). Still, Maryland was outrebounded by 18 (43-25), and they also shot an abysmal 2-14 from three-point range. Dino Gregory seemed more concerned with blocking shots (he had four) than boxing out and grabbing rebounds (only two in 35 minutes). Williams had eight rebounds, and the only other Terp with more than five was Sean Mosley, with six. Sure, Pittsburgh is a deep team and has a lot of frontcourt size, but Maryland has to do better on the boards, period.
Overall, it was a tough, hard-fought victory for Pitt, even if they looked sloppy for most of the game. But Maryland battled them to the end. They'll face another tough opponent, No. 16 Illinois, tonight in the consolation game.
Two other notes:
- Whenever Williams gets in foul trouble, the Terps are going to struggle. Gregory isn't really adept at controlling the paint like Williams can, and Berend Weijs (junior) and Padgett aren't really big enough to do a whole lot of damage inside either. Besides Mosley and Gregory (when he actually focuses on it), the Terps don't have a ton of rebounding ability.
- Freshmen Terrell Stoglin and Pe'Shon Howard are only going to get better. The Terps' best perimeter scorer this season is probably going to be Cliff Tucker, but both Stoglin and Howard can spell Tucker and Adrian Bowie and still keep the pressure on opposing defenses. They sometimes don't have the best shot selection and aren't as skilled at running Gary Williams's offense yet, but they're still rather advanced for freshmen.
It's no revelation to point out that fans aren't fond of their teams getting blown out, especially in big games. But except for a select few elite teams, every team loses big at one time or another, like it or not. Now, I'm not saying the Redskins are an elite team, or even close to one, and I'm also not excusing their terrible, embarrassing performance against the Eagles on Monday night. But judging by some of the crazy reactions from fans, you'd think this kind of thing never happens to the Redskins, or at least hadn't happened for a long time.
But that's not true. Just going back a few seasons, the Redskins suffered two such losses that rival the 59-28 debacle against the Eagles.
Patriots 52, Redskins 7
On October 28, 2007, the 4-2 Redskins traveled to Gillette Stadium to take on the 7-0 Patriots. The undefeated Patriots were definitely thought of as the better team, but some still gave the Skins a fighting chance. Unfortunately, that hope didn't last long; the Patriots took a quick lead and didn't look back. At halftime, the Patriots led 24-0, and they kept their foot on the accelerator, eventually leading 52-0 with just a few minutes left in the game. With about three minutes left, a 15-yard touchdown pass from Jason Campbell to Chris Cooley cut the lead to 52-7, which ended up being the final score.
On that day, the Skins were completely dominated in every phase of the game. Here's the tale of the tape (Patriots numbers listed first):
Total yards: 486-224
Pass yards: 334-177
Rush yards: 152-47
First downs: 34-13
Forced turnovers: 4-1
Tom Brady finished the game 29-38 for 306 yards and three touchdowns. Oddly enough, he also rushed for two touchdowns. Jason Campbell, on the other hand, was 21-36 for 197 yards, one touchdown, and one interception. Oh, and he also lost three fumbles.
Silver lining: The Redskins beat the Jets 23-20 the very next week, but they lost four straight games afterward. But then, with Todd Collins filling in for an injured Campbell and with heavy hearts following the death of Sean Taylor, the Skins put together four straight crucial wins to earn a playoff berth. Unfortunately, they lost in the first round against the Seahawks in Seattle.
Giants 45, Redskins 12
Most fans should remember this game; it took place just last season, on another Monday night (December 21) at home. The Giants came into the game as a decent (7-6) team, but they would eventually finish 8-8 and miss the playoffs. The Skins, however, were 4-9 and not a good team at all, though they had just returned home from Oakland after a 34-13 win over the Raiders.
Just like in the Patriots game above, the Giants took the lead in no time and were ahead 24-0 at halftime. Right before the half, though, the Skins pulled off one of the worst plays in NFL history. You probably remember it: Instead of opting for a 38-yard field goal to end the half and at least get some points on the board in an awful game, Jim Zorn sent out the special teams unit to attempt a crazy Hail Mary-type pass with punter Hunter Smith -- not once, but twice -- even after the Giants were prepared to stop it (which wasn't too difficult). If the loss in Week 3 to the Lions hadn't already sealed Zorn's fate after the season, that play certainly did.
The Skins scored two touchdowns in the third quarter (with a missed extra point and a failed two-point conversion), but that was it. The Giants scored the final points of the game, a touchdown in the fourth quarter, and ended up with a 45-12 win. A terrible, embarrassing loss? Yes, definitely.
Here's the tale of the tape for that game (Giants numbers listed first):
Total yards: 387-302
Pass yards: 273-213
Rush yards: 114-89
First downs: 23-15
Forced turnovers: 3-0
The Giants didn't necessarily dominate statistically, but they dominated the Skins in every other way possible. Also, Eli Manning was 19-26 for 268 yards and three touchdowns. Campbell, though, was 15-28 for 192 yards, one touchdown, and two interceptions. He was also sacked five times.
Silver lining: Sort of. The Redskins lost their next two games and finished the season with a 4-12 record. But that also led to Zorn's firing and, more importantly, Vinny Cerrato's overdue departure. So yeah, losses aren't fun, but sometimes they lead to good things.
-----
Is there an overarching point in all of this? Maybe, maybe not. But it's clear that the Redskins are not an elite team, and they won't be until they stop making horrific personnel decisions and start keeping draft picks instead of giving them away for overrated, older players -- especially ones that don't fit a certain scheme that the team will run.
It's hard to watch Albert Haynesworth laying on the field against the Eagles (and in other games too) and think that the primary problem isn't effort or a lack of heart. But really, that's not it. The Redskins are too old at too many key positions, and they don't have solid backups behind them. That's not a defense of Haynesworth -- far from it. But until the Skins start operating differently -- and there are a few signs that maybe the Skins are, in fact, changing for the better -- these types of losses will continue to happen. And no amount of yelling or insane ranting is going to change that.
It takes time to build a consistent winner; Band-Aids rarely work.
Now with a 2-9 record after last night's 109-94 loss to the short-handed Wizards, it's fair to say that the Raptors are one of the worst teams in the NBA. Still, the Wizards improved to 3-6 with the win, and they did so without John Wall, and to a lesser extent, Yi Jianlian.
The Raptors, far from a good defensive team, allowed the Wizards to shoot over 56 percent from the field and dish out 28 assists. The Wizards ended the first half with a seven-point lead and then outscored the Raptors by 15 points in the third quarter (36-21) to put the game away for good.
With Wall out, Gilbert Arenas and Kirk Hinrich started together in the backcourt, and both had solid games. Arenas scored 20 points on 7-14 shooting, including 3-6 from three-point range, and he also had seven rebounds and six assists. Hinrich was also efficient, scoring 13 points on eight shots, while also dishing out a game-high 12 assists. Andray Blatche led the Wizards with 22 points (9-13 from the field) and also had seven rebounds, five assists, and three steals. Rounding out the starting five, Al Thornton added six points and seven rebounds, and JaVale McGee had eight points, nine rebounds, and four blocks.
Nick Young (30 minutes) and Trevor Booker (20 minutes) both played a sizable chunk of minutes off the bench. Young poured in 20 points on 8-15 shooting and also managed to do something else other than scoring points, grabbing six rebounds. The 20 minutes for Booker were the most he's played so far in his young career, and his eight points were also a career high. Also, Hilton Armstrong scored 10 points in a productive 16 minutes off the bench.
As a team, the Wizards held the Raptors to 40.7 percent from the field and outrebounded them 47-36. The Wizards also had nine more assists than Toronto (28-19), but they did turn the ball over three more times (16-13).
After beating the Raptors in Washington, the Wizards face the Celtics in Boston today. Unfortunately, they may still be without Wall, whose status is "still uncertain." The Celtics won't roll over like the Raptors did, and Wall's presence will likely be missed much more in tonight's game.
Brief note: I realize that Young was likely to play more minutes in this game because of Wall's injury, but it's still funny to see how his minutes change from game to game. His 30 minutes last night were a season high, but he hadn't even played 20 minutes in a game since November 2 against the 76ers. I realize that Young basically is who he is at this point -- a guy who doesn't bring a whole lot to the table other than his ability to heat up and score points in bunches -- but I guess he's sort of settling into his role as the fourth guard, which essentially means that he'll see some playing time if Wall, Arenas, or Hinrich misses a game. If not, then I guess he gets to spend most of the game with Sam Cassell on the bench.
Last night's embarrassing blowout loss to the Eagles -- with a final score of 59-28 -- showcased this current Redskins team's weaknesses. And yes, there are plenty of them. Here are a few: The defense gives up way too many yards and can't get a consistent pass rush; overall team speed is lacking; the offense doesn't have many playmakers; the offensive line is rather awful; and the Redskins have not gotten consistent quarterback play from Donovan McNabb. None of this should be surprising at this point.
Well, let's go back to that point about McNabb: that he hasn't been consistent. Actually, that's not quite true. With all of the deficiencies of this team contributing, McNabb has been consistently mediocre. That might seem a little unfair after last night's terrible game; after all, of course it's not McNabb's fault that the defense allowed that many points and a whopping 592 total yards. McNabb doesn't deserve all of the blame -- far from it. But he does deserve his fair share, especially since he's going to be in Washington for a few more years after signing an extension.
Last night, McNabb completed 17 of 31 passes for 295 yards, two touchdowns, and three interceptions. That was good enough for a 69.4 quarterback rating. One of those interceptions was returned for a touchdown. McNabb was sacked twice and hit six times, and he was under consistent pressure from the beginning of the game. Still, the Redskins failed to convert one third down the entire game (0-10). That just can't happen.
Let's try to forget about last night's game for a moment. McNabb's last solid performance probably came against Houston, when he threw for 426 yards and a touchdown in a losing effort. He didn't turn the ball over and had a 119.0 QB rating. Since that game (all the way back in Week 2), McNabb hasn't posted a QB rating over 80, and his only multi-touchdown game came last night. Take a look at the numbers:
Opponent
Yards
TD
INT
QBRat
Rams
236
1
1
79.7
Eagles
125
1
1
60.2
Packers
357
1
1
75.0
Colts
246
1
2
67.5
Bears
200
1
2
56.8
Lions
210
1
1
75.7
And then yesterday's game against the Eagles. So, yeah, not very good. Here are some other numbers:
His quarterback rating of 75.2 ranks 29th in the NFL.
His 57.1 completion percentage also ranks 29th, just ahead of Jason Campbell (56.7).
McNabb is actually ranked ninth in passing yards (2,266), one yard ahead of Matt Ryan. But McNabb also only has nine touchdown passes (tied for 24th) while also throwing 11 interceptions (tied for fourth most).
Whether it's the current offensive scheme, the lack of playmakers, or just not being familiar in a Redskins uniform yet, McNabb has not played well in Washington. He also turns 34 on November 25. It's nice that the Redskins have some quarterback stability (not sure if that's the right word) with McNabb after signing him to an extension. The deal likely ensures that he'll be in Washington for the next three or four years, and in that time, maybe the Skins can draft and develop a young quarterback to be ready by the time McNabb departs. Also, with the quarterback position filled, the Redskins can finally focus on key areas in the next few NFL drafts, like offensive and defensive line, wide receiver, running back, and obviously other positions. Maybe that finally means they'll stop trading away draft picks for players that don't produce. If it takes giving McNabb that extension for that to happen, maybe it's worth it.
Then again, the Redskins have just committed a lot of money to an aging quarterback who hasn't shown, except for one game against a terrible defense, that he can still produce at a high level. I don't think McNabb is done, and obviously the Redskins don't either. But they painted themselves into a corner when they traded for McNabb, and the only thing that would have looked worse than signing him to an extension would have been to let him walk.
Thomas Boswell frequently writes solid columns. His most recent column on the Wizards, though, struck me as a bit simplistic. Don't get me wrong: He brought up some interesting points and even crunched some numbers in the second part of his article (where he "added up all [players'] points, rebounds, assists, steals and blocks, then subtracted [their] turnovers and missed shots of any type" and compared various players. The Wizards don't have anyone elite in that category, if you were wondering). But his main point, essentially, is that the Wizards have "a chance to be a losing team, but a respectable one . . . [i]f they work hard."
Yes, for Boswell, it's about practice.
This column was primarily written because of the Wizards practice controversy on Monday, when Flip Saunders stormed out of practice and held a second one later in the day. Apparently there was a lack of effort, and also some complaining, so instead of sticking around, Saunders just rolled out. But after Tuesday's practice, Saunders seemed pleased with the level of effort at practice, saying, "We had better concentration. More concentrated effort, mentally and physically. Comprehended more things. Hopefully message delivered, message received."
I'm not saying that Saunders overreacted -- far from it. But coaches do occasionally pull stunts like what Saunders did to motivate their players. So if the Wizards do happen to beat the Rockets tonight, don't be stunned to hear about how focused the team was, or how much more effort the team exerted.
But back to Boswell's column. He also makes two other points:
"This year's team could go either way - dramatically. They have just enough talent, plus the Wall spark, to be fun most nights. But Monday's eruption is a major red flag. The Wizards need to be honest with themselves: Less than full effort will be a disaster."
"All in all, by this measure and plenty of others you can use, the Wizards are not doomed to be terrible. But if they want to compete with anyone, they must use every iota of ability, not force the coach to kick them out of practice in disgust."
I don't think anyone would disagree with these two statements. All fans want their teams to hustle and play hard every game, and lackadaisical effort gets booed and written about negatively. For the most part, most Wizards fans didn't see this current team as anything special (other than John Wall). I still think they'll improve on last year's 26-56 record, but a lot of that hinges on Wall's improvement, Gilbert Arenas's health, how much production the Wiz can get from Andray Blatche and JaVale McGee, and several other factors.
However, if the Wizards continue to play poorly, it'll be pretty easy to blame their lack of wins on effort, or a lack thereof. Not that he's played flawlessly, but it's not Wall's fault that the Wizards don't have a great rebounder or a strong interior presence. And it's not his fault that Saunders insists on a three-guard lineup that doesn't seem to be working too well. Despite the effort/practice cliche, talent wins in the NBA. Boswell briefly touches on this later in his article when looking at the best three players on the Heat, Lakers, and Celtics -- three of the league's best teams. The Wizards simply don't compare to those teams over a full season, and no amount of hard-nosed practicing will change that.
That's not to say that the Wizards can't or shouldn't practice harder and give more effort, but sometimes that's not enough. Even Saunders would admit that.
