RELATED CONTENT

Sonics Playoff Homepage Scouting the Kings Guards Radmanovic Practices, Expects to Play Saturday Sonics News Archive

Mike Bibby

You probably would be surprised to learn it was Bobby Jackson. Bibby ranked in the top 20% of all players, but nowhere near as high as his backup. Meanwhile, a pair of Sonics guards, Ray Allen (fifth) and Antonio Daniels (seventh) ranked in the top ten.

Because so much is riding on one game in the playoffs, it's easy for a handful of games to dominate memories of them. As a result, Bibby's outstanding performance in the 2002 Western Conference Finals is remembered; his uneven performance in the 2003 playoffs is not.

SUPERSONICS.COM has taken Hollinger a step further before this year's Kings-Sonics series, looking at the postseason performance of every player on each team who has seen playoff action using the NBA.com Efficiency Rating on a per-48 minute basis. Because players don't play in the playoffs every year, their regular-season ratings are weighted by the number of playoff games they played that year so we're not biased in favor of players who played poorly in seasons in which they did not make the playoffs or those who have only gone to the playoffs during their prime seasons.

EFF48 Playoff Stats Player Reg. Play. Ratio PGm PMin PPPG PRPG PAPG Eddie House 14.7 16.5 +11.9% 3 64 12.7 1.7 1.7 Kenny Thomas 22.6 23.1 +1.9% 12 389 10.6 9.3 0.9 Bobby Jackson 22.3 22.5 +0.9% 43 944 9.8 3.3 2.2 Mike Bibby 21.9 21.6 -1.6% 40 1562 17.9 3.5 5.6 Greg Ostertag 22.9 21.1 -8.1% 87 1742 4.2 5.4 0.4 Brad Miller 29.2 24.9 -14.7% 27 743 9.8 7.4 2.3 Peja Stojakovic 24.5 20.3 -17.4% 52 1885 16.8 6.1 1.3 Corliss Williamson 21.2 17.4 -17.9% 58 1048 8.0 2.9 0.8 Cuttino Mobley 16.4 12.8 -21.9% 9 304 11.1 3.1 2.8 Darius Songaila 22.8 17.5 -23.3% 7 85 3.7 1.9 0.3 Brian Skinner 23.7 12.1 -44.8% 13 132 2.5 2.2 0.0 Player 351 8898

EFF48 Playoff Stats Player Reg. Play. Ratio PGm PMin PPPG PRPG PAPG Ray Allen 26.8 27.5 +2.9% 26 1074 24.2 5.0 5.2 Antonio Daniels 18.6 18.6 -0.2% 48 916 7.3 1.7 1.8 Vladimir Radmanovic 19.3 17.0 -12.0% 5 113 7.6 3.6 1.0 Rashard Lewis 23.8 20.7 -12.8% 8 236 14.4 5.3 0.6 Jerome James 21.6 14.9 -30.9% 10 154 3.8 2.3 0.7 Vitaly Potapenko 19.3 8.9 -53.8% 4 70 4.3 2.8 0.8 Player 101 2563

So, what do the numbers tell us? The most obvious implication should be something Hollinger expounded on at length in his playoff study: Numbers fall across the board in the post-season, both because defensive intensity tightens up and because there are no weak teams to get fat against. As a result, merely keeping one's performance at regular-season level, a la Daniels, is actually an impressive feat.

Many players have not played enough in the postseason to really say much about their ability to take their games to the next level in the playoffs. Yes, Eddie House has improved dramatically, but he had three good games. That's not really all that surprising.

Allen, on the other hand, is an example of a player who has raised his performance in May and June over a more substantial period. During the 2001 Playoffs, when he led the Milwaukee Bucks within a game of the NBA Finals, Allen was brilliant. He averaged 25.1 points, 6.0 assists and 4.1 rebounds in 18 playoff games, shooting 47.7% from the field and 47.9% from 3-point range. In Game 6 of the Bucks Eastern Conference Finals matchup with Philadelphia, Allen scored 41 points to force Game 7.

"I've always said that I was a pressure player," says Allen. "I think the way people look at the game, when the game is on the line, I look at it differently - it's the best time to play. The playoffs are that situation, where more people may be watching. Names are made in the playoffs. I always welcome the challenge because it's a fun time of year." Daniels' best postseason also came in 2001, when the San Antonio Spurs advanced to the Western Conference Finals. With starter Derek Anderson sidelined for six games, Daniels stepped into the starting lineup and averaged 13.5 points per game while shooting 48.1% from the field. He was the Spurs third-leading scorer after Tim Duncan and David Robinson. Daniels also played well against the Sonics in the 2002 Playoffs, averaging 8.2 points and shooting 50% from the field.

"Names are made in the playoffs. I always welcome the challenge because it's a fun time of year." Jonathan Daniels/Getty Images

Like Daniels, Jackson has provided reserve punch in the postseason. In both 2002 and 2003, he averaged double-figures as a reserve. In his best playoffs, 2003, Jackson averaged 14.3 points and 4.5 rebounds per game. Bibby may not have done quite as relatively well in the postseason as Jackson, but he's experienced very little drop-off and has made some big shots.

"He's a clutch player," says Sonics Coach Nate McMillan. "He makes big shots when they need a basket."

Peja Stojakovic's reputation as a poor postseason performer is probably deserved. He was outstanding in the 2003 Playoffs, averaging 23.1 points per game on 48.0% shooting, but Stojakovic has not shot better than 41% in any other postseason in his career, and his scoring average dropped off by 6.4 points in 2002 and 6.7 points last year.

Sonics forwards Rashard Lewis and Vladimir Radmanovic haven't been outstanding in the postseason, but both can point to injuries that bothered them in 2002, when the Sonics took on the Spurs. Lewis came into the series nursing a sprained ankle, Radmanovic a sore toe. Lewis shot 37.5% in three games before injuring his shoulder, but averaged 15.4 points and shot 47.4% from 3-point range during the 2000 Playoffs against Utah. Radmanovic had a big Game 4 against the Spurs, scoring a then-career-high 23 points and hitting five 3-pointers.

Another point raised by looking at past playoff performance is the clear advantage in experience the Kings have entering this series. Six Sonics players will be making their postseason debuts tomorrow, while only Allen and Daniels have extensive playoff experience. Overall, Sacramento's roster boasts nearly three and a half times as many playoff games and minutes as the Sonics group. Daniels doesn't see that as reason for concern.

"I think it can be viewed both ways," says Daniels. "We're a very young team as far as the playoffs are concerned and a lot of guys haven't been here, but you can get some positives out of that. Guys don't know what to expect. Guys are bright-eyed and go in and take everything as it comes. They really don't see a difference; they go in and play the same way they played throughout the season."

As Daniels reminds us, while the past may be interesting, it's the future that matters starting tomorrow.