LeBron's minutes

[Nitro]

Took this from Dr Mufasa at RealGM, found it interesting...

 

Lebron currently has 25k minutes. If he averages 3700 minutes a season from now on assuming long playoff runs, his numbers will look like

 

11 - 28.7

12 - 32.4

13 - 36.1

14 - 39.8

15 - 43.5

16 - 47.2

 

Here are some recent numbers for comparable talents

 

Duncan - 34k at end of 07, 42k now

Shaq - 34k at end of 03, 43k at end of 06, 50k now

KG - 41.5 at end of 08, 45k now

Jordan - 43k at 98 retirement

Kobe - 45k now

 

I'm guessing Lebron starts falling off right around the early 40ks. But that might be generous consider most of the guys who stay elite into the 40ks are super workers. For example Paul Pierce has around 36k right now, it looks like he'll be on the decline by 40. Sheed has only 37k. Nash has 35k. Jamison around 32. Seems like Pierce, Jamison, Nash are all next in line to decline doesn't it. All these guys are in the top 15 in MP. Lebron has ethic, but not KG or Kobe like. 40k may be generous. He may last till 35-38 only.

 

Even 40k, that gives him 4 or 5 more prime years. If he falls off at mid 30s, he could have as little as 3 more prime years.

 

Basically unless he's a major outlier, the Lebron era has a 3-5 year window giving him a 10-12 year prime which is about right for stars. I think this is less than most people/the media are projecting for him. And it may prove joining the Heat is a very good decision for this reason. If he stayed in Cleveland, the clock would've been ticking very hard for those titles

 

Another interesting fact - Jordan had only 17k minutes before the '91 season. Lebron has played 2.5x seasons more in minutes. The "Jordan didn't win till 27, Lebron is 25" reasoning is dubious - It's more like Jordan had the MP of a 25 year old after '90 and Lebron has the MP of a 27 year old right now. Lebron is trailing Jordan, not the other way around. Lebron has almost no chance of catching Jordan's 6 titles as the man. Even if he 6peated, he'd still need to be MVP/title as the man caliber at 48k which is basically unheard of. Now a couple 60 game seasons could drop that to 45-46k, but that's still a tall tall task to hold up that long, even Kobe is showing cracks at 45k. Going by minutes, Wade actually has a better chance of maintaining MVP caliber play 6 years from now. (Wade's minutes and age is exactly where Jordan's was at the end of '90, btw)

[AboveLegit]

Amazing read, very informative. Really hard to disagree with whats posted.

[Flash]

Maybe so, but I don't think any of the guys mentioned above were the type of physical specimen LBJ is. He's got the body to take on big minutes like that.

[Real Deal]

Maybe so, but I don't think any of the guys mentioned above were the type of physical specimen LBJ is. He's got the body to take on big minutes like that.

Jordan is arguably the most athletic player in NBA history.

[Flash]

Jordan is arguably the most athletic player in NBA history.

 

Compared to LBJ? I don't know anyone with that type of body.

[Poe]

To suggest that the only reason LeBron won't age well because his "work ethic isn't KG or Kobe like" is a ridiculous statement. Who is to say LeBron's work ethic isn't up to par with them? We can assume that one or the other works harder, but there are no tangibles to compare.

 

And actually, the only relevant comparisons that he presents are Kobe and KG from a minutes standpoint, because they both came out of highschool and started their NBA minutes at about the same stage in life. Besides, playing in the NBA isn't the only place where these players spend time and physical energy. You have to think about College and sometimes the Euroleage, and also what they do over the summer like FIBA and the Olympics.

 

This guys entire argument, whatever is the main point he's trying to prove, is very flawed.

Edited October 3, 2010 by Poe

[Real Deal]

Compared to LBJ? I don't know anyone with that type of body.

Karl Malone.

 

But athleticism isn't just about a player's muscles, either.

[Nitro]

To suggest that the only reason LeBron won't age well because his "work ethic isn't KG or Kobe like" is a ridiculous statement. Who is to say LeBron's work ethic isn't up to par with them? We can assume that one or the other works harder, but there are no tangibles to compare.

 

And actually, the only relevant comparisons that he presents are Kobe and KG from a minutes standpoint, because they both came out of highschool and started their NBA minutes at about the same stage in life. Besides, playing in the NBA isn't the only place where these players spend time and physical energy. You have to think about College and sometimes the Euroleage, and also what they do over the summer like FIBA and the Olympics.

 

This guys entire argument, whatever is the main point he's trying to prove, is very flawed.

 

I posted the entire post for context and because he did the work. His arguement is opinion, take it or leave it. The main point is a fact, which is the enormous amount of minutes LeBron has played since he came into the league.

 

The fact that he came straight from HS hurts him in regards to his NBA longetivity when comparing him to players his age. If he played in college for 2 years he would have played in about 100 less games. Also factor in that college games are only 40min long. To compare, LeBron has had 4 seasons where he's averaged over 40MPG. Another comparison is D-Wade, who in 2 college seasons accumulated 2000 minutes...Wade has had 4 seasons of over 2700 minutes played, not including post-season. FIBA/Olympics? LeBron, Bosh and Melo I believe were the only players that played in the 2006 WC's, 2007 FIBA America's, and 2008 Olympics. Again, not helping his case.

 

Listen, of course there are many, many variables to consider, and LeBron could certainly be an exception to the trend. However, it is definitely something to look at consider as he progress forward. With his game being so predicated on power and athleticism, I wouldn't be so quick to assume his game will age as well as Kobe's, who is a shell of his former self athletically.

[Check my Stats]

No player will ever as age as well as Kobe has. 14 seasons and there is no end in sight for when he will start to 'fall off'.

[Poe]

Listen, of course there are many, many variables to consider, and LeBron could certainly be an exception to the trend. However, it is definitely something to look at consider as he progress forward. With his game being so predicated on power and athleticism, I wouldn't be so quick to assume his game will age as well as Kobe's, who is a shell of his former self athletically.

 

Well, that's a different argument in itself. Whether LeBron will learn to adjust is something we will see over time once LeBron's athleticism does begin to decline, which it hasn't yet.

 

My guess is that his dominance won't last the way Kobe has unless he adds a consistent jumper once defenses are more comfortable playing closer up on him, or unless he adds a real post game.

 

But all of that has little to do with how many minutes he's played over the years, or even the amount of work ethic Lebron may or may not have. Some players naturally have a better shooting touch than others in a genetic sense almost the same way some players naturally run faster or jump higher. Players can strengthen their leg muscles, but some people will just never jump as high as VC. Likewise, some players can work on their jump-shot 5 hours a day and still not shoot as well as Ray Allen.

 

Take Rondo as an example. I'm sure he works very hard at his jumper as well as the rest of his game, and has shown improvement in other areas of his game like his ability to see holes in the defense and finish around the rim, and his court vision and passing creativity. He just doesn't have the natural ability to shoot well. He will improve with practice and hard work, but he will never shoot like Steve Nash.

 

With that said, LeBron may never shoot or post up as well as Kobe, because his natural shooting ability isn't at the same level. I can see him using his superior strength in the post, but other skills that come with the post game like a turnaround jumper won't be as much of a threat as many other players around the league, at least once players guard him more tightly and give him less elbow space.

 

 

Anyway, now I'm starting to ramble and get further away from the main subject. Back to what was said originally, I doubt the minutes are going to play as big of a role as age itself. If LeBron learns to take care of his body the right way, his athleticism could last into his 30s.

 

KG came out of highschool, and didn't experience a decline in his minutes until he was about 31.

 

Duncan came out of 4 years in college, though started getting a decline in minutes at about 26, 27 years old.

 

Kobe Bryant came out of high school, and is still averaging more points than his career average at 32 years old.

 

Shaq spent a couple years in college, and experienced his decline at about 31, 32 years old.

 

Jordan spent about 3 years in college, and his scoring wasn't consistently below his career average until about 33 years old, though it wasn't much of a dropoff because at 35 he was averaging just under 29 ppg.

 

 

So really, whatever age a player chooses to come into the league doesn't seem to really affect how long they last. Duncan spent 4 years in college and started dropping off extra early, and Jordan spent 3 years and started dropping off extra late. Both Kobe and KG came out of high school, and KG lasted until he got held back by injuries, and Kobe is still going strong though his athleticism isn't the same.

 

I could be wrong as well, but it seems to me that how long a player lasts depends mostly on how well a player can adjust his game throughout his career, how durable the player is, and how much they rely on their athleticism. Next comes how much age affects this particular player's athleticism (like some people grow up faster, some people grow old faster), and then comes the amount of minutes they've played throughout their careers and how much that wears them down over time.

 

 

 

BTW, as a side note, I'm going to be more clear in my posts from now on like this one. I've been careless in the past which has led to misinterpretation, and I've even allowed myself to take things at a personal level, which I won't do anymore. Let me know when something I say doesn't make sense.

[Nitro]

Some players naturally have a better shooting touch than others in a genetic sense almost the same way some players naturally run faster or jump higher. Players can strengthen their leg muscles, but some people will just never jump as high as VC. Likewise, some players can work on their jump-shot 5 hours a day and still not shoot as well as Ray Allen.

 

That's ridiculous. Shooting has NOTHING to do with genetics (unless that person has issues with depth perception and whatnot). It is all muscle memory built through practicing with correct form. LeBron hasn't scratched the surface of being a truly great jumpshooter because his form sucks. Even if he practiced more than Kobe, the likelihood of his current jumper being more effective is slim because of the form. Same idea as lifting; if you lift with improper form, you won't gain as much strength or muscle as someone using correct form, even if you're lifting for longer than that person.

 

I could be wrong as well, but it seems to me that how long a player lasts depends mostly on how well a player can adjust his game throughout his career, how durable the player is, and how much they rely on their athleticism. Next comes how much age affects this particular player's athleticism (like some people grow up faster, some people grow old faster), and then comes the amount of minutes they've played throughout their careers and how much that wears them down over time.

 

1) I don't understand how age is more important than minute's played. I think the first post demonstrated that, where guys like Nash/Jamison/Pierce are in their mid-30's, but have logged less than 40K minutes. As a result, their game's haven't suffered much. Same with Jordan, who was in his mid-30's when he retired with the Bulls, but had played less minutes than Kobe has thus far. Minutes played is essentially how you determine a player's wear and tear, and it's what is most directly correlated with losses in athleticism (also makes you more prone to injury).

 

2) Once again, the point of the post wasn't necessarily to agree or disagree with the guy's arguement. It was simply to bring the point about LeBron's minutes to light.

[Poe]

That's ridiculous. Shooting has NOTHING to do with genetics (unless that person has issues with depth perception and whatnot). It is all muscle memory built through practicing with correct form. LeBron hasn't scratched the surface of being a truly great jumpshooter because his form sucks. Even if he practiced more than Kobe, the likelihood of his current jumper being more effective is slim because of the form. Same idea as lifting; if you lift with improper form, you won't gain as much strength or muscle as someone using correct form, even if you're lifting for longer than that person.

 

Pick two people the same age and train them both to have the same perfect form and the same perfect work ethic, the person with the more favorable genetics to that particular task will be better.

 

 

I've heard that Michael Phelps doesn't have the perfect swimming form compared to other top swimmers. He's a freak of nature with a great work ethic, which outweighed his form so greatly that he was still the best.

 

Likewise, JJ Redick and Jared Dudley have different shooting forms. JJ Redick has the more ideal shooting form, yet Dudley both made more three pointers and shot a higher percentage last year than Redick.

 

 

I'm not denying that both form and work ethic increase one's potential to shoot, yet genetics determine how high the individual's potential is, and it is the same with all things. Some people have a higher capacity in mathematics, yet I'm sure that no matter how hard some people work at math, they will never be comparable to the mathematical genius of Albert Einstein.

 

Take an extreme case of a freak of nature mentally like an autistic person, who can do incredible things mentally with memorization and mathematics, yet are super unstable emotionally and socially. I've seen videos of a person with autism that took a helicopter ride over the city of Rome, and then was asked to draw what he remembered with no picture references allowed. He drew the whole thing perfectly (though on the flip side, he couldn't speak a word from what I remember).

 

 

As far as shooting goes, it's the same on a physical level and a mental level.

 

Some people have better hand-eye coordination, and have a better natural ability to hit their target regardless of form. Some people have a better sense of focus to consistently hit their target even when fatigued. Some people are more intuned with their bodies to naturally become more comfortable doing things differently than they are used to. Some people have a natural perfectionist mentality to do things at a more precise level (like remembering to hold their follow-through without being reminded to).

 

And physically, some people have hands that are a more favorable size to shooting a basketball (which is one reason why Rondo has difficulty because of his abnormally large hands), and some people have longer or shorter arms.

 

It goes on and on. There are many more things that come into play at a genetic level on being able to shoot than the above.

 

 

I hope I've made myself more clear.

 

 

1) I don't understand how age is more important than minute's played. I think the first post demonstrated that, where guys like Nash/Jamison/Pierce are in their mid-30's, but have logged less than 40K minutes. As a result, their game's haven't suffered much. Same with Jordan, who was in his mid-30's when he retired with the Bulls, but had played less minutes than Kobe has thus far. Minutes played is essentially how you determine a player's wear and tear, and it's what is most directly correlated with losses in athleticism (also makes you more prone to injury).

 

I don't think a loss in athleticism causes a player to be more injury prone. Age itself, though, does make you more injury prone and unable to withstand certain tasks as much as in their youth.

 

The biggest cause to injury is doing things improperly, like not having good form in weight training or doing simple things like running incorrectly. Most players... actually almost every player and american/european, don't know how to run properly, which over time causes ankle, knee, hip, and lower back pains, and makes them more prone to severe injury in those areas when doing physical activities like professional basketball.

 

What I'm referring to is heel-strike versus landing in the mid-foot. Running heel-to-toe is not the way humans have evolved to run, yet the cushioning in our shoes makes running this way more comfortable, thus we put too much pressure on our joints because of repeatedly landing on our heels when we aren't supposed to.

 

 

Now I'm getting offtopic again. BLAH.

 

 

Anyway, perhaps I'm wrong. Maybe wear and tear does affect players longevity in the league more than I innitially thought. I'd like to see some examples of players that have played off the bench for most of their careers and see where they begin to drop off statistically, but I can't think of any examples to research.

 

 

2) Once again, the point of the post wasn't necessarily to agree or disagree with the guy's arguement. It was simply to bring the point about LeBron's minutes to light.

 

I'm not disagreeing with you as much as I'm disagreeing with the thread topic. I don't think LeBron playing more minutes early on will affect his game as much as people think, rather than his ability to adjust his game. I could be wrong, though.

[Nitro]

Pick two people the same age and train them both to have the same perfect form and the same perfect work ethic, the person with the more favorable genetics to that particular task will be better.

 

 

I've heard that Michael Phelps doesn't have the perfect swimming form compared to other top swimmers. He's a freak of nature with a great work ethic, which outweighed his form so greatly that he was still the best.

 

Likewise, JJ Redick and Jared Dudley have different shooting forms. JJ Redick has the more ideal shooting form, yet Dudley both made more three pointers and shot a higher percentage last year than Redick.

 

 

I'm not denying that both form and work ethic increase one's potential to shoot, yet genetics determine how high the individual's potential is, and it is the same with all things. Some people have a higher capacity in mathematics, yet I'm sure that no matter how hard some people work at math, they will never be comparable to the mathematical genius of Albert Einstein.

 

Take an extreme case of a freak of nature mentally like an autistic person, who can do incredible things mentally with memorization and mathematics, yet are super unstable emotionally and socially. I've seen videos of a person with autism that took a helicopter ride over the city of Rome, and then was asked to draw what he remembered with no picture references allowed. He drew the whole thing perfectly (though on the flip side, he couldn't speak a word from what I remember).

 

 

As far as shooting goes, it's the same on a physical level and a mental level.

 

Some people have better hand-eye coordination, and have a better natural ability to hit their target regardless of form. Some people have a better sense of focus to consistently hit their target even when fatigued. Some people are more intuned with their bodies to naturally become more comfortable doing things differently than they are used to. Some people have a natural perfectionist mentality to do things at a more precise level (like remembering to hold their follow-through without being reminded to).

 

And physically, some people have hands that are a more favorable size to shooting a basketball (which is one reason why Rondo has difficulty because of his abnormally large hands), and some people have longer or shorter arms.

 

It goes on and on. There are many more things that come into play at a genetic level on being able to shoot than the above.

 

 

I hope I've made myself more clear.

 

I used to go to a basketball camp ran by Kevin Boyle (one of the best HS coaches in the US, coached LeBron in an ASG his senior year), and one day we had a guest. It was a shooting coach who had worked with a bunch of NBA players, ranging from Kobe to Stromile Swift. He was an average guy, average height, average abilities from a physical standpoint. However, as he was giving us his lecture, he was taking shot after shot...he made over 500 consecutive jumpers from various spots on the floor. What was his secret? Proper form and intense work ethic. He alluded to how many of the NBA players he works with had no idea how to properly warm up before working on their jumpers, and the ones who didn't see vast improvements were ones who didn't work hard enough or take advice.

 

Basically what I'm getting at that unless you're shooting 50% or better from 3pt distance, then there will always be plenty of room for improvement. Some people have an easier time improving that area than others, but you cannot blame genetics for a guy not improving his average jumpshot. All that means is you have to work harder and smarter. In LeBron's case, his problem isn't even necessarily his level of skill at jumpshooting, it's his shot selection. He takes 5+ 3's per game, and many of them are contested (as are his midrange jumpers). Improving that alone would shoot his percentages up a bit. He's already made huge improvements to his jumper, and if he fixed his crappy form up his potential would be that much higher.

 

 

I don't think a loss in athleticism causes a player to be more injury prone. Age itself, though, does make you more injury prone and unable to withstand certain tasks as much as in their youth.

 

I meant that general wear and tear by playing tens of thousands of minutes in an NBA career makes you more prone to injury. Just like a car...the '98 Altima with 50K miles will hold up much better than the one with 200K miles, despite being the same age. Playing so long slowly breaks your body down. Being younger helps you recover from those injuries faster, but those injuries will certainly accumulate as you put more and more strain on your body over time.