MENU

NBA Top 50: Joe Johnson (No. 20)


OtB is counting down the days 'til the NBA 2009-10 season tips off by ranking the top 50 players in the league. On Wednesday there are/were 20 days left.

Is Joe Johnson great? Yeah. Is he your Tom Cruise on a title winning USS Enterprise? (Not the Klingon fighting kind. Top Gun, not Star Trek, Holmes.) Not really. He's certainly no Goose, but is he the guy who feels the need to iterate the need? In other words, is he going to lead you to the promised land? In a word, no. He's no Moses, but let's say he's a little like Aaron. He makes it all possible. Without guys like Joe Johnson, you can't recognize the brilliance of great teams. They come out in stutters (Like the biblical Aaron, c'mon guy, keep up). Let's try one last one on ya. Johnson's like Queequeg. He's no passive bystander like Ishmael, and he saves more than one game from being swallowed whole by whale heads, alive or dead. Still, he's no Ahab. He doesn't steer the Pequod indelibly toward the looming jaws of fate.

In other words, we can lament Johnson's journey to Hot-lanta, and we can wish he had an MJ to whom he could play the Pippen role, but you get what the sea coughs up to you. Johnson is a Hawk, and he's part of the reason this team is on the rise. He actually reminds me of former Hawk Steve Smith, though Johnson handles a little more competently and consequently hands out a few more dishes than Smith would. In fact, the comparison of the two players time in Atlanta is a little uncanny. They both hit for around 20 points per game. They both pulled in about four boards and dished at a similar clip. They both held a true shooting percentage in the mid .500s, shooting in the mid .300s from distance. They both have first and last names starting with the same letter. In truth, Johnson's stats are a little better than Smith's. Keep in mind, though, that Smith's Hawks were generally 50 win teams, which also translates to Smith's usage rate being a little lower than Johnson's.


Queequeg Finished Light Zoom, originally uploaded by inkysweet.
Here's the real rub, when looking at Johnson's production. Two season's ago, he sat out the last 35 games. This means we get to see what his stats would look like if he stopped playing after February. Johnson, it's been noted, tends to drop off around then. He gets tired. He can't carry the load any further. For you literary types, this is about the point where Queequeg gets fitted, in the throes of a riotous fever, for his own casket. So, what does Johnson's production look like when he stops playing in early March? How about 25 points per game and a field goal percentage of .471? In the last two seasons, he's ended with a fg percetage below .440. This is not to say Johnson's not durable. Since the start of the 02-03 season, he's only missed 8 games excepting those 35 in 06-07. Still, it is saying there's only so much this man can do.

I had Johnson at 13th before the start of last season. Perhaps he fell prey to the number. Perhaps I thought he would have a bounce back year after he was a little less potent in 07-08 than he was in his injury shortened season. It turns out, his production has remained pretty consistent. This is what we're getting from Johnson. To reiterate, per game style: 21 points, nearly 6 assists, four and a half boards, over .800 from the line, over .350 from three. A February fade. Playoff appearances, but perhaps no Finals runs. Perhaps.

Share

Twitter Delicious Facebook Digg Stumbleupon Favorites More