Rethinking the Value of Small Forwards

Bethlehem Shoals - SportingNews.com

Last night, I watched Carmelo Anthony and Kevin Durant go at it in a battle of the pure scorers. Actually, let's make that "pure small forwards," but I don't know if that will be met with any less disdain.

Forwards like Anthony and Durant are the second-class citizens of the NBA star system. No matter how efficient Melo becomes, or how much Durant realizes his awesome potential, they'll always be penalized for their "limitations." They'll make the All-Star team, and garner fan attention, but at the end of the day, experts will tell you that the season turned on point guards, big men and multi-tooled guards -- the latter shoehorned in by the bullying legacy of Michael Jordan. And the stark way in which Kobe Bryant, Dwyane Wade or Brandon Roy can take over all facets of a game.

Small forwards, no matter how excellent, have to stand on and watch, or be subject to all sorts of second-guessing. They can put up points, rebound a little and improve as defenders, all non-essential, or token, contributions. So why do they matter? Without them, their teams would be nothing. But they come under scrutiny that, for reasons that stem from the most narrow-minded basketball thinking, other stars avoid. Centers and power forwards? Big men and defense win championships. Point guards? Quarterbacks controlling the action. Kobe, Wade, or Roy? You try and argue against that one.

Way, way back, I wrote a column suggesting that the swingmen -- who aren't nearly as typecast as SFs -- weren't getting respect because no one knew what they were really up to. It kind of disintegrated from there, but at various points touched on personal favorites like Gerald Wallace, Josh Smith and Josh Howard. Howard's yet to get healthy this season, but Wallace and Smith are having career years and truly defying positionality. In a way, the SF position is now seen as something to be vacated, or outmoded. We want to see Durant blossom into someone who can play inside with authority, and handle the ball with impunity. Same with Dirk Nowitzki, albeit to a lesser degree.

LeBron James, who can play any position he wants, is stuck at small forward because it provides an easy cipher. No one cares about the SF; in a structural sense, it might as well not even exist. The same goes for Kevin Garnett, who in his younger days was pegged as one. The dream is that the small forward will outstrip its "pure scorer" legacy, and blossom into either something more glorious and varied (blame that on Pippen) or leave itself as a non-descript home for players beyond category.

But enough against these players, whom I have come here to support in their underdog's struggle. Carmelo Anthony is the single most productive and, from an anecdotal standpoint, most dominant player on the Nuggets. Denver also happens to be the second-best team in the West, possibly the whole league. Granted, it's a deep crew, boasting -- and here comes the scuttlebutt -- proven champ Chauncey Billups at the point and increasingly authoritative big man Nene. See, Anthony is automatically minimized. Maybe Billups is the real leader? And how exactly would this team fare with Melo as the unquestioned center of attention?

That's the unfortunate standard that SFs are subjecte to. They can't carry a team by themselves, but this dependence on teammates to flesh out winning that bears their name involves ... well, an admission that they're glorified role players. Teams always want points. But before that, they need offensive coherence and some heft in the paint. Oh, and they'd love a guy who can simply do everything himself. Structurally, small forwards just aren't essential like those other three classes of basketball citizens. Mostly, they just score, which as we know, is the devil.

Why is it, though, that we can't read Billups and Nene as the supporting players needed to make a scoring machine like Melo into a team-leading dynamo? I think we can agree that, were Denver relying on J.R. Smith for offense, this team wouldn't be nearly as much of a monster as it is. And let's not underestimate things like leadership, charisma and the willingness to make plays when the game is on the line. Billups is aging. Nene will only ever be so good. It simply makes no sense to get all puritanical, or John Wooden-esque, with the hierarchy here. The most important player on the Nuggets is a kid who scores in bunches, effortlessly and in a way that makes everyone's life easier.

Is that so hard to accept? If a guy does his duty to the utmost, and isn't a total sieve when it comes to ball movement, the boards and other, more moral, qualities, how is he not qualified for real franchise-dom? Many point guards and centers aren't perfect but are completed by those around them. We simply can't continue to argue that role alone disqualifies say, Melo from MVP consideration. Dirk, listed as a PF and capable of putting up some power numbers, is maligned like he were one. His 2007 MVP was in part a commendation for playing more like a big man, which in turn, caused the Mavs to have a great year.

Not to rub salt on anyone's wounds, but in a way this comes back to Oden/Durant. All the GMs on Earth swore they'd take Oden over Durant because centers were a more valuable commodity. More raw, harder to project, less scintillating, but worth more on the open market because basketball logic says they are. Why exactly was it such a daunting challenge to take Durant, then get a big man and point guard to complement him? That's what OKC did, and it's looking pretty good. And the Thunder are still depending on Jeff Green as their PF.

That says to me that, if Durant or Anthony are winning games and providing the central contribution to their teams' way of being -- even if that is filthy, filthy offense -- then who are we to demote them? They are smart players, diligent players, players who do as much as they can with the other aspects of the game. But they were born to score, and they light it up like few others. Maybe they can't boast the same all-around brilliance as Kobe, James or Roy. And yet like with a great big man or center, their teams know how to build around them. Making a small forward your franchise player can indeed yield results.

Sanity check: Of course, there's a reason Alex English and George Gervin aren't remembered as indispensable members of basketball society. In a vacuum, if you're building a team from scratch, small forwards are probably the least attractive pick by position. That explains why the Nuggets took a while to get off the ground, and why the Thunder had their ups and downs last season, even as most pundits saw they were much better than their record. Yet you can't argue with results, and now that these two franchises have committed to Anthony and Durant, and seen results, who are we to question their worth?

Otherwise, you end up with the bizarre conclusion that a team like the Nuggets has no true MVP candidate. Or must always default back to the PG or big man. That certainly doesn't make more sense than the odds-defying scenario where a SF leads a team built to accommodate him. If you see anything other than that when you watch Denver or OKC, then you're approaching the NBA with way too much of an agenda.

----

More basketball news

More sport news

Sports home

Copyright 2012 by SportingNews.com