In defense of Jack Taylor’s 138-point game

November 24, 2012 in Basketball, Sport

More surprising than the 138-point game by Jack Taylor game has been the overwhelming negativity directed at the jaw-dropping performance from the 5’10” guard from Grinnell College in Dallas.

For those unfamiliar with the feat, Taylor, a sophomore who actually played lacrosse last year, scored 138 points in Grinnell’s high-octane 179-104 victory over Faith Baptist Bible in an NCAA Division IIII game on Tuesday night.

Taylor had struggled with his shot in his first two games of the season, but on this night he hit 52 of his 108 shot attempts (!!), including 27 of 71 from three-point range (!!!). He was also 7 of 10 from the free throw line. He played 36 out of a possible 40 minutes.

To rationalize how the feat was possible, know that Grinnell coach David Arsenault employs a crazy offensive and defensive scheme designed to maximize opportunities to score a lot of points — for both sides. Players are told to shoot quickly and frequently and the team employs a high-risk, high-reward full court trap for the entire game, which often means certain players rarely even cross the half court line on defense. Arsenault’s teams have led the nation in scoring in 17 of the last 19 years at any college level in America. Taylor’s teammate, Griffin Lentsch, scored 89 points in a game last November using the same system.

In this particular game, Taylor started off cold, but he was encouraged to keep shooting and by halftime he had 58 points (his previous career high was 48 points in high school). Sensing something special was happening, his teammates sacrificed their own shots and kept feeding Taylor the ball, much like Wilt Chamberlain’s teammates did on the historic night the Stilt scored 100 in an NBA game (and probably slept with his 20,000th woman on the same night). Taylor eventually caught fire like Katniss Everdeen and scored 28 consecutive points at one point before finishing with the incredible record which shredded the previous NCAA high of 113 by Bevo Francis in 1954.

Here is the link to the full game, or you can check out the highlights below.

Admittedly, there are a lot of people amazed and impressed by the performance, including NBA superstars like LeBron James, Kobe Bryant, Kevin Durant and Carmelo Anthony. But the praise has been overshadowed by the vitriol directed at Taylor, his team, his teammates, his opponents and his coach.

Here are some of the more common complaints.

He took 108 shots and 71 three-pointers in a single game with zero assists! What a hog!

Yes, Taylor took an insane number of shots. But how else would you expect someone to score 138 points? By standing around? By passing his teammates the ball? They were the ones who kept feeding Taylor the ball and encouraging him to score as many points as he could. He would never have managed it if they didn’t keep passing the ball to him, setting screens for him and getting him extra possessions with their full court trap.

The fact that he was able to take so many shots in 36 minutes is impressive in itself. It’s not like he tries to do this every game. It was just one of those nights where he was given free reign to launch. Basketball is a team game where everyone has a role. Taylor’s role on this night was to shoot as much as he could. He did it with the blessing and support of his coach and teammates.

In Chamberlain’s 100-point game, Wilt took 63 shots but had 32 free throw attempts, while Taylor only had 10. Chamberlain also played 12 more minutes. In Kobe Bryant’s 81-point game, he played 42 minutes and took just 46 shots, but had 20 free throws attempts. And remember, Taylor scored 38 points more than Chamberlain and 57 points more than Kobe. Scoring 38 or 57 points in a single game is impressive enough, let alone 100 more than that. Wilt’s career average is around 30 points a game. Kobe has only scored more than 57 points four times in his entire career.

Zero assists? Big deal. Wilt and Kobe only had 2 assists each in their historic games. Plenty of guards at the elite level have recorded zero assist games, and none of them have ever scored 138 points.

He didn’t even shoot 50%! Anyone who takes that many shots can score 138 points!

This just shows a complete lack of understanding of basketball. 52 of 108 from the field is 48%, a rate which most basketball players at any level would take on any given night. The same goes for his 38% (27 of 71) shooting from three-point range (Reggie Miller, regarded as either the best or second best three-point shooter of all-time, averaged 39.5% from the three-point line for his career). They are not amazing percentages for a player having the game of his life, but they are certainly respectable, especially considering how many of his shots were jumpshots and not layups.

I’d also differ on the argument that anyone who takes that many shots can score 138 points. In an empty gym, maybe, but not in a proper game. If it were that easy and common we wouldn’t be talking about it.

Great scorers might be able to score that many points on that many shots against the right opponents, but the bigger difficulty is actually being able to attempt that many shots in a 40-minute game. I don’t care what anyone says, taking a shot every 20 seconds for 36 minutes straight while running around is extremely difficult to do regardless of the opponent.

His opponents were crap; my high school team could have beaten them

This may be true, but it’s been greatly exaggerated. The inept Faith Baptist may be 0-5 on their season but they are still a college basketball team in the NCAA (albeit Div III). No one is saying they are North Carolina, but let’s not pretend this was Michael Jordan dominating in the mentally challenged midget league. Taylor wasn’t playing in a backyard comp against his baby sister — he was playing in a proper game against an opponent deemed good enough to be in the same league. Let’s not forget, Faith Baptist scored 104 points of their own, which means at the very least that they are not complete amateurs and were competing.

Yes, your high school team might have been able to beat them, crush them even. But could anyone on that team score 138 points against them?

His opponents didn’t play any defense

Another myth espoused by haters who likely didn’t even see any game footage. They weren’t exactly good defenders but from what I could tell they sure tried. It wasn’t like they were daring him to shoot and allowing him open jumpers or offering a layup drill all night. They weren’t inviting him to put up 138 points and embarrass them, if that’s what anyone is suggesting.

The vast majority of Taylor’s shots were at least semi-contested or made in traffic. Most of them were made off the dribble in isolation situations. At times Faith Baptist double and triple teamed him and there’s no denying that Taylor made a bunch of difficult shots.

It’s sad that any time a player has a great offensive game critics are quick to blame the defense rather than give credit to the offense.

His opponents should have “done something about it”

It’s frightening how many people say Faith Baptist should have put Taylor on his backside or tried to cause him physical harm by attempting to score so many points on them in a game that was probably settled by halftime. This is not the bush league and the name “Faith Baptist” should have suggested that such tactics were unlikely.

“I will tell you, we tried,”said Faith Baptist coach Brian Fincham. “I’m not going to be cheap and foul or hit somebody. That’s not the type of program we’re going to be. But I’m proud of my guys and the effort they put in. Jack just had a great night.”

Some say it’s not a classy thing to run up the score against a hapless opponent, but it’s happened countless times before and no one ever scored 138 points.

“I wasn’t going to take a guy out who was in the zone,” Grinnell’s Arsenault said in defense of letting Taylor run wild. “I’ve never been in the zone like that, and if I was I certainly wouldn’t want my coach to end it for me. So we just let him go.”

Perhaps Faith Baptist could have slowed down their offense and run out the clock to minimize Grinnell’s possessions, but that was their choice to make. You can’t fault Grinnell or Taylor for making the most of their opponent’s strategy.

David Larson’s 70 points on 34 of 44 shooting was more impressive

Some critics have gone as far as to say that David Larson from Faith Baptist, who scored 70 points on 34 of 44 shooting against Grinnell on the same night, had the more impressive performance.

No it’s not.

First of all, his team got trounced. While Larson, who played all 40 minutes, scored at a much more efficient percentage (77%), the majority of his baskets came from close range after Grinnell’s high-risk full court press broke down (and broke down often). In fact, Larson’s performance was much more like an undefended layup drill than Taylor’s.

Oh, and by the way, Taylor almost doubled Larson’s point output.

So what? He wouldn’t score 10 points in the NBA!

By far the dumbest comment I’ve seen, and I’m surprised how many times I’ve come across something like it the last few days.

No one with half a brain is saying this guy is a future NBA star. No one’s even saying he’s the second coming of Jimmer Fredette. He’s going to have his 15 minutes of fame and that’ll be the end of it. But what is wrong with that?

Taylor’s 138-point game is what it is — a once-in-a-lifetime freakish occurrence where everything fell into line at the right place at the right time. It was the culmination of coach Arsenault’s system, Faith Baptist’s less-than-stellar defense and refusal to slow the game down, Taylor’s teammates and coach helping him along the way, and of course, Taylor catching fire like he has never before and probably never will again. But most record-setting performances in basketball are a combination of circumstances, luck and skill, and I don’t see why this was any less amazing just because it happened in Div III of the NCAA.

Perhaps Kobe said it best: “I don’t care what level you’re at. Scoring 138 points is pretty insane.”

LeBron said he couldn’t even do it in a video game, noting that he would have to mess with the rules and ratings and sliders to be able to accomplish it.

Accordingly to Taylor’s critics, however, it was nothing special. I’m not sure what would impress them. Perhaps it needs to be an NBA player who shoots 70% from the floor while racking up a triple-double and hits the game winner as well — in addition to the 138 points, of course. Then again, my guess is even then it will never be enough for the haters.

I’m not saying Taylor should start being compared to Wilt or Kobe or even Tyler Hansbrough, but I think it’s unfortunate so many people are so quick to shoot down what is clearly a remarkable achievement which should be appreciated and respected, in context or otherwise.


Game Review: NBA 2K12 (PS3)

February 21, 2012 in Basketball, Game Reviews, NBA, Reviews, Sport

I really need to find more time to play video games these days.  Despite purchasing the game on DAY ONE, I have only recently found time (well, at least at the time I typed this sentence a few weeks ago) to play enough of NBA 2K12 to be able to give my thoughts about it and found the time to write the darn review.

It’s easy to proclaim 2K12 as the greatest basketball simulation of all time.  After all, 2K11 was the previous GOAT and there has been nothing to challenge it since, especially considering that the NBA Live (aka Elite) team is still on hiatus after the embarrassing debacle that was NBA Elite 2011, the game that never was.

That said, I’m not going to judge 2K12 as a an independent video game.  It’s only fair that I compare the game to its predecessor, 2K11, because that’s the only yardstick people can compare to.

So does the 2K12 compare favourably to 2K11?  On the whole, yes.  The best improvements are the controls, the simplified playcalling, the widened legends roster, more legendary teams, and the presentation.  But to be perfectly honest, it’s not a revolutionary advancement in the franchise.

Let’s break it down.


The graphics are supposed to be improved, but I really could not tell.  In fact, some friends have told me that they felt the visuals actually took a step back this year.

There’s just something different about it, as though the level of detail has been pared back slightly.  The players don’t look quite as shiny during the gameplay, though the close up cut scenes are as impressive as ever.  Another improvement is the extent to which the computerised players resemble their real life counterparts (for instance, Kobe looks less like an alien).  One of the biggest problems before — the bad hairdos of white guys (including coaches) — has been fixed somewhat.  It’s not perfect but it’s a step in the right direction.

There has been an improvement, but white dudes' hairstyles still don't look quite right

This year, with the new NBA’s Greatest (discussed below), the creators of the game also ingeniously tried to emulate the TV broadcast quality of times gone by, so if you play an 80s game, the colours are less sharp, and if you play a 60s game, the game is fuzzier and in black and white.  Even though it’s kind of gimmicky, it’s a nice added touch.

Ultimately, I think it’s possible that the visuals are more realistic but less detailed.  It looks more like a live game you would see on TV rather than a video game with mind-blowing graphics.  Does that make sense?


Not a lot of improvement here.  New music, a new commentator (Steve Kerr, replacing Clark Kellogg and joining Kevin Harlan), but not a whole lot of freshness.  Not to say the commentary isn’t good, but in terms of variety and the amount of excitement it can add to the game, I think it has essentially peaked for the series.  The only real way to improve it is to make the commentary more varied, more dynamic and more excited when players make big plays.


Improved again from last year.  Not dramatic changes in terms of the menus (just more streamlined) but I quite like the changes they made in stuff like player intros, the half time reports and the post game features like Player of the Game, etc.  You can tell they put a lot of effort into making the game seem like a real TV broadcast.


Last year I thought the gameplay was already pretty awesome, and this year they upped it another notch.

It might take a little while to get used to the changes, but it’s worth trying the various tutorials and drills to get the hang of them before playing proper games.  It makes a HUGE difference when you feel more in control of the players you are controlling.  It not only makes you a better player, it makes the games far more exciting.

The best improvements are in the areas of post play (offense and defense) and off the ball movement.  There is an entire tutorial teaching you how to fake out your opponent when playing without the ball.  You can learn how to pound the ball inside and wreak havoc down low like Kevin McHale or Hakeem Olajuwon by using an encyclopaedia of post moves.  It’s awesome.  Your ability to call for screens, utilise the give-and-go, perform up-and-unders, hop steps, spin moves, in-and-outs, behind the back dribbles, crossovers, Euro steps, face-up moves — the whole shebang — makes the game super real and will keep players coming back as they improve their techniques with the control pad.

That’s the best thing — you can play on the lower levels with just the basics and it’ll be fine, but as you get to the more difficult settings, you really need to learn the entire repertoire of moves to have a chance against your opponents.

The computer AI is also improved, though it might be hard to tell for casual gamers unless you line the two up side by side.  But it’s there.  Fast breaks are better on both sides of the ball.  Crazy passes are less likely to thread through untouched.  If you run into teammates you’ll lose the ball.  Playcalling has been simplified and you can simply call plays for particular players or just call the best play available.  It’s the little things that have made the biggest differences in the game.

Game Modes

You still have the same stuff from last year, so I won’t go through them all.  The new headline mode is the aforementioned NBA’s Greatest.  Last year it was reliving Michael Jordan’s greatest moments — a good idea that got old real quick.  This year, there are a lot more legends and you only need to complete one challenge game to unlock more stuff, and all you have to do is win the freaking game.  You got guys like Magic Johnson, Larry Bird, Scottie Pippen, Isiah Thomas, Bill Russell, Kareem Abdul Jabbar, Karl Malone, John Stockton, and so on.  It’s fine, but it’s still a single playthrough kind of mode.

The modes you’ll spend most of your time on are still the Association Mode and My Player Mode.

Association Mode is largely unchanged, but it’s still the most packed mode in the game that will allow you to play for hours and hours through years of NBA seasons, playing games, organising rosters, scouting new rookies, making trades, signing players, scheduling practices, developing young players and so forth.

A little overboard for the 14th pick of a weak draft, but these little touches make 2K12 fun

My Player Mode is slightly improved.  The biggest change is that instead of going in the D-League to start off, you get to play in a showcase game which will determine where you go in the NBA Draft.  If you play well enough you get drafted, which is pretty cool (they show the whole process, including handshakes with Commissioner David Stern), and you’ll get a chance to fight for a starting position straight away.  Jeremy Lin, anyone?

There are also add on downloadable features, such as the Legends Showcase.  I’m too cheap to get it, but here’s a review and it seems decent if you are into living in the past and playing with legends all day long.


Not for me, but I hear that the online mode is not very stable, at least not on the PS3.  Apparently, a lot of people have flooded back to 2K11’s online mode, which is a huge indictment of this year’s game.

The good thing about having the Internets is that you can update your roster to keep them up-to-date with what’s been happening in real NBA (eg, I hear Jeremy Lin recently got a stats upgrade). You can also download fan-made rosters and players, so you can get your hands on players who aren’t licensed for the game — the main ones being Reggie Miller, Charles Barkley and Allen Iverson.  If you have a lot of time on your hands you can also create your own players and teams and share them with others.

Reckon there's going to be a lot of Linsanities online?

Playstation Move

This was one of the things 2K played up in the lead up to the release — you can play 2K12 with the Playstation Move!  Wow!  And it’s so easy and intuitive anyone can do it on their first try!

Err…no, that idea just stinks.  If you want to play real basketball, pick up a ball and go outside.   I haven’t even bothered trying the Move mode of the game.  It’s a waste of time.

Check this out and tell me it’s not lame.


So is 2K12 worth getting if you already have 2K11?  Now?  Yes.  Originally, when the game was first released, the NBA was still in lockout mode, meaning you had only a couple of the pre-signed rookies in this year’s class.  With the NBA now in full swing, you can download the official updated rosters or the fan-made ones.

For me, the greatest improvement was the controls and gameplay.  If you have the patience to lean the moves, 2K12 becomes much more enjoyable than 2K11.  All the other improvements, such as the presentation and the graphics (if you call it an improvement) were nice, but they’re not game changers.  If you can’t let go of the past and feel the urge to keep using Larry Bird to shoot over Chuck Person while saying, “Merry F&*%ing Christmas”, then the NBA’s Greatest Mode would also be a great reason to buy the game.

At the end of the day, 2K12 is of course a better game than 2K11, but it didn’t blow me away like I thought it would.  Nonetheless, credit must go to 2K for making the effort to improve last year’s game when they had zero competition.  It will still be the most played game in my collection until 2K13.

8.5 out of 10