PDA

View Full Version : You Pretty Much Need To Have A Top 10 Offense AND Defense To Win Title



Clippersfan86
04-07-2014, 03:30 AM
At a first glance, this may sound stupidly obvious. Yet each and every year only a handful of teams meet this criteria. I looked over all of the NBA champions and noticed just how true it was. I thought of this with the Pacers in mind. All time great D, but absolutely atrocious offense. If you look at history, their odds are almost nonexistent purely because of this. Historically it also doesn't seem defense is more important, but rather equally important.

Do you agree that you need a top 10 D and O to win it all? Currently only the Spurs, Thunder and Clippers meet that criteria. With the Heat and Rockets D on the cusp. Which when you think of it, those are the top recognized contenders anyway. The Pacers seem to be regressing to pretender status lately.

tredigs
04-07-2014, 03:35 AM
What are you basing their defensive/offensive rankings on?

tredigs
04-07-2014, 03:38 AM
As far as the Pacers go, I'd say they're an easy choice for a 1st round knockout. But, East... so, anything is possible.

Clippersfan86
04-07-2014, 03:43 AM
I apologize for not being more clear. Offensive and defensive efficiency rating. I personally got my figures from Basketball Reference .

http://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/

Clippersfan86
04-07-2014, 03:45 AM
BTW Warriors are a cusp team like Miami and Houston. 13th ranked offense.

tredigs
04-07-2014, 03:52 AM
I apologize for not being more clear. Offensive and defensive efficiency rating. I personally got my figures from Basketball Reference .

http://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/
Gotchya. Just clicking through real quick I saw a handful of Champs/Runner-ups who had either a defense or offense a bit outside the top 10 via bbref's efficiency, but only one had an SRS outside the top 10 (clicked back 15 years or so), and that was the 99 Knicks. They were actually ranked 26th of 29th in O rating but 13th in SRS.

95% had an SRS of 7th or higher. On quick glance that seemed to be the closer corollary on the BBREF page.

2010 Boston actually was 10th exactly on SRS, but 15th in Offensive efficiency.

Worth noting that different sites rate offensive/defensive efficiency a little differently and have some teams ranked above others.

tredigs
04-07-2014, 03:55 AM
As far as GS goes, I'll believe it when I see it from them. They're very unpredictable and that's not a healthy trait going into the post season. Fun, though...

Clippersfan86
04-07-2014, 04:19 AM
No doubt SRS is more empirical. Just saying balanced teams win it all. Not teams great on only one end typically

Hawkeye15
04-07-2014, 07:10 AM
Hca

torocan
04-07-2014, 09:26 AM
Historically it's very hard to win as a one dimensional team simply because it's hard to be equally effective in every facet of the game against every type of team you meet in a play off run.

The Pistons were an exception.

For the most part, you need offense when you run into an offensive powerhouse that you can't shut down. And you need defense when you can't hit a bucket.

Strong balanced teams > 1 way 1 dimensional teams

Jamiecballer
04-07-2014, 11:55 AM
i'm confused. i thought the Raptors were pretty much there then as well. 10th in offense, 9th in defense, and considering they played almost a quarter of their schedule before shipping out Rudy that's god damn amazing.

Clippersfan86
04-07-2014, 12:42 PM
Raptors are very balanced. They lack the star power though to be a true title contender. No doubt underrated. I was listing only contenders that most give a shot. Hell I think the T'Wolves are in this criteria too? At least they were a month ago.

Chronz
04-07-2014, 01:09 PM
Lots of factors at play but the Pacers are most often compared to the Pistons who won with a shoddy offense.

IndyRealist
04-07-2014, 02:26 PM
I think it's not so much having a top 10 in both, but having an extremely high differential that's important.

For the Pacers specifically, at one point their offense was like 14th. Combine that with the #1 defense and I like those odds. Now their offense and defense are both shoddy, so I don't like their odds at all.

arlubas
04-07-2014, 04:04 PM
Haven't looked up any numbers but you could make a case that this current Pacers team is similar to the '04 team that got knocked out by the Pistons in the ECFs. They also had great defense but their offensive game was pretty terrible at times, looking like they couldn't create anything going for themselves. I'll never forget G6 of that series when in the 3rd Q I think both teams were left scoreless for a good 8-10 minutes of pure playing time. Painful to the eyes.