Checking in on the NBA playoffs
Personally, I enjoy the NBA playoffs more than any other postseason event in American sports. The regular season is emphasized by the supremacy of home-court advantage within the sport while the 16 team format ensures that everyone has to work to earn a championship. The best of 7 format weeds out weaker teams, challenges the strong teams, and provides a tactical back-and-forth that is pretty compelling for those of us interested in the strategic elements of sport.
Additionally, I love how basketball emphasizes both the individual AND the team. A dominant athlete can dominate a basketball game in ways that are not possible in soccer, football, or baseball. At the same time, better team play will always trump individual athleticism and skill. I have no idea why the sport is so divisive amongst some sports fans, I'm sure the haters will appear in the comments section with their reasoning.
I'd prefer to discuss the remaining playoff teams and possibly draw Tjarks here to provide some matchup analysis. This is an exciting post season in the NBA in which rooting for whoever is playing the Lakers is likely to yield satisfying results. As it stands, I have favorable feelings towards the three teams most likely to bring home the trophy.
Let's start in the East:
A few parameters for how I typically evaluate teams: Over in the Wins Produced realm of statistical analysis (a school of thought I adhere to), they project winners based on the wins produced totals of the top 6 players on a team. As a general rule in playoff basketball, everyone on the bench after the 6th best have almost zero statistical impact in the playoffs. You can see a chart illustrating this point while also projecting the 2nd round here.
Wins produced numbers are calculated by adding up all of a player's statistical numbers and weighing them based on what numbers are expected to produce x number of wins. For instance, if you've seen "Moneyball" there is a part where Jonah Hill explains to Brad Pitt that they want to score x number of runs in order to expect to win x number of games that they anticipate will be necessary to reach the playoffs.
Wins produced stats are tested through regression analysis so that the calculations can accurately predict teams' records within 95%. In my opinion, it's the best tool we have for measuring who on the court is producing results that result in winning basketball games. Now the Eastern Conference:
Philadelphia 76ers vs. the Boston Celtics:
While Chicago was certainly one of the best teams in the NBA, I think the injuries to Rose and Noah overshadowed the fact that this is a good Philly team. Andre Iquodala has been playing great basketball all year and the return of healthy Spencer Hawes could make a huge impact on these playoffs beyond their first round upset.
Additionally, everything about Rip Hamilton's addition on the Bulls was disastrous. He played heavy minutes that should have gone to the far superior Kyle Korver, failed to address any team needs, and of course is wasting cap space. Boozer has also been a huge disappointment, especially for the money they're paying him.
The Celtics are still chugging along mostly due to "the big 3" 's persistent quality and Rondo's star levels of play. In Wins Produced terms: .100 is an average player (1/5 win produced per 48 minutes) .200 is a star .300 is a superstar. Typically, championship teams have a .300 or 2 or more .200-level players. Of late, Garnett has shown flashes of the .300+ level production he used to generate in his prime. When he and Pierce play at this level with Rondo the Celtics become very good.
Most likely, they won't be able to sustain that level of play and they'll return to their .150 levels of play that were on display over the course of the entire season. Surrounding the big 4 is a pretty weak supporting cast and the under-utilized Stiemsa. Bradley may be a fierce defender but his production has been below-average so far and Brandon Bass's performances are decidedly uneven.
Philadelphia is a marginally better team that could emerge victorious if they weather this surge of Gatorade-era Garnett and get Hawes going. Pierce is somewhat hobbled by injury and the miles on this team are certain to break them before they reach the end.
Miami Heat vs. Indiana Pacers:
Chris Bosh was the worst possible complement to the Wade-James power trio in Miami of the prominent Power Forwards in the game. Because they are so perimeter oriented, all they really need is a defender who can contest shots at the rim, attack the basket on pick'n'rolls, and crash the boards on both ends. Okay, maybe those guys aren't terribly common, but Bosh's lack of shotblocking or defensive rebounding presence makes his price tag pretty counterproductive for them. If they had Serge Ibaka or Tyson Chandler it would all be over.
Bosh's ability to space the floor on offense is very valuable and might be missed in the finals, but Anthony and Haslem can hold down the fort against overmatched Indiana.
Wins produced reveals the Pacers to be a collection of "not quite stars" that thrive mostly by virtue of having nobody terrible on the court. The Heat are a terrible matchup for them, as they are for most teams, because Miami has 3 of the better perimeter defenders in the league in Battier, Wade, and James. They suffocated Granger and George in game 1 and Indiana has little in the way of low-post scoring to punish the Heat's one glaring Bulls-esque weakness.
In the Eastern Conference Finals, Bosh's likely absence could come into play in trying to deal with Hawes in the low post or if Garnett hasn't pooped out from overcoming the 76er's. In addition to the fact that the Heat lack a scoring threat in the low post, they tend to be vulnerable to teams that have athletic bigs who can protect the rim.
Wade, and Lebron moreso, thrive on attacking the rim and out-athleting people once they get there. James has been brought down in the past by teams with athletic bigs like Tyson Chandler, Dwight Howard, Tim Duncan, or Kevin Garnett. When James is met at the rim by the likes of Chandler it takes away a healthy chunk of what makes him so dominant.
Now obviously most teams struggle against athletic big men who can defend the rim, but with the Heat that's virtually their only weakness. Teams keyed by penetration and guard-play will have to account for the possibility of LeBron James on their no. 1 playmaker with Battier or Wade on option no. 2. Even for a team loaded on the perimeter like the Thunder that's a pretty rough situation to create offense in.
Given Boston's age and and mounting injuries, I foresee them gritting out a victory over the 76er's and forcing Miami into an uncomfortable 6-7 game series sans Bosh. However, ultimately no one here is going to overcome James and Wade playing with home court advantage.
Western Conference:
Oklahoma City Thunder vs. Los Angeles Lakers:
All the difficulties that Denver gave LA with pace and penetration are going to be maintained by the Thunder backcourt. Harden in particular is a player the Lakers have no answer for and the Ibaka-led frontcourt should be able to stave off the under-utilized LA bigs.
When Kobe defers more to Pau and Bynum the Lakers are a really difficult matchup for everyone. Most teams can't handle one 7-foot scorer, defending 2 of them when 1 can play the high post is nightmarish for most defenses. Fortunately for us Laker-haters, Kobe Bryant often takes 25 shots per game while shooting 43% and lets defenses off the hook.
The Thunder can throw Sefolosha on Bryant at times to bother him, survive the beating down low with Perkins/Collison's bodies and Ibaka's improving D, and then run through the Lakers with whomever of Durant, Westbrook, or Harden is most hot on a given night. The addition of Sessions did improve the Lakers drastically over Fisher, but it hasn't solved their difficulties in defending quick point guards. From here on out, that's all they are likely to see.
San Antonio Spurs vs. Los Angeles Clippers:
Reggie Evans elevates this Clippers team a notch with his methodical rebounding and solid interior defense and enabled them to survive their battle with the physical Grizzlies. Gay helped a lot as well.
Chris Paul is the best player in the Western Conference, but with Griffin injured or healthy they don't have many offensive options other than Paul's brilliance and this Spurs team can and will absolutely make life difficult for CP3 and force other players to make plays. It's not your 00's Spurs defense since Timmy has lost a few steps, Robinson is a spectator, and Leonard/Jackson are not Bowen. But their pick'n'roll offense is dazzling and they have 2 guys in Ginobili and Parker who operate it at a very high level.
Duncan is mostly around for defense and rebounding but he is still capable of a classic 20-10 now and then, particularly against a poor defender.
One particularly fascinating element to the Spurs is their bench, which defies the above playoff wisdom. They legimately go about 9 deep, and they can allocate minutes to whichever of those players their strategy and matchups dictate as necessary. Another trait of this team is their abundance of 3 pt. shooters. Green, Manu, Bonner and Neal all shot 40% or better from 3 this season and Jackson's percentage has increased since he is getting much better shots in San Antonio. The highly underrated Kawhi Leonard is shooting 37% as well.
That makes their floor spacing in the pick'n'roll exceptional and their ball movement echoes back to what we saw carry the Mavs to the title last year. The Clippers are totally outclassed here, even if Paul manages to maintain his status as the best player in this series. The Spurs have too many answers, too much leadership, and too many scoring threats.
I expect a Thunder vs. Spurs WCF with the Spurs getting a slight edge from their experience and the Popovich vs. Brooks matchup. Talent wise they are a wash with the Thunder's big 4 somewhat negated by Perkins' mediocrity and Westbrook's penchant for taking over games with turnovers and poor shooting.
The series will probably be determined by Westbrook's ability to make good decisions in the face of classic Spurs defensive gameplanning...advantage San Antonio.
As for the Finals, I would have granted the Heat the championship this year but the loss of Bosh and the potential of Duncan, Splitter, Bonner, and Blair going against Anthony, Haslem, Turiaf, and Sexy Dexy doesn't speak well for the Heat's chances. If the Heat have to draw in too many resources to protect the rim the Spurs will rain open 3's on them until they capitulate.
Ultimately James' quest for that rep-freeing ring will depend on the conditioning and remaining fire in Kevin Garnett and Tim Duncan. Should be fascinating.
28 comments
|
Add comment
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Hate to do it
But I still go Miami, although if Bosh cannot return that is huge.
I just nodded at this:
When Kobe defers more to Pau and Bynum the Lakers are a really difficult matchup for everyone. Most teams can’t handle one 7-foot scorer, defending 2 of them when 1 can play the high post is nightmarish for most defenses. Fortunately for us Laker-haters, Kobe Bryant often takes 25 shots per game while shooting 43% and lets defenses off the hook.
Kobe can still ball and he predictably had a pretty good series against Denver. Against OKC and possibly San Antonio, he has to ride Bynum and Gasol if he wants that sixth ring. It made me shake my head when Kobe claimed that he could have “easily” scored 38 points in the season finale to win the scoring title but simply chose not to. He was right that he could have against the Kings… and it’s also true that if KD was as trigger-happy as Kobe, he would have scored over thirty a game and won the scoring title in a landslide. Kobe is one of the greatest players ever but that hard-headedness still gets frustrating.
by TheElusiveShadow on May 14, 2025 1:16 PM CDT reply actions
One of my friends
who’s getting married soon (congrats to him!) pointed out that Durant has scored hundred more points this year than Kobe by virtue of staying healthy.
Seems like an argument could be made that the scoring title should go to the player with the most points.
Personally, I would give a shooting title that would be based on EFG% or TS%. Neither Kobe nor Durant would get that one, I think. Certainly not Kobe.
by Nickel Rover on May 14, 2025 1:28 PM CDT up reply actions
Your shooting title goes to Tyson Chandler
With Dwight Howard and Gortat in hot pursuit.
Volume is the enemy of efficiency. And your best scorers have a lot of volume. Your best role players tend to be very efficient. And shooting all of your attempts on put backs and dunks is a good way to spice up your efficiency.
As for Kobe, the biggest problem the Lakers have is that even though he does take too many shots and he has a lot of tread on those tires, some of it is dictated by the fact that Gasol can become very passive and Bynum can go into extended sulks when they’re doubled. The last game showed what they’re capable of when they decide to assert themselves. Kobe was more than willing to feed them and he played great D.
by Scipio Tex on May 14, 2025 3:16 PM CDT up reply actions
He fed them last night, that's hardly a constant for him
How sulky or passive would Gasol or Bynum be if they actually got to shoot as often as their talent deserves and thereby earn bigger salaries, adulation, and credit. Typically Kobe feeds them when it becomes glaringly obvious that he has to in order to win, and even then it’s not a given.
My shooting title could have limitations if we didn’t want highly efficient centers to win it every year for some reason. It could be EFG or TS, the former of which would tilt the scales back towards guards who can shoot 3’s. There could also be a shot floor, to guarantee that centers who go 3-5 every night don’t qualify.
Of course, not everyone can do that like Howard, Gortat, and Chandler can or else they would. I’ve never understood the belittling of players who are able to take, and make, easy shots on a routine basis. That’s far more beneficial to a team than someone who can shoot 40% on Iso plays all game.
Also, this would be in addition to a “scoring title” which would be based on total points scored.
by Nickel Rover on May 14, 2025 3:31 PM CDT up reply actions
One possible solution...
Is to take the number of points a player scored, and subtract out some sort of baseline amount, given the number of shots. Keep in mind that the goal is to raise your team’s true shooting percentage as much as possible, rather than earning the highest one you can get for yourself. Higher volume at a somewhat lower TS% can be better than lower volume at a higher TS%. It all depends on what the numbers are.
Some sort of points over an expected baseline value starts to get at this, even if it is imperfect. It also results in a number that is sensible, written in terms of points. I have been messing around with this sort of approach for the last year, although I am not entirely sure how I feel about how I came up with the baseline value. My approach was arbitrary, if sensible, and I would like to have it on more solid footing.
I am on Twitter @jeffchaley
Burnt Orange Nation
Hoop-Math
by Reggieball on May 14, 2025 6:03 PM CDT up reply actions
arbitrary
If you can’t avoid it becoming arbitrary it seems like you are at risk of using stats to get the results you want or expect. Like Hollinger’s PER.
Additionally, I’m highly skeptical of the idea that shooting a low-percentage shot is ever good for your team unless it’s to get any kind of shot off within a time constraint.
by Nickel Rover on May 14, 2025 6:38 PM CDT up reply actions
It isn’t completely arbitrary. It is just one number that you have to assume a reasonable value for. You have to assume some sort of baseline ehooting efficiency to compare with. This is how all of the baseball guys do it; you need to assume a “replacement” level to get runs over replacement. So there is some error in what you end up estimating. This is just life. I try to be reasonably transparent, and not over interpret things. Small differences between two players should be treated as being within some uncertainty limit.
It isn’t that I think taking low percentage shots is good, it is just that in most contexts a guy who takes 30% of his team’s shots and makes 55% of them adds more value then a guy who takes 10% of his team’s shots and makes 60% of them.
I am on Twitter @jeffchaley
Burnt Orange Nation
Hoop-Math
by Reggieball on May 14, 2025 8:43 PM CDT up reply actions
wins produced
accounts for that though, it doesn’t just assign points to whoever is most efficient. If you score lots of points fairly efficiently you will produce more wins than someone who scores very infrequently but very efficiently.
by Nickel Rover on May 14, 2025 10:54 PM CDT up reply actions
The problem is that you really have to buy all of Berri's regressions
I am sure he has done the analysis right (well, I am assuming that). My basic problem is that his regressions impose a linear world in an area where the relationships are pretty clearly non-linear. This isn’t a problem for most players and teams, but it likely under/over values certain players and teams where there are outliers. This would be less of a problem in the NBA, where there aren’t many outlier teams, but in college it has me concerned; most of the interesting teams in college are outliers, and play a game that is substantially different from the NCAA average.
In Oliver’s four factors analysis, he also used regression analysis to come up with the weights for each factor. But if you study individual teams, you will find that depending on the team, the weights have to be different. In other words, linear regression misses a lot of interesting stuff.
There is no grounding theoretical basis for any of this. You put a bunch of stuff in a stats package and then cross your fingers. You basically have to assume you are right, and rely on out of sample testing, etc, to be sure. And then when it is all done, what have you learned? I guess you have a formula that tells you who the MVP should be, but I am not sure that you understand any more about basketball; certainly not as much as if you had sat down to think things through.
I am on Twitter @jeffchaley
Burnt Orange Nation
Hoop-Math
by Reggieball on May 15, 2025 5:54 AM CDT up reply actions
That came out sounding more harsh then intended. I shouldn’t post before coffee. Berri’s work is useful. It is just directed towards a set of questions that I am not as interested in.
I am on Twitter @jeffchaley
Burnt Orange Nation
Hoop-Math
by Reggieball on May 15, 2025 6:50 AM CDT up reply actions
I think it's really good
at identifying what generates basketball victories and then determining which players are producing the results that result in victories.
Now, here’s an example that might give you pause: The mid 00’s Shawn Marion.
He put up Top 5 numbers in wins produced in those years catching alley-oops from Steve Nash and accumulating rebounds and putbacks in their run’n’gun offense.
So, is it just the system and playing with Nash? Would he have been so good on another team with another point guard? Probably not.
Would Nash have been so good without Marion? Probably not.
But both players have put up similar numbers in other settings. It seems that players who are really good at things like rebounding, tend to be good at that skill regardless of their environment. It’s not often that you see players become wildly more or less efficient in new environments. At least not as often as you think.
Is that the kind of problem you were considering?
Anyways, in regards to college ball, it is fairly different and I’m not sure how well everything translates.
by Nickel Rover on May 15, 2025 1:56 PM CDT up reply actions
This is off topic, but I’m pretty sure that Greg Popovich is actually The Dark Wizard of Manhattan, grown bored in the CFB offseason.
by Yossarian Rising on May 14, 2025 1:50 PM CDT reply actions
A terrifying possibility
I hadn’t considered before. Perhaps they are both apprentices of the same dark lord.
by Nickel Rover on May 14, 2025 1:55 PM CDT up reply actions
Except that instead of being a dark wizard
he’s a righteous, upstanding Jedi Master. But yeah, other than being good rather than evil, I see a lot of similarities.
by HawkHorn on May 14, 2025 2:48 PM CDT up reply actions
You have to at least admit
that he looks evil and sinister. Shades of Kurtwood Smith in Robocop.
by Nickel Rover on May 14, 2025 2:55 PM CDT up reply actions
For sure
The overabundance of pockmarks and permanent scowl don’t exactly help his public image. Manny Diaz he is not.
by HawkHorn on May 14, 2025 3:17 PM CDT up reply actions
I don’t buy the upstanding BS. He’s a shape-shifting, 147yr old man with a master’s degree in the dark arts. He wins basketball games to make Houston covet their neighbors, then recruits junior college kids to make Mack Brown eat shit. He does these things for fun and because he’s pure evil.
by Yossarian Rising on May 14, 2025 3:38 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
And forgive the reply to my own thread...
…but Manu Ginobili thinks he’s playing soccer and scores 20pts a game.
Pop got AT&T to build him a stadium for basketball in San Antonio, and I can’t get AT&T to build a phone network in Houston that works in Greenway Plaza.
I’d also like to point out that Tony Parker is FRENCH. How can that guy be that good if not for sorcery?
by Yossarian Rising on May 14, 2025 3:48 PM CDT up reply actions
I gotta figure that if he was capable of shape-shifting
there are a helluva lot nicer shapes to shift into than Grep Popovich and Bill Snyder. Those two men are a lot of things, but ‘aesthetically pleasing’ ain’t on the list.
Also, you can’t possibly blame Popovich for making “Houston covet their neighbors” - Houston wouldn’t know what to do with a decent major sports franchise if they had one. Any time a Houston team starts to get close to being good, management/ownership promptly shit themselves and does everything they can to immediately bring themselves back to mediocrity.
by HawkHorn on May 14, 2025 4:02 PM CDT up reply actions
Look, you clearly don’t know that rules when it comes to shape-shifters, what they are capable of and what they aren’t.
by Yossarian Rising on May 14, 2025 4:07 PM CDT up reply actions
You may be right about that
but in my defense, most of my shape shifting impressions were formed by watching X-men and thinking about Rebecca Romijn wearing nothing but body paint. Now if you’ll excuse me, I have to go look up pictures of Rebecca Romijn wearing nothing but body paint.
by HawkHorn on May 14, 2025 4:13 PM CDT up reply actions
Post-Season, emphasis on Season
1st round takes what, 3 weeks?
Of all the sports, basketball seems the most damaged by the size and speed of modern players. WTF?! Stay with me. The court was laid out decades ago. It’s stunning to me to see 10 bodies that large and fast moving in such a constricted space. The standard end-game play these days seems to be the long 3 - even when you’re down 1. I know that gets into officiating, but part of that is trying to keep an entertaining flow to a game with 10 massive bodies jammed into such a tight space.
We heard for awhile about raising the rim, which makes little sense to me. I would be interested to see what the game would look like with a court two feet wider and two feet longer, as well as an international lane. Olympic hockey plays on a larger rink than NHL games, and the games seem more entertaining to me - more open.
I haven’t watched an NBA series in two decades. Just too much investment for too little variation. Same basic problem I have with pro sports in general these days.
by G.O.F on May 14, 2025 7:18 PM CDT reply actions
This must be posted here: thanks to Pounding The Rock

"Casa de mi Padre" which is Spanish for the vagina of the sun
by Ese-De-SA on May 14, 2025 7:49 PM CDT reply actions
All the good things offered by the internet
are dwarfed by the utter joy of GIF’s like this.
by Nickel Rover on May 14, 2025 10:56 PM CDT up reply actions
NBA Playoffs
I would say are the best professional playoffs. I like the NFL season more. I am more interested in college championships due to my Texas fanatiscism. But the NBA playoffs have the best basketball players caring about the outcome, playing defense, and giving maximum effort. And if they don’t they won’t last long. That makes me watch.
I think this is the Heat’s year but I expect either the Spurs or Thunder to challenge them. Then I predict the Thunder winning it next year.
by Monahorns on May 14, 2025 9:28 PM CDT reply actions
Something to say? Choose one of these options to log in.

- » Create a new SB Nation account
- » Already registered with SB Nation? Log in!

by Nickel Rover on 






















