PDA

View Full Version : "Unpopular" thought on the Lakers/ Sonics game



ChicagoJ
03-12-2006, 08:50 PM
That was somewhat fun to watch, even if I don't care about either team.

Good to see Bo Hill back on the sideline. He coaches a fun style of game to watch, and when he's got the players it can be successful.

Its too bad we've got a league full of unoriginal thinkers at the head coaching position, save for Bo Hill and D'Antoni.

Also glad to see Dwayne Wade not call a timeout on his rebound late in that game. The right play was to get the ball out of traffic and score, not call a damn timeout in that situation. Kudo's to Riley for trusting his players and not being a control freak that time. LET 'EM PLAY.

I really dislike most coaching in today's NBA. I can't wait for a running team to win a championship again so that this silly notion of "defense wins championships" can finish its course.

Outscoring your opponent 16 times during the playoffs is what wins championships. It doesn't matter whether its offense or defense, but its obviously easiest to do if you're good at both ends of the court.

SoupIsGood
03-12-2006, 09:30 PM
I agree. I bought into the defense-only stuff at first, but you just have to be a balanced team. You don't have to be an awesome defensive or offensive team, just good and both, and, most importantly, the team has to be tough.

Chauncey
03-13-2006, 02:51 PM
A team with a great offense and average defense will beat a team with an average offense and great defense every day of the week and twice on Sundays.

Kstat
03-13-2006, 02:52 PM
A team with a great offense and average defense will beat a team with an average offense and great defense every day of the week and twice on Sundays.

.....says the guy who was asleep during the 2004 finals.....

Anthem
03-13-2006, 02:53 PM
.....says the guy who was asleep during the 2004 finals.....
I must have missed it... who in the 2004 finals had a great offense?

Kstat
03-13-2006, 02:56 PM
I must have missed it... who in the 2004 finals had a great offense?

Obviously, nobody. That's what great defense does for you.

Fool
03-13-2006, 03:03 PM
2004
Lakers were 6th in offense and 8th in defense.
Pistons were 18th in offense and 2nd in defense.

ChicagoJ
03-13-2006, 03:38 PM
Its hard to argue that 2004 Pistons didn't have a great offense.

Wasn't high scoring, but it was very efficient and impactive ( :D ). Maybe not as effecient as the current Pistons' offense.

Peck
03-13-2006, 03:51 PM
I know the Pistons pride themselves on being defensive dynamo's but I have to add that they are a good offensive team as well.

They are not showtime or anything like that but they have a machine like effeciancy that is hard to stop.

Ben Wallace is the only starter who is not above average on the offensive end. Hamilton is superb, Billips is a deep threat, Prince has his moments & R. Wallace can be as big of an offensive player at the four as anybody in the NBA not named Duncan or Garnett & yes he can be every bit as deadly as J.O. can from the floor.

So while I would consider them to be supreme defenders I would also put them above average on the offensive end.

Since86
03-13-2006, 03:52 PM
2004
Lakers were 6th in offense and 8th in defense.
Pistons were 18th in offense and 2nd in defense.

Is that PPG, FG%, combination of the two, or those and others?

Kstat
03-13-2006, 03:53 PM
LA was 4th in %FG in the season and 1st in the playoffs.

ChicagoJ
03-13-2006, 03:57 PM
2004
Lakers were 6th in offense and 8th in defense.
Pistons were 18th in offense and 2nd in defense.

Is that points per game? That speaks more to the pace of the game than either good (or bad) offense/ defense.

That Pistons team had a variety of offensive weapons but were willing to play a slower, grinding pace. Still, they created numerous mis-matches and scoring opportunities every time down the court, and the one guy who wasn't a threat in the context of the offense was a beast on the offensive glass.

If Billups is handling the ball and Rip is coming off a screen set by Rasheed, with Prince spotted up on the weakside and Ben in rebounding position, who are you going to double team? A. None of them.

FrenchConnection
03-13-2006, 04:08 PM
.....says the guy who was asleep during the 2004 finals.....

The Pistons won, and in convincing fashion, but that was like watching pain dry. After all, this is above all else entertainment, and that finals was anything but entertaining. But then again, except for a few game a couple of weeks ago, I would say the same thing about the watching the Pacers this year. I hope that the Suns or Mavs win this year so that other teams will model themselves after them instead of focusing on defense.

Since86
03-13-2006, 04:09 PM
I still don't see where you guys are getting these stats from.....

A little evidence would go a long way here.

LA could of been #1 in the playoffs, but if Det. was #2 the argument still stands.

Kstat
03-13-2006, 04:15 PM
I hope that the Suns or Mavs win this year so that other teams will model themselves after them instead of focusing on defense.

Pistons are going to model themselves on defense regardless.

2ndly, If you think the Mavs model themselves around OFFENSE, you haven't seen them play this year.

Dallas and Sacramento have both gone to iso-oriented perimiter and post up offenses and physical man-to-man defense. They both slow down the tempo more and run halfcourt sets.

FrenchConnection
03-13-2006, 04:40 PM
Pistons are going to model themselves on defense regardless.

2ndly, If you think the Mavs model themselves around OFFENSE, you haven't seen them play this year.

Dallas and Sacramento have both gone to iso-oriented perimiter and post up offenses and physical man-to-man defense. They both slow down the tempo more and run halfcourt sets.

I was not really worried about the Pistons (or the Spurs for that matter) per se, but I am worried about them having the effect on the NBA that the NJ Devils had on the NHL after they won the Cup in 1995. For those of you who don't watch hockey, they beat a much more talented Detroit Red Wings team with the dreaded "trap," a defensive system that was successful but almost killed the game. I do think that the Pistons' success has been good because teams are building as teams instead of thinking about stars and supporting casts. The NBA has a larger fan base to start with, but rating are dropping because the product is not as fun to watch, especially if you don't care which team wins.

Kstat
03-13-2006, 04:46 PM
The difference in the NHL is the fact that anybody could win a lot of games and beat anybody in the playoffs with a tough defensive scheme, regardless of personnel.

In the NBA, you still need great defensive PLAYERS to pull it off. Not just anybody can be successful in a defensive system.

Since86
03-13-2006, 04:47 PM
I guess no stats are going to back up the offensive numbers that LA and Det. supposedly put up.....

Fool
03-13-2006, 05:30 PM
I guess no stats are going to back up the offensive numbers that LA and Det. supposedly put up.....

Sorry, I hadn't been back to the site (or at least the thread) since I posted those numbers.

They are points / 100 possessions so its efficiency and not pace skewed.

I got them from basketball-reference.com

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/DET/2004.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/LAL/2004.html

SoupIsGood
03-13-2006, 05:32 PM
God, I hope no one models themselves around Dallas' offense. It's like puke this year.

Since86
03-13-2006, 05:51 PM
Sorry, I hadn't been back to the site (or at least the thread) since I posted those numbers.

They are points / 100 possessions so its efficiency and not pace skewed.

I got them from basketball-reference.com

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/DET/2004.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/LAL/2004.html

Your numbers are right, but the actual points/100 possessions tell the whole story.

DET averaged 102.1 on offense
LAL averaged 105.2 on offense

A difference of 3.1 points, and 12 places between the two.

DET averaged 95.3 on defense
LAL averaged 101.5 on defense

A difference of 6.2 points, and 6 spots between them.


The marginal gap between teams offensively is relatively small compared to that defensively.

ChicagoJ
03-13-2006, 06:04 PM
So let's go back to Chauncey's statement:


A team with a great offense and average defense will beat a team with an average offense and great defense every day of the week and twice on Sundays.

and apply it (if possible) to the 2004 NBA Finals.

A team with great offense and average defense (LA) lost to a team (Detroit) with great offense and a great defense.

Okay, that makes sense and it certainly doesn't discredit Chauncey's comment.

Throw out the pace and look at effeciency; further, look at the fact Detroit had five threats to score on the court at all times.

The Pacers, IIRC, scored more points per game than Detroit but had to make a lineup change against Detroit because one guy (Foster) was so inept at the offensive end that Detroit was able to smother the rest of our offense.

Bottom-line,


A team with a great offense and average defense will beat a team with an average offense and great defense every day of the week and twice on Sundays.

has not been refuted, at least not in this thread. And I would be surprised if somebody really can refute it, because it seems to be true.

Kstat
03-13-2006, 06:08 PM
That can be skewed any way you wanted then, if you don't want to have a set standard of statistics, depending on your opinion of what constitutes "great" offense and "great" defense.

ChicagoJ
03-13-2006, 06:11 PM
As always, I know it when I see it, and there's nothing that stats can do to prove or disprove it.

I've always been impressed with the offensive effeciency of Detroit's current lineup, regardless of the points per game. There's a synergy there and the players compliment each other quite well.

Lithfan
03-13-2006, 06:42 PM
I can tell you that the transition from D to O has worked immediately in Europe.

7 years ago it was only D. Then some teams - Zalgiris first and others followed stressed team O. Since then best offensive team wins Euroleague.

I thought it would happen in NBA too (Suns) but for some reason it didn't. yet.

In NBA many other factors influence - especially injuries. I believe that one of the keys for Detroit success were injury-less seasons that allowed them to develop their perfect 5.

ChicagoJ
03-13-2006, 07:13 PM
It won't until the Suns win a championship.

Then you'll see everybody rush to it and a bunch of knee-jerk reaction guys will talk about just how bad of coaches that Larry Brown and Fratello and JVG really are because they can't coach a team's offense to escape from a wet paper bag.

Peck
03-13-2006, 07:37 PM
Wait, I'm confused.

Are Detroit fans arguing that they do Not have a good offensive team?

ChicagoJ
03-13-2006, 07:50 PM
Seems that way to me.

Chauncey
03-14-2006, 09:19 AM
Let me expand a little more because I don't have much time these days to post on here.

Just because you score a lot of points, doesn't mean you're a great offense.

Just because you don't allow a lot of points doesn't mean you're a great defense.

To me what separates the great from the good--or potentially great--is how the team plays when they need it the most. To me having a great offense means that when you have the ball, down by 1, with 10 seconds left, you're favored to win the game. Great offensive teams can get quality shots and put them in positions to score anytime. Some want to cast the Pistons and Spurs as defensive teams, but what I see are teams that nearly always get quality shots when they need them and more often than not, make those shots.

Just because you have a great offense and its wonderful most of the time, doesn't mean that you're playing great offense today. All 5 players on the court must know the system/play inside and out. All 5 players on the court must be willing to run the system. And you have to have a couple of guys you can turn to when the defense locks you down for a potential bail-out shot. This is what separates great offense from great defenses. When a special player gets the ball, 95% of the time, they can get a shot up without it being blocked..and at that point the game has nothing to do with the defense, it just depends on how good that player's shot is.