If you play a larger percentage of games against bad offensive units, your defensive stats should be better.
Seems like the bucks and lakers were the 3rd and 4th highest scoring teams. The pacers had the 26th pace, but they were 9th in off rating. The nets were the 25th offense though.
4 of your starters fouled out? lol
You were mean to rookie melo, but so were the pacers.
Are Pistons fans so disappointed by their current team that they have to go back and retroactively go back and add to their former glory.
The average for this season? .447.
In 03-04, eight teams shot under .430, and only four teams shot over .450.
This season, four teams shoot under .430, and a whopping 11 teams shoot over .450.
In 03-04, only six teams shot a FG% higher than the current season's average, whereas, 20 of the league's 30 teams are shooting higher than 03-04's FG% average.
Those Pistons were a great defensive team, sure, but no rational person (that excludes a few of you, sadly...) can deny that their defensive numbers are clearly inflated by the fact that 03-04 was arguably the low-point of modern NBA offense. They were a slow-paced, plodding, ugly team, playing in the era of hideous offense.
My personal opinion is that those Pistons deserve about 80% of the credit for the defensive numbers they put up, while the other 20% is credited to terrible offense, league-wide. I'd put those numbers at about 90/10 for this current Pacers team.
One of the best testaments to the Pacers' defensive dominance is to compare their top-ranked oFG% (.413) to the second-ranked oFG% (Warriors; .429), and see how it stacks up to past margins.
Here are the top-ranked oFG%'s, and their margin over the second-ranked oFG's, since 1990:
1. 1993 Knicks (3.0)
2. 1998 Spurs (1.7)
3T. 2013 Pacers (1.6)
3T. 1995 Knicks (1.6)
5. 2008 Celtics (1.4)
6. 1990: Pistons (0.8)
7T. 2003 Kings (0.7)
7T. 1997 Knicks (0.7)
7T. 1994 Knicks (0.7)
10T. 2007 Rockets (0.6)
10T. 2000 Lakers (0.6)
12T. 2011 Bulls (0.4)
12T. 1996 Heat (0.4)
12T. 1991 Spurs (0.4)
15T. 2006: Bulls (0.3)
15T. 2004: Spurs (0.3)
17T. 2012: Celtics (0.2)
17T. 2001: Knicks (0.2)
18T. 2010 Magic (0.1)
18T. 2005 Bulls (0.1)
18T. 2002 Lakers (0.1)
18T. 1999 Spurs (0.1)
18T. 1992 Spurs (0.1)
23. 2009 Celtics (<0.1)
I'm honestly not surprised, they have been playing some of the best defense i've ever seen.
People need to lay off Kstat, that Pistons team absolutely was one of the best ever defenses. I don't understand why people are trying to downplay their accomplishments.
I'd worked through the rankings of the Pistons playoff opponents and how they fared, but it seemed more like a pile on against KStat and I'm not really trying to tear that team down because once they added Sheed they were tough.
But with some of the other discussions let me bring up one of the main findings. They did hold their opponents to lower than their normal FG%, but the Nets and Pacers were below average FG% teams and fundamentally that post-season FG% number was built on 7 games - the first game vs the Nets (in the 25% range) and the 6 games vs the Pacers. The Nets actually went over 41% for 4 of the games (as I recall from looking last night) and the Bucks/Lakers both shot in the "decent" low 40% for their series.
But the Pacers...well they couldn't make a shot to save their life apart from one game and basically won at all on their own defense. This doesn't really dismiss the Pistons effort and has nothing to do with the sub-70 run (though league-wide the pace was much slower that year), but it does suggest factually that if you take out that Pacers series and only face teams with top 14 offenses DURING THE PLAYOFFS (where you'd expect to find quality teams) then the Pistons don't put up a number nearly as nasty as they did.
They were title caliber and one of the great defenses, but dwarfing what other great defenses did? No. Put them in the 2000 Finals and you don't see them keeping LA or Indy under 80 points. In my opinion obviously.
Remember that this is why the Pacers made the Al for Jackson trade. Detroit was able to use Sheed/Ben/Prince on the frontline as length against any interior offense, and the Pacers found out quickly they only had one outside threat - Reggie. So they swapped low post Al for outside shooting Jackson, and right before the brawl it appeared to have worked. Stupid brawl helped ruin what could have been a fantastic 3-4 year rivalry on par with 90's Pacers/Knicks.
Anyway to me it seems to be truth to say that the Pistons were an awesome defense and the currrent Pacers at full strength (but even without DG) are an elite defense. The days of a pace that supports regular sub-70 games is gone, but the Pacers are capable of knocking out several sub-80s games in a row in a season when that's abnormal.
We were hurt... We were dysfunctional....we just couldn't make shots....yeah, I recall getting that a lot in 2004. From everybody.
And yes, take out their best performances and the averages drop. That's stunning. I've never, ever heard that one before...
I'm not being defensive at all. I'm just pointing out they set more defensive records in 25 games than any other team did over 82.
Having said that, I think people here are underestimating that Pistons defense. If I needed to win a game, I'd take them over this year's Pacers defense.
That team held more teams under 70 points in their last 25 games than any other NBA team in history managed in 82...so I'm going to go out on a limb and say no.
At one point, they strung together five in a row. The old NBA record was two. They also hold the NBA record for 36 straight games keeping opponents under 100.
The bottom line is, even if you take the averages out of the equation, they strung together more dominating defensive performances in 25 games than any other team has ever cobbled together in 82.
This is really just sad. If you need to pretend like that should go right on ahead. The rest of us over here in reality no otherwise. Btw in those 25 games you played a whopping 2 top 10 offenses
I've often said two things.
The Pistons after they acquired Sheed were the best defensive team I have ever seen. But the rules were changed after that season and the Pistons style they played in 2004 would cause them to foul way too much to be effective.
However if that Pistons team were playing right now, they would still be a great defensive team, just different because of the rules - but still great. The best I have ever seen? I don't know that - would have to see how they adjusted to the new rules.
In our Pacers history, two of my biggest regrets are the day the Pistons acquired Rasheed and the Pacers trading Antonio a year too early.
I believe both moves cost the Pacers a championship.