b-ball forever wrote:You're asking 2 very different questions. One is "what is the best playoff unit of the past 5 years", and the other is "which 5 man unit has the best difference of offensive rating minus defensive rating over only 100 minutes".
This is a valid point, but let me repackage it this way: I'm asking one question: What is the best playoff unit of the past 5 years? Then you and I are answering it two different ways.
- 1) My way is to look at offensive rating minus defensive rating over MINIMUM 100 minutes.
2) Your way?? As far as I can tell, is just to go with your personal opinion. Gee, this unit seems to be the best unit based on their personnel...therefore they must be.
I absolutely admit that my way is limited by amount of minutes and matchups, but it's merely the limitation that's built into our playoff system--we only get four opponents on the way to a title, and the coaches choose how to distribute minutes. So my way isn't absolute law; it's just a really damn good argument, especially in the case of this Mavs unit, where the numbers are so high, so much higher than anyone else's. And my way is easily better than your way, which is entirely subjective. Our eyes can be fooled.
b-ball forever wrote:The rating itself doesn’t take into account a ton of things that sway the numbers in comparison to actual basketball value, which falsifies rankings. Is said unit locking down CP3/Belinelli/Ariza/West/Okafor, or Jack/Willie Green/Pondexter/Jason Smith/Gray? Are they beating up on Noah/Boozer/Deng/Bogans/D-Rose, or is it Collison/Paul George/Granger/Hansbrough/Hibbert? Are any of the opposing players playing injured or sick over the stretch? Did anybody in the unit bang the wife of another player in said unit over the stretch? (looking atcha Vanessa). The quality of the opposition and ability to matchup with the other team while said unit is on the court is a major factor that doesn’t show up in the numbers.
Adjusted +/- factors in the quality of the opponent, but I didn't use that because 1) I don't have 2007 values for APM, so it shrinks our study 2) People seem to be uncomfortable with the mathematical complexity of it, so I went with the simpler version 3) I feel like playoff basketball means you're pretty consistently playing against high level competition. Even if you beat up on crap for some of the time, you're eventually going to get exposed if you play enough minutes. I think 100 is good enough. You don't. Agree to disagree, I guess. None of the units that made the list happen to be second units that spent their time beating up on second units.
Now, if I did use APM, that 2011 Mavs unit still beats the sh*t out of everybody.
(Gee, I guess I can't factor in theoretical wife-bangings...I guess we'll have to just scrap the whole thing)
b-ball forever wrote:Why am I taking Rondo/Allen/Pierce/KG/Perkins? Because together they’re easily the most devastating combo over the past 5 years.
You do realize this is tantamount to saying: Why are they the best? Because they're the best!
And all this is an elaboration on that point:
b-ball forever wrote:At PG they’ve got the best defensive PG in the league who can stay in front of the many speed demons of the league and play the passing lanes, and on the offensive end produce high quality playmaking along with slashing. At SG they’ve the best shooter in NBA history, who also has good handles and solid passing, and is deadly both set and off the dribble. At SF they’ve got a do-it all (and at a high level) swingman can slash, post-up, pass, handle the rock, defend various types of players, and shoot. At PF they’ve the most complete 4-spot player ever, who is among the best at his position at PnR, PnP, posting-up, knocking down mid-range J’s, passing, defending the PnR, switching out onto swingmen defensively, guarding the post, rebounding, and anchoring a defense. At C they’ve an elite post defender who is mobile enuf to switch onto PFs as well, makes opposing players think twice before attacting the rim via intimidation, is a good rebounder, and doesn’t disrupt his teammates' offensive games, while himself not being an offensive liability a la Ben Wallace.
That unit can run literally every single play in the book at a very high level, both offensively and defensively, as well as create mismatches. The balance is perfect. Ray, Pierce, and KG are all among the best shooters at their positions and can space for Rondo. Rondo covers for Allen’s lack of abilty to stay in front of quick guards. Pierce can guard the physical swingmen of the league, and post-up on the weaker ones. Everybody besides Perkins plays offense at a high enuf level to cover for him offensively.
That's all opinion. I agree with a lot of it, but certainly not all of it, but either way, it's entirely subjective. It's like arguing that someone runs fast by detailing how they have long, lean muscular legs and powerful arms and an explosive stride and... Great, but did you time them? Do they actually run fast?
Don't get me wrong: I know that unit is very good. They were a foundational crew for a title: that's good basketball. And player by player, they're solid, absolutely. But sometimes a unit just fits together, and becomes much greater than the sum of it's parts. THAT'S WHAT THE NUMBERS ARE SAYING ABOUT THIS DALLAS UNIT.
Thing is, your Celtics unit didn't actually outplay all their opponents. They got beat by both the Lakers and Cavs in real basketball. Boston won those series because of other units--certainly units that included a lot of the same players, but that's not what this discussion is about. We're talking about a single unit by itself. Your Celtics unit beat the **** out of a 37-45 Hawks team and a has-been Pistons team, but they needed their depth to beat the Lakers and Cavs.
2008 Rondo/Allen/Pierce/KG/Perkins
Atlanta +23.45
Cleveland -3.79
Detroit +14.68
LA -0.06
2011 Kidd/Terry/Marion/Dirk/Chandler
Portland +37.98
OKC +36.67
LA +19.73
Miami +38.07
