Playoff Seeding

[closg00]

I grow less and less confident that we can beat the Bulls with each passing game. Joakim Noah is playing at a space-jam level right now.

Agreed, things are beginning to tighten. However, Hortford won't be back for ATL this season. I think ATL is the only current playoff team that I have any confidence predicting a series win over.

The playoffs are about depth (especially the front court), endurance, and coaching.

[nate33]

The playoffs are about depth (especially the front court), endurance, and coaching.

Nonsense.

Depth and endurance matters a lot less in the playoffs because there are no back-to-backs and aging players don't have to think about staying healthy for the entire season. All your 33-36 minute players will play 38-40 minutes. Wall will probably play 42 minutes a game, for instance.

I think coaching matters less too. Coaching isn't some deep arcane science. Most coaches apply the same basic strategies. The good ones are the ones who recognize game conditions and adapt quickly to get the jump on bad coaches. For that reason, good coaching can often be the difference in a standard regular season game against an unfamiliar opponent. But in a playoff series, after the first game or two, everyone pretty much knows every play the other team is going to run and what the appropriate strategic counter should be. At that point, it boils down to talent, NOT coaching.

[dobrojim]

Agreed, things are beginning to tighten. However, Hortford won't be back for ATL this season. I think ATL is the only current playoff team that I have any confidence predicting a series win over.

and we won't be playing ATL. Not unless they seriously start playing better and move up.

[dobrojim]

At that point, it boils down to talent, NOT coaching.

and execution (which maybe you could also describe as talent).
SAN came oh so close (finals) partly because MIA wasn't hitting the shots
SAN was giving them. I don't know that MIA starting taking significantly
different shots more than they just started more consistently hitting
the shots they were offered.

[closg00]

The playoffs are about depth (especially the front court), endurance, and coaching.

Nonsense.

Depth and endurance matters a lot less in the playoffs because there are no back-to-backs and aging players don't have to think about staying healthy for the entire season. All your 33-36 minute players will play 38-40 minutes. Wall will probably play 42 minutes a game, for instance.

I think coaching matters less too. Coaching isn't some deep arcane science. Most coaches apply the same basic strategies. The good ones are the ones who recognize game conditions and adapt quickly to get the jump on bad coaches. For that reason, good coaching can often be the difference in a standard regular season game against an unfamiliar opponent. But in a playoff series, after the first game or two, everyone pretty much knows every play the other team is going to run and what the appropriate strategic counter should be. At that point, it boils down to talent, NOT coaching.

Coaching matters less? Ask Brendan Haywood if he should have been matched-up vs Z instead of Etan Thomas in the Cavs Vs Wiz series ( not that we would have won that series but..)

I disagree with you about endurance, playoff games/series at-points become tough, slowed-down, physical battles. Endurance is needed just to gut-out a win. The need for talent is a given.

[Nivek]

Bad coaches can always screw things up. Nate's point is basically correct, though. By the end of the season, pretty much everyone who's paying attention knows what everyone else is doing, especially when facing teams in their own conference. That only gets strengthened in a series where the same two teams face each other repeatedly -- with some breaks between games for film study, practice and game planning. Any "wrinkle" one coach creates gets countered pretty quickly.

When Nate says "talent," I suspect he's including "execution" because good, talented players execute well.

Depth matters a lot less in the playoffs (unless there are injuries) because most teams play their top players heavy minutes. Endurance -- in the sense of being able to sustain effort over the course of a game -- shouldn't be too much of an issue. Perhaps mental endurance -- being able to maintain the kind of intensity and focus a highly competitive game requires. But, that really goes back to talent too.

[barelyawake]

By Jim's response, I obviously missed a post from someone blocked. I'm sure it was enlightening.

Jim, the idea that we are better without Nene is flat out ridiculous on several levels.

A) Anyone who watches basketball knows games slow down in the playoffs. We will absolutely need a low post threat when that happens, and the lanes clog, and teams play aggressive defense. Gortat and Wall will be able to get off a few pick and rolls a game, but that's not going to fly as a real go to option. Neither is posting an undersized Booker or an almost retired Gooden. All those options help, and I love that they are clicking. But, we have three real options when we are under pressure, playing from behind, well-defended and need to make a push - Wall, Ariza and Nene.

B) People like Gortat and Booker are going to get mugged all day in the playoffs, without a whistle. Nene is our only big with any cache with the refs. That matters much more during the playoffs than your average game.

C) The reason we have been playing better is our bench and team cohesion. Having seasoned vets who can handle pressure, who were once respected and still have enough game left to contribute is what has helped us.

D) Defense wins playoff games. Our defense is much better with Nene.

I'm glad we have developed as a team, and aquired a bench, but the idea that Nene drags us down is frankly insane.

[closg00]

Agree with Barley, points A & B are my points as-well, but better articulated

[Dat2U]

The playoffs are about depth (especially the front court), endurance, and coaching.

Nonsense.

Depth and endurance matters a lot less in the playoffs because there are no back-to-backs and aging players don't have to think about staying healthy for the entire season. All your 33-36 minute players will play 38-40 minutes. Wall will probably play 42 minutes a game, for instance.

I think coaching matters less too. Coaching isn't some deep arcane science. Most coaches apply the same basic strategies. The good ones are the ones who recognize game conditions and adapt quickly to get the jump on bad coaches. For that reason, good coaching can often be the difference in a standard regular season game against an unfamiliar opponent. But in a playoff series, after the first game or two, everyone pretty much knows every play the other team is going to run and what the appropriate strategic counter should be. At that point, it boils down to talent, NOT coaching.

Agreed. Teams that max out their ability like Chicago in the regular season tend to struggle come playoffs because the game is simplified and every one plays hard (unlike in the regular season).

Basically, the creme rises to the top. The playoffs is when talent takes over. The teams that have guys who can create mismatches tend to have a huge advantage. It's when the stars tend to shine and where role players can make a huge pay day. Shooting and the ability to create quality shots are at premium because usually the interior defenses of playoff teams are usually really good at shutting off the driving lanes.

[barelyawake]

Btw, as far as my prediction, if you haven't gotten that I scale what could happen and always take the most optimistic prediction, because I'm a fan and want to hope that occurs, then you haven't been here very long.

I'm still ok with thinking fourth (though the last loss hurt bad -- which we should have won). Fifth with a first round win, with Nene healthy, I am still very confident about.

[Kanyewest]

The playoffs are about depth (especially the front court), endurance, and coaching.

Nonsense.

Depth and endurance matters a lot less in the playoffs because there are no back-to-backs and aging players don't have to think about staying healthy for the entire season. All your 33-36 minute players will play 38-40 minutes. Wall will probably play 42 minutes a game, for instance.

I think coaching matters less too. Coaching isn't some deep arcane science. Most coaches apply the same basic strategies. The good ones are the ones who recognize game conditions and adapt quickly to get the jump on bad coaches. For that reason, good coaching can often be the difference in a standard regular season game against an unfamiliar opponent. But in a playoff series, after the first game or two, everyone pretty much knows every play the other team is going to run and what the appropriate strategic counter should be. At that point, it boils down to talent, NOT coaching.

I agree talent matters a lot but even if coaching only matters a little, it it is still significant because sometimes there isn't much of difference in talent/execution.

I would say depth still matters- it just matters in different ways. It is evaluated more often 6 through 8 rather than 6 10. Endurance matters for the starters who sometimes aren't used to those 44 to 46 mpg. Plus the mental fatigue that every possession matters which isn't usually the case in the regular season. I agree the lack of back to backs allow players to recover and do it all over again like Tim Duncan.

Sometimes, a coach takes its depth out of the equation. For instance the Bulls were a strong regular season team in 2011 because they relied on their bench. Instead of relying on their bench in the postseason against Miami, they went to a short rotation that squandered leads late in games to the Heat. However, a team like the Mavericks stuck to its deeper rotation even with injuries to Butler and Haywood, playing guys like DeShawn Stevenson and Brian Cardinal against the Heat which allowed Dirk to get his rest.

I still think coaching matters because talent/execution is going to be pretty close when it gets to the deeper rounds. In the case of Indiana and San Antonio who both have excellent coaching but decided to go small against Miami at crucial points. Against Indiana, LeBron was able to get to the rim for a game winner with Hibbert out of the game. With Duncan out of the game, the Heat recovered an offensive rebound to in the closing seconds of regulation to hit a 3. That might be the case of good coaches outsmarting themselves.

[dobrojim]

FWIW, it was PiF who said

As to "with a healthy Nene" -- have you been watching? We are *better* w/o Nene! As we are better w/o Seraphin! The former is a shadow of the player he was; the latter is a shadow, period.

[dobrojim]

With Duncan out of the game, the Heat recovered an offensive rebound to in the closing seconds of regulation to hit a 3. That might be the case of good coaches outsmarting themselves.

y'all may be sick of hearing me say this but Pop should have deliberately fouled up 3 with
the shot clock turned off in gm 6. He didn't trust his team to hit Championship winning
FTs (after they got the ball back with a lead) and thereby lost the championship. I'll believe
this to my last breath. Pops is an awesome coach but that was a poor strategy.

[hands11]

while we are merging

[nate33]

The playoffs are about depth (especially the front court), endurance, and coaching.

Nonsense.

Depth and endurance matters a lot less in the playoffs because there are no back-to-backs and aging players don't have to think about staying healthy for the entire season. All your 33-36 minute players will play 38-40 minutes. Wall will probably play 42 minutes a game, for instance.

I think coaching matters less too. Coaching isn't some deep arcane science. Most coaches apply the same basic strategies. The good ones are the ones who recognize game conditions and adapt quickly to get the jump on bad coaches. For that reason, good coaching can often be the difference in a standard regular season game against an unfamiliar opponent. But in a playoff series, after the first game or two, everyone pretty much knows every play the other team is going to run and what the appropriate strategic counter should be. At that point, it boils down to talent, NOT coaching.

I agree talent matters a lot but even if coaching only matters a little, it it is still significant because sometimes there isn't much of difference in talent/execution.

I would say depth still matters- it just matters in different ways. It is evaluated more often 6 through 8 rather than 6 10. Endurance matters for the starters who sometimes aren't used to those 44 to 46 mpg. Plus the mental fatigue that every possession matters which isn't usually the case in the regular season. I agree the lack of back to backs allow players to recover and do it all over again like Tim Duncan.

Sometimes, a coach takes its depth out of the equation. For instance the Bulls were a strong regular season team in 2011 because they relied on their bench. Instead of relying on their bench in the postseason against Miami, they went to a short rotation that squandered leads late in games to the Heat. However, a team like the Mavericks stuck to its deeper rotation even with injuries to Butler and Haywood, playing guys like DeShawn Stevenson and Brian Cardinal against the Heat which allowed Dirk to get his rest.

I still think coaching matters because talent/execution is going to be pretty close when it gets to the deeper rounds. In the case of Indiana and San Antonio who both have excellent coaching but decided to go small against Miami at crucial points. Against Indiana, LeBron was able to get to the rim for a game winner with Hibbert out of the game. With Duncan out of the game, the Heat recovered an offensive rebound to in the closing seconds of regulation to hit a 3. That might be the case of good coaches outsmarting themselves.

The point is, coaching and depth matter less in the playoffs than they do in the regular season because of the familiarity of the opposition and the lack of back-to-backs. Therefore, I'm less worried about teams like Chicago with a foundation rooted in coaching and depth because I think they lack an "extra gear" for the playoffs. They are capped by their fundamental lack of talent.

[Severn Hoos]

With Duncan out of the game, the Heat recovered an offensive rebound to in the closing seconds of regulation to hit a 3. That might be the case of good coaches outsmarting themselves.

y'all may be sick of hearing me say this but Pop should have deliberately fouled up 3 with
the shot clock turned off in gm 6. He didn't trust his team to hit Championship winning
FTs (after they got the ball back with a lead) and thereby lost the championship. I'll believe
this to my last breath. Pops is an awesome coach but that was a poor strategy.

jim - did you see the MD-UVA game last Sunday? MD up 3, fouled with ~3 seconds left. UVA hits the first FT, misses 2nd, ball out of bounds off MD. UVA scores on a perfectly executed inbounds play to send the game to OT.

Of course, MD won in OT, so it was a moot point, but had they lost in OT, the coach would have been vilified for that decision. So you can look like a fool no matter which way you go. If Pop had done it the other way, people would be saying "he didn't trust his team to play defense" exactly the way you said he didn't trust his team to make FTs.

Personally, I'm probably way too old-school, but I believe you should man up and play some D in that case, not turn the game into a FT shooting contest. Granted, the latter may be the smarter strategy in the modern win-at-all-costs environment. But the aesthetics and integrity of the game is boosted by playing it the "right" way (in my admittedly purely subjective and personal opinion).

And FWIW, when Tony Bennett was faced with the same situation against Pitt in the ACC semis, he chose not to foul. And this happened:

http://www.virginiasportstv.com/mensbasketball/1yqk

That's a thousand times more satisfying than watching a FT war of attrition. I'll take the loss when the guy just plain makes the 3. (It's the rebound and second opportunity that killed me in the MIA-SA game. If LeBron hit the initial 3, oh well - go play OT. But giving up the board and somehow losing track of Ray Allen? That's unforgivable.) But play the game like a man or don't play at all.

I say, let 'em crash!

[Higga]

Yeah I never liked the foul them up 3 strategy. Too many bad things can go wrong. Just man up and play D. When the other team has to hit a 3, it's not as tough to defend.

Reg. playoff seedings, I'd prefer to avoid the Nets. I know we've beaten them three times this year, but the playoffs are a different ballgame and I don't like the matchup of our youth vs. their experience. I'm not afraid of the Bulls. You can try hard your way to 45+ wins in the regular season but in the playoffs talent wins out and we have more talent. The Raptors would be a fun series, probably 7 game coinflip.

[Dat2U]

Watching Chicago, Toronto & Brooklyn closely, here's the order I'd place them in ranking from worst to best matchup.

1. Toronto. IMO they have the most talent. Lowry has been putting together a MVP like campaign for them. No, he's not the high usage guy Wall or Irving are but he does so much to help his team win games and he's more consistent than either Wall or Irving. DeRozan is an all-star and has become a real solid shot creator. Amir Johnson is the underrated grunt at PF that's as rock solid as they come. Terrence Ross has been their wildcard as an explosive wing and streak shooter. Valanciunas is an up and coming center who's inconsistent but an effective P&R big man. We would really need Wall to play at an elite level to just keep pace. I think we'd lose in 6 games, with or without Nene.

2. Chicago. Joakim Noah.... That's it. He's their best player, their emotional leader and the nucleus of their team. Chicago might not be able to take it to another level but Noah will. He's going to bring it and likely will abuse Gortat badly. If Gortat wants big time dollars this off-season, he'd better hope he's not facing Noah in the playoffs. And I guess we'd get to see Gibson vs. Booker for those who thought Booker was comparable, lol. Outside of Noah & Gibson and the distinct advantage at head coach, Chicago doesn't have much else to fear. D.J. Augustin going off would be a very bad sign though. Wizards in 6.

3. Brooklyn. All smoke and mirrors. Pierce at PF, Garnett at C... it's small ball in spades for the Nets. They're no longer one of the slowest teams in NBA history, now their just slow and undersized. Joe Johnson with the last shot is the one situation you want to avoid if your the Wizards. They have absolutely no answer for John Wall though. Neither Deron Williams nor Shaun Livingston has a shot in hell of guarding him. Wizards in 6.

[Upper Decker]

With Duncan out of the game, the Heat recovered an offensive rebound to in the closing seconds of regulation to hit a 3. That might be the case of good coaches outsmarting themselves.

y'all may be sick of hearing me say this but Pop should have deliberately fouled up 3 with
the shot clock turned off in gm 6. He didn't trust his team to hit Championship winning
FTs (after they got the ball back with a lead) and thereby lost the championship. I'll believe
this to my last breath. Pops is an awesome coach but that was a poor strategy.

Also, don't forget, Vogel did the exact same thing with Hibbert, TWICE. I agree with Nate, however, good coaching doesn't matter as much in the playoffs, but bad coaching...ugh, it'll kill you.

[dobrojim]

I'd still rather foul. Nothing is failsafe, that is clearly true as one can always find examples
of either alternative failing or succeeding. I think more things have to go right for your opp
and wrong for you in the case of my preferred strategy. Just playing straight up D, your opp
only has to do 1 thing, hit a 3 ptr. That's too simple/routine.