GOAT TEAM TOURNAMENT (round 2) #14 83 Sixers v. #6 08 Celtics #

[penbeast0]

Each player will be considered to be as dominant against his opponents as he was the year that he played (ie. if you are just going to say the more modern team wins, don't bother to participate). And EACH MATCHUP WILL FEATURE THE RULES, REFEREES, AND EQUIPMENT OF THE OLDER TEAM. This doesn't mean that Steph Curry will be called for carrying each time he tries to dribble, just assume that his handle is proportionately as good relative to the era as it is relative to his own. So, in 65, if you think he has the best handle in today's league, you can assume he has the best handle of that era; if he's roughly average for starting PGs of today's league in terms of that one aspect, you can assume he is roughly average for starting PGs of that era. This hopefully will eliminate a bit of the recency bias. Health is as it was, if a player was 75% during the playoffs that year, assume he's only 75% now, this is a playoff tournament, not a regular season seeding.

One last thing. VOTES WITHOUT ANALYSIS (or with what in my personal subject opinion is stupid analysis) WONT BE COUNTED.

!983 Philadephia 76ers

Moses Malone
(Marc Iavaroni)
Julius Erving
Andrew Toney
Maurice Cheeks

Bobby Jones
Clint Richardson
Clemon Johnson

"Fo, fo, fo!," was Moses's prediction for the playoffs. Actually they did lose one game in the playoffs but this is a team whose regular season performance probably understates both it's talent and it's postseason dominance (only 5th/23 in both offense and defense during the regular season). Although Iavaroni was the nominal starter, Bobby Jones and Clint Richardson both played more minutes as this team was both very deep and full of HOF players. Adding Moses Malone to a perennial contender was looked on as almost unfair and the Sixers, for this one year, made that look accurate. Bird and the Celtics were taken down by Sidney Moncrief and the Bucks but the Sixers swept the Showtime Lakers with Kareem and Tragic Johnson in the finals. The 3 pointer existed in the NBA in 1983 but this team didn't use it; the Sixers scored a total of one 3 pointer (out of 10 attempts) in their playoff run.

2008 Boston Celtics

PG Rajon Rondo
SG Ray Allen
SF Paul Pierce
PF Kevin Garnett
C Kendrick Perkins

F/G James Posey
C/F PJ Brown
PG Sam Cassell
F Leon Powe

The first of the "big 3" teams of the modern era. James Posey was the main sub with Garnett swinging to center and Pierce to PF at times. Perkins was not yet considered sucky, Rondo had not yet broken out in the playoffs so it is basically the big 3 and defense. The Celtics were a terrific defensive team, leading the league (only 10/30 offensively) and Garnett, Rondo, Posey, and Brown were all very good defenders for their spots (Brown v. other backup centers). The Celtics shot just under 20 3PA per game hitting at a .381 pace (slightly worse in the playoffs).

[SpreeS]

Oh man, its very touch decision. I like BOS matchups: KG/Perkins on Mose and Pierce/Possey on Erving, but I dont like BOS PO record.

4-3 ATL
4-3 CLE Lebron 23y with Ilgauskas
4-2 DET It was really bad matchup for DET
4-2 LAL The worst version of 2008-2010 LAL teams

BOS was deeper and more balanced team, they had game from outside and inside. Then you look at LeBron/Kobe efficiency against BOS in PO, you really know that Toney and Erving wouldnt be sweet. But again, I think PHI peaked at right time. 12-1 PO record agaisnt MIL and LAL, is huge warning. I would pick BOS if I dont rely on what happened in 83 ir 08 PO. But now I pick PHI in 5 or 6 ( if 7games - Boston).

[70sFan]

Important to note that Celtics defense with illegal defense wouldn't be nearly as powerful. I think it has to be considered in such a matchup.

[pandrade83]

I think Philly is in a bit of trouble. There's not any rule change that is going to hamper Boston materially here, so right off the bat they have a sizeable spacing advantage & Boston can throw out more flexible lineups - whereas any deviation from the starters + Jones is a big drop-off from the Sixers.

There's 3 Wild Cards that could swing this Philly's way:

1) TO economy. Both sides are bad at it - Philly 17/23, Boston 29/30. Boston was the best at forcing TO's, Philly was 4th. Given that there will be a lot of fastbreaks off TO's in this series, Philly does have better finishers to take advantage of it; if they're not a TO machine themselves.

2) The Charity stripe. Philly was the best at getting to the line; Boston was 23rd in opponent ft/fga. Philly could be making a parade to the foul line.

3) Moses & the boards. Moses could take over this series & wreak havoc on Boston; if he can dominate inside, this forces Boston to play Perkins more which gums up their spacing/offense a bit.

While the TO economy could swing Philly's way - it's just as (if not more) likely to go Boston's way since their Net TO economy is +0.5 vs. Philly's of -0.5%; I think that ends up being a net detriment. The charity stripe thing is real, but skewed by Perkins (7 fouls per 100); which means that Moses is forced to save the day in order to keep Perkins in the game. He can do it - he's overcame greater odds in era & inflicted damage on '81 Boston - but he's never had to do it against a squad this good.

Pick: Celtics in 6.

[70sFan]

I think Philly is in a bit of trouble. There's not any rule change that is going to hamper Boston materially here, so right off the bat they have a sizeable spacing advantage & Boston can throw out more flexible lineups - whereas any deviation from the starters + Jones is a big drop-off from the Sixers.

There's 3 Wild Cards that could swing this Philly's way:

1) TO economy. Both sides are bad at it - Philly 17/23, Boston 29/30. Boston was the best at forcing TO's, Philly was 4th. Given that there will be a lot of fastbreaks off TO's in this series, Philly does have better finishers to take advantage of it; if they're not a TO machine themselves.

2) The Charity stripe. Philly was the best at getting to the line; Boston was 23rd in opponent ft/fga. Philly could be making a parade to the foul line.

3) Moses & the boards. Moses could take over this series & wreak havoc on Boston; if he can dominate inside, this forces Boston to play Perkins more which gums up their spacing/offense a bit.

While the TO economy could swing Philly's way - it's just as (if not more) likely to go Boston's way since their Net TO economy is +0.5 vs. Philly's of -0.5%; I think that ends up being a net detriment. The charity stripe thing is real, but skewed by Perkins (7 fouls per 100); which means that Moses is forced to save the day in order to keep Perkins in the game. He can do it - he's overcame greater odds in era & inflicted damage on '81 Boston - but he's never had to do it against a squad this good.

Pick: Celtics in 6.

Illegal defense is a huge disadvantage for Celtics. They relied heavily on helping and rotations, this wasn't possible in 1983.

[Jiminy Glick]

The Sixers had 5 elite players, the Celtics had 4 so I am voting for the Sixers. They swept the Lakers in the finals that year and I think the 1983 Lakers could beat the 2008 Celtics.

[pandrade83]

I think Philly is in a bit of trouble. There's not any rule change that is going to hamper Boston materially here, so right off the bat they have a sizeable spacing advantage & Boston can throw out more flexible lineups - whereas any deviation from the starters + Jones is a big drop-off from the Sixers.

There's 3 Wild Cards that could swing this Philly's way:

1) TO economy. Both sides are bad at it - Philly 17/23, Boston 29/30. Boston was the best at forcing TO's, Philly was 4th. Given that there will be a lot of fastbreaks off TO's in this series, Philly does have better finishers to take advantage of it; if they're not a TO machine themselves.

2) The Charity stripe. Philly was the best at getting to the line; Boston was 23rd in opponent ft/fga. Philly could be making a parade to the foul line.

3) Moses & the boards. Moses could take over this series & wreak havoc on Boston; if he can dominate inside, this forces Boston to play Perkins more which gums up their spacing/offense a bit.

While the TO economy could swing Philly's way - it's just as (if not more) likely to go Boston's way since their Net TO economy is +0.5 vs. Philly's of -0.5%; I think that ends up being a net detriment. The charity stripe thing is real, but skewed by Perkins (7 fouls per 100); which means that Moses is forced to save the day in order to keep Perkins in the game. He can do it - he's overcame greater odds in era & inflicted damage on '81 Boston - but he's never had to do it against a squad this good.

Pick: Celtics in 6.

Illegal defense is a huge disadvantage for Celtics. They relied heavily on helping and rotations, this wasn't possible in 1983.

I don’t really think Philly has the spacing to take advantage.

[penbeast0]

...Moses is forced to save the day in order to keep Perkins in the game. He can do it - he's overcame greater odds in era & inflicted damage on '81 Boston - but he's never had to do it against a squad this good.

Pick: Celtics in 6.

Nice analysis and some interesting points. I just wanted to disagree with that last point. Moses played against the Celtics superteam of his own day with a much stronger front line (Parish, McHale, Bird, and even Bill Walton in reserve), a more talented team than 08; to say nothing of the Lakers with Kareem, Worthy, Magic, etc. I'm not as impressed with the 08 Celtics as either the Bird Celtics or Showtime Lakers, they weren't as consistent or as good for as long. They might be better than the one season iterations here, they might not but they certainly aren't a different caliber of team in any positive sense.

The Sixers had 5 elite players, the Celtics had 4 so I am voting for the Sixers. They swept the Lakers in the finals that year and I think the 1983 Lakers could beat the 2008 Celtics.

Who is the 4th elite player for Boston: Perkins, Posey, or Rondo?

[pandrade83]

...Moses is forced to save the day in order to keep Perkins in the game. He can do it - he's overcame greater odds in era & inflicted damage on '81 Boston - but he's never had to do it against a squad this good.

Pick: Celtics in 6.

Nice analysis and some interesting points. I just wanted to disagree with that last point. Moses played against the Celtics superteam of his own day with a much stronger front line (Parish, McHale, Bird, and even Bill Walton in reserve), a more talented team than 08; to say nothing of the Lakers with Kareem, Worthy, Magic, etc. I'm not as impressed with the 08 Celtics as either the Bird Celtics or Showtime Lakers, they weren't as consistent or as good for as long. They might be better than the one season iterations here, they might not but they certainly aren't a different caliber of team in any positive sense.

The Sixers had 5 elite players, the Celtics had 4 so I am voting for the Sixers. They swept the Lakers in the finals that year and I think the 1983 Lakers could beat the 2008 Celtics.

Who is the 4th elite player for Boston: Perkins, Posey, or Rondo?

I guess I was meaning that while Moses won a few series as an under-dog (mainly in '81), he had never pulled off the feat against a squad this strong - I should've clarified that. I think this series hinges on Moses' ability to inflict enough damage on the Celtics such that Perkins has to stay in the game longer - this will increase the likelihood of Boston turning it over & fouling.

[Jiminy Glick]

...Moses is forced to save the day in order to keep Perkins in the game. He can do it - he's overcame greater odds in era & inflicted damage on '81 Boston - but he's never had to do it against a squad this good.

Pick: Celtics in 6.

Nice analysis and some interesting points. I just wanted to disagree with that last point. Moses played against the Celtics superteam of his own day with a much stronger front line (Parish, McHale, Bird, and even Bill Walton in reserve), a more talented team than 08; to say nothing of the Lakers with Kareem, Worthy, Magic, etc. I'm not as impressed with the 08 Celtics as either the Bird Celtics or Showtime Lakers, they weren't as consistent or as good for as long. They might be better than the one season iterations here, they might not but they certainly aren't a different caliber of team in any positive sense.

The Sixers had 5 elite players, the Celtics had 4 so I am voting for the Sixers. They swept the Lakers in the finals that year and I think the 1983 Lakers could beat the 2008 Celtics.

Who is the 4th elite player for Boston: Perkins, Posey, or Rondo?

Rondo but I think he wasn't as effective as the Sixers 4th and 5th best players. Also in the match up he would need to play more minutes as he was good per 36.

[tihsad]

Yes, I think there would be a mild spacing issue if playing under the new rules, but otherwise yikes. The 08' Celtics team is a common ATG standard on this board, but given their struggles in the PS I just don't see it. The 83' 76s are just a horror show match up for most teams. I don't have time to go into analysis currently, but one team clearly went one way in the PS (we all know the quote) while the other struggled to the end. I'll make a post later tonight to give my vote (if voting is closed, just give me a heads up), and take a long look at arguments against, but I'm still a little surprised the 08' Celts made it out of the last round - much less had to deal with 4/4/4.

[JordansBulls]

The Sixers have greater depth as well as a superior starting lineup. Also they have the two best players on the floor. Very difficult to see this series going further than 6.

[trex_8063]

...Moses is forced to save the day in order to keep Perkins in the game. He can do it - he's overcame greater odds in era & inflicted damage on '81 Boston - but he's never had to do it against a squad this good.

Pick: Celtics in 6.

Nice analysis and some interesting points. I just wanted to disagree with that last point. Moses played against the Celtics superteam of his own day with a much stronger front line (Parish, McHale, Bird, and even Bill Walton in reserve), a more talented team than 08; to say nothing of the Lakers with Kareem, Worthy, Magic, etc. I'm not as impressed with the 08 Celtics as either the Bird Celtics or Showtime Lakers, they weren't as consistent or as good for as long. They might be better than the one season iterations here, they might not but they certainly aren't a different caliber of team in any positive sense.

Walton didn't join to make that super-star frontline until '86 (Sixers didn't face them in the playoffs, and went 2-4 against them in the rs, fwiw). For that matter, McHale probably wasn't solidly into his prime until '84 (Sixers did go 4-2 against them in the rs, but again: no Walton yet).

[trex_8063]

I think I'm actually gonna go with the Sixers. This team is just grossly underrated by its SRS, so the seeding really misrepresents them.

I like Boston's spacing and 3pt shooting better (even "curving" it toward '83 standards). Philly [even by '83 standards] just didn't have any outside shooters except for Andrew Toney (and even he wasn't elite out there): they were 22nd (of 23) in 3PA and 14th in 3pt% in '83. Boston, by comparison (with Ray Ray, Pierce, House, Posey) were a very good 3pt-shooting team. I would say they're generally the better passing team, too, and yes, they're the better team defense.

The major wildcard here, though, is the banging bull that is Moses Malone; who will I think force the Celtics to play Kendrick Perkins more (just to have someone physical to bang [and probably absorb some of the foul burden]), which is going to hinder their offense and spacing to a small degree. And still I think Moses will give them problems at the line: Boston was a team that sent opponents to the FT-line often as a general rule, and the '83 Sixers were #1 in the league in FTAr. I just see that combination of factors as being problematic. It's something that Boston's brand of defense may be ill-prepared to deal with, and Moses is a factor that is relatively uneffected by their poor spacing.

I also think, as pandrade83 mentioned, that turnovers could be an issue for both teams, but I like Philly's transition runners/finishers better (Dr. J, Bobby Jones, and even Mo Cheeks [although small, super athletic]).

idk, I expect this to be a rough, very physical 7-game series. But I'm going with the '83 Sixers to take it.

[iggymcfrack]

I’m voting Celtics in 7 with homecourt. Just on the records, it looks like the Sixers had a much better playoff performance, but if you really break it down, they’re not that different. Playoff ORtg of 109.4 for Boston and playoff ORtg of 108.0 for Philly. Playoff DRtg of 103.3 for Boston and playoff DRtg of 101.4 for Philly. So they’re really only half a point different on average.

Also, I can’t imagine a team that doesn’t shoot from outside matching up well with that Celtics squad, illegal defense or no. Their interior defense was incredible, and Pierce is a perfect 1-on-1 stopper to put on Dr. J.

[Bel]

I'd seriously consider the 83 Sixers to be finals material in this competition. Its way too early for them to drop out.

From my research, the 80's teams have heavily deflated SRS compared to other decades. So an SRS based ranking like this is going to undervalue them and other 80's teams, and overvalue others who played in periods where it was easier to beat up on the weaker teams for various reasons.

Even before taking into account talent, I really love the Sixers balance, with a great harmony between offense and defense. The Celtics have a depth advantage in the #7/8 slots, but both on individual matchups and overall fit the Sixers just have so many weapons. Boston had a lot of trouble creating offense at times against a well-structured defense, and the Sixers can match them in physicality with a rebounding edge and fantastic perimeter D. The Celtics will do better containing the Sixers than most teams due to their excellent interior D. This is amplified by the rules since in 83 there's no defensive 3 seconds, and I'm skeptical illegal defense would be called enough if a team actually tried to circumvent it like the Celtics, Lakers, and Pistons all would later on in the decade. Just imagine how scary the Celtics are when they can legally pack the paint and thwart those Dr. J drives in advance.

On the other hand, back in 2008 there just weren't teams with a #1 and #2 like Moses and Dr. J. And as the 83 Sixers/Bucks series showed, Toney can step up when the former two grab the opposing team's attention. The Celtics probably would do great in half-court sets, but the Sixers can easily make up for this from rapid transition points, while the Celtics don't have a corresponding type of equalizer.

To be fair on the other side, the Celtics playoff troubles are probably overblown. The 2008 Cavs were by far their hardest match, but that team was much better than what their SRS indicated since they had overhauled their roster at the trade deadline and were playing themselves into form throughout the season. They had a fantastic team defense. The Atlanta series wasn't really very competitive when watching the games despite the score line. The finals was rather one sided as well. But the Sixers were just that rare combination of things that made them so good for a brief period.

Sixers 4-1

[penbeast0]

Votes as of now 5-2 Sixers

Sixers -- Bel. trex_8063, tihsad, Jiminy Glick, SpreeS
Celtics -- iggymcfrack, pandrake 83

[Owly]

...Moses is forced to save the day in order to keep Perkins in the game. He can do it - he's overcame greater odds in era & inflicted damage on '81 Boston - but he's never had to do it against a squad this good.

Pick: Celtics in 6.

Nice analysis and some interesting points. I just wanted to disagree with that last point. Moses played against the Celtics superteam of his own day with a much stronger front line (Parish, McHale, Bird, and even Bill Walton in reserve), a more talented team than 08; to say nothing of the Lakers with Kareem, Worthy, Magic, etc. I'm not as impressed with the 08 Celtics as either the Bird Celtics or Showtime Lakers, they weren't as consistent or as good for as long. They might be better than the one season iterations here, they might not but they certainly aren't a different caliber of team in any positive sense.

I know this is re Celtics versus Celtics, but if you're dinging '08 Celts for lack of longevity of quality and the match-up is the '83 Sixers ('84 76ers, 2.39 SRS, out in the first round, bounce back to peripheral contenders for a season with Barkley) ...

Versus the early decade Lakers that Moses faced in his prime ... SRS suggests '08 Boston might be a different caliber of team (depending on how you band teams and how far into the decade you're willing to go). Harder to make that case versus early 80s Boston, but even so the '83 version of the Celts that didn't even get to Philly were the weakest of that era, and it wouldn't be until the latter half of the decade ('86, the one year with a somewhat healthy Walton, Moses's final year in Philly and a major down year for him) that the Celtics broke [smashed] the 7SRS barrier, where the '08 Celtics are at 9.30, so it's not entirely implausible to say the versions Moses faced, did his best work against, are at a lower level (again levels are going to somewhat arbitrary).