Spoiler:
Overall SRS: My combo-SRS from the regular season and playoffs as discussed in the master thread
Standard Deviations: Standard Deviations of Overall SRS from the league mean.
When I post the roster makeup of the team, I try and do it by playoff minutes. The numbers are age, regular season BPM and Playoff BPM (basketball-reference's BPM is being used here).
So if I say: "C: Vlade Divac (22), +2.3 / +4.3" I mean that Vlade Divac was their center, he was 22, he had a BPM of +2.3 in the regular season and a +4.3 in the playoffs. Yes, BPM misses out on a lot of subtle stuff but I thought it a good quick-hits indicator of the skills of the players.
I also list the playoff players (20+ MPG) in order of OLoad (which is usage that integrates assists) and it has everyone's per game average for minutes, points, rebounds, assists and stocks (steals plus blocks), but all of those (including minutes) are adjusted for pace.
I then cover the three highest players in scoring per 100 (with their true shooting relative to league average) and the three highest players in Assists per 100. I realize that these are arbitrary, but I wanted a quick-hits reference for how these teams' offenses ran.
I then talk about Heliocentrism, Wingmen and Depth. Basically I add up all of the team's VORP (again, basketball-reference) and then figure out what percentage of that VORP comes from the #1 player (Heliocentrism), from the #2 and 3 players combined (Wingmen) and Depth (everyone else). I include the ranking among the top 100 for reference. There are only 82 of these rankings, because 18 teams pre-date BPM/VORP, so I only have 82 to work with. I'm not saying that these are particularly meaningful, I just thought they were cool.
Playoff Offensive Rating: Amount by which your playoff offensive rating exceeds the offensive rating you'd expect given the regular season defensive rating of your playoff opponents. If you would be expected to post a 99 given your opponents but you post a 104, that's graded as +5. This way we can compare across eras.
Playoff Defensive Rating is the same as Offensive Rating, just the opposite.
Playoff SRS: Is SRS measured *only* in the playoffs. Overall SRS is a mix of both playoffs and regular season.
Total SRS Increase Through Playoffs: Basically their Overall SRS minus their Regular Season SRS. This is basically how much better a team did in the playoffs than you'd guess, relative to their regular season performance.
Average Playoff Opponent Offense: The average regular season offensive rating of your playoff opponents.
Average Playoff Opponent Defense: The average regular season defensive rating of your playoff opponents.
Rankings of any kind are out of my list. So if I say that the '91 Lakers had the 42nd best regular season offense, I don't mean "42nd best of All-Time", I mean "42nd best of my Top 100 Teams of All_Time". Which will be pretty comparable, but I want to be clear about this.
I also walk through the playoffs at each round, covering their opponent their SRS (at that time), how many games the series was, the margin of victory (and a "+" is always in the favor of the discussed team; losing a series by +2.0 means that you outscored the other team by two points a game on average despite losing) and for reference I put in an SRS equivalency (beat a +5 SRS team by 5 points a game, that's an equivalent +10 SRS series).
In writeups, if I ever say a player shot at "-8%" or something, that means "his true shooting was 8% lower than the league average that year". Any time I say "a player shot" and follow it by a percent, I am *always* using true shooting percentage unless otherwise indicated.
I also have a modern comps section for any teams pre-2011. It's basically me weighting each statistical characteristic and feeding each player's stats into the BackPicks database and choosing the best-rated comp from the list. I might list something like this:
PG: 2017 LeBron James (worse rebounding, better passing, way fewer shots)
What I mean is, "This team's point guard was basically 2017 LeBron James, but make his passing better, make his rebounding worse and make him take way fewer shots).
Anyhow. I don't know how clear any of this will be, so please let me know what does and doesn't work from these writeups. And thanks for reading!
Standard Deviations: Standard Deviations of Overall SRS from the league mean.
When I post the roster makeup of the team, I try and do it by playoff minutes. The numbers are age, regular season BPM and Playoff BPM (basketball-reference's BPM is being used here).
So if I say: "C: Vlade Divac (22), +2.3 / +4.3" I mean that Vlade Divac was their center, he was 22, he had a BPM of +2.3 in the regular season and a +4.3 in the playoffs. Yes, BPM misses out on a lot of subtle stuff but I thought it a good quick-hits indicator of the skills of the players.
I also list the playoff players (20+ MPG) in order of OLoad (which is usage that integrates assists) and it has everyone's per game average for minutes, points, rebounds, assists and stocks (steals plus blocks), but all of those (including minutes) are adjusted for pace.
I then cover the three highest players in scoring per 100 (with their true shooting relative to league average) and the three highest players in Assists per 100. I realize that these are arbitrary, but I wanted a quick-hits reference for how these teams' offenses ran.
I then talk about Heliocentrism, Wingmen and Depth. Basically I add up all of the team's VORP (again, basketball-reference) and then figure out what percentage of that VORP comes from the #1 player (Heliocentrism), from the #2 and 3 players combined (Wingmen) and Depth (everyone else). I include the ranking among the top 100 for reference. There are only 82 of these rankings, because 18 teams pre-date BPM/VORP, so I only have 82 to work with. I'm not saying that these are particularly meaningful, I just thought they were cool.
Playoff Offensive Rating: Amount by which your playoff offensive rating exceeds the offensive rating you'd expect given the regular season defensive rating of your playoff opponents. If you would be expected to post a 99 given your opponents but you post a 104, that's graded as +5. This way we can compare across eras.
Playoff Defensive Rating is the same as Offensive Rating, just the opposite.
Playoff SRS: Is SRS measured *only* in the playoffs. Overall SRS is a mix of both playoffs and regular season.
Total SRS Increase Through Playoffs: Basically their Overall SRS minus their Regular Season SRS. This is basically how much better a team did in the playoffs than you'd guess, relative to their regular season performance.
Average Playoff Opponent Offense: The average regular season offensive rating of your playoff opponents.
Average Playoff Opponent Defense: The average regular season defensive rating of your playoff opponents.
Rankings of any kind are out of my list. So if I say that the '91 Lakers had the 42nd best regular season offense, I don't mean "42nd best of All-Time", I mean "42nd best of my Top 100 Teams of All_Time". Which will be pretty comparable, but I want to be clear about this.
I also walk through the playoffs at each round, covering their opponent their SRS (at that time), how many games the series was, the margin of victory (and a "+" is always in the favor of the discussed team; losing a series by +2.0 means that you outscored the other team by two points a game on average despite losing) and for reference I put in an SRS equivalency (beat a +5 SRS team by 5 points a game, that's an equivalent +10 SRS series).
In writeups, if I ever say a player shot at "-8%" or something, that means "his true shooting was 8% lower than the league average that year". Any time I say "a player shot" and follow it by a percent, I am *always* using true shooting percentage unless otherwise indicated.
I also have a modern comps section for any teams pre-2011. It's basically me weighting each statistical characteristic and feeding each player's stats into the BackPicks database and choosing the best-rated comp from the list. I might list something like this:
PG: 2017 LeBron James (worse rebounding, better passing, way fewer shots)
What I mean is, "This team's point guard was basically 2017 LeBron James, but make his passing better, make his rebounding worse and make him take way fewer shots).
Anyhow. I don't know how clear any of this will be, so please let me know what does and doesn't work from these writeups. And thanks for reading!
#34*. The 2020 Los Angeles Lakers
Spoiler:
Overall SRS: +9.93, Standard Deviations: +1.87, Won NBA Finals (Preseason 2nd)
Regular Season Record: 52-19, Regular Season SRS: +6.28 (64th), Earned the 1 Seed
Regular Season Offensive Rating: +1.4 (82nd), Regular Season Defensive Rating: -4.3 (38th)
PG: Alex Caruso, -0.2 / -0.5
SG: Kentavious Caldwell-Pope, -0.8 / -0.8
SF: Danny Green, +0.5 / -0.7
PF: LeBron James, +8.4 / +10.6
C: Anthony Davis, +8.0 / +8.7
6th : Kyle Kuzma, -2.6 / -3.6
7th: Rajon Rondo, -1.3 / +3.6
LeBron James (PF, 35): 34 MPPG, 34% OLoad, 25 / 8 / 10 / 2 on +1.2%
Anthony Davis (C, 26): 34 MPPG, 28% OLoad, 26 / 9 / 3 / 4 on +4.5%
Rajon Rondo (PG, 33): 20 MPPG, 22% OLoad, 7 / 3 / 5 / 1 on -7.1%
Kyle Kuzma (PF, 24): 25 MPPG, 22% OLoad, 13 / 4 / 1 / 1 on -3.4%
Alex Caruso (PG, 25): 18 MPPG, 15% OLoad, 5 / 2 / 2 / 1 on -4.0%
Kentavious Caldwell-Pope (SG, 26): 25 MPPG, 14% OLoad, 9 / 2 / 2 / 1 on +1.9%
Danny Green (SF, 32): 25 MPPG, 14% OLoad, 8 / 3 / 1 / 2 on -1.3%
Scoring/100: Anthony Davis (36.1 / +4.5%), LeBron James (34.9 / +1.2%), Kyle Kuzma (24.4 / -3.4%)
Assists/100: LeBron James (14.0), Rajon Rondo (11.6), Alex Caruso (5.0)
Heliocentrism: 41.2% (28th of 84 teams) - LeBron
Wingmen: 43.9% (18th) - AD & Green
Depth: 14.9% (70th)
Playoff Offensive Rating: +4.64 (58th), Playoff Defensive Rating: -4.12 (67th)
Playoff SRS: +11.70 (37th), Total SRS Increase through Playoffs: +3.65 (28th)
Average Playoff Opponent Offense: +2.42 (49th), Average Playoff Opponent Defense: +0.66 (96th)
Playoff Heliocentrism: 46.2% (9th of 84 teams) - LeBron
Playoff Wingmen: 51.9% (4th) - AD & Rondo
Playoff Depth: 1.9% (84th)
Round 1: Portland Trail Blazers (-0.6), won 4-1, by +10.6 points a game (+10.0 SRS eq)
Round 2: Houston Rockets (+5.4), won 4-1, by +7.2 points a game (+12.6 SRS eq)
Round 3: Denver Nuggets (+3.6), won 4-1, by +4.4 points a game (+8.0 SRS eq)
Round 4: Miami Heat (+8.5), won 4-2, by +5.5 points a game (+14.0 SRS eq)
LeBron James’ second tour through Cleveland had been a resounding success. In 2016 he had brought a title to Cleveland, defeating a team that had the best regular season record ever. Coming from being down 3-1, it was a storybook ending. In 2017 the team was almost as good, but met the Kevin Durant Warriors in the Finals and lost fairly decisively (no shame in that game). In the offseason talented #2 Kyrie Irving decided that he didn’t want to live in LeBron’s shadow and left via demanded trade to the Celtics. The Irving-less Cavs, their roster (minus) LeBron running on fumes, still won the East but in lackluster fashion, posting a +2.9 OSRS for the season (the worst team to win a conference in a long time) and were crushed in the Finals by 15 points a game. It was pretty clear that title hopes in Cleveland were dwindling.
So LeBron left. There were a variety of suitors and he eventually signed with the Los Angeles Lakers. The choice seemed like a non-sequitur at the time; sure LA was a big media market with strong ties to the film industry, and it did have a surplus of young talent, but were just coming off of a 35-47 season. There was no other two of a Big Three waiting here for him. So for a superstar that wanted to win rings, the Lakers seemed a curious decision (and the media expressed their surprise in a variety of ways, some more productive than others).
2019 was a rough year for the Lakers. GM Magic Johnson, for whatever reason, worked to surround LeBron with secondary ball-handlers but not shooters, and the results were predictably lackluster. LeBron missed some time with an injury (first time that’s happened in a while) and the Lakers only won 37 games, two better than they did without LeBron. And the matter wasn’t improved by LeBron’s clear frustration with his team construction, and his apparent willingness/desire to see some of his teammates traded for players that could win right away. It was a moderate crapshow of a season that made nobody involved look good.
Elsewhere in the West was a different kind of crapshow. Anthony Davis had been drafted #1 overall, the kind of can’t miss prospect that the league hadn’t seen since LeBron James (unless you want to be generous and say Blake Griffin). He was already extremely long and quick, unusually skilled for a big. He developed into a strong rebounder and an outstanding defender (posting blocks with steals in quantities reminiscent of Hakeem or Robinson). And he could post high usage with good efficiency, combining a combination of lob finishing, post game and an impressively solid midrange game. In the modern game he was arguably the best all-around big man pick and roll man, because he could both rim-run and shoot from a distance. He could even ball-handle, posting strong assist numbers as a big in 2019 while keeping his turnovers low. By most box score metrics he was a Top 10 player, maybe even Top 5. But he played on the Pelicans, who were rarely above 500. Davis was becoming frustrated with carrying the team to first round exits at best, and eventually made clear his desire to be traded.
The two situations blended together when Davis was traded to the Lakers for (basically) two firsts, Lonzo Ball and Brandon Ingram. It left the Lakers with a thinned out roster, but they now had both LeBron and Anthony Davis. Davis, of all the teammates LeBron had ever had, may have been the best fit. Davis, despite being a 30% usage player, was surprisingly not ball-dominant. He was perhaps even more of a finisher than initiator, which worked perfectly with one of the best initiators ever. LeBron James was perhaps the best pick and roll ball handler in the game, and Anthony Davis may have been the best pick and roll big man in the game. The beauty was that Davis had the skills to exploit whatever the defense gave him; if they played off him he could shoot, and if they played him (or the ball handler) tight, Davis was the best lob threat ever. And LeBron was superb at making the right choice given what the defense gave him. And much of Davis’ value didn’t even come on offense, but instead in being an incredibly mobile rim protector. I know I’m going on about this but I want to be clear: LeBron and AD were insane together. The rest of the roster was a little less impressive. They had a variety of solid players (Rondo, Caruso, KCP, Danny Green) and some strong defensive rim-runners (Dwight Howard and JaVale McGee). The oddsmakers were impressed but a little skeptical of . . . I honestly don’t know. I guess they figured that there was no way that Anthony Davis and some subtraction from a 37 win team would win a championship. They still were ranked 2nd in the odds, behind the Clippers who combined Kawhi Leonard and Paul George.
The Lakers went on to post the best record in the West for the COVID-shortened 2020 season. Their RSRS of +6.28 was 3rd in the league. In many ways the ‘20 Lakers were the anti-Cavs. Where the Cavs had posted weak defenses, but bombarded opponents with dominant shooting and spacing, the Lakers led with outstanding defense (Howard/McGee plus AD made for a lot of rim protection and rebounding, while LeBron showed an unusual amount of buy-in on the defensive end) and an offense that sucked from three (well, maybe an exaggeration but 23rd in attempts and 21st in makes is clearly poor) and instead made their hay at the rim. And in another inversion of the norm, LeBron functioned more as a passer than scorer, leading the league in assists and posting unusually low scoring efficiency for him. Going into the playoffs they were well-regarded . . . but doubted. When the bubble had started back up the Lakers had looked sluggish at first. The Clippers were still the fashionable pick, the going-against-the-grain pick that was so common that it was in the majority.
In the first round the Lakers drew the Blazers (-0.6), a fierce offense but weak defense. The Lakers lost the first game by 7 (validating all the doubters) . . . and then won the next four games by 60 points between them. AD posted a 30/9/4 on +9.1% and LeBron averaged a 27/10/10 with +14.3% shooting. The Lakers had rolled to a 10.6 point per game victory, solid, but not great against a relatively weak team.
In the second round they faced the Rockets (+5.4), who were now sporting Russell Westbrook. The Rockets won game one by 15 (validating the doubters) . . . and then the Lakers won the next four by 51 points between them. There were doubts about how the Lakers would survive playing Dwight Howard and JaVale McGee against the Rockets small-ball attack. The Lakers circumvented the problem by simply not playing those two and using AD at the center. And it quickly became clear that, while the Lakers preferred to play big, they were actually a much better designed small team than the Rockets. AD averaged a 25/12/4 on +9.8% and LeBron averaged a 26/10/7 on +3.9% (with two steals a game). The Lakers won by 7.2 points a game, a pretty solid victory.
In the Conference Finals, instead of playing the preseason favorite Clippers they faced the Denver Nuggets (+3.6). The Nuggets had come from being down 3-1 in both of the prior series, and were considered a tough matchup. OSRS doesn’t like them too much, given that their MoVs for the prior two series were -3.4 and +0.5. Still, they were a capable (and curiously constructed) team, built around the talents of a passing big man, of all things. The Lakers shook up the routine by losing Game 3 instead of Game 1, but they still took the series in five games. They struggled to stop Denver’s offense, but the Nuggets couldn’t stop the Lakers at all. AD averaged a 31/6/3 on +10.6% and LeBron averaged a 27/10/9 on +4.3%. The Lakers took the series by 4.4 points a game, a solid win but not underwhelming given that the Nuggets hadn’t been dominant to that point.
In the Finals they faced the Heat (+8.5), who had been mediocre through the regular season but had ripped through the playoffs. J.J. Reddick, asked about his estimate, quipped that the Lakers had the two best players in the series and that the Heat had the next five. While probably true (depending on how you rate Playoff Rondo), the series went pretty much the same as all the others had. The Heat’s zone defense was exposed (and subsequently retired) quickly. The Heat were undermanned, missing point guard Goran Dragic for the series (and outstanding young big Bam Adebayo for two games). And if it weren’t for Jimmy Butler playing, frankly, LeBronesque basketball the Heat would likely have lost big. As it was Butler averaged a 26/8/10 on +9.3% (with 2.2 steals a game), comparable to LeBron’s 30/12/9 on +10.6% or AD’s 25/11/3 on +10.4%. But the Lakers won the series in six by 5.5 points a game. Do I think that playing the Heat with no Dragic and only ⅔ of Bam cheapens the win? Probably some, though Butler’s surprising brilliance probably cancels those out. I still think that the Lakers would have won, but it’s definitely worth remembering.
The 2020 Lakers probably represented the biggest two-man carry-job ever on a champion ever. Every single series they posted epic stat lines with efficient shooting and outstanding defense. Here are the Helio numbers (for the top two players) comparing the ‘20 Lakers with the next highest team I found, (I didn’t look too hard) the ‘01 Lakers:
2020: 77.7% reg season / 87%
2001: 80.8% reg season / 55%
It’s really hard to overstate how much LeBron and AD combined were by themselves enough to roll through the playoffs. Fairly unprecedented. Also hard to overstate how underwhelming their supporting cast was (playoff Rondo excepted).
10 |
9 | Celtics, Lakers
8 |
7 | Raptors, Heat
6 | Bucks, Clippers
5 |
4 | Rockets
3 | Nuggets, Jazz
2 | Mavericks
1 |
0 | Thunder, Suns
-0 | 76ers, Magic, Grizzlies, Spurs, Pelicans
-1 | Pacers, Blazers, Kings
-2 |
-3 |
-4 | Nets, Bulls, Pistons, Timberwolves
-5 | Wizards
-6 | Knicks
-7 | Hornets, Hawks, Cavs
-8 | Warriors
-9 |
-10|
2020 was a fairly uncompetitive year. It’s not that the extremes were high; only three teams above/below +/- 8 isn’t that bad. But it’s that only ten teams were between +2 and -4; tons of teams were at the edges and a full third of the league was at -4 or worse. When you put everything together, the Lakers were a solid regular season team (64th on the list) and a very strong playoff team (37th on the list), but they did both in a reasonably noncompetitive league, which hurts them. Detractors argue that they never played a really good opponent (though the Heat had certainly done well in the playoffs) but the Lakers also never looked close to losing any of those series (in retrospect). 2020 was a weird year; there were only three teams that were expected to be really good: the Bucks, Lakers and Clippers. The Clippers imploded, the Bucks imploded and the Lakers kind of waltzed to a championship. I think they’re a perfectly good championship team historically. But I do think that they’re on the weak end for what we’ve seen since 2011.
* Addendum, I accidentally credited them for playing the Celtics not the Heat, which bumped their score. Adjusted for that they finish with a +9.66 OSRS and a +1.78 SD, which slots them 42nd, above the ‘06 Mavs and below the ‘04 Pistons. But I’ve already posted those so I thought it easier to post the ‘20 Lakers in the wrong position and explain it than to re-orient the rankings mid-run. Apologies for the confusion.
Regular Season Record: 52-19, Regular Season SRS: +6.28 (64th), Earned the 1 Seed
Regular Season Offensive Rating: +1.4 (82nd), Regular Season Defensive Rating: -4.3 (38th)
PG: Alex Caruso, -0.2 / -0.5
SG: Kentavious Caldwell-Pope, -0.8 / -0.8
SF: Danny Green, +0.5 / -0.7
PF: LeBron James, +8.4 / +10.6
C: Anthony Davis, +8.0 / +8.7
6th : Kyle Kuzma, -2.6 / -3.6
7th: Rajon Rondo, -1.3 / +3.6
LeBron James (PF, 35): 34 MPPG, 34% OLoad, 25 / 8 / 10 / 2 on +1.2%
Anthony Davis (C, 26): 34 MPPG, 28% OLoad, 26 / 9 / 3 / 4 on +4.5%
Rajon Rondo (PG, 33): 20 MPPG, 22% OLoad, 7 / 3 / 5 / 1 on -7.1%
Kyle Kuzma (PF, 24): 25 MPPG, 22% OLoad, 13 / 4 / 1 / 1 on -3.4%
Alex Caruso (PG, 25): 18 MPPG, 15% OLoad, 5 / 2 / 2 / 1 on -4.0%
Kentavious Caldwell-Pope (SG, 26): 25 MPPG, 14% OLoad, 9 / 2 / 2 / 1 on +1.9%
Danny Green (SF, 32): 25 MPPG, 14% OLoad, 8 / 3 / 1 / 2 on -1.3%
Scoring/100: Anthony Davis (36.1 / +4.5%), LeBron James (34.9 / +1.2%), Kyle Kuzma (24.4 / -3.4%)
Assists/100: LeBron James (14.0), Rajon Rondo (11.6), Alex Caruso (5.0)
Heliocentrism: 41.2% (28th of 84 teams) - LeBron
Wingmen: 43.9% (18th) - AD & Green
Depth: 14.9% (70th)
Playoff Offensive Rating: +4.64 (58th), Playoff Defensive Rating: -4.12 (67th)
Playoff SRS: +11.70 (37th), Total SRS Increase through Playoffs: +3.65 (28th)
Average Playoff Opponent Offense: +2.42 (49th), Average Playoff Opponent Defense: +0.66 (96th)
Playoff Heliocentrism: 46.2% (9th of 84 teams) - LeBron
Playoff Wingmen: 51.9% (4th) - AD & Rondo
Playoff Depth: 1.9% (84th)
Round 1: Portland Trail Blazers (-0.6), won 4-1, by +10.6 points a game (+10.0 SRS eq)
Round 2: Houston Rockets (+5.4), won 4-1, by +7.2 points a game (+12.6 SRS eq)
Round 3: Denver Nuggets (+3.6), won 4-1, by +4.4 points a game (+8.0 SRS eq)
Round 4: Miami Heat (+8.5), won 4-2, by +5.5 points a game (+14.0 SRS eq)
LeBron James’ second tour through Cleveland had been a resounding success. In 2016 he had brought a title to Cleveland, defeating a team that had the best regular season record ever. Coming from being down 3-1, it was a storybook ending. In 2017 the team was almost as good, but met the Kevin Durant Warriors in the Finals and lost fairly decisively (no shame in that game). In the offseason talented #2 Kyrie Irving decided that he didn’t want to live in LeBron’s shadow and left via demanded trade to the Celtics. The Irving-less Cavs, their roster (minus) LeBron running on fumes, still won the East but in lackluster fashion, posting a +2.9 OSRS for the season (the worst team to win a conference in a long time) and were crushed in the Finals by 15 points a game. It was pretty clear that title hopes in Cleveland were dwindling.
So LeBron left. There were a variety of suitors and he eventually signed with the Los Angeles Lakers. The choice seemed like a non-sequitur at the time; sure LA was a big media market with strong ties to the film industry, and it did have a surplus of young talent, but were just coming off of a 35-47 season. There was no other two of a Big Three waiting here for him. So for a superstar that wanted to win rings, the Lakers seemed a curious decision (and the media expressed their surprise in a variety of ways, some more productive than others).
2019 was a rough year for the Lakers. GM Magic Johnson, for whatever reason, worked to surround LeBron with secondary ball-handlers but not shooters, and the results were predictably lackluster. LeBron missed some time with an injury (first time that’s happened in a while) and the Lakers only won 37 games, two better than they did without LeBron. And the matter wasn’t improved by LeBron’s clear frustration with his team construction, and his apparent willingness/desire to see some of his teammates traded for players that could win right away. It was a moderate crapshow of a season that made nobody involved look good.
Elsewhere in the West was a different kind of crapshow. Anthony Davis had been drafted #1 overall, the kind of can’t miss prospect that the league hadn’t seen since LeBron James (unless you want to be generous and say Blake Griffin). He was already extremely long and quick, unusually skilled for a big. He developed into a strong rebounder and an outstanding defender (posting blocks with steals in quantities reminiscent of Hakeem or Robinson). And he could post high usage with good efficiency, combining a combination of lob finishing, post game and an impressively solid midrange game. In the modern game he was arguably the best all-around big man pick and roll man, because he could both rim-run and shoot from a distance. He could even ball-handle, posting strong assist numbers as a big in 2019 while keeping his turnovers low. By most box score metrics he was a Top 10 player, maybe even Top 5. But he played on the Pelicans, who were rarely above 500. Davis was becoming frustrated with carrying the team to first round exits at best, and eventually made clear his desire to be traded.
The two situations blended together when Davis was traded to the Lakers for (basically) two firsts, Lonzo Ball and Brandon Ingram. It left the Lakers with a thinned out roster, but they now had both LeBron and Anthony Davis. Davis, of all the teammates LeBron had ever had, may have been the best fit. Davis, despite being a 30% usage player, was surprisingly not ball-dominant. He was perhaps even more of a finisher than initiator, which worked perfectly with one of the best initiators ever. LeBron James was perhaps the best pick and roll ball handler in the game, and Anthony Davis may have been the best pick and roll big man in the game. The beauty was that Davis had the skills to exploit whatever the defense gave him; if they played off him he could shoot, and if they played him (or the ball handler) tight, Davis was the best lob threat ever. And LeBron was superb at making the right choice given what the defense gave him. And much of Davis’ value didn’t even come on offense, but instead in being an incredibly mobile rim protector. I know I’m going on about this but I want to be clear: LeBron and AD were insane together. The rest of the roster was a little less impressive. They had a variety of solid players (Rondo, Caruso, KCP, Danny Green) and some strong defensive rim-runners (Dwight Howard and JaVale McGee). The oddsmakers were impressed but a little skeptical of . . . I honestly don’t know. I guess they figured that there was no way that Anthony Davis and some subtraction from a 37 win team would win a championship. They still were ranked 2nd in the odds, behind the Clippers who combined Kawhi Leonard and Paul George.
The Lakers went on to post the best record in the West for the COVID-shortened 2020 season. Their RSRS of +6.28 was 3rd in the league. In many ways the ‘20 Lakers were the anti-Cavs. Where the Cavs had posted weak defenses, but bombarded opponents with dominant shooting and spacing, the Lakers led with outstanding defense (Howard/McGee plus AD made for a lot of rim protection and rebounding, while LeBron showed an unusual amount of buy-in on the defensive end) and an offense that sucked from three (well, maybe an exaggeration but 23rd in attempts and 21st in makes is clearly poor) and instead made their hay at the rim. And in another inversion of the norm, LeBron functioned more as a passer than scorer, leading the league in assists and posting unusually low scoring efficiency for him. Going into the playoffs they were well-regarded . . . but doubted. When the bubble had started back up the Lakers had looked sluggish at first. The Clippers were still the fashionable pick, the going-against-the-grain pick that was so common that it was in the majority.
In the first round the Lakers drew the Blazers (-0.6), a fierce offense but weak defense. The Lakers lost the first game by 7 (validating all the doubters) . . . and then won the next four games by 60 points between them. AD posted a 30/9/4 on +9.1% and LeBron averaged a 27/10/10 with +14.3% shooting. The Lakers had rolled to a 10.6 point per game victory, solid, but not great against a relatively weak team.
In the second round they faced the Rockets (+5.4), who were now sporting Russell Westbrook. The Rockets won game one by 15 (validating the doubters) . . . and then the Lakers won the next four by 51 points between them. There were doubts about how the Lakers would survive playing Dwight Howard and JaVale McGee against the Rockets small-ball attack. The Lakers circumvented the problem by simply not playing those two and using AD at the center. And it quickly became clear that, while the Lakers preferred to play big, they were actually a much better designed small team than the Rockets. AD averaged a 25/12/4 on +9.8% and LeBron averaged a 26/10/7 on +3.9% (with two steals a game). The Lakers won by 7.2 points a game, a pretty solid victory.
In the Conference Finals, instead of playing the preseason favorite Clippers they faced the Denver Nuggets (+3.6). The Nuggets had come from being down 3-1 in both of the prior series, and were considered a tough matchup. OSRS doesn’t like them too much, given that their MoVs for the prior two series were -3.4 and +0.5. Still, they were a capable (and curiously constructed) team, built around the talents of a passing big man, of all things. The Lakers shook up the routine by losing Game 3 instead of Game 1, but they still took the series in five games. They struggled to stop Denver’s offense, but the Nuggets couldn’t stop the Lakers at all. AD averaged a 31/6/3 on +10.6% and LeBron averaged a 27/10/9 on +4.3%. The Lakers took the series by 4.4 points a game, a solid win but not underwhelming given that the Nuggets hadn’t been dominant to that point.
In the Finals they faced the Heat (+8.5), who had been mediocre through the regular season but had ripped through the playoffs. J.J. Reddick, asked about his estimate, quipped that the Lakers had the two best players in the series and that the Heat had the next five. While probably true (depending on how you rate Playoff Rondo), the series went pretty much the same as all the others had. The Heat’s zone defense was exposed (and subsequently retired) quickly. The Heat were undermanned, missing point guard Goran Dragic for the series (and outstanding young big Bam Adebayo for two games). And if it weren’t for Jimmy Butler playing, frankly, LeBronesque basketball the Heat would likely have lost big. As it was Butler averaged a 26/8/10 on +9.3% (with 2.2 steals a game), comparable to LeBron’s 30/12/9 on +10.6% or AD’s 25/11/3 on +10.4%. But the Lakers won the series in six by 5.5 points a game. Do I think that playing the Heat with no Dragic and only ⅔ of Bam cheapens the win? Probably some, though Butler’s surprising brilliance probably cancels those out. I still think that the Lakers would have won, but it’s definitely worth remembering.
The 2020 Lakers probably represented the biggest two-man carry-job ever on a champion ever. Every single series they posted epic stat lines with efficient shooting and outstanding defense. Here are the Helio numbers (for the top two players) comparing the ‘20 Lakers with the next highest team I found, (I didn’t look too hard) the ‘01 Lakers:
2020: 77.7% reg season / 87%
2001: 80.8% reg season / 55%
It’s really hard to overstate how much LeBron and AD combined were by themselves enough to roll through the playoffs. Fairly unprecedented. Also hard to overstate how underwhelming their supporting cast was (playoff Rondo excepted).
10 |
9 | Celtics, Lakers
8 |
7 | Raptors, Heat
6 | Bucks, Clippers
5 |
4 | Rockets
3 | Nuggets, Jazz
2 | Mavericks
1 |
0 | Thunder, Suns
-0 | 76ers, Magic, Grizzlies, Spurs, Pelicans
-1 | Pacers, Blazers, Kings
-2 |
-3 |
-4 | Nets, Bulls, Pistons, Timberwolves
-5 | Wizards
-6 | Knicks
-7 | Hornets, Hawks, Cavs
-8 | Warriors
-9 |
-10|
2020 was a fairly uncompetitive year. It’s not that the extremes were high; only three teams above/below +/- 8 isn’t that bad. But it’s that only ten teams were between +2 and -4; tons of teams were at the edges and a full third of the league was at -4 or worse. When you put everything together, the Lakers were a solid regular season team (64th on the list) and a very strong playoff team (37th on the list), but they did both in a reasonably noncompetitive league, which hurts them. Detractors argue that they never played a really good opponent (though the Heat had certainly done well in the playoffs) but the Lakers also never looked close to losing any of those series (in retrospect). 2020 was a weird year; there were only three teams that were expected to be really good: the Bucks, Lakers and Clippers. The Clippers imploded, the Bucks imploded and the Lakers kind of waltzed to a championship. I think they’re a perfectly good championship team historically. But I do think that they’re on the weak end for what we’ve seen since 2011.
* Addendum, I accidentally credited them for playing the Celtics not the Heat, which bumped their score. Adjusted for that they finish with a +9.66 OSRS and a +1.78 SD, which slots them 42nd, above the ‘06 Mavs and below the ‘04 Pistons. But I’ve already posted those so I thought it easier to post the ‘20 Lakers in the wrong position and explain it than to re-orient the rankings mid-run. Apologies for the confusion.
#33. The 2010 Orlando Magic
Spoiler:
Overall SRS: +10.56, Standard Deviations: +2.11, Lost in Conference Finals (Preseason 5th)
Regular Season Record: 59-23, Regular Season SRS: +7.12 (41st), Earned the 2 Seed
Regular Season Offensive Rating: +3.8 (48th), Regular Season Defensive Rating: -4.3 (35th)
PG: Jameer Nelson, +0.7 / +5.2
SG: Vince Carter, +2.0 / -0.9
SF: Matt Barnes, +1.3 / +2.2
PF: Rashard Lewis, +1.8 / +3.5
C: Dwight Howard, +4.4 / +3.8
6th: Mickael Pietrus, +0.9 / +5.7
Vince Carter (SG, 33): 34 MPPG, 25% OLoad, 18 / 4 / 3 / 1 on -0.2%
Jameer Nelson (PG, 27): 31 MPPG, 25% OLoad, 14 / 3 / 6 / 1 on -0.3%
Dwight Howard (C, 24): 38 MPPG, 23% OLoad, 20 / 14 / 2 / 4 on +8.7%
Rashard Lewis (PF, 30): 36 MPPG, 19% OLoad, 15 / 5 / 2 / 2 on +3.0%
Mickael Pietrus (SF, 27): 24 MPPG, 17% OLoad, 9 / 3 / 1 / 1 on +1.2%
Matt Barnes (SF, 29): 28 MPPG, 16% OLoad, 10 / 6 / 2 / 1 on +3.3%
Scoring/100: Vince Carter (28.1 / -0.2%), Dwight Howard (27.6 / +8.7%), Jameer Nelson (22.9 / -0.3%)
Assists/100: Jameer Nelson (9.9), Vince Carter (5.3), Matt Barnes (3.3)
Playoff Offensive Rating: +6.46 (37th), Playoff Defensive Rating: -7.06 (29th)
Playoff SRS: +13.44 (20th), Total SRS Increase through Playoffs: +3.44 (32nd)
Average Playoff Opponent Offense: +0.36 (92nd), Average Playoff Opponent Defense: -3.26 (25th)
Round 1: Charlotte Bobcats (+1.3), won 4-0, by +9.3 points a game (+10.6 SRS eq)
Round 2: Atlanta Hawks (+4.7), won 4-0, by +25.3 points a game (+30.0 SRS eq)
Round 3: Boston Celtics (+7.1), lost 2-4, outscored by 2.8 points a game (+5.3 SRS eq)
Round 4:
In 2009 the Magic came out of nowhere. They were 11th in preseason betting, but posted the 4th best record and RSRS of any team in the league. And in the playoffs they beat the ‘09 Cavs, perhaps the best team in the league. They did it with two things: Dwight Howard being a beast and tons of three-pointers. The basic premise was that almost nobody could stop Howard one on one, and the Magic would punish attention in the paint with long bombs. It worked pretty well except for two problems: 1) if the other team *could* slow/stop Howard one on one the whole thing kind of fell apart and 2) Howard was not a particularly effective passing big, limiting how much the advantage could be exploited. The first problem was generously pointed out in the NBA Finals when the Lakers completely wrecked them.
Going into 2010 the Magic were taken considerably more seriously, ranked 5th in the preseason odds. They’d tweaked their lineup, adding veteran Vince Carter to provide more on-ball pressure, but the real MVP for the team was Dwight. It’s easy to forget, but Howard was a monster in his time. He was arguably the best rebounder in the game, and could combine above average usage with really good efficiency. This is a bit tailored, but if I ask stathead for seasons with at least 3.5 blocks per 100, 17 rebounds per 100, 25 minutes per game and 26 points per 100 with true shooting at 58% or above we get two Dwight Howard, one Shaq and two David Robinson seasons. Again, this suffers from being a bit cherry-picked, but it should convey that Howard blended rebounding, defense and scoring in volumes that very few players ever had before. Was he as good as Robinson or Shaq? No; Howard was a weak passer and quite prone to turnovers, but these only limited his value, they certainly didn’t eliminate it.
Anyhow, on to the actual season. The 2010 Magic had another very strong year, finishing only behind the ‘10 Cavs in the East. The Magic posted the 41st RSRS on this list, certainly respectable. In the first round they drew the Bobcats (+1.3) and swept them easily by 9.3 points a game. The Magic led all four factors, in spite of Howard’s fairly awful series (10/9/2 on -8.3% with 5 blocks a game and lots of foul trouble). Nevertheless, it was a pretty solid win.
In the second round they faced the +4.7 Atlanta Hawks. And they proceeded to unleash one of the most lopsided butt-whippings in history. In Game 1 the Magic led by 2 after the first quarter, 20 at halftime, 41 after the 3rd and then they pulled their starters. In Game 2 they were only up by 1 going into the 4th . . . before winning the game by 14. In Game 3 they led by 19 at the half, 24 going into the 3rd and played 13 combined starter minutes in the 4th. In Game 4 they won by a measly 14. The total damages were a 25.3 point per game whipping. Some of the margin was in the 4th quarter of blowouts, but the vast majority of it was before the 4th quarter at all. The Magic simply destroyed the Hawks. And remember, the Hawks were pretty good (+4.7 OSRS is nothing to sneeze at). And they weren’t injured at all (that I could tell). Howard averaged a 21/13/2 on +22.2% with 3 blocks a game. It was a crazy victory.
In the Conference Finals they faced the +7.1 Boston Celtics. Strange as it may sound, the Magic likely would have been a better matchup against the ostensibly superior Cavs (given that Howard had proven that he could have his way with their frontcourt the prior year). The Celtics instead combined smart high-executing defense, with a combination of Kendrick Perkins (whose major selling point was defense in the post) and the old, but not done, Rasheed Wallace to throw at Howard. Even if on paper the Magic were far superior, the Celtics weren’t going to go down easy. And they didn’t. While Howard managed a strong 22/11/1 (that one assist isn’t great) on +4.1% shooting with 3 blocks a game, the rest of the Magic shot 33.8% from three and shot -0.5% as a team. Vince Carter managed only 14 a game on -9.5%. The Celtics were held to shooting -0.2% and it was a narrow thing, with the Celtics pulling out a tight win, 2.8 points a game. Was the whole series swung by the Magic’s three pointers not falling? Maybe, but even if they’d shot at their regular season average, it would only have tied things up. I’m not at all convinced that the Celtics were the better team, but they were very much the rock to the Magic’s scissors, and the result was a tight matchup that the Celtics won.
Now. You may be thinking that the 2010 Orlando Magic have no business being ranked this high. But seriously, that Hawks series! That’s the reason they’re so high, beginning and end. It is simply an incredible achievement. So how much you think of the ‘10 Magic ranking really ties together with how much you think of that kind of blowout. A lot of it depends on how predictive such a thing is. So. Below I’ve gathered every single playoff series (minimum four games) with a 15 point or higher margin of victory, sorted by opponent SRS, along with how far that team got:
2004: Pacers over Celtics (-2.0), by +16.8 -> loss in Conf Finals
2020: Raptors over Nets (-1.0), by +20.5 -> loss in Semis
1971: Bucks over Warriors (-0.8), by +16 -> Championship
2019: Bucks over Pistons (-0.6), by +23.8 -> loss in Conf Finals
2009: Cavs over Pistons (-0.4), by +15.5 -> loss in Conf Finals
2016: Thunder over Mavericks (0.0), by +18.2 -> loss in Conf Finals
2017: Warriors over Blazers (+0.2), by +18.0 -> Championship
2016: Warriors over Rockets (+0.3), by +18.8 -> loss in NBA Finals
2012: Spurs over Jazz (+0.9), by +16.0 -> loss in Conf Finals
2009: Cavs over Hawks (+1.0), by +18.0 -> loss in Conf Finals
1978: 76ers over Knicks (+1.1), by +18.7 -> loss in Conf Finals
2009: Nuggets over Hornets (+1.4), by +24.2 -> loss in Conf Finals
2013: Spurs over Lakers (+1.5), by +18.7 -> loss in NBA Finals
1980: Celtics over Rockets (+1.9), by +18.5 -> loss in Conf Finals
1989: Suns over Warriors (+2.1), by +15.8 -> loss in Conf Finals
2017: Cavs over Raptors (+2.5), by +15.3 -> loss in NBA Finals
2018: Warriors over Cavs (+2.9), by +15.0 -> Championship
2017: Cavs over Celtics (+3.3), by +20.0 -> loss in NBA Finals
2016: Cavs over Raptors (+4.0), by +15.5 -> Championship
2017: Warriors over Jazz (+4.6), by +15.0 -> Championship
2010: Magic over Hawks (+4.7), by +25.3 -> loss in Conf Finals
1986: Celtics over Bucks (+6.7), by +15.0 -> Championship
1996: Bulls over Magic (+8.5), by +16.7 -> Championship
2017: Warriors over Spurs (+8.9), by +16.0 -> Championship
2001: Lakers over Spurs (+10.3), by +18.2 -> Championship
That’s a lot of data so I’ll try and digest it a bit. First. There are twelve teams since 2003 (when the first round went to four games) that won a series by 15 points or more against opponents at +2.5 or worse. You’ll note that only one of them won a championship. But that doesn’t mean that these blowouts mean nothing. Assuming these blowouts were all achieved in the first round (which is often, but not always true) you’d expect these 12 teams to finish in the following way (assuming the blowouts indicated nothing):
1.5 Champions
1.5 losing in the Finals
3 losing in the Conference Finals
6 losing in the semis
Instead these teams finished thusly:
1 Champion
3 losing in the Finals
7 losing in the Conference Finals
1 losing in the Semis
So, while blowing out a modest team (+2.5 or less) by 15 certainly doesn’t make a champion, it certainly seems to suggest that the team doing the blowing out was certainly better than an average team going into the Semis. So it’s not everything, but there is value there.
Now look at the teams who had 15+ point per game blowouts against teams better than +2.5. There are nine such. The teams who did it against the four toughest opponents not only won the championship but are considered to be four of the best teams *ever*. Of the remaining five teams you have two all-time greats (the ‘17 and ‘18 Warriors again), the ‘16 Cavs, the ‘17 Cavs (who had almost no chance of winning the Finals due to opposition) . . . and the ‘10 Magic. And I’ll point out that the Hawks were pretty good opponents for this group.
Take from this whatever you’d like. I’m just saying, blowing out a good team is a really, really good indicator that you are, historically, the real deal.
10 | Magic
9 |
8 | Lakers
7 | Celtics, Suns
6 |
5 |
4 | Cavs, Nuggets
3 | Jazz, Thunder, Mavs, Spurs
2 |
1 | Bucks
0 | Hawks, Bobcats, Blazers
-0 | Heat, Rockets
-1 | Raptors, Grizzlies
-2 | Bulls, Hornets
-3 | 76ers, Pacers, Warriors
-4 | Knicks, Wizards, Kings
-5 | Pistons
-6 | Clippers
-7 |
-8 | Nets
-9 | TWolves
-10|
2010 was tolerably competitive. Plenty at the margins (Magic, Nets, Timberwolves) but more than ⅔ of the league was between +5 and -5, which is reasonably centered. The Magic’s incredibly high ranking is driven by their blowout of the Hawks. Is that legit? Probably not totally. Even trimming the fourth quarters off of those blowouts would probably drop them five spots at least. But it’s a weird problem. How do you rank a team that, when they’re on, is comparable to the greatest teams ever, but isn’t consistently on? Do you ignore the dominant series, figuring that the rest are their true colors? Or do you honor how transcendent the team was when firing on all cylinders? I think the present ranking errs too much toward the latter, but we would do well to remember that the 2009 and 2010 Magic were very strong teams.
Regular Season Record: 59-23, Regular Season SRS: +7.12 (41st), Earned the 2 Seed
Regular Season Offensive Rating: +3.8 (48th), Regular Season Defensive Rating: -4.3 (35th)
PG: Jameer Nelson, +0.7 / +5.2
SG: Vince Carter, +2.0 / -0.9
SF: Matt Barnes, +1.3 / +2.2
PF: Rashard Lewis, +1.8 / +3.5
C: Dwight Howard, +4.4 / +3.8
6th: Mickael Pietrus, +0.9 / +5.7
Vince Carter (SG, 33): 34 MPPG, 25% OLoad, 18 / 4 / 3 / 1 on -0.2%
Jameer Nelson (PG, 27): 31 MPPG, 25% OLoad, 14 / 3 / 6 / 1 on -0.3%
Dwight Howard (C, 24): 38 MPPG, 23% OLoad, 20 / 14 / 2 / 4 on +8.7%
Rashard Lewis (PF, 30): 36 MPPG, 19% OLoad, 15 / 5 / 2 / 2 on +3.0%
Mickael Pietrus (SF, 27): 24 MPPG, 17% OLoad, 9 / 3 / 1 / 1 on +1.2%
Matt Barnes (SF, 29): 28 MPPG, 16% OLoad, 10 / 6 / 2 / 1 on +3.3%
Scoring/100: Vince Carter (28.1 / -0.2%), Dwight Howard (27.6 / +8.7%), Jameer Nelson (22.9 / -0.3%)
Assists/100: Jameer Nelson (9.9), Vince Carter (5.3), Matt Barnes (3.3)
Playoff Offensive Rating: +6.46 (37th), Playoff Defensive Rating: -7.06 (29th)
Playoff SRS: +13.44 (20th), Total SRS Increase through Playoffs: +3.44 (32nd)
Average Playoff Opponent Offense: +0.36 (92nd), Average Playoff Opponent Defense: -3.26 (25th)
Round 1: Charlotte Bobcats (+1.3), won 4-0, by +9.3 points a game (+10.6 SRS eq)
Round 2: Atlanta Hawks (+4.7), won 4-0, by +25.3 points a game (+30.0 SRS eq)
Round 3: Boston Celtics (+7.1), lost 2-4, outscored by 2.8 points a game (+5.3 SRS eq)
Round 4:
In 2009 the Magic came out of nowhere. They were 11th in preseason betting, but posted the 4th best record and RSRS of any team in the league. And in the playoffs they beat the ‘09 Cavs, perhaps the best team in the league. They did it with two things: Dwight Howard being a beast and tons of three-pointers. The basic premise was that almost nobody could stop Howard one on one, and the Magic would punish attention in the paint with long bombs. It worked pretty well except for two problems: 1) if the other team *could* slow/stop Howard one on one the whole thing kind of fell apart and 2) Howard was not a particularly effective passing big, limiting how much the advantage could be exploited. The first problem was generously pointed out in the NBA Finals when the Lakers completely wrecked them.
Going into 2010 the Magic were taken considerably more seriously, ranked 5th in the preseason odds. They’d tweaked their lineup, adding veteran Vince Carter to provide more on-ball pressure, but the real MVP for the team was Dwight. It’s easy to forget, but Howard was a monster in his time. He was arguably the best rebounder in the game, and could combine above average usage with really good efficiency. This is a bit tailored, but if I ask stathead for seasons with at least 3.5 blocks per 100, 17 rebounds per 100, 25 minutes per game and 26 points per 100 with true shooting at 58% or above we get two Dwight Howard, one Shaq and two David Robinson seasons. Again, this suffers from being a bit cherry-picked, but it should convey that Howard blended rebounding, defense and scoring in volumes that very few players ever had before. Was he as good as Robinson or Shaq? No; Howard was a weak passer and quite prone to turnovers, but these only limited his value, they certainly didn’t eliminate it.
Anyhow, on to the actual season. The 2010 Magic had another very strong year, finishing only behind the ‘10 Cavs in the East. The Magic posted the 41st RSRS on this list, certainly respectable. In the first round they drew the Bobcats (+1.3) and swept them easily by 9.3 points a game. The Magic led all four factors, in spite of Howard’s fairly awful series (10/9/2 on -8.3% with 5 blocks a game and lots of foul trouble). Nevertheless, it was a pretty solid win.
In the second round they faced the +4.7 Atlanta Hawks. And they proceeded to unleash one of the most lopsided butt-whippings in history. In Game 1 the Magic led by 2 after the first quarter, 20 at halftime, 41 after the 3rd and then they pulled their starters. In Game 2 they were only up by 1 going into the 4th . . . before winning the game by 14. In Game 3 they led by 19 at the half, 24 going into the 3rd and played 13 combined starter minutes in the 4th. In Game 4 they won by a measly 14. The total damages were a 25.3 point per game whipping. Some of the margin was in the 4th quarter of blowouts, but the vast majority of it was before the 4th quarter at all. The Magic simply destroyed the Hawks. And remember, the Hawks were pretty good (+4.7 OSRS is nothing to sneeze at). And they weren’t injured at all (that I could tell). Howard averaged a 21/13/2 on +22.2% with 3 blocks a game. It was a crazy victory.
In the Conference Finals they faced the +7.1 Boston Celtics. Strange as it may sound, the Magic likely would have been a better matchup against the ostensibly superior Cavs (given that Howard had proven that he could have his way with their frontcourt the prior year). The Celtics instead combined smart high-executing defense, with a combination of Kendrick Perkins (whose major selling point was defense in the post) and the old, but not done, Rasheed Wallace to throw at Howard. Even if on paper the Magic were far superior, the Celtics weren’t going to go down easy. And they didn’t. While Howard managed a strong 22/11/1 (that one assist isn’t great) on +4.1% shooting with 3 blocks a game, the rest of the Magic shot 33.8% from three and shot -0.5% as a team. Vince Carter managed only 14 a game on -9.5%. The Celtics were held to shooting -0.2% and it was a narrow thing, with the Celtics pulling out a tight win, 2.8 points a game. Was the whole series swung by the Magic’s three pointers not falling? Maybe, but even if they’d shot at their regular season average, it would only have tied things up. I’m not at all convinced that the Celtics were the better team, but they were very much the rock to the Magic’s scissors, and the result was a tight matchup that the Celtics won.
Now. You may be thinking that the 2010 Orlando Magic have no business being ranked this high. But seriously, that Hawks series! That’s the reason they’re so high, beginning and end. It is simply an incredible achievement. So how much you think of the ‘10 Magic ranking really ties together with how much you think of that kind of blowout. A lot of it depends on how predictive such a thing is. So. Below I’ve gathered every single playoff series (minimum four games) with a 15 point or higher margin of victory, sorted by opponent SRS, along with how far that team got:
2004: Pacers over Celtics (-2.0), by +16.8 -> loss in Conf Finals
2020: Raptors over Nets (-1.0), by +20.5 -> loss in Semis
1971: Bucks over Warriors (-0.8), by +16 -> Championship
2019: Bucks over Pistons (-0.6), by +23.8 -> loss in Conf Finals
2009: Cavs over Pistons (-0.4), by +15.5 -> loss in Conf Finals
2016: Thunder over Mavericks (0.0), by +18.2 -> loss in Conf Finals
2017: Warriors over Blazers (+0.2), by +18.0 -> Championship
2016: Warriors over Rockets (+0.3), by +18.8 -> loss in NBA Finals
2012: Spurs over Jazz (+0.9), by +16.0 -> loss in Conf Finals
2009: Cavs over Hawks (+1.0), by +18.0 -> loss in Conf Finals
1978: 76ers over Knicks (+1.1), by +18.7 -> loss in Conf Finals
2009: Nuggets over Hornets (+1.4), by +24.2 -> loss in Conf Finals
2013: Spurs over Lakers (+1.5), by +18.7 -> loss in NBA Finals
1980: Celtics over Rockets (+1.9), by +18.5 -> loss in Conf Finals
1989: Suns over Warriors (+2.1), by +15.8 -> loss in Conf Finals
2017: Cavs over Raptors (+2.5), by +15.3 -> loss in NBA Finals
2018: Warriors over Cavs (+2.9), by +15.0 -> Championship
2017: Cavs over Celtics (+3.3), by +20.0 -> loss in NBA Finals
2016: Cavs over Raptors (+4.0), by +15.5 -> Championship
2017: Warriors over Jazz (+4.6), by +15.0 -> Championship
2010: Magic over Hawks (+4.7), by +25.3 -> loss in Conf Finals
1986: Celtics over Bucks (+6.7), by +15.0 -> Championship
1996: Bulls over Magic (+8.5), by +16.7 -> Championship
2017: Warriors over Spurs (+8.9), by +16.0 -> Championship
2001: Lakers over Spurs (+10.3), by +18.2 -> Championship
That’s a lot of data so I’ll try and digest it a bit. First. There are twelve teams since 2003 (when the first round went to four games) that won a series by 15 points or more against opponents at +2.5 or worse. You’ll note that only one of them won a championship. But that doesn’t mean that these blowouts mean nothing. Assuming these blowouts were all achieved in the first round (which is often, but not always true) you’d expect these 12 teams to finish in the following way (assuming the blowouts indicated nothing):
1.5 Champions
1.5 losing in the Finals
3 losing in the Conference Finals
6 losing in the semis
Instead these teams finished thusly:
1 Champion
3 losing in the Finals
7 losing in the Conference Finals
1 losing in the Semis
So, while blowing out a modest team (+2.5 or less) by 15 certainly doesn’t make a champion, it certainly seems to suggest that the team doing the blowing out was certainly better than an average team going into the Semis. So it’s not everything, but there is value there.
Now look at the teams who had 15+ point per game blowouts against teams better than +2.5. There are nine such. The teams who did it against the four toughest opponents not only won the championship but are considered to be four of the best teams *ever*. Of the remaining five teams you have two all-time greats (the ‘17 and ‘18 Warriors again), the ‘16 Cavs, the ‘17 Cavs (who had almost no chance of winning the Finals due to opposition) . . . and the ‘10 Magic. And I’ll point out that the Hawks were pretty good opponents for this group.
Take from this whatever you’d like. I’m just saying, blowing out a good team is a really, really good indicator that you are, historically, the real deal.
10 | Magic
9 |
8 | Lakers
7 | Celtics, Suns
6 |
5 |
4 | Cavs, Nuggets
3 | Jazz, Thunder, Mavs, Spurs
2 |
1 | Bucks
0 | Hawks, Bobcats, Blazers
-0 | Heat, Rockets
-1 | Raptors, Grizzlies
-2 | Bulls, Hornets
-3 | 76ers, Pacers, Warriors
-4 | Knicks, Wizards, Kings
-5 | Pistons
-6 | Clippers
-7 |
-8 | Nets
-9 | TWolves
-10|
2010 was tolerably competitive. Plenty at the margins (Magic, Nets, Timberwolves) but more than ⅔ of the league was between +5 and -5, which is reasonably centered. The Magic’s incredibly high ranking is driven by their blowout of the Hawks. Is that legit? Probably not totally. Even trimming the fourth quarters off of those blowouts would probably drop them five spots at least. But it’s a weird problem. How do you rank a team that, when they’re on, is comparable to the greatest teams ever, but isn’t consistently on? Do you ignore the dominant series, figuring that the rest are their true colors? Or do you honor how transcendent the team was when firing on all cylinders? I think the present ranking errs too much toward the latter, but we would do well to remember that the 2009 and 2010 Magic were very strong teams.
#32. The 2019 Toronto Raptors
Spoiler:
Overall SRS: +10.08, Standard Deviations: +1.85, Won NBA Finals (Preseason 5th)
Regular Season Record: 58-24, Regular Season SRS: +5.49 (77th), Earned the 2 Seed
Regular Season Offensive Rating: +2.7 (68th), Regular Season Defensive Rating: -3.3 (57th)
PG: Kyle Lowry, +2.3 / +2.3
SG: Danny Green, +2.0 / -0.7
SF: Kawhi Leonard, +7.2 / +10.1
PF: Pascal Siakam, +2.4 / +2.6
C: Marc Gasol, +2.9 / +3.4
6th : Fred VanVleet, +0.5 / +0.1
7th: Serge Ibaka, +0.2 / -0.4
Kawhi Leonard (SF, 27): 34 MPPG, 29% OLoad, 27 / 7 / 3 / 2 on +4.6%
Kyle Lowry (PG, 32): 34 MPPG, 23% OLoad, 14 / 5 / 9 / 2 on +0.2%
Serge Ibaka (PF, 29): 27 MPPG, 21% OLoad, 15 / 8 / 1 / 2 on +2.2%
Pascal Siakam (PF, 24): 32 MPPG, 20% OLoad, 17 / 7 / 3 / 2 on +6.8%
Fred VanVleet (PG, 24): 27 MPPG, 20% OLoad, 11 / 3 / 5 / 1 on -2.1%
Marc Casol (C, 34): 25 MPPG, 18% OLoad, 9 / 7 / 4 / 2 on +0.5%
Danny Green (SG, 31): 28 MPPG, 14% OLoad, 10 / 4 / 2 / 2 on +7.2%
Scoring/100: Kawhi Leonard (37.5 / +4.6%), Serge Ibaka (26.5 / +2.2%), Pascal Siakam (25.5 / +6.8%)
Assists/100: Kyle Lowry (12.2), Fred VanVleet (8.4), Marc Gasol (7.5)
Heliocentrism: 29.2% (56th of 84 teams) - Kawhi
Wingmen: 32.3% (65th) - Siakam & Lowry
Depth: 38.5% (17th)
Playoff Offensive Rating: +1.72 (86th), Playoff Defensive Rating: -8.55 (15th)
Playoff SRS: +12.33 (30th), Total SRS Increase through Playoffs: +4.59 (12th)
Average Playoff Opponent Offense: +2.55 (40th), Average Playoff Opponent Defense: -2.12 (48th)
Playoff Heliocentrism: 43.3% (17th of 84 teams) - Kawhi
Playoff Wingmen: 29.9% (74th) - Gasol & Siakam
Playoff Depth: 26.8% (36th)
Round 1: Orlando Magic (+0.3), won 4-1, by +14.4 points a game (+14.7 SRS eq)
Round 2: Philadelphia 76ers (+4.8), won 4-3, by +2.7 points a game (+7.5 SRS eq)
Round 3: Milwaukee Bucks (+12.4), won 4-2, by +1.0 points a game (+13.4 SRS eq)
Round 4: Golden State Warriors (+9.2), won 4-2, by +5.7 points a game (+14.9 SRS eq)
A Toronto Raptors team in the Top 50? Do you realize how crazy that would have sounded, say, ten years ago? Let’s take a step back, and start with Masai Ujiri.
He was made the GM of the Denver Nuggets in 2010. The Nuggets had had several good teams with star Carmelo Anthony, but never seemed to be able to get over the hump. Carmelo, frustrated with the lack of team success, demanded a trade. Ujiri eventually complied, moving Anthony to the Knicks for . . . well, a lot. Basically here was the trade:
Denver loses: Carmelo Anthony, Chauncey Bullips and a 1st (Jakob Poltl)
Denver gains: Wilson Chandler, Raymond Felton, Danilo Gallinari, Timofey Mozgov, a 2nd (Dario Saric) and a 1st (Jamal Murray)
It was generally seen as a rebuilding move, a small market franchise giving up its superstar and thus its chance to compete. The next year the Nuggets were forecast at 36.5 wins, but outperformed it, winning 38 (this is better than it looks because of the strike-shortened season). The subsequent year they were forecast at 49.5 wins, but won 57. That they exited the playoffs early both years was besides the point. At least in the regular season, trading Carmelo was supposed to trigger a rebuild. Instead, the Nuggets had used the trade to build a deep team, with no star but lots of redundancy and execution. It’s not an exaggeration to say that the Nuggets post-Carmelo were actually better in the regular season than they had been with Carmelo. For this achievement Ujiri was named Executive of the year. That offseason he was offered a lucrative contract to take over running the sad-sack Toronto Raptors, a team that had posted one winning record in the past eleven seasons. Starting in 2014, the first year with Ujiri, they would never post below 48 wins and they would always make the playoffs.
Over the next five years they would post RSRSs of +2.55, +2.45, +4.08, +3.65 and +7.29. These led to two first round exits, two exits in the semifinals and one exit in the conference finals. This incredible turnaround in franchise fortunes cannot all be attributed to Ujiri. Of the 2018 big names, DeMar DeRozan, Kyle Lowry and Jonas Valanciunas were all acquired before Ujiri, while he picked up Ibaka in trade, and drafted Siakam and Anunoby. So he didn’t create them from scratch, he merely took solid component parts and added skillfully to them. But the team kept coming up short. From 2016 to 2018 they made the 2nd round or farther each year. And each year they lost to LeBron and the Cavs. In 2018 the Raptors posted the best RSRS in the East and the best record, while the Cavs without Kyrie limped into the playoffs with an RSRS of +0.59. It didn’t matter, the Raptors still lost to LeBron and the Cavs by 14 points a game.
But in 2019 things looked up for two reasons. First, LeBron left Cleveland and signed with the Lakers in the West. Second, Kawhi Leonard was on the block. Despite him having led the Spurs to some very strong seasons there were significant tensions there. In 2018 Leonard had injured his quadriceps and had been out much of the year. Eventually the Spurs doctors cleared him to play, but he got a second opinion from a doctor that encouraged him to sit out the year. This led to him feeling like the Spurs didn’t have his health or his interests at heart, so he demanded a trade. He was a risk. His health was in question, and he only had one more year on his contract, so there was a very good chance that acquiring him, however successful, would be a one-year rental. Ujiri, sensing opportunity, pulled the trigger, sending DeRozan and a protected 1st to the Spurs for Leonard. Despite having taken a 59-win team and added Leonard, the oddsmakers put Toronto below the Lakers, Rockets, Celtics and Warriors. The first three seem a bit nuts, but the last certainly makes sense. Golden State was the massive x-factor to the whole thing. Even if Toronto could now win the East, could they beat the Curry/Durant/Draymond Warriors that had just posted arguably the most dominant two-year stretch in history?
The regular season for Toronto went pretty well (if not as well as you might guess); they won 58 games and finished with a +5.49 RSRS. Kawhi proved healthy (with a healthy amount of load management) and would be most everything advertised. And midseason Ujiri pried veteran Marc Gasol away from the Grizzlies for Jonas Valanciunas and a 2nd. But the Raptors only won the two-seed; the immediate threat to their championship journey would not be from the Warriors, but instead the Milwaukee Bucks. Forecast 11th in the league at 48 wins, the Bucks would win 60 games and a +8.04 RSRS, the best in the league. Their young phenom, Giannis Antetokounmpo, took a leap, averaging 39 points and 20 rebounds per 100 on +8.4% efficiency and posting a BPM above +10. He won the MVP handily. He anchored the best defense in the league, and on offense he could not be kept from the rim. If Toronto was going to win a championship they’d likely have to get through the Bucks first.
In the first round they blew apart the +0.3 Orlando Magic to the tune of 14.4 points a game. The Magic were held to -6.4% shooting and the Raptors shot a strong +2.2%, led by Kawhi who averaged a 28/7/3 on +11.9% shooting. The Magic were only an average team, but it was a strong showing in any case.
They ran into a much tighter contest in the second round against the 76ers (+4.8). The Sixers lacked the Raptors’ firepower but boasted an intriguing defensive lineup (Jimmy Butler, Joel Embiid, Tobias Harris and Ben Simmons), and a big man (Embiid) that nobody in the league had a really good answer for. It was a tight series, with the first six games splitting 3-3, with the Raptors averaging around a 3 point MoV for the six. Game 7 went down to the wire, in one of the most exctiing finishes of the season. With two minutes to play the score was tied.
1:41 - Kawhi Leonard gets a screen and drills a long two-pointer just over Joel Embiid to give the Raptors a two point lead.
1:18 - the Sixers possession stalls out, late in the clock they pass to Harris, who gets doubled, he unloads to Embiid, Lowry jumps the pass and sets Siakam up for a layup, four point Raptors lead. The crowd goes nuts. Pretty much the entire last two minutes.
0:59 - Jimmy Butler gets fouled and hits one of two free throws. Three point lead for Raptors
0:41 - Leonard drives into the paint but is completely shut down by Butler’s defense, Leonard takes an awkward two and misses, but Ibaka gets the rebound, Raptors’ ball
0:27 - Leonard takes a weird turnaround three-pointer and clanks it, Sixers’ ball, still three point lead for the Raptors.
0:12 - Embiid draws a foul and gets two free throws, hitting both, Raptors lead by one.
0:11 - Leonard is intentionally fouled, makes one and misses one, Raptors lead by two.
0:04 - Butler gets a head of steam in transition and barrels in for a layup, tie game.
0:00 - Leonard takes an insane running three with Embiid all over him, the ball bounces around the rim before falling through, Raptors win. Everyone loses their mind.
That the Raptors won the series on buzzer-beater like that gives an impression that they were lucky to win (sort of like the ‘13 Heat were to beat the Spurs on the Allen three). But there are several important differences:
-In 2013, the Heat had been outscored leading up to that moment (if not by a lot), the Heat would have lost without the shot going in, and they were down 3-2 at the time.
-In 2019, the Raptors had outscored the Sixers for the series to date, they would have gone to overtime if the shot had missed and the series was tied.
In other words, the '13 Heat needed the shot to land to even have a chance, while the '19 Raptors were already in the driver's seat, they just needed the shot to ice the game.
So, on the whole, beating the Sixers by 2.7 points a game was a narrow win, tighter than you’d want for a contending team over a quality (but not great) opponent. But it was a lot better than what may have been remembered as a coin-flip.
And in the Conference Finals were, of course, the Milwaukee Bucks. The Bucks had immolated the average Pistons by 23.8 points per game and, in case they needed to prove things further, they played a strong Celtics team (+5.5) and beat them in five by 8.6 points a game. The Bucks went into the game with an OSRS of +12.4, an intimidating challenge for the Raptors. The Bucks won Game 1 by eight, with Giannis posting a 24/14/6 on +0.4%, 2 steals and 3 blocks. In Game 2 the Bucks won by 22, with Giannis having a 30/17/5 on +3.3%. Two games in, it seemed over. So coach Nick Nurse made a change, matching Kawhi Leonard up on Giannis. Furthermore, the Raptors through the series would make cutting Giannis off on his route to the basket a priority, especially with the man defending light-shooting Eric Bledsoe. The resulting combination slowed Giannis, and the rest of the Bucks were unable to make up the difference. Giannis averaged a 23/14/6 on -4.2% for the series, while Kawhi averaged a 30/10/4 on +1.4%. The Raptors won it in six, but the margin of victory was tight, one point a game. Nevertheless, any victory over the Bucks was an impressive achievement. And the Raptors advanced to the Finals to face the Warriors.
But the ‘19 Warriors weren’t the same monster that they’d been in years past. Their playoff series to this point had been: +10.9 SRS eq, +9.7 SRS eq and +14.3 SRS eq. You may look at that and say “An 11.6 average PSRS? That sounds pretty good.” It was. But compared to the ‘17 and ‘18 Warriors, +11.6 PSRS was awkwardly mortal. Compounding matters, Kevin Durant was expected to be out for the series. This was bad for the Warriors . . . but not as bad as it sounded. Tensions between Durant and the rest of the Warriors had been high all year. And the Warriors had posted their best playoff series (the +14.3 SRS eq against the Blazers) with no Durant at all. Losing Durant would hurt, but not as much as one might guess. It would be a tight Finals, but the Raptors would prevail in six, by 5.7 points a game. The Raptors slightly controlled possession (3 shots a game) and slightly outshot the Warriors, +2.1% to +1.0%.
Did the fact that the Raptors won with Durant out (and Klay missing Game 6) diminish the victory? Yeah, some. But their 5.7 margin of victory is pretty solid against a clearly strong team; remember, this was basically the ‘15 and ‘16 Warriors, just older and with a thinner bench (and no Harrison Barnes). Personally, I’m more impressed by the victory over the Bucks, but still.
Either way, the Raptors had run the table and won the franchise’s first championship. Kawhi had played marvelously. He would leave in the offseason, and it would still be worth it.
11 | Bucks
10 | Raptors
9 |
8 | Warriors
7 | Rockets
6 |
5 |
4 | 76ers, Celtics, Nuggets
3 | Blazers
2 | Thunder, Spurs
1 | Pacers
0 |
-0 | Clippers, Heat, Kings, Mavs
-1 | Hornets, Lakers, TWolves, Pelicans
-2 | Nets, Magic, Grizzlies
-3 | Wizards
-4 | Pistons
-5 |
-6 | Hawks
-7 |
-8 | Bulls, Knicks, Suns
-9 | Cavs
-10|
2019 was a fairly non-competitve year. 12% of the league above +7 and 12% of the league below -8 is pretty lopsided. So that diminishes the Raptors season somewhat. Still. Their RSRS was nothing to brag about (77th on the list) but their playoff run was excellent, 30th on this list. Skeptics may seek to diminish their achievement by saying that the Bucks were overrated, but remember, the Bucks were trashing everyone. They faced a very solid, young, athletic, well-coached Celtics team and the Bucks mowed right through them. The Bucks were unstoppable . . . until the Raptors stopped them. And the Warriors without Durant may have been diminished, but even diminished they still stomped through the West pretty handily. I’m comfortable with this ranking for the Raptors. It was a hell of a run.
Regular Season Record: 58-24, Regular Season SRS: +5.49 (77th), Earned the 2 Seed
Regular Season Offensive Rating: +2.7 (68th), Regular Season Defensive Rating: -3.3 (57th)
PG: Kyle Lowry, +2.3 / +2.3
SG: Danny Green, +2.0 / -0.7
SF: Kawhi Leonard, +7.2 / +10.1
PF: Pascal Siakam, +2.4 / +2.6
C: Marc Gasol, +2.9 / +3.4
6th : Fred VanVleet, +0.5 / +0.1
7th: Serge Ibaka, +0.2 / -0.4
Kawhi Leonard (SF, 27): 34 MPPG, 29% OLoad, 27 / 7 / 3 / 2 on +4.6%
Kyle Lowry (PG, 32): 34 MPPG, 23% OLoad, 14 / 5 / 9 / 2 on +0.2%
Serge Ibaka (PF, 29): 27 MPPG, 21% OLoad, 15 / 8 / 1 / 2 on +2.2%
Pascal Siakam (PF, 24): 32 MPPG, 20% OLoad, 17 / 7 / 3 / 2 on +6.8%
Fred VanVleet (PG, 24): 27 MPPG, 20% OLoad, 11 / 3 / 5 / 1 on -2.1%
Marc Casol (C, 34): 25 MPPG, 18% OLoad, 9 / 7 / 4 / 2 on +0.5%
Danny Green (SG, 31): 28 MPPG, 14% OLoad, 10 / 4 / 2 / 2 on +7.2%
Scoring/100: Kawhi Leonard (37.5 / +4.6%), Serge Ibaka (26.5 / +2.2%), Pascal Siakam (25.5 / +6.8%)
Assists/100: Kyle Lowry (12.2), Fred VanVleet (8.4), Marc Gasol (7.5)
Heliocentrism: 29.2% (56th of 84 teams) - Kawhi
Wingmen: 32.3% (65th) - Siakam & Lowry
Depth: 38.5% (17th)
Playoff Offensive Rating: +1.72 (86th), Playoff Defensive Rating: -8.55 (15th)
Playoff SRS: +12.33 (30th), Total SRS Increase through Playoffs: +4.59 (12th)
Average Playoff Opponent Offense: +2.55 (40th), Average Playoff Opponent Defense: -2.12 (48th)
Playoff Heliocentrism: 43.3% (17th of 84 teams) - Kawhi
Playoff Wingmen: 29.9% (74th) - Gasol & Siakam
Playoff Depth: 26.8% (36th)
Round 1: Orlando Magic (+0.3), won 4-1, by +14.4 points a game (+14.7 SRS eq)
Round 2: Philadelphia 76ers (+4.8), won 4-3, by +2.7 points a game (+7.5 SRS eq)
Round 3: Milwaukee Bucks (+12.4), won 4-2, by +1.0 points a game (+13.4 SRS eq)
Round 4: Golden State Warriors (+9.2), won 4-2, by +5.7 points a game (+14.9 SRS eq)
A Toronto Raptors team in the Top 50? Do you realize how crazy that would have sounded, say, ten years ago? Let’s take a step back, and start with Masai Ujiri.
He was made the GM of the Denver Nuggets in 2010. The Nuggets had had several good teams with star Carmelo Anthony, but never seemed to be able to get over the hump. Carmelo, frustrated with the lack of team success, demanded a trade. Ujiri eventually complied, moving Anthony to the Knicks for . . . well, a lot. Basically here was the trade:
Denver loses: Carmelo Anthony, Chauncey Bullips and a 1st (Jakob Poltl)
Denver gains: Wilson Chandler, Raymond Felton, Danilo Gallinari, Timofey Mozgov, a 2nd (Dario Saric) and a 1st (Jamal Murray)
It was generally seen as a rebuilding move, a small market franchise giving up its superstar and thus its chance to compete. The next year the Nuggets were forecast at 36.5 wins, but outperformed it, winning 38 (this is better than it looks because of the strike-shortened season). The subsequent year they were forecast at 49.5 wins, but won 57. That they exited the playoffs early both years was besides the point. At least in the regular season, trading Carmelo was supposed to trigger a rebuild. Instead, the Nuggets had used the trade to build a deep team, with no star but lots of redundancy and execution. It’s not an exaggeration to say that the Nuggets post-Carmelo were actually better in the regular season than they had been with Carmelo. For this achievement Ujiri was named Executive of the year. That offseason he was offered a lucrative contract to take over running the sad-sack Toronto Raptors, a team that had posted one winning record in the past eleven seasons. Starting in 2014, the first year with Ujiri, they would never post below 48 wins and they would always make the playoffs.
Over the next five years they would post RSRSs of +2.55, +2.45, +4.08, +3.65 and +7.29. These led to two first round exits, two exits in the semifinals and one exit in the conference finals. This incredible turnaround in franchise fortunes cannot all be attributed to Ujiri. Of the 2018 big names, DeMar DeRozan, Kyle Lowry and Jonas Valanciunas were all acquired before Ujiri, while he picked up Ibaka in trade, and drafted Siakam and Anunoby. So he didn’t create them from scratch, he merely took solid component parts and added skillfully to them. But the team kept coming up short. From 2016 to 2018 they made the 2nd round or farther each year. And each year they lost to LeBron and the Cavs. In 2018 the Raptors posted the best RSRS in the East and the best record, while the Cavs without Kyrie limped into the playoffs with an RSRS of +0.59. It didn’t matter, the Raptors still lost to LeBron and the Cavs by 14 points a game.
But in 2019 things looked up for two reasons. First, LeBron left Cleveland and signed with the Lakers in the West. Second, Kawhi Leonard was on the block. Despite him having led the Spurs to some very strong seasons there were significant tensions there. In 2018 Leonard had injured his quadriceps and had been out much of the year. Eventually the Spurs doctors cleared him to play, but he got a second opinion from a doctor that encouraged him to sit out the year. This led to him feeling like the Spurs didn’t have his health or his interests at heart, so he demanded a trade. He was a risk. His health was in question, and he only had one more year on his contract, so there was a very good chance that acquiring him, however successful, would be a one-year rental. Ujiri, sensing opportunity, pulled the trigger, sending DeRozan and a protected 1st to the Spurs for Leonard. Despite having taken a 59-win team and added Leonard, the oddsmakers put Toronto below the Lakers, Rockets, Celtics and Warriors. The first three seem a bit nuts, but the last certainly makes sense. Golden State was the massive x-factor to the whole thing. Even if Toronto could now win the East, could they beat the Curry/Durant/Draymond Warriors that had just posted arguably the most dominant two-year stretch in history?
The regular season for Toronto went pretty well (if not as well as you might guess); they won 58 games and finished with a +5.49 RSRS. Kawhi proved healthy (with a healthy amount of load management) and would be most everything advertised. And midseason Ujiri pried veteran Marc Gasol away from the Grizzlies for Jonas Valanciunas and a 2nd. But the Raptors only won the two-seed; the immediate threat to their championship journey would not be from the Warriors, but instead the Milwaukee Bucks. Forecast 11th in the league at 48 wins, the Bucks would win 60 games and a +8.04 RSRS, the best in the league. Their young phenom, Giannis Antetokounmpo, took a leap, averaging 39 points and 20 rebounds per 100 on +8.4% efficiency and posting a BPM above +10. He won the MVP handily. He anchored the best defense in the league, and on offense he could not be kept from the rim. If Toronto was going to win a championship they’d likely have to get through the Bucks first.
In the first round they blew apart the +0.3 Orlando Magic to the tune of 14.4 points a game. The Magic were held to -6.4% shooting and the Raptors shot a strong +2.2%, led by Kawhi who averaged a 28/7/3 on +11.9% shooting. The Magic were only an average team, but it was a strong showing in any case.
They ran into a much tighter contest in the second round against the 76ers (+4.8). The Sixers lacked the Raptors’ firepower but boasted an intriguing defensive lineup (Jimmy Butler, Joel Embiid, Tobias Harris and Ben Simmons), and a big man (Embiid) that nobody in the league had a really good answer for. It was a tight series, with the first six games splitting 3-3, with the Raptors averaging around a 3 point MoV for the six. Game 7 went down to the wire, in one of the most exctiing finishes of the season. With two minutes to play the score was tied.
1:41 - Kawhi Leonard gets a screen and drills a long two-pointer just over Joel Embiid to give the Raptors a two point lead.
1:18 - the Sixers possession stalls out, late in the clock they pass to Harris, who gets doubled, he unloads to Embiid, Lowry jumps the pass and sets Siakam up for a layup, four point Raptors lead. The crowd goes nuts. Pretty much the entire last two minutes.
0:59 - Jimmy Butler gets fouled and hits one of two free throws. Three point lead for Raptors
0:41 - Leonard drives into the paint but is completely shut down by Butler’s defense, Leonard takes an awkward two and misses, but Ibaka gets the rebound, Raptors’ ball
0:27 - Leonard takes a weird turnaround three-pointer and clanks it, Sixers’ ball, still three point lead for the Raptors.
0:12 - Embiid draws a foul and gets two free throws, hitting both, Raptors lead by one.
0:11 - Leonard is intentionally fouled, makes one and misses one, Raptors lead by two.
0:04 - Butler gets a head of steam in transition and barrels in for a layup, tie game.
0:00 - Leonard takes an insane running three with Embiid all over him, the ball bounces around the rim before falling through, Raptors win. Everyone loses their mind.
That the Raptors won the series on buzzer-beater like that gives an impression that they were lucky to win (sort of like the ‘13 Heat were to beat the Spurs on the Allen three). But there are several important differences:
-In 2013, the Heat had been outscored leading up to that moment (if not by a lot), the Heat would have lost without the shot going in, and they were down 3-2 at the time.
-In 2019, the Raptors had outscored the Sixers for the series to date, they would have gone to overtime if the shot had missed and the series was tied.
In other words, the '13 Heat needed the shot to land to even have a chance, while the '19 Raptors were already in the driver's seat, they just needed the shot to ice the game.
So, on the whole, beating the Sixers by 2.7 points a game was a narrow win, tighter than you’d want for a contending team over a quality (but not great) opponent. But it was a lot better than what may have been remembered as a coin-flip.
And in the Conference Finals were, of course, the Milwaukee Bucks. The Bucks had immolated the average Pistons by 23.8 points per game and, in case they needed to prove things further, they played a strong Celtics team (+5.5) and beat them in five by 8.6 points a game. The Bucks went into the game with an OSRS of +12.4, an intimidating challenge for the Raptors. The Bucks won Game 1 by eight, with Giannis posting a 24/14/6 on +0.4%, 2 steals and 3 blocks. In Game 2 the Bucks won by 22, with Giannis having a 30/17/5 on +3.3%. Two games in, it seemed over. So coach Nick Nurse made a change, matching Kawhi Leonard up on Giannis. Furthermore, the Raptors through the series would make cutting Giannis off on his route to the basket a priority, especially with the man defending light-shooting Eric Bledsoe. The resulting combination slowed Giannis, and the rest of the Bucks were unable to make up the difference. Giannis averaged a 23/14/6 on -4.2% for the series, while Kawhi averaged a 30/10/4 on +1.4%. The Raptors won it in six, but the margin of victory was tight, one point a game. Nevertheless, any victory over the Bucks was an impressive achievement. And the Raptors advanced to the Finals to face the Warriors.
But the ‘19 Warriors weren’t the same monster that they’d been in years past. Their playoff series to this point had been: +10.9 SRS eq, +9.7 SRS eq and +14.3 SRS eq. You may look at that and say “An 11.6 average PSRS? That sounds pretty good.” It was. But compared to the ‘17 and ‘18 Warriors, +11.6 PSRS was awkwardly mortal. Compounding matters, Kevin Durant was expected to be out for the series. This was bad for the Warriors . . . but not as bad as it sounded. Tensions between Durant and the rest of the Warriors had been high all year. And the Warriors had posted their best playoff series (the +14.3 SRS eq against the Blazers) with no Durant at all. Losing Durant would hurt, but not as much as one might guess. It would be a tight Finals, but the Raptors would prevail in six, by 5.7 points a game. The Raptors slightly controlled possession (3 shots a game) and slightly outshot the Warriors, +2.1% to +1.0%.
Did the fact that the Raptors won with Durant out (and Klay missing Game 6) diminish the victory? Yeah, some. But their 5.7 margin of victory is pretty solid against a clearly strong team; remember, this was basically the ‘15 and ‘16 Warriors, just older and with a thinner bench (and no Harrison Barnes). Personally, I’m more impressed by the victory over the Bucks, but still.
Either way, the Raptors had run the table and won the franchise’s first championship. Kawhi had played marvelously. He would leave in the offseason, and it would still be worth it.
11 | Bucks
10 | Raptors
9 |
8 | Warriors
7 | Rockets
6 |
5 |
4 | 76ers, Celtics, Nuggets
3 | Blazers
2 | Thunder, Spurs
1 | Pacers
0 |
-0 | Clippers, Heat, Kings, Mavs
-1 | Hornets, Lakers, TWolves, Pelicans
-2 | Nets, Magic, Grizzlies
-3 | Wizards
-4 | Pistons
-5 |
-6 | Hawks
-7 |
-8 | Bulls, Knicks, Suns
-9 | Cavs
-10|
2019 was a fairly non-competitve year. 12% of the league above +7 and 12% of the league below -8 is pretty lopsided. So that diminishes the Raptors season somewhat. Still. Their RSRS was nothing to brag about (77th on the list) but their playoff run was excellent, 30th on this list. Skeptics may seek to diminish their achievement by saying that the Bucks were overrated, but remember, the Bucks were trashing everyone. They faced a very solid, young, athletic, well-coached Celtics team and the Bucks mowed right through them. The Bucks were unstoppable . . . until the Raptors stopped them. And the Warriors without Durant may have been diminished, but even diminished they still stomped through the West pretty handily. I’m comfortable with this ranking for the Raptors. It was a hell of a run.
Back to the Main Thread
