2000s vs 2010s

[OdomFan]

2000 Lakers vs 2010 Lakers - The 2000 Lakers are the better team and I think they'd win the series in 6.

2001 Lakers vs 2011 Mavs - Interesting battle. I think the Mavs could pose problems, but hard to pick against the best Shaq/Kobe Laker team. I'd pick them in 6.

2002 Lakers vs 2012 Heat - Another interesting battle. The Heat did typically struggle against big men and Shaq is still close to his peak here. But this is arguably LeBron's peak and it's hard seeing the Lakers containing him. Probably a pick-em series. Wade was also still very good here. Honestly not sure who I'd lean with. Gun to my head, I'd go with the 2012 Heat.

2003 Spurs vs 2013 Heat - If this is the playoffs version of the Heat, this is much closer. The Heat would have loads of issues dealing with Duncan's peak. If it's their RS version, I think they'd easily win. LeBron's peak again arguably and I don't think the Spurs have the defenders to really throw at him and contain him. Maybe they throw him off with a zone like the 2013 Spurs did, but I also think that team is flat out better than the 2003 team despite Duncan's decline. I'll go 2013 Heat in probably 7 again.

2004 Pistons vs 2014 Spurs - Don't think the Pistons have near enough shooting to combat them and I think the Spurs' ball movement would dissect that defense greatly. Going Spurs in 5.

2005 Spurs vs 2015 Warriors - Spurs handled a somewhat lesser version of the Warriors easily vs the Suns that season, but the Warriors are a much better defensive team and I don't think the Spurs have enough threes in them. Going Warriors in 6/7.

2006 Heat vs 2016 Cavs - Arguably the biggest mismatch. The Heat are arguably the worst team on this list. LeBron's arguable peak with a very stout playoff defense. Going Cavs in 5.

2007 Spurs vs 2017 Warriors - Maybe the 2nd biggest mismatch. I think the Suns eliminate the Spurs that season were it not for the suspensions in game 5. Warriors in 5.

2008 Celtics vs 2018 Warriors - I don't think the Celtics have enough threes in them, but this would be an interesting series. Warriors in 6 though.

2009 Lakers vs 2019 Raptors - One of the tougher ones to call. I'd say it's a pick-em series again. Can see arguments both ways. Gun to my head, I'd go with the Raptors.

I think the 2010s have better teams overall. Also the 2018 Rockets and 2017 Cavs are better than almost every title team from the 2000s IMO.

2004 Pistons vs 2014 Spurs - The 04 Pistons had additional shooters in young Okur and Corliss Williamson, that would be able to help keep that game close against them, and their defense should be able to keep up. Ben and Sheed taking turns on Duncan. Rip doing his thing, and heck. 04 was probably Prince's best year with that team. All of that factors.

2006 Heat vs 2016 Cavs - Not sure how you think the Heat are the weakest here. Shaq might be older but fact is those Cavs still have no one that can guard him. So Shaqs presence will draw massive double teams which should make things very easy for Wade and the rest of those guys to do their thing against this Cleveland team. Plus they have Alonzo Mourning coming off the bench to help out on the inside defensively. Jason Williams was still very good, and Gary Payton was very useful to defensively. I say they win that in 6 or 7. Maybe 5.

[jalengreen]

Approaching a discussion like this from the perspective of matching these teams up is uninteresting tbh. Like yeah, the game has clearly become more optimized (although apparently based on some comments here there may not be a consensus on this). IMO 70sFan had the right idea of making a comparison relative to the team's actual competition, which is what matters. None of these teams would be constructed in the same way if their competition was actually these modern teams.

[OdomFan]

2000 Lakers vs 2010 Lakers - Realistically I think 2010 Lakers win it. How? Mamba will go straight for his younger self and explain to him why they and Shaq broke up. Young Kobe refuses to play in the game. plot twist.

2001 Lakers vs 2011 Mavs - 01 Lakers easily. Dirks 2011 run was amazing, but they don't have the squad to pull this one off if you ask me. Tyson Chandler was of great help in 2011, but up against prime Shaq he's going to be looking like Chicago Bulls Chandler again. Dirks going to get his, but Horry will be solid enough to not let it get too crazy.

2002 Lakers vs 2012 Heat - Lakers. Heat have no answer for Shaq. the Heat will throw everything they can at Kobe to keep it close, but in the end I think the Lakers pull through in 6 or 7.

2003 Spurs vs 2013 Heat - The Spurs have a chance if Stephen Jackson lights them up the way he did the teams back then, not to mention Speedy Claxton getting his while of course Duncan gets his too. but I think the Heat win the odds in a 6-7 game series.

2004 Pistons vs 2014 Spurs - Another one that can go either way. 2 of the greatest defensive teams of all time going at it. I'd love to see it. young Tayshawn Prince's against young Kawhi would be amazing to watch on both ends. Honestly think the winner will come down between who can out play the other between those 2. Sheed seemed more focused and determined than ever in 04 to get it done so I think that would factor in his part against Duncan too, plus Big Ben can switch on to him. The Pistons have Okur coming off the bench, solid vets like Hunter, WIliamson, James, Sura, Davis. I like the Spurs chances, but I have to roll with the Pistons here in 6. I think they would steal a key game in San Antonio then finish things off at home. The Pistons were too good at home in 2004. They might even take it in 5 if they can win all their home games.

2005 Spurs vs 2015 Warriors - Honestly think it could go either way. One x factor for the Spurs chances could be Big Glen Robinson, but the Spurs big 3 will be there doing their thing, and Robert Horry should also help factor in closing things out for the Spurs with his defense. Might even hit the big shot to win a game if needed. Curry gets his but Parker will make it fun to watch. prime Manu vs Klay. Oh man. I don't know. Thats another key match up that can help determine it. The Spurs can also put Bowen on Klay if need be, Brent Barry will be a factor...I say Spurs in 6.

2006 Heat vs 2016 Cavs - As mentioned before I think Shaq is too much for the Cavs to overcome even at that age. He was still a star in 05 and 06 in Miami. Heck, 06 was Shaq on a mission after having lost in 05. He'll still have that attitude in this match up I'd imagine, and I think Wade would be motivated to have something to prove against a future version of someone from his own draft class. Especially after finding out that Lebron had joined him in Miami to win before to take that 2016 won. The Heat have a lot of shooters themselves that can seal the deal for them. Eddie Jones is going to be killing it I'd imagine, Gary Payton on both ends to some degree. Walker, Williams, Mourning. Yea. Heat in 5.


2007 Spurs vs 2017 Warriors - The Spurs big 3 at their very best most likely, and a solid core around them. I think even with KD out there they have a good chance at winning this in atleast 7 games. Both likely take care of business on their home floor. The Spurs probably put Manu on Curry here, and rotate Bown with that, Horry on KD, Duncan on Green of course. Switching on to KD when needed. Either team in 7 i say.

2008 Celtics vs 2018 Warriors - KG steps to the challenge against KD. Thatll be a big match up that it comes down to imo, because thats the KD that took off and Lebron kept getting out of the way. KG aint backing down from that challenge so itll be interesting to see. Klay vs Ray. Amazing back and forth, but I think Ray wins in the end. Paul Pierce will likely have big problems against Durant offensively, but he'll still manage to contribute well with KG and co assisting him. I say Celtics in 6 or 7. Whoever can steal a big game on the road should take it.

2009 Lakers vs 2019 Raptors - This is definitely going to game 7 if you ask me. Both solid on both ends, but I gotta lean on my Lakers winning in the end. Trevor Ariza was very big LA that year so he should be able to be a great help going up against Leonard. Heck Kobe might take the Kawhi assignment himself too so thatll factor as well. Then you have Gasol. Gasol that year really looked to prove himself. I think he'd be too much for the Raptors to deal with. Fisher getting his buckets too. Odom should be solid.

[Doctor MJ]

Approaching a discussion like this from the perspective of matching these teams up is uninteresting tbh. Like yeah, the game has clearly become more optimized (although apparently based on some comments here there may not be a consensus on this). IMO 70sFan had the right idea of making a comparison relative to the team's actual competition, which is what matters. None of these teams would be constructed in the same way if their competition was actually these modern teams.

Thing is:

Do this same comparison in other decades, you often don’t have the same problem.

The fact that these 00s teams are outclassed by 10s teams isn’t about it being 10 years later, it’s about the game going through something really, really interesting.

Like, way more interesting to understand if you want to understand basketball than just comparing in-era dominance which can largely be done without talking about basketball.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[rrravenred]

The 2005 perimeter changes and the explosion in analytics leading to Pace and Space towards the end of the 10s are key factors here. Every champion optimises for the current "meta" of basketball. It's always an issue for cross-era comparisons, and I'd argue the past 20-odd years it's bigger than most, especially with the prioritisation of the 3. Does Shaq get P'n'Rd to death? What is Curry's slashing game if he can be hard-handchecked at the perimeter?

[Colbinii]

The 2005 perimeter changes and the explosion in analytics leading to Pace and Space towards the end of the 10s are key factors here. Every champion optimises for the current "meta" of basketball. It's always an issue for cross-era comparisons, and I'd argue the past 20-odd years it's bigger than most, especially with the prioritisation of the 3. Does Shaq get P'n'Rd to death? What is Curry's slashing game if he can be hard-handchecked at the perimeter?

I don't really see a difference in "hard-handchecking" from the early 2000s to the 2010s and current NBA. It isn't like defenders were grabbing players arms when they had the ball.

Curry would stand 3-4 feet behind the 3P line and teams wouldn't guard him. He would absolutely roast them for 2 games [because the 1st game they would think it was a fluke] and then teams would be unable to effectively switch off-ball since they had never seen a player travel 4 miles--let alone 7-8 miles--in a game off-ball just weaving in and out of screens.

[The Big O]

I side with all 2010 teams with the possible exception of 2000 Lakers beating the 2010 Lakers. I think Shaq would be too much at his zenith.

Some of these other matchups I would expect a one sided series notably: 2016 Cavs would destroy 2006 Heat. 2017 Warriors would run the 07 Spurs off the court.

[Doctor MJ]

The 2005 perimeter changes and the explosion in analytics leading to Pace and Space towards the end of the 10s are key factors here. Every champion optimises for the current "meta" of basketball. It's always an issue for cross-era comparisons, and I'd argue the past 20-odd years it's bigger than most, especially with the prioritisation of the 3. Does Shaq get P'n'Rd to death? What is Curry's slashing game if he can be hard-handchecked at the perimeter?

I don't really see a difference in "hard-handchecking" from the early 2000s to the 2010s and current NBA. It isn't like defenders were grabbing players arms when they had the ball.

Curry would stand 3-4 feet behind the 3P line and teams wouldn't guard him. He would absolutely roast them for 2 games [because the 1st game they would think it was a fluke] and then teams would be unable to effectively switch off-ball since they had never seen a player travel 4 miles--let alone 7-8 miles--in a game off-ball just weaving in and out of screens.

Yup. I believe it was really just a quirk of timing that led us to permanently associate the handchecking rule with pace & space.

Did the handchecking rule help offense to some degree? Absolutely. But even if you attribute the entirety of the +3.2 change in ORtg that year to the handcheck rule, it really doesn't make sense to connect it in any way with the +4.2 change in ORtg we've had over the past 3 seasons.

It's understandable that the idea that the handchecking rule was the real watershed those first few years, but this just doesn't explain an escalating rate of improvement after the fact.

The key principles of today's offense are:

1. Take advantage of transition opportunities before the defense can re-set. (Pushed by the 2001 rule change removing the complex illegal defense rule, and thus allowing half-court defense to play more optimal, and tipping the risk/reward of transition play toward reward.)

2. Be positioned to take 3's whenever the opportunity avails. (The optimal since 1980 when the 3-point line began so long as you've sufficient skill.)

3. Look to attack interior when the defense tries to defend against 3's. (Comes organically when 2 happens).

I think that would still be the case regardless of handcheck rules so long as things kept below a certain threshold of violence. I make no claims about having thought through the value of pace & space in jungle ball.

[rrravenred]

The 2005 perimeter changes and the explosion in analytics leading to Pace and Space towards the end of the 10s are key factors here. Every champion optimises for the current "meta" of basketball. It's always an issue for cross-era comparisons, and I'd argue the past 20-odd years it's bigger than most, especially with the prioritisation of the 3. Does Shaq get P'n'Rd to death? What is Curry's slashing game if he can be hard-handchecked at the perimeter?

I don't really see a difference in "hard-handchecking" from the early 2000s to the 2010s and current NBA. It isn't like defenders were grabbing players arms when they had the ball.

Curry would stand 3-4 feet behind the 3P line and teams wouldn't guard him. He would absolutely roast them for 2 games [because the 1st game they would think it was a fluke] and then teams would be unable to effectively switch off-ball since they had never seen a player travel 4 miles--let alone 7-8 miles--in a game off-ball just weaving in and out of screens.

Yup. I believe it was really just a quirk of timing that led us to permanently associate the handchecking rule with pace & space.

Did the handchecking rule help offense to some degree? Absolutely. But even if you attribute the entirety of the +3.2 change in ORtg that year to the handcheck rule, it really doesn't make sense to connect it in any way with the +4.2 change in ORtg we've had over the past 3 seasons.

It's understandable that the idea that the handchecking rule was the real watershed those first few years, but this just doesn't explain an escalating rate of improvement after the fact.

The key principles of today's offense are:

1. Take advantage of transition opportunities before the defense can re-set. (Pushed by the 2001 rule change removing the complex illegal defense rule, and thus allowing half-court defense to play more optimal, and tipping the risk/reward of transition play toward reward.)

2. Be positioned to take 3's whenever the opportunity avails. (The optimal since 1980 when the 3-point line began so long as you've sufficient skill.)

3. Look to attack interior when the defense tries to defend against 3's. (Comes organically when 2 happens).

I think that would still be the case regardless of handcheck rules so long as things kept below a certain threshold of violence. I make no claims about having thought through the value of pace & space in jungle ball.

Wasn't entirely resting my point on handchecking (for clarity) or necessarily making it a totally linear throughline of rule changes.

Would a James "I drive and pick up a foul" Harden have flourished in the early 00s? Entirely possible, although the externalities to him as a player required to execute to a high level would have depended on a lot more factors than just how perimeter contact was adjudicated.

Agree with your three principles generally, though do think the complexity of things like perimeter screening actions and playswitching (which links again to 2) have arguably increased to be worth their own point.

Not sure how much I agree with the Transition Opportunities as being a seismic change. Ran a primitive comparison of Fast Break Points against pace, and the FBB pointe per possession appear to have actually DROPPED since 2000.

Code: Select all

Year   FBPS   Pace   FBPSPP
2000   13.97   91.3   0.153
2001   12.86   90.7   0.142
2002   12.79   91   0.141
2003   12.40   90.1   0.138
2004   12.13   90.9   0.133
2005   12.29   90.5   0.136
2006   11.76   91.9   0.128
2007   12.10   92.4   0.131
2008   12.56   91.7   0.137
2009   12.31   92.7   0.133
2010   14.12   92.1   0.153
2011   13.96   91.3   0.153
2012   13.26   92   0.144
2013   13.26   93.9   0.141
2014   13.37   93.9   0.142
2015   13.12   95.8   0.137
2016   13.17   96.4   0.137
2017   13.16   97.3   0.135
2018   12.10   100   0.121
2019   13.79   100.3   0.137
2020   13.37   99.2   0.135

Not claiming any great insight on that drop, although the arms race between transition offence and defence have likely ebbed and flowed over the years. Also, these are all-league averages rather than outliers (i.e. good teams with good coaches and well-constructed teams are more likely to be able to execute higher-percentage styles of play.)

[70sFan]

Do this same comparison in other decades, you often don’t have the same problem.

Except you do, it's always very tough to compare teams across decades. Different rules, different strategies, different approaches - it's always the same problem.

Not denying the huge shift that happened in the last 10 years, but I disagree with you here.

[TheGOATRises007]

2000 Lakers vs 2010 Lakers - The 2000 Lakers are the better team and I think they'd win the series in 6.

2001 Lakers vs 2011 Mavs - Interesting battle. I think the Mavs could pose problems, but hard to pick against the best Shaq/Kobe Laker team. I'd pick them in 6.

2002 Lakers vs 2012 Heat - Another interesting battle. The Heat did typically struggle against big men and Shaq is still close to his peak here. But this is arguably LeBron's peak and it's hard seeing the Lakers containing him. Probably a pick-em series. Wade was also still very good here. Honestly not sure who I'd lean with. Gun to my head, I'd go with the 2012 Heat.

2003 Spurs vs 2013 Heat - If this is the playoffs version of the Heat, this is much closer. The Heat would have loads of issues dealing with Duncan's peak. If it's their RS version, I think they'd easily win. LeBron's peak again arguably and I don't think the Spurs have the defenders to really throw at him and contain him. Maybe they throw him off with a zone like the 2013 Spurs did, but I also think that team is flat out better than the 2003 team despite Duncan's decline. I'll go 2013 Heat in probably 7 again.

2004 Pistons vs 2014 Spurs - Don't think the Pistons have near enough shooting to combat them and I think the Spurs' ball movement would dissect that defense greatly. Going Spurs in 5.

2005 Spurs vs 2015 Warriors - Spurs handled a somewhat lesser version of the Warriors easily vs the Suns that season, but the Warriors are a much better defensive team and I don't think the Spurs have enough threes in them. Going Warriors in 6/7.

2006 Heat vs 2016 Cavs - Arguably the biggest mismatch. The Heat are arguably the worst team on this list. LeBron's arguable peak with a very stout playoff defense. Going Cavs in 5.

2007 Spurs vs 2017 Warriors - Maybe the 2nd biggest mismatch. I think the Suns eliminate the Spurs that season were it not for the suspensions in game 5. Warriors in 5.

2008 Celtics vs 2018 Warriors - I don't think the Celtics have enough threes in them, but this would be an interesting series. Warriors in 6 though.

2009 Lakers vs 2019 Raptors - One of the tougher ones to call. I'd say it's a pick-em series again. Can see arguments both ways. Gun to my head, I'd go with the Raptors.

I think the 2010s have better teams overall. Also the 2018 Rockets and 2017 Cavs are better than almost every title team from the 2000s IMO.

2004 Pistons vs 2014 Spurs - The 04 Pistons had additional shooters in young Okur and Corliss Williamson, that would be able to help keep that game close against them, and their defense should be able to keep up. Ben and Sheed taking turns on Duncan. Rip doing his thing, and heck. 04 was probably Prince's best year with that team. All of that factors.

2006 Heat vs 2016 Cavs - Not sure how you think the Heat are the weakest here. Shaq might be older but fact is those Cavs still have no one that can guard him. So Shaqs presence will draw massive double teams which should make things very easy for Wade and the rest of those guys to do their thing against this Cleveland team. Plus they have Alonzo Mourning coming off the bench to help out on the inside defensively. Jason Williams was still very good, and Gary Payton was very useful to defensively. I say they win that in 6 or 7. Maybe 5.

The Spurs and Cavs would absolutely demolish the Heat and Pistons.

It wouldn't even be close. They don't have enough shooting and their spacing would be awful vs modern defensive principles.

[OdomFan]

2000 Lakers vs 2010 Lakers - The 2000 Lakers are the better team and I think they'd win the series in 6.

2001 Lakers vs 2011 Mavs - Interesting battle. I think the Mavs could pose problems, but hard to pick against the best Shaq/Kobe Laker team. I'd pick them in 6.

2002 Lakers vs 2012 Heat - Another interesting battle. The Heat did typically struggle against big men and Shaq is still close to his peak here. But this is arguably LeBron's peak and it's hard seeing the Lakers containing him. Probably a pick-em series. Wade was also still very good here. Honestly not sure who I'd lean with. Gun to my head, I'd go with the 2012 Heat.

2003 Spurs vs 2013 Heat - If this is the playoffs version of the Heat, this is much closer. The Heat would have loads of issues dealing with Duncan's peak. If it's their RS version, I think they'd easily win. LeBron's peak again arguably and I don't think the Spurs have the defenders to really throw at him and contain him. Maybe they throw him off with a zone like the 2013 Spurs did, but I also think that team is flat out better than the 2003 team despite Duncan's decline. I'll go 2013 Heat in probably 7 again.

2004 Pistons vs 2014 Spurs - Don't think the Pistons have near enough shooting to combat them and I think the Spurs' ball movement would dissect that defense greatly. Going Spurs in 5.

2005 Spurs vs 2015 Warriors - Spurs handled a somewhat lesser version of the Warriors easily vs the Suns that season, but the Warriors are a much better defensive team and I don't think the Spurs have enough threes in them. Going Warriors in 6/7.

2006 Heat vs 2016 Cavs - Arguably the biggest mismatch. The Heat are arguably the worst team on this list. LeBron's arguable peak with a very stout playoff defense. Going Cavs in 5.

2007 Spurs vs 2017 Warriors - Maybe the 2nd biggest mismatch. I think the Suns eliminate the Spurs that season were it not for the suspensions in game 5. Warriors in 5.

2008 Celtics vs 2018 Warriors - I don't think the Celtics have enough threes in them, but this would be an interesting series. Warriors in 6 though.

2009 Lakers vs 2019 Raptors - One of the tougher ones to call. I'd say it's a pick-em series again. Can see arguments both ways. Gun to my head, I'd go with the Raptors.

I think the 2010s have better teams overall. Also the 2018 Rockets and 2017 Cavs are better than almost every title team from the 2000s IMO.

2004 Pistons vs 2014 Spurs - The 04 Pistons had additional shooters in young Okur and Corliss Williamson, that would be able to help keep that game close against them, and their defense should be able to keep up. Ben and Sheed taking turns on Duncan. Rip doing his thing, and heck. 04 was probably Prince's best year with that team. All of that factors.

2006 Heat vs 2016 Cavs - Not sure how you think the Heat are the weakest here. Shaq might be older but fact is those Cavs still have no one that can guard him. So Shaqs presence will draw massive double teams which should make things very easy for Wade and the rest of those guys to do their thing against this Cleveland team. Plus they have Alonzo Mourning coming off the bench to help out on the inside defensively. Jason Williams was still very good, and Gary Payton was very useful to defensively. I say they win that in 6 or 7. Maybe 5.

The Spurs and Cavs would absolutely demolish the Heat and Pistons.

It wouldn't even be close. They don't have enough shooting and their spacing would be awful vs modern defensive principles.

Such a short sighted, casual look on it. We're just going to have to agree to disagree because clearly you're not really putting much effort into what made those Spurs and Pistons as good as they were. Especially if you think the 04 Pistons would get demolished. I have nothing but respect for the 2014 Spurs. I enjoyed watching them win that year, but that doesn't mean they're running over one of the greatest defensive teams of the 2000s/all time like it's nothing. Both series would have been competitive regardless of who wins in the end.

The Cavs were a good team as well, but again, the 2006 Heat have Shaq. He isn't 2000-2002 Shaq anymore that year, but he's still a very solid star next to Dwayne Wade. Dwayne Wade? He's Dwayne Wade. That's really all I need to say about that. He and Shaq are going to get theirs, and they have a better roster around them then the 2016 Cavs. Jason Williams and Gary Payton played very well along side each other, that'll factor, Alonzo Mourning coming off the bench to help out on the inside. That's not going to be easy for anyone to have their way in that paint late in games, Walker, young Haslem, James Posey. Yeah...They are not getting demolished.

[Doctor MJ]

Do this same comparison in other decades, you often don’t have the same problem.

Except you do, it's always very tough to compare teams across decades. Different rules, different strategies, different approaches - it's always the same problem.

Not denying the huge shift that happened in the last 10 years, but I disagree with you here.

My point is that progress is not linear.

[Doctor MJ]

I don't really see a difference in "hard-handchecking" from the early 2000s to the 2010s and current NBA. It isn't like defenders were grabbing players arms when they had the ball.

Curry would stand 3-4 feet behind the 3P line and teams wouldn't guard him. He would absolutely roast them for 2 games [because the 1st game they would think it was a fluke] and then teams would be unable to effectively switch off-ball since they had never seen a player travel 4 miles--let alone 7-8 miles--in a game off-ball just weaving in and out of screens.

Yup. I believe it was really just a quirk of timing that led us to permanently associate the handchecking rule with pace & space.

Did the handchecking rule help offense to some degree? Absolutely. But even if you attribute the entirety of the +3.2 change in ORtg that year to the handcheck rule, it really doesn't make sense to connect it in any way with the +4.2 change in ORtg we've had over the past 3 seasons.

It's understandable that the idea that the handchecking rule was the real watershed those first few years, but this just doesn't explain an escalating rate of improvement after the fact.

The key principles of today's offense are:

1. Take advantage of transition opportunities before the defense can re-set. (Pushed by the 2001 rule change removing the complex illegal defense rule, and thus allowing half-court defense to play more optimal, and tipping the risk/reward of transition play toward reward.)

2. Be positioned to take 3's whenever the opportunity avails. (The optimal since 1980 when the 3-point line began so long as you've sufficient skill.)

3. Look to attack interior when the defense tries to defend against 3's. (Comes organically when 2 happens).

I think that would still be the case regardless of handcheck rules so long as things kept below a certain threshold of violence. I make no claims about having thought through the value of pace & space in jungle ball.

Wasn't entirely resting my point on handchecking (for clarity) or necessarily making it a totally linear throughline of rule changes.

Would a James "I drive and pick up a foul" Harden have flourished in the early 00s? Entirely possible, although the externalities to him as a player required to execute to a high level would have depended on a lot more factors than just how perimeter contact was adjudicated.

Agree with your three principles generally, though do think the complexity of things like perimeter screening actions and playswitching (which links again to 2) have arguably increased to be worth their own point.

Not sure how much I agree with the Transition Opportunities as being a seismic change. Ran a primitive comparison of Fast Break Points against pace, and the FBB pointe per possession appear to have actually DROPPED since 2000.

Code: Select all

Year   FBPS   Pace   FBPSPP
2000   13.97   91.3   0.153
2001   12.86   90.7   0.142
2002   12.79   91   0.141
2003   12.40   90.1   0.138
2004   12.13   90.9   0.133
2005   12.29   90.5   0.136
2006   11.76   91.9   0.128
2007   12.10   92.4   0.131
2008   12.56   91.7   0.137
2009   12.31   92.7   0.133
2010   14.12   92.1   0.153
2011   13.96   91.3   0.153
2012   13.26   92   0.144
2013   13.26   93.9   0.141
2014   13.37   93.9   0.142
2015   13.12   95.8   0.137
2016   13.17   96.4   0.137
2017   13.16   97.3   0.135
2018   12.10   100   0.121
2019   13.79   100.3   0.137
2020   13.37   99.2   0.135

Not claiming any great insight on that drop, although the arms race between transition offence and defence have likely ebbed and flowed over the years. Also, these are all-league averages rather than outliers (i.e. good teams with good coaches and well-constructed teams are more likely to be able to execute higher-percentage styles of play.)

Interesting data. 2 thoughts:

1. What do you think is causing the increase in pace if it's not attempting to attack before the meat of the defense is set? To me these seem one and the same.

2. I'm not sure what explains the data here. I do think that one effect of the push to attack early is that defenses don't crash the glass like they used to, instead looking to get back to prevent the fast break. It's thus possible that this defensive evolution is causing things not to be considered "fast breaks" and instead classified as something one step down.

[70sFan]

Do this same comparison in other decades, you often don’t have the same problem.

Except you do, it's always very tough to compare teams across decades. Different rules, different strategies, different approaches - it's always the same problem.

Not denying the huge shift that happened in the last 10 years, but I disagree with you here.

My point is that progress is not linear.

I agree, that's definitely true. It also means that it's always hard to compare teams across eras.

[SK21209]

2004 Pistons vs 2014 Spurs - The 04 Pistons had additional shooters in young Okur and Corliss Williamson, that would be able to help keep that game close against them, and their defense should be able to keep up. Ben and Sheed taking turns on Duncan. Rip doing his thing, and heck. 04 was probably Prince's best year with that team. All of that factors.

2006 Heat vs 2016 Cavs - Not sure how you think the Heat are the weakest here. Shaq might be older but fact is those Cavs still have no one that can guard him. So Shaqs presence will draw massive double teams which should make things very easy for Wade and the rest of those guys to do their thing against this Cleveland team. Plus they have Alonzo Mourning coming off the bench to help out on the inside defensively. Jason Williams was still very good, and Gary Payton was very useful to defensively. I say they win that in 6 or 7. Maybe 5.

The Spurs and Cavs would absolutely demolish the Heat and Pistons.

It wouldn't even be close. They don't have enough shooting and their spacing would be awful vs modern defensive principles.

Such a short sighted, casual look on it. We're just going to have to agree to disagree because clearly you're not really putting much effort into what made those Spurs and Pistons as good as they were. Especially if you think the 04 Pistons would get demolished. I have nothing but respect for the 2014 Spurs. I enjoyed watching them win that year, but that doesn't mean they're running over one of the greatest defensive teams of the 2000s/all time like it's nothing. Both series would have been competitive regardless of who wins in the end.

The Cavs were a good team as well, but again, the 2006 Heat have Shaq. He isn't 2000-2002 Shaq anymore that year, but he's still a very solid star next to Dwayne Wade. Dwayne Wade? He's Dwayne Wade. That's really all I need to say about that. He and Shaq are going to get theirs, and they have a better roster around them then the 2016 Cavs. Jason Williams and Gary Payton played very well along side each other, that'll factor, Alonzo Mourning coming off the bench to help out on the inside. That's not going to be easy for anyone to have their way in that paint late in games, Walker, young Haslem, James Posey. Yeah...They are not getting demolished.

I love Shaq but he definitely dropped off from 2005 to 2006:

2005 Shaq: 22.9 ppg, 10.4 rbs, 2.3 blks, 5.3 BPM, 4.6 VORP

2006 Shaq: 20.0 ppg, 9.2 rbs, 1.8 blks, 2.7 BPM, 2.1 VORP

In the 2006 Finals Shaq only managed 13.7 ppg in 35 minutes with a negative net rating against a Mavs center rotation of Dampier and Diop, who were pretty big and physical but not exactly world beaters. Duncan put up 32 ppg on those same guys in the same playoffs. Shaq wasn't a "he's going to get his" type of player anymore and it showed in the Finals.

Someone has to be the worst champion on this list and its the 2006 Heat IMO. They have the worst Net Rating and SRS of everyone on this list except for the 2001 Lakers, who did not give a **** about the regular season at all and are clearly much better than the 06 Heat. Jason Williams, Payton, Walker, Mourning, those guys were all okay but they were pretty close to the end of their careers. Posey was pretty good. All that said, it is pretty impressive that they beat two 60 win teams in the Pistons and Mavs.

[rrravenred]

Interesting data. 2 thoughts:

1. What do you think is causing the increase in pace if it's not attempting to attack before the meat of the defense is set? To me these seem one and the same.

2. I'm not sure what explains the data here. I do think that one effect of the push to attack early is that defenses don't crash the glass like they used to, instead looking to get back to prevent the fast break. It's thus possible that this defensive evolution is causing things not to be considered "fast breaks" and instead classified as something one step down.

Can think of a few possible explanations for 1.

* decrease in traditional PG play, with more players able to bring the ball up the court, leading to less "reset time" following a change in possession
* decrease in offensive rebounding (24% this year, 28% in 2000), probably driven by outside shots and longer rebounds offering scanter opportunities for the offensive bigs to crash the boards, meaning quicker changes in possession.
* decrease in traditional post play and bigs (and to a degree, one-out isos), meaning sets can take place earlier in the shot clock without setting up on the block (though outside the 6-sec "fast break" window). I note this somewhat supports both point 2 and your original contention. It's interesting that the Sixers and Nuggets, both Big-Centred offences, are 27th and 23rd respectively in pace this year.

Will admit that none feel particularly authoritative. But if there is incentivisation for early-possession attacks, you'd expect at least a bit of movement in the fastbreak points to reflect the rewards being reaped from such an approach.