Profile of an NBA Finalist

[CBS7]

reported for spam

[tsherkin]

Offense over defense seems to be a 10s thing.

Getting there, we'll see what I find.

Pace doesn't seem to have much bearing (a little). Even in the tens, you were looking at a top-6 RS DRTG on average, and the average champion PS DRTG was 4.2.

Regular season wins matter l, home court advantage matters

Clearly, seeding and home court have an impact. And yeah, you mostly need to be pretty damned good on defense.

[tsherkin]

reported for spam

Love you too, buddy.

[tsherkin]

The average offensive and defensive 4 Factors for the champions in the 2000s (plus FTr on offense):

Offense

FTr: 7.5
eFG%: 6.3
TOV%: 13.5
ORB%: 13.9
FT/FGA: 11


Defense

eFG%: 4.1
TOV%: 16.2
ORB%: 8.3
FT/FGA: 12.4

So we see FTr rising in this era, a lot of which comes from those first 3 Lakers titles, but also that 03 San Antonio squad. It wasn't realy a big thing in the 90s. I wish it were easier to collect a whole bunch of shot distribution era for the decades and compare, but I only have zone data from 97 onward, per the stuff on b-ref. The 90s were a down period for FT relevance. I suppose I should look at FT% to see if that played in, but we'll see. Team eFG% rank similar in the 90s and the 2000s, and perhaps not surprisingly lower than in the 80s, when one of the best offenses of all-time was crushing it for half the decade. And Boston was also quite skillful.

It's also worth noting that 2001 LA and 2006 Miami were a little different on D in the playoffs compared to the RS, as I'd previously mentioned. That said, LA was pretty rough at turnover generation during all three titles in the 3-peat, and not a lot better in 2009. 17.5 in the 80s, 12.4 in the 90s, 16.2 in the 00s... not a huge emphasis placed on leading the league in generating turnovers. In the 2000s, the 08 Celtics were the only ones higher than 6th (they led the league and were, of course, an historic defense).

We start to see some backslide in the relevance in offensive rebounding, down to 13.9 average rank from 8.6 and 8.9. Or at least perhaps less of the teams good at it being good enough overall. LA was 5th and 3rd to open the decade but no open got higher than 9th after that. DRB% seems fairly similar: 8.5% in the 80s, 10.9 in the 90s, 8.3 in the 00s.

[tsherkin]

The average offensive and defensive 4 Factors for the champions in the 2010s (plus FTr on offense):

Offense

FTr: 19.3
eFG%: 3.6
TOV%: 16.7
ORB%: 19.5
FT/FGA: 17.2


Defense

eFG%: 5.9
TOV%: 13.2
ORB%: 14.6
FT/FGA: 10.4

FTr goes back to 90s levels of relevance. eFG% goes back to 80s levels, likely from the 3pt shooting (certainly in the latter half). Golden State was a NIGHTMARE while leading the league in eFG% at either end of the floor. Offensive rebounding was at its least important, again likely due to 3pt shooting. Shot defense remained as relevant as ever. Defensive rebounding was less well-represented, also at its lowest level. Not fouling your opponent too much remained important, but not critical. The Lakers and the Mavs, as well as the 2014 Spurs, were the only ones higher than 11th in defensive FT/FGA.

[tsherkin]

The average offensive and defensive 4 Factors for the champions in the 2020s (plus FTr on offense):

Offense

FTr: 19.6
eFG%: 2.6
TOV%: 18
ORB%: 10.8
FT/FGA: 22


Defense

eFG%: 7.8
TOV%: 16
ORB%: 7
FT/FGA: 9.8

First half of the 2020s, we see a renewed relevance in offensive rebounding, largely because of the 2020 Lakers, who were 23rd in the league in 3PAr, FWIW. 27 FGA/g inside the arc just from Lebron and AD, averaging about 55% FG between the two of them. That's... nuts, and a big part of why they were 5th in offensive eFG% despite being 21st in 3P%. They were 3rd in 2FG%. Just bludgeoning people to death inside. Lebron was getting about 7 shots per game in the RA at 72.7% FG, which was actually quite low for him (his worst FG% there since 2016, actually).

Boston was 2nd in the league in ball protection, Milwaukee was 12th. The Lakers, Warriors and Nuggets were all 23rd or worse. Everyone but the 2020 Lakers was 20th or worse in FTr, though again, LA bludgeoned it inside, so that's less surprising. Quite a lot of variation in turnover generation on D. GSW and Milwaukee dominating the defensive glass, LA also quite good.

[tsherkin]

A look at 3PAr, Net Rating, Pace, as well as relative ORTG and DRTG over titles since 1980. Also some averages for specific decades.

All righty...

Average Net Rating for all champions from 1980 forward: 7.4

Average relative ORTG: +3.8
Average relative DRTG: -3.5

Other Averages:

1980s

3PAr: 3.9%
Pace: 101.1

1990s

3PAr: 14.3% (95-97, shortened line, worth noting)
Pace: 92.5

2000s

3PAr: 20.7%
Pace: 91.0

2010s

3PAr: 31.4%
Pace: 95.2

2020s (so far)

3PAr: 41.0%
Pace: 99.4


Of the 45 NBA Champions in this time frame:

Top 10 by Net Rating

Code: Select all

96 CHI 13.4
97 CHI 12.0
24 BOS 11.6
17 GSW 11.6
08 BOS 11.3
92 CHI 11.0
15 GSW 10.2
91 CHI 9.4
07 SAS 9.3
86 BOS 9.2

HM to 00 and 87 LA at 9.1, and to 99 SAS at 9.0.

Bottom 10 by Net Rating

Code: Select all

95 HOU 2.3
23 DEN 3.4
01 LAL 3.6
06 MIA 4.2
94 HOU 4.5
11 DAL 4.7
82 LAL 4.7
10 LAL 5.1
22 GSW 5.6
80 LAL 5.6

HM to 20 LAL at 5.7, 21 MIL and 81 BOS at 5.8, and 03 SAS at 5.9.

Top 10 relative DRTGs

Code: Select all

09 BOS -8.6
04 DET -7.5
05 SAS -7.3
99 SAS -7.2
07 SAS -6.6
00 LAL -5.9
96 CHI -5.8
98 CHI -5.2
22 GSW -5.1
94 HOU -4.9

Top 10 relative ORTGs

Code: Select all

24 BOS 7.9
97 CHI 7.7
96 CHI 7.6
92 CHI 7.3
87 LAL 7.3
17 GSW 6.8
91 CHI 6.7
13 MIA 6.4
85 LAL 6.2
15 GSW 6.0

[tsherkin]

So, circling back to this, let's look at the teams who are top-5 at both ends of the floor as of right now... aka, no one.

So let's look at the top-5 teams by NetRTG, with their ORTG and DRTG ranks as well:

OKC +12.3 (6th / 1st)
CLE +10.8 (1st / 8th)
BOS +8.9 (3rd / 5th)
MEM +7.4 (5th / 7th)
NYK +6.8 (2nd / 15th)

HM: HOU +5.3 (13th / 4th)

Houston is the only other team better than +4.0 NetRTG.

We're a little past the halfway mark now, cruising towards the ASB.

New York and Houston are a little outside the typical profile, but wouldn't be unprecedented. The others, though, look pretty similar to our perennial contender types, at least so far.

EDIT: At some point, I'll update the frontpage with the 2020s data found later in the posts.

[tsherkin]

So, quick recap of the last half decade of NBA Finalists:

Code: Select all

2020: MIA: 7/11 RS, 5/9 PS; LAL: 11/3 RS, 2/6 PS
2021: MIL: 6/10 RS, 11/1 PS ; PHO: 5/9 RS, 10/4 PS
2022: BOS: 7/2 RS, 9/3 PS ; GSW: 17/1 RS, 4/6 PS
2023: DEN: 5/15 RS, 1/3 PS ; MIA: 25/9 RS, 6/7 PS
2024: BOS: 1/3 RS, 3/3 PS ; DAL: 10/18 RS, 7/6 PS

Some big turnarounds come the playoffs in a couple cases, like Miami in 2023 and Denver the same year. Golden State in 2022 switching the O on come the playoffs, and of course Dallas last year.

Surprises happen, though we usually see that from health or roster changes as much as anything else. Lots of very good defenses making the Finals this past half decade. 7/10 Finalists have had a top-10 defense or better during the RS. Of those who did not, one was 11th, and the other two were Denver and Dallas, both of whom dramatically turned around their defense in the playoffs. And Dallas really was doing it in the latter third or so of the season before the playoffs started, while Denver ended up being the 3rd-best defense in the postseason. It reminds us that while offense is exciting, defense remains a big deal, regardless of how much moaning and bitching people want to do about modern-era defense.

[OhayoKD]

Interesting that finalists tended to be around middle of the pack in terms of pace in all eras during regular season. Probably play a more deliberate game. I would imagine the teams at the highest pace tend to struggle when things slow down, and the teams that are at the slow end of the extreme just dont have a functional enough offense to get to their sets quickly.

There are exceptions.

So far, I have found 4 teams in the 90s who were top 5 in the RS in pace, though none of them won. In the 2000s, only the 09 Lakers were top 5... but they were also the 2nd-fastest team in the postseason in 2008 and 5th fastest when the titled in 09. In the 2010s, 4 teams were top 5. The Warriors were 1st when they won in 2015 and 2nd a year after. There are a couple more if you expand to include #6, but yeah, teams tend to be a little more methodical in the regular season.

Now, come the postseason? 5 teams in the 80s were top 5 in postseason pace, and an additional 3 were 6th or 7th. Houston won that way in 94 and 95, and Chicago was 7th in pace in 96. 8 teams were top 6 in postseason pace and made the Finals in the 2000s. All of LAL's 3-peat was that way (4, 4, 6). The 03 title Spurs were 6th. The 06 title Heat. Orlando was 8th in 09.

Sansterre made an observation of a similar nature:

Spoiler:

No, not the ones in Mongolia.

The ones in Golden State.

They were really, really good. Like, really good. In 2015 they brought in new coach Steve Kerr, ripped through the league and won a championship. In 2016 they broke the regular season wins record (set by the ‘96 Bulls) and made it through a Western Conference gauntlet unlike anything seen since 1972. But in the Finals they fell in seven games to LeBron James and the Cleveland Cavaliers.

The problem was that the Warriors weren’t likely to get better. They had fielded two of the best regular seasons ever (and 2016 has an argument for being #1, though not a strong one). But the team’s offense, a high-octane engine of ball-movement and swished threes, slowed in the playoffs both years. In 2015 it had been enough (when Kevin Love and Kyrie Irving had been injured). In 2016 it had not been. It wasn’t clear if the Warriors’ title window was closing or not. How could such great regular season offenses struggle in the playoffs?

Let’s talk about passing. Or more specifically, about assist-dependency. By which I mean, teams where a disproportionate amount of their made shots were assisted.

You may be picturing the Steve Nash Suns or the Showtime Lakers here. But neither franchise shows up particularly high in this metric. The teams that show up super-high (+7.0% above league average is what I checked) tend to be dependent on an extremely specific kind of ball-movement. And, since ‘1991, teams that show up high in this metric and show strong offenses in the regular season (+3 or better) see their offenses regress pretty hard in the playoffs. I found fifteen teams between ‘91 and ‘16 that met those criteria (AST/FGM at 7% above league average or higher, Offense at +3 or higher, and at least two playoff series):

The 1993 Cavs. They showed a +4.7 offense in the regular season, but dropped by 5 points in the playoffs (adjusted for opposition)

The Utah Jazz (‘96 - ‘00): They led the league in Assist Dependency each year until 2000. They averaged a +5.42 regular season offense but saw their offense drop by an average of 2.94 points in the playoffs (in ‘96 and ‘97 their offense held up fine, the decline was ‘98-00).

The 2004 Sacramento Kings led the league and had an insane +7.4 Offensive Rating in the regular season, but it plummeted in the playoffs, dropping by 9.5 points.

The 2006 Detroit Pistons were 2nd, had a +4.6 Offensive Rating in the regular season but saw it drop by 2.4 points in the playoffs.

The Utah Jazz (‘07, ‘08 and ‘10) were second two years and first in the other, averaged about a +4.3 in the regular season. Unlike others in this group the Jazz got *better* in the playoffs each year, on average by about 2 points.

The 2015 Atlanta Hawks led the league in Assist/FGM and posted a strong regular season offensive rating of +3.3. But in the playoffs they struggled, dropping by 5.4 points per 100.

The 2015 and 2016 Golden State Warriors were 2nd and 1st in AST/FGM and posted outstanding regular season offenses (+6.0 and +8.1) but saw them drop off both years, but 1.9 and 3.9 points respectively.

So.

I’ll be the first to admit that a fifteen-team sample size (ultimately dependent on a two-series playoff sample) is *not* a reasonable basis for a conclusion. The Deron Williams Jazz were very assist-dependent and their offenses held up reasonably well in the playoffs. And if I were actually trying to make a substantive argument about this I’d be charting all kinds of offenses and how they fared. Nevertheless, it’s an interesting pattern.

But either way, it’s notable that the Warriors super-charged their offense in 2015 by adding tons of ball-movement in the regular season, but in both postseasons they saw their offense take a step back. Everyone had an intuitive sense that the ‘15 Hawks (for example) wouldn’t be able to succeed in the playoffs with no star and lots of passing, but surely nobody had such a sense about the Warriors. And why should they have? Stephen Curry in those two years was about as good as any regular season player has ever been on offense.

[tsherkin]

Let’s talk about passing. Or more specifically, about assist-dependency. By which I mean, teams where a disproportionate amount of their made shots were assisted.

You may be picturing the Steve Nash Suns or the Showtime Lakers here. But neither franchise shows up particularly high in this metric. The teams that show up super-high (+7.0% above league average is what I checked) tend to be dependent on an extremely specific kind of ball-movement. And, since ‘1991, teams that show up high in this metric and show strong offenses in the regular season (+3 or better) see their offenses regress pretty hard in the playoffs. I found fifteen teams between ‘91 and ‘16 that met those criteria (AST/FGM at 7% above league average or higher, Offense at +3 or higher, and at least two playoff series):

I guess that makes sense. The D knows what you're trying to do, and if you can interrupt it and don't have a lot of other options, you struggle. If you don't have someone who can attack in a broken-play scenario, then all your carefully-arranged offense will eventually break down. Utah is a fairly classic example of this, as they had almost no competent perimeter scoring outside of the PnR, and the Bulls had dogs with athleticism and reach to overwhelm them.

The 2004 Sacramento Kings led the league and had an insane +7.4 Offensive Rating in the regular season, but it plummeted in the playoffs, dropping by 9.5 points.

This one is maybe a little more surprising. I think it's more that they were too reliant on jump shooting, not so much the passing. Webber was pretty soft, and had slowed some due to the injuries (and turning 30). Peja was a shooter. Bibby was overwhelmed a bit. Christie sucked, and they had little enough off the bench with no Bobby Jackson.

The 2006 Detroit Pistons were 2nd, had a +4.6 Offensive Rating in the regular season but saw it drop by 2.4 points in the playoffs.

This brings up the question of how much is a normal level of drop-off in the playoffs, particularly relative to opponents. The Pistons had been in the Finals in the two previous seasons and made a deep run into the ECFs in 06. The Bucks and the Cavs weren't much on D but the Heat were pretty good on defense in the RS (9th) and were, in fact, the BEST defense in the playoffs. That has to impact the drop-off in the Detroit offense.

But either way, it’s notable that the Warriors super-charged their offense in 2015 by adding tons of ball-movement in the regular season, but in both postseasons they saw their offense take a step back. Everyone had an intuitive sense that the ‘15 Hawks (for example) wouldn’t be able to succeed in the playoffs with no star and lots of passing, but surely nobody had such a sense about the Warriors. And why should they have? Stephen Curry in those two years was about as good as any regular season player has ever been on offense.[/spoiler]

They also relied heavily upon 3pt shooting. So same looks, different result was a thing for them in many cases. To whit, they shot 31.6 3PA/g at 41.6% in the regular season. Then 36.0 3PA/g at 39.3% in the playoffs. Their 2FG% dropped from 52.8% to 49.2%. They were a 114.5 offense in the RS. Against Houston, 111.9, with Steph only playing 2 games. 117.1 vs Portland with Steph again only playing 2 games. 107.3 vs OKC, with Steph playing all 7. That one was the tough series. They were doing relatively well up until that point, but OKC's length and athleticism caused them some grief. They killed it from 3 but struggled to get it done inside. Klay was pretty underwhelming and Draymond was quite poor in his (comparatively few) scoring possessions. And they had no other double-digit scorers. 107.9 vs Cleveland in the Finals. No real help from the supporting cast. Steph was good but not transcendent, and same with Klay.

Cleveland had some pretty good athletes on defense, and Lebron in particular was a bit of a monster on that end.

[AEnigma]

So let's look at the top-5 teams by NetRTG, with their ORTG and DRTG ranks as well:

OKC +12.3 (6th / 1st)
CLE +10.8 (1st / 8th)
BOS +8.9 (3rd / 5th)
MEM +7.4 (5th / 7th)
NYK +6.8 (2nd / 15th)

We're a little past the halfway mark now, cruising towards the ASB.

New York (and Houston) are a little outside the typical profile, but wouldn't be unprecedented. The others, though, look pretty similar to our perennial contender types, at least so far.

So with Houston I need to see a larger sample before grouping them in. The rest of these top five have been in this realm (if not the exact numbers) previously, and accordingly I feel more confident they will maintain that for the remainder of the regular season and potentially into the postseason.

The Cavaliers are something of a true conference breakout though, so I will focus on them a bit more — specifically under the lens of Mitchell. I have significant issues with the ranking framework in the postseason because of differing samples and the skewed opponent portions, but will do it here to correspond with your analysis.

2018: Jazz offence goes from 16/30 to 13/16 in the postseason (two rounds)

2019: Jazz offence goes from 15/30 to 13/16 in the postseason (one round)

2020: Jazz offence goes from 10/30 to 1/16 in the postseason (one round)

2021: Jazz offence goes from 3/30 to 2/16 in the postseason (two rounds)

2022: Jazz offence goes from 1/30 to 12/16 in the postseason (one round)

2023: Cavaliers offence goes from 9/30 to 15/16 in the postseason (one round)

2024: Cavaliers offence goes from 18/30 to 14/16 in the postseason (two rounds, Mitchell injury)

In general I would not say any of the above gives me confidence that their offence will maintain in the postseason, but it is at least not an unprecedented concept for Mitchell.

[tsherkin]

So with Houston I need to see a larger sample before grouping them in. The rest of these top five have been in this realm (if not the exact numbers) previously, and accordingly I feel more confident they will maintain that for the remainder of the regular season and potentially into the postseason.

I guess. They were trending up defensively last year, having moved from a +4.5 D in 2023 to a -1.9 D last year and now -4.2.

Amen Thompson is playing 9 more mpg this season, too, and jumped into the starting lineup about 20 games ago. So there's some underpinning to it as well, not just random change.

The Cavaliers are something of a true conference breakout though, so I will focus on them a bit more — specifically under the lens of Mitchell. I have significant issues with the ranking framework in the postseason because of differing samples and the skewed opponent portions, but will do it here to correspond with your analysis.

Oh, certainly. The ranking means totally different things in a 16-team environment compared to 30, especially without any actual numbers applied to quantify those rankings. But there's a general trend, especially from the RS, which I wanted to highlight to start some discussion.

In general I would not say any of the above gives me confidence that their offence will maintain in the postseason, but it is at least not an unprecedented concept for Mitchell.

So another way to look at this is that Mitchell is a roughly 45/37/84 guy in the RS at about 25/4/4 on 34 mpg. Come the playoffs, he's more like a 25/5/5 guy in 38 mpg, shooting 44/36/85. Around .250 FTr and 11% TOV in the RS, 57% TS, about .280 and 11% on 56% TS in the playoffs. Was at 58.4% TS in the PS last year, and he was pretty hot in 2020 and 2021, which appear to have been outlier seasons for him.

But Cleveland this season has a LOT of high-end 3pt shooting, is very good about ball protection (in part because they bomb so many threes, of course), and when they do shoot inside the arc, they're the best in the league at it. Mobley, Allen and Lavert do a pretty good job of getting a lot of high-percentage looks inside, which helps support that.

They're going to have trouble in any game/stretch where their 3s aren't falling, but they're also a pretty good D and SO many of their guys are elite 3pt shooters that it's gonna be a stretch for them to ALL be off enough to tank their O for a protracted period of time. Should be interesting to see.

So generally speaking, the real contenders/champions tend to be just shy of +4 / -4 and average out to a NetRTG of a little better than +7. Cleveland is 2nd in the league in that regard, and they're good enough on D that they can tolerate some erosion of their offense and remain competitive. They'd have to properly TANK OUT on offense to fall off enough to drop off the list, right?

They're a fast team, they bomb a lot in transition and they're really good at it. Defending that isn't going to be very easy, so there's got to be some love for the thought that their O might be resilient enough to make noise in the playoffs.