Moderators: Clav, Domejandro, ken6199, bisme37, Dirk, KingDavid, cupcakesnake, bwgood77, zimpy27, infinite11285
Onlytimewilltel wrote:Mr Puddles wrote:Onlytimewilltel wrote:Lots of Steve Nash led offenses. Very smart of Mark Cuban to let him walk to Phoenix.
Didn't pay 65 mil for 6 years of Steve Nash, only to turn around that same off-season and pay 73 mil for 7 seasons of Eric Dampier.
Clearly the right decision, Nash was small and white, Dampier was …. big..
Doctor MJ wrote:cupcakesnake wrote:UcanUwill wrote:not sure what that (+xx) mean, above league average? but anyhow, Nash Dirks team dominant at that. Wild to remember that team had Nash and Dirk to spam pick and rolls, at a time, we didn't knew what we had in Nash yet.
What's crazier is that they didn't spam pick & rolls. Don Nelson loved to variety in his offense, so sometimes Nash would be standing in the corner so Finley or Van Exel could do stuff with the ball (or later: Antoine and Antawn). Can't argue with the regular season results, but I wish Nelson was less of a tinkerer come playoff time and more of a spammer.
Yup, the sad truth about Nelson's coaching. He had a great coaching career by all normal standards, but he wasn't a guy who saw the best way that no one else saw and bet everything on it. He was instead someone who was in love with trying different things, sometimes stumbled on something amazing, but would follow that up with something in the other direction.
In fairness to Nelson, he absolutely didn't want Dallas to let Nash go, so that's not on him...
but prior to that point the franchise had added a slew of volume scorers whose addition meant marginalizing Nash, which made it harder to justify to ownership why Nash should be kept. And again, maybe that should be blamed on Cuban entirely, it fits with how Nelson tended to work and I'm not aware of him blaming Cuban for the acquisition of Van Exel, Walker & Jamison the way he did with letting Nash go.
Ice Man wrote:Fox/Sabonis, Brandon Roy, and Deron Williams are the three outliers. Although yeah I know, injuries with Roy. Had he stayed healthy, maybe he would have had an HOF career like the rest of those guys on the list.
It's also worth noting that there are a LOT of famous names missing, for example -
LeBron (!!!!)
Kobe
Hakeem
Giannis
Jokic
Rust_Cohle wrote:Ice Man wrote:Fox/Sabonis, Brandon Roy, and Deron Williams are the three outliers. Although yeah I know, injuries with Roy. Had he stayed healthy, maybe he would have had an HOF career like the rest of those guys on the list.
It's also worth noting that there are a LOT of famous names missing, for example -
LeBron (!!!!)
Kobe
Hakeem
Giannis
Jokic
People will just blame LeBron's supporting cast. But definitely surprising to see him not mentioned once.
Djoker wrote:Fun Fact: KD is the only star to have a #1 offense on three different teams: 2013 Thunder, 2017/2019 Warriors, 2021 Nets.
Djoker wrote:This list contains the #1 offense (by rORtg) of every season since the shot clock so 1955.
Year - Team (rORtg) -- Best Offensive Player/Key Supporting PlayersSpoiler:
RaptorsLife on Mon Jun 11, 2018 7:45 pm wrote:nabbs wrote:RaptorsLife wrote:Nurse can’t be our head coach
Why not? Who is your choice?
Def Messina
RaptorsLife on Tue Jun 12, 2018 6:31 pm wrote:Messina sucks
zimpy27 wrote:Only thing I don't like about relative O rating is that it's not scaling to the average and simply just looks for the difference to average.
Like Celtics 23-24 were +7.9 rOrting but if you account for the fact that it's easier to score above average if the average is higher then it was +6.9.
Meanwhile the Mavs 01-02 were +7.7 rOrting but if you scale to average then they were at +7.4.
I guess great minds think alike. RaptorsLife on Mon Jun 11, 2018 7:45 pm wrote:nabbs wrote:RaptorsLife wrote:Nurse can’t be our head coach
Why not? Who is your choice?
Def Messina
RaptorsLife on Tue Jun 12, 2018 6:31 pm wrote:Messina sucks
bledredwine wrote:cpower wrote:2011 -- Denver Nuggets (+5.1) -- Carmelo Anthony
That is Billups offense
Maybe, but not in the year they nearly beat LAL to go to the finals. I was a big fan of that team. Melo was on fire and also crushed it in the playoffs, nearly beating LA. No question he was their best player that year. 2009? I forgot.
He was also the most clutch player that year by a significant margin. I'm not saying you're wrong about that particular year... but we've got to put respect on prime Melo's name.
That 2004 team was crazy, I remember all of us at the time wondering what exactly the logic was for that roster lolcupcakesnake wrote:Doctor MJ wrote:cupcakesnake wrote:
What's crazier is that they didn't spam pick & rolls. Don Nelson loved to variety in his offense, so sometimes Nash would be standing in the corner so Finley or Van Exel could do stuff with the ball (or later: Antoine and Antawn). Can't argue with the regular season results, but I wish Nelson was less of a tinkerer come playoff time and more of a spammer.
Yup, the sad truth about Nelson's coaching. He had a great coaching career by all normal standards, but he wasn't a guy who saw the best way that no one else saw and bet everything on it. He was instead someone who was in love with trying different things, sometimes stumbled on something amazing, but would follow that up with something in the other direction.
In fairness to Nelson, he absolutely didn't want Dallas to let Nash go, so that's not on him...
but prior to that point the franchise had added a slew of volume scorers whose addition meant marginalizing Nash, which made it harder to justify to ownership why Nash should be kept. And again, maybe that should be blamed on Cuban entirely, it fits with how Nelson tended to work and I'm not aware of him blaming Cuban for the acquisition of Van Exel, Walker & Jamison the way he did with letting Nash go.
I think of the 2003 vs. 2004 Mavericks as the best example of 2-way balance being superior to being overwhelming on one end.
2003: Amazing offense! #1 in the league and a fairly historic +7.1 rOrtg, which was actually slightly down from their league leading +7.7 the year before. Unlike the year before, this team could play some defense. They had 4 good sources of scoring (Dirk, Nash, Finley, Van Exel) but everyone else on the roster was a defensive player to complement that (Lafrentz, Bradley, Najera, Raja Bell, Adrian Griffin). It wasn't amazing, but good enough for a 9th ranked -1.3 rDrtg. Their entire playoff run was against contenders (50-win Blazers, 59-win Kings, 60-win Spurs) and with some better injury luck they might have gone to the finals (where they probably beat a less impressive Nets team.)
2004: Forget that we're already #1 on offense. Let's test the limits! Bring in the Twans, banish defense from the roster (or at least the rotation) and turn our contender into more of a mad science experiment. +9.2 rOrtg! (so basically the best ever?) -4.5 rDrtg (bottom 4 defense). They get to the playoffs and it doesn't even seem like there's a coherent game plan outside of Dirk actions. Marquis Daniels is all of a sudden a focal point. The Kings are a bad defensive team, but the Mavericks offense is so random that it feels like opponent defense is irrelevant. Neither of these teams really felt serious but the Mavericks especially just didn't feel like a real team.
tsherkin wrote:bledredwine wrote:cpower wrote:2011 -- Denver Nuggets (+5.1) -- Carmelo Anthony
That is Billups offense
Maybe, but not in the year they nearly beat LAL to go to the finals. I was a big fan of that team. Melo was on fire and also crushed it in the playoffs, nearly beating LA. No question he was their best player that year. 2009? I forgot.
He was also the most clutch player that year by a significant margin. I'm not saying you're wrong about that particular year... but we've got to put respect on prime Melo's name.
Billups was definitely the main reason for their evolution. Melo responded well to playing alongside a point guard who could run the show. We saw it again with Billups and Kidd in New York. Melo needed guidance. He had a lot of physical tools and he was a good shooter when his shot selection didn't get in the way, but left to his own devices, he was a clock-gobbling isolation specialist who disrupted team offensive flow. When he got off-ball a little more, he was considerably more effective, but that was a lot about Billups stabilizing the offense and moving the ball around. And of course himself being an 18/6 guy on 59.5% TS after the trade, then basically a 20/6 guy on 60% TS the year after.
Meantime, the year he "crushed it in the playoffs, nearly beating LA" was also 2009. They lost 2-4, with Melo shooting 40.7% from the field. and posting +0.2% rTS relative to league playoff average (54.6% over 54.4%). It was a decent series, but nothing remarkable; he certainly didn't "crush" it. And he dropped a 6/17 (35.3% FG) egg in Game 6. Did a great job getting to the line, but couldn't hit any shots, wasn't passing well. In his defense, Billups was also pretty brutal that game. He put up a big performance in the Game 5 loss, but when they won in Game 4, he was 3/16 for 15 points. Indeed, he shot 34.7% from the field after the first game. HUGE first game, brilliant scoring performance, but then he couldn't hit a shot to save his life the rest of the series.
Not the series you want to use to prop him up, I'd say. And he was pretty brutal the year after against the Jazz in the first round, too.
LeBron is 0-7 in game winning/tying FGs in the finals. And is 20/116 or 17% in game winning/tying FGs in the 4th/OT for his career. That's historically bad bledredwine wrote:tsherkin wrote:bledredwine wrote:
Maybe, but not in the year they nearly beat LAL to go to the finals. I was a big fan of that team. Melo was on fire and also crushed it in the playoffs, nearly beating LA. No question he was their best player that year. 2009? I forgot.
He was also the most clutch player that year by a significant margin. I'm not saying you're wrong about that particular year... but we've got to put respect on prime Melo's name.
Billups was definitely the main reason for their evolution. Melo responded well to playing alongside a point guard who could run the show. We saw it again with Billups and Kidd in New York. Melo needed guidance. He had a lot of physical tools and he was a good shooter when his shot selection didn't get in the way, but left to his own devices, he was a clock-gobbling isolation specialist who disrupted team offensive flow. When he got off-ball a little more, he was considerably more effective, but that was a lot about Billups stabilizing the offense and moving the ball around. And of course himself being an 18/6 guy on 59.5% TS after the trade, then basically a 20/6 guy on 60% TS the year after.
Meantime, the year he "crushed it in the playoffs, nearly beating LA" was also 2009. They lost 2-4, with Melo shooting 40.7% from the field. and posting +0.2% rTS relative to league playoff average (54.6% over 54.4%). It was a decent series, but nothing remarkable; he certainly didn't "crush" it. And he dropped a 6/17 (35.3% FG) egg in Game 6. Did a great job getting to the line, but couldn't hit any shots, wasn't passing well. In his defense, Billups was also pretty brutal that game. He put up a big performance in the Game 5 loss, but when they won in Game 4, he was 3/16 for 15 points. Indeed, he shot 34.7% from the field after the first game. HUGE first game, brilliant scoring performance, but then he couldn't hit a shot to save his life the rest of the series.
Not the series you want to use to prop him up, I'd say. And he was pretty brutal the year after against the Jazz in the first round, too.
Well, Chauncey was .397 from the field!
Melo was the better offensive force quite handily.
And if you want the efficiency stats, do look up the PER
but on top of that,
Melo gamescore - 17.9
Chauncey - 14.7
Please find PER if you can. Melo was the better and more dominant player, though Chauncey certainly helped to function as the glue... there's no denying that.
For that particular series, Melo was also the better defensive player, which was cool to see.
Without Melo being able to nearly equalize Kobe, the Nuggets get absolutely slaughtered. Without Chauncey, they at least would have been somewhat competitive.
LockoutSeason wrote:No Lebron-led offenses. Goes to show you how loaded his era was.
bledredwine wrote:Well, Chauncey was .397 from the field!
Melo was the better offensive force quite handily.
And if you want the efficiency stats, do look up the PER
Please find PER if you can. Melo was the better and more dominant player, though Chauncey certainly helped to function as the glue... there's no denying that.
Without Chauncey, they at least would have been somewhat competitive.
I'd be willing to bet that if we posted this on the Nuggets forum, they'd be near unanimous choosing Melo in that series and even that season.
