Teams that can be top 5 on O and D?

[cupcakesnake]

It's a good question, but I'm going to take a little exception to using "offensive efficiency" as the end all and be all of "best offense". Volume matters too. A team like OKC isn't so dominant just because they are efficient per possession. It's the combo of high efficiency on high volume that starts overwhelming other teams. It's just a whole different animal than a team who is grinding it out but doing it very efficiently. And defensively, it might even be more pronounced. If you can play high pace AND give up few points per possession, that's just a recipe for blowout wins.

I'm not sure what you mean by volume. Like, being the team that has more offensive possessions than the opponent? If you can get more shots that the other opponent, that's huge, and teams do this with turnovers, offensive rebounding, and elite defense. Some of that stuff gets captured in offensive efficiency. OKC getting so many easy buckets with their pressure defense is the most obvious example of that.

Teams play at different paces, but when we're talking grind it out, that's typically an effort to limit possessions when you know the other team scores more efficiently than you.

Is there an example you have of a "high volume/low efficiency" offense that has been successful?

[Billl]

It's a good question, but I'm going to take a little exception to using "offensive efficiency" as the end all and be all of "best offense". Volume matters too. A team like OKC isn't so dominant just because they are efficient per possession. It's the combo of high efficiency on high volume that starts overwhelming other teams. It's just a whole different animal than a team who is grinding it out but doing it very efficiently. And defensively, it might even be more pronounced. If you can play high pace AND give up few points per possession, that's just a recipe for blowout wins.

I'm not sure what you mean by volume. Like, being the team that has more offensive possessions than the opponent? If you can get more shots that the other opponent, that's huge, and teams do this with turnovers, offensive rebounding, and elite defense. Some of that stuff gets captured in offensive efficiency. OKC getting so many easy buckets with their pressure defense is the most obvious example of that.

Teams play at different paces, but when we're talking grind it out, that's typically an effort to limit possessions when you know the other team scores more efficiently than you.

Is there an example you have of a "high volume/low efficiency" offense that has been successful?

Sure, there were lots of run and gun teams.

I'm talking mostly about the reverse though. You can be efficient with low possessions and still not have a truly elite offense or defense. eg 2 teams with identical offensive and defensive efficiency metrics, but 1 of those teams gets 10 more possessions per game. The team that can be efficient on higher volume is going to be much more dangerous. Kinda like two 40% 3 point shooters are very different players if 1 is taking 3 attempts and the other 9.

But no, grind it out isn't an admission that teams are more efficient than you. You play that way because you think you can be more efficient in that style than your opponent can. Most teams aren't equally efficient in every play style.

[cupcakesnake]

It's a good question, but I'm going to take a little exception to using "offensive efficiency" as the end all and be all of "best offense". Volume matters too. A team like OKC isn't so dominant just because they are efficient per possession. It's the combo of high efficiency on high volume that starts overwhelming other teams. It's just a whole different animal than a team who is grinding it out but doing it very efficiently. And defensively, it might even be more pronounced. If you can play high pace AND give up few points per possession, that's just a recipe for blowout wins.

I'm not sure what you mean by volume. Like, being the team that has more offensive possessions than the opponent? If you can get more shots that the other opponent, that's huge, and teams do this with turnovers, offensive rebounding, and elite defense. Some of that stuff gets captured in offensive efficiency. OKC getting so many easy buckets with their pressure defense is the most obvious example of that.

Teams play at different paces, but when we're talking grind it out, that's typically an effort to limit possessions when you know the other team scores more efficiently than you.

Is there an example you have of a "high volume/low efficiency" offense that has been successful?

Sure, there were lots of run and gun teams.

I'm talking mostly about the reverse though. You can be efficient with low possessions and still not have a truly elite offense or defense. eg 2 teams with identical offensive and defensive efficiency metrics, but 1 of those teams gets 10 more possessions per game. The team that can be efficient on higher volume is going to be much more dangerous. Kinda like two 40% 3 point shooters are very different players if 1 is taking 3 attempts and the other 9.

But no, grind it out isn't an admission that teams are more efficient than you. You play that way because you think you can be more efficient in that style than your opponent can. Most teams aren't equally efficient in every play style.

Some teams definitely try to win by winning the possessions battle, rather than generating elite halfcourt production. Taylor Jenkins and Nick Nurse are examples of coaches who emphasize tilting the game in their favor by trying to have more possessions than the other team.

I get that offensive efficiency as a catch-all for good offense doesn't capture the whole story.

I don't think individual player 3-point volume works as an analogy though. Increasing the "volume" of your offense isn't straight forward because after your possession ends, the other team gets a possession. Increasing pace gives the other team more possessions too. An offensive rebound gives you 2 possessions instead of 1, but it necessitates missing on the first possession so it's not like there's a chance to score twice. A turnover ends the other team's possession without them getting an attempt, and often times creates an easy bucket transition possession.

When we talk about a player being a high-volume scorer or 3-point shooter, we're still talking about that player using team possessions to shoot it. Raising the entire volume of your offense requires creating more possessions than your opponent, and there are limited ways to do that.

For a lot of these reasons, offensive efficiency does capture most of offensive success, but it doesn't mean a team is a strong halfcourt offense. We all watched OKC struggle at times with their halfcourt offense in the playoffs, but all those liveball turnovers made them a good enough offense to win.

[picc]

Love Big Al, but I think this team is too old to keep up a top 5 pace on both ends for a whole season. It's almost more likely that they'll be a championship contender thatn they'll be a regular season beast, if their health timing is good. Jimmy has never not missed games, Steph is 37, Horford is 39, Draymond is 35.

It feels more like the kind of team that plays at that level for a month or 2 in the season when they're all healthy. They played at a top 5 level on both ends after the Jimmy trade last year though, so the ability is there. It would just seem like a health miracle if they were healthy enough to do that over 82 games.

Eh, you’re probably right about the pace and health. Steph, Jimmy, Al… yeah, thats a tall order to stay on the court and locked in all season, although Jimmy and Draymond will probably feed off each other’s intensity.

I do think they’ll be a serious problem in the playoffs and be able to beat anyone with their versatility and experience. Just have to stay healthy.

Up until the mid 2010s, I had a lot of faith in veteran squads bullying the youngsters in the playoffs with their superior experience.

I don't think that's the case anymore. There's so much more movement in basketball, I don't think teams built around old cores have a good chance to beat the young guys. The last several years, the old teams have looked so worn down in the playoffs, and they're much more likely to be injured.

I'm with you on loving the stylistic concept of Steph/Jimmy/Draymond/Al. It's basketball heaven, but this version is going to be too geriatric. They'll make us believe for chunks of the season, but I'm not buying them as serious contenders with their theoretical 4 best plays aged 35-39.

The injury risk is real AF. Steph coming off a hammy, Jimmy being banged up consistently, Horford being a load management posterboy. No doubt about that.

However I think the movement thing is also more of a stylistic concept that a reality. I just watched the whole '25 playoffs, and what I saw was what the playoffs always historically become -- a deevolution into basic and simplistic sets in the face of prepared and well-coached defenses.

Like the teams the Warriors would actually have to worry about are: The champion Thunder, who just spammed Shai/JDub iso and PnR all playoffs. The Rockets, who did the same thing with Green/FVV/Sengun and got totally shut down. KD will be a much better version of Green but their offense will operate on the same principles. Denver moves more, but no more than they have in the past when they've played GS. The Clippers are just Harden and Kawhi isos. Minnesota doesn't do a whole lot more with Randle and Edwards.

In the east, the Knicks devolved into Brunson iso sets. The Celtics, if they were still around, just pass around the perimeter and chuck threes. The Pacers are the most dangerous example of what you described, and they won't exist next season either. The Cavs move on offense but I'm betting in a potential finals series, we'd see Mitchell and Garland iso and PnR, because that's what always happens.

The pace and space of teams may tax them in the regular season and lead to injuries or taking their foot off the gas, for sure. But the Dubs with Horford aren't missing the playoffs, and I don't think they need HCA to beat any team in the West if they are all on the court. The game would devolve as it typically does, with the grind of the playoffs and the Warriors extremely well coached defensive schemes, and the contests would likely come down to experience and IQ.

Saying that, where I think you're going is that the regular season taxation is going to manifest in the playoffs with the tighter schedule and harder played basketball, and regardless of any of the above, somebody's body is likely to break down during the 3 month postseason because of it.

I would agree there's a pretty decent chance of that. But with some smart (and possibly fine-worthy) load management in the regular season, we may just see the Horford Warriors surprise us and vet their way to the finals.

[cupcakesnake]

Eh, you’re probably right about the pace and health. Steph, Jimmy, Al… yeah, thats a tall order to stay on the court and locked in all season, although Jimmy and Draymond will probably feed off each other’s intensity.

I do think they’ll be a serious problem in the playoffs and be able to beat anyone with their versatility and experience. Just have to stay healthy.

Up until the mid 2010s, I had a lot of faith in veteran squads bullying the youngsters in the playoffs with their superior experience.

I don't think that's the case anymore. There's so much more movement in basketball, I don't think teams built around old cores have a good chance to beat the young guys. The last several years, the old teams have looked so worn down in the playoffs, and they're much more likely to be injured.

I'm with you on loving the stylistic concept of Steph/Jimmy/Draymond/Al. It's basketball heaven, but this version is going to be too geriatric. They'll make us believe for chunks of the season, but I'm not buying them as serious contenders with their theoretical 4 best plays aged 35-39.

The injury risk is real AF. Steph coming off a hammy, Jimmy being banged up consistently, Horford being a load management posterboy. No doubt about that.

However I think the movement thing is also more of a stylistic concept that a reality. I just watched the whole '25 playoffs, and what I saw was what the playoffs always historically become -- a deevolution into basic and simplistic sets in the face of prepared and well-coached defenses.

Like the teams the Warriors would actually have to worry about are: The champion Thunder, who just spammed Shai/JDub iso and PnR all playoffs. The Rockets, who did the same thing with Green/FVV/Sengun and got totally shut down. KD will be a much better version of Green but their offense will operate on the same principles. Denver moves more, but no more than they have in the past when they've played GS. The Clippers are just Harden and Kawhi isos. Minnesota doesn't do a whole lot more with Randle and Edwards.

In the east, the Knicks devolved into Brunson iso sets. The Celtics, if they were still around, just pass around the perimeter and chuck threes. The Pacers are the most dangerous example of what you described, and they won't exist next season either. The Cavs move on offense but I'm betting in a potential finals series, we'd see Mitchell and Garland iso and PnR, because that's what always happens.

The pace and space of teams may tax them in the regular season and lead to injuries or taking their foot off the gas, for sure. But the Dubs with Horford aren't missing the playoffs, and I don't think they need HCA to beat any team in the West if they are all on the court. The game would devolve as it typically does, with the grind of the playoffs and the Warriors extremely well coached defensive schemes, and the contests would likely come down to experience and IQ.

Saying that, where I think you're going is that the regular season taxation is going to manifest in the playoffs with the tighter schedule and harder played basketball, and regardless of any of the above, somebody's body is likely to break down during the 3 month postseason because of it.

I would agree there's a pretty decent chance of that. But with some smart (and possibly fine-worthy) load management in the regular season, we may just see the Horford Warriors surprise us and vet their way to the finals.

I didn't mean they'd get stylistically outmatched by teams that move a lot. My point was simply: the Warriors will very likely be more banged up and tired than whoever they have to face in the playoffs. Playoffs get physical, and high effort, and the team with younger legs and/or a deeper bench has a huge advantage.

[picc]

I didn't mean they'd get stylistically outmatched by teams that move a lot. My point was simply: the Warriors will very likely be more banged up and tired than whoever they have to face in the playoffs. Playoffs get physical, and high effort, and the team with younger legs and/or a deeper bench has a huge advantage.

Yeah, I see your point. Like we could easily see GS mow to the WCF and then all of a sudden every starter is in the ER.

Hopefully not... but no one would be shocked.

[Lalouie]

clippers arent going to run it up.... theyre going to slow it down

running against young teams would be insane and would be playing their game

[clippertown]

clippers arent going to run it up.... theyre going to slow it down

running against young teams would be insane and would be playing their game

Agreed. Clippers are focused on defense to ensure opponents play at a slower pace. Lopez will be huge for them in this capacity if he can keep up.

I think it is harder to become a top 5 defense than a top 5 offense. Not many teams can be top 5 in both, but the 2025 Clips have a shot at it.

[Lockdown504090]

clippers arent going to run it up.... theyre going to slow it down

running against young teams would be insane and would be playing their game

Agreed. Clippers are focused on defense to ensure opponents play at a slower pace. Lopez will be huge for them in this capacity if he can keep up.

I think it is harder to become a top 5 defense than a top 5 offense. Not many teams can be top 5 in both, but the 2025 Clips have a shot at it.

Harden
Beal
DJJ
collins
Zu

They can shoot, rebound, switch, chase, protect basket, iso. Any game kawhi plays thats not against a top 5-6 team is probably going to be a win, and theyll win a lot of those too. beal is going to have a great season playing with the real unselfishness the clippers play with. It was a real joy to watch them when i could last year in the back half of the season.

[floppymoose]

I'm a huge GSW fan and they don't belong on this list. It's possible they will be top5 in both 15 games into the season. Not likely, but I could see it. But of Curry, Draymond, Butler, and Melton (and Horford if he ends up there), I'll be surprised if those 4 collectively average 55 games. Most don't realize just how likely it is that multiple key players go down for big parts of the season. I'm not a sports gambler, but I would take the under on GSW at 45.5 wins if I were, and I've been correct on the win line for GSW since 2021.

[cupcakesnake]

I'm a huge GSW fan and they don't belong on this list. It's possible they will be top5 in both 15 games into the season. Not likely, but I could see it. But of Curry, Draymond, Butler, and Melton (and Horford if he ends up there), I'll be surprised if those 4 collectively average 55 games. Most don't realize just how likely it is that multiple key players go down for big parts of the season. I'm not a sports gambler, but I would take the under on GSW at 45.5 wins if I were, and I've been correct on the win line for GSW since 2021.

I agree with you about all this and have discussed it a bit in this thread. I threw them an honorable mention because of how they played post-Jimmy trade, and how good the defense (and to a lesser extent the offense) can be when this team is healthy and clicking.

I view Golden State as a borderline playoff team. I project them as the 8th ranked team in the West, the 15th ranked offense, and the 10th ranked defense.