sp6r=underrated wrote:First, saying a team is weak on the boards almost entirely refutes the idea that a team is best in history quality.
Second, During their 27 game win streak their avg MOv was 11.92.
Many teams, which aren't regarded as ATG teams had 27 game stretches were they outscored their opponents by similar margins. The 90 Pistons had a 27 game stretch were they went 25-2 and won by 11.56. Were they an ATG team?
Point differential as an indicator of team quality is far more proven than plus/minus as an indicator of individual quality. The case for point differential is as strong as the case for cigarettes causing lung cancer while the case for plus/minus is only slightly superior to the case that organic food being good for you. Yet for some reason on this board it is plus/minus that is taken as gospel while people constantly dismiss point differential under "oh they were coasting".
As I mentioned, one of the most noteworthy trends of the Heat's run was how they coasted in the first half.
Consider: During that 27 game run the Heat's average 4th quarter edge was +5.6. Multiplied over 4 quarters, that the equivalent of an edge +22, which is pretty damn noteworthy.
Is it more noteworthy than the '90 Pistons? I don't know. More importantly though:
Is it something we can say was NOT much affected by luck? Obviously if this had more to do with luck than anything else that answers all questions. If it wasn't luck based, then isn't it a pretty huge deal when you can win 27 in a row while clearly not giving max effort the entire time?
Re: Point differential more proven that +/-. That's an odd statement. I'm not ignoring point differential here because I don't look at it, I"m giving a specific reason why it's misleading in this case. I make specific cases why an individual's +/- is pretty off pretty often too.
Re: Can a team be GOAT if they are weak on the boards? See now that's a good question. The Heat feel like a team that might be GOAT-effective built around their contemporaries but might have had to go in a very different direction in another era. It's worth asking what we should think about that if that's true.
We can't ask that though without pointing out how what suicide it would be to try to run many old strategies in the modern NBA.