1970s Top Team Tourney, Ro32: '79 Bullets @ '75 Celtics

[sansterre]

Don't forget, the home team for the series only benefits from that designation for Game 7. The rankings for these teams are out of 37 (because there are 37 teams in the 1970s tourney). The player stats are SS (ShotShare, percentage of team's shots taken when on the court), and the slash stats are rebounds per game, assists per game and stocks per game (if applicable), all adjusted to a Pace of 100.

The 1979 Washington Bullets (#17) @ The 1975 Boston Celtics (#16)

Overall:

Record: ‘75 Celtics, 60 wins (6th) > '79 Bullets, 54 wins (19th)
RSRS: ‘75 Celtics, +5.40 (15th) > ‘79 Bullets, +4.75 (19th)
PSRS: '75 Celtics, +4.88 (24th) > ‘79 Bullets, +1.97 (31st)

When the '79 Bullets have Possession:

Overall Comparison, '79 Bullets' offense vs '75 Celtics’ defense:

Regular Season: +3.6 Offensive Rating (7th) vs -3.0 Defensive Rating (20th): +0.6 expected
Playoffs: -0.4 Offensive Rating (33rd) vs +3.2 Defensive Rating (36th): +2.8 expected

Lineup:

PG: Tom Henderson, 15.5% SS on -1.1% rTS, 10.1 / 2.2 / 5.6 / 1.2: -0.9 playoff OBPM
SG: Kevin Grevey, 24.3% SS on -3.6% rTS, 14.6 / 3.4 / 2.3 / 0.8: -2.2 playoff OBPM
SF: Bob Dandridge, 24.2% SS on +2.3% rTS, 19.2 / 5.4 / 4.4 / 1.5: +4.2 playoff OBPM
PF: Elvin Hayes, 24.4% SS on -0.7% rTS, 20.5 / 11.4 / 1.6 / 3.0: +2.0 playoff OBPM
C: Wes Unseld, 12.9% SS on +6.9% rTS, 10.2 / 10.1 / 3.8 / 1.3: +2.0 playoff OBPM


When the '75 Celtics have Possession:

Overall Comparison, '75 Celtics' offense vs '79 Bullets' defense:

Regular Season: +2.3 Offensive Rating (14th) vs -1.1 Defensive Rating (31st): +1.2 expected
Playoffs: +7.3 Offensive Rating (2nd) vs -2.3 Defensive Rating (24th): +5.0 expected

Lineup:

PG: Jo Jo White, 21.7% SS on -1.4% rTS, 17.2 / 3.6 / 5.3 / 1.7: +1.3 playoff OBPM
SG: Don Chaney, 16.9% SS on -3.1% rTS, 9.0 / 4.2 / 2.1 / 2.2: +0.3 playoff OBPM
SF: John Havlicek, 22.6% SS on +0.3% rTS, 18.1 / 5.6 / 5.0 / 1.4: +1.5 playoff OBPM
PF: Paul Silas, 15.4% SS on -2.0% rTS, 10.0 / 11.8 / 2.5 / 0.9: +0.6 playoff OBPM
C: Dave Cowens, 22.6% SS on +0.7% rTS, 19.2 / 13.9 / 4.3 / 2.3: +1.5 playoff OBPM
6th: Don Nelson, 20.5% SS on +9.8% rTS, 13.2 / 5.6 / 2.2 / 0.6: +4.6 playoff OBPM

Thoughts:

-Injuries: No injuries.
-The ‘79 Bullets were a small inversion of the classic formula. In the regular season they were distinguished by their offense (helped by the addition of the veteran Bob Dandridge) while their defense was only decent. But in the playoffs the Bullet’s offense struggled. Elvin Hayes’ efficiency dropped 5%, Grevey by 5.5% and Henderson by almost 11%. I’ll concede that the Sonics were the best shooting-defense team in the league (and completely shut down the Bullets’ offense) but the Spurs and Hawks between them were only about league average. But the notable thing is that the Celtics weren’t a particularly great shot-defense team. So if we think the Celtics can play the Bullets tight enough, there is reason to think that the Bullets’ shooting will fall apart. Do we think that? The Bullets may have made the Finals that year, but they barely squeaked by both the Hawks and the Spurs, and the Sonics thrashed them pretty convincingly.
- The Celtics, at first glance, appear to be the better team in almost every way (if not by a lot). Their weird hangup is that the ‘75 Bullets shut them down in the playoffs. The Celtics shot almost 6% worse than in the regular season; Havlicek and Cowens shot sub-40% from the floor for the series. My question is, how different are the ‘75 and ‘79 Bullets? Obviously only Unseld and Hayes remain in the starting five, and the ‘79 team’s defense is considerably weaker. Do we think that the Celtics would hold up?


I’m going to put this up for 48 hours, unless I need to keep it open for a tie-breaker.

Post with who you would pick to win this series, ideally with the number of games. And if you have any insight into these players or matchups beyond what is above please don't hesitate to post; the goal (as always) is for us all to walk away with more knowledge than we started with. We always have more to learn!

Spoiler:

MasterThread

[70sFan]

This is quite interesting matchup. A lot of would depend on Havlicek vs Dandridge matchup, I'd go as far as say that it's essential for the winning team.

I have to think about it for a bit longer, but for now I think I'd favor Celtics slightly.

[penbeast0]

meh, not a fan of either backcourt (the Celts at least have good backcourt defense); Hayes and Unseld were pretty good against Cowens/Silas on both ends, something about their playstyles. Havlicek is better than Dandridge but a focused Dandridge will play him strong. Don Nelson is a very good 6th man if you don't care about defense, I'd give the edge to Mitch Kupchak but he was injured most of the playoffs; Greg Ballard has the makings of a solid glue guy but he wasn't the scorer Nelson was so the Bullets would turn to Charles Johnson as their go to bench guy when they needed one and, although never a good player over the regular season, he had some nice playoff games. Not going to call this one at the moment; my head says Celtics, my gut says Bullets.

[homecourtloss]

Boston looks like the easy choice here, but that gaudy Celtics’ 1975 playoffs was based off of running the Rockets off the court and then being shut down by the Bullets as everyone other than Nelson struggled. BigE and Unseld are still there though perhaps weaker defensive versions of themselves. Chenier had a great series in 1975 but wouldn’t be a factor in 1979.

I’m going Celtics in 6 taking into everything into account and thinking the 1975 series was a 6 game sample that wouldn’t be reproduced again.

[sansterre]

I am cautiously picking the Celtics in 7. The Bullets of 1979 are clearly not in the same defensive league as the Bullets in 1975. This is as much a home court advantage things as any of it.

[Odinn21]

I know their roster and play style got changed in 4 years but the Bullets were arguably better in 1979, Dandridge is a bigger matchup issue than Chenier for the Celtics, especially considering two way impact.
Hayes and Unseld held the Celtics under 42% in the paint, forced them to take mid/long range shots in 1975. I don't see why they wouldn't replicate such performance, especially with Dandridge on the team.

A solid frontcourt defense was a matchup nightmare for the Celtics in the mid '70s. Every time they achieved something (wanted to say performed well), they did so against bad to average frontcourts from 1974 to 1976.

The Celtics do not have enough, aggressive firepower to win this series.

Vote: The Bullets in 6.

[sansterre]

I know their roster and play style got changed in 4 years but the Bullets were arguably better in 1979, Dandridge is a bigger matchup issue than Chenier for the Celtics, especially considering two way impact.
Hayes and Unseld held the Celtics under 42% in the paint, forced them to take mid/long range shots in 1975. I don't see why they wouldn't replicate such performance, especially with Dandridge on the team.

A solid frontcourt defense was a matchup nightmare for the Celtics in the mid '70s. Every time they achieved something, they did so against bad to average frontcourts from 1974 to 1976.

The Celtics do not have enough, aggressive firepower to win this series.

Vote: The Bullets in 6.

Not that I disagree with your conclusion, but you'd rate the '74 Bucks frontcourt as "average"?

[Odinn21]

I know their roster and play style got changed in 4 years but the Bullets were arguably better in 1979, Dandridge is a bigger matchup issue than Chenier for the Celtics, especially considering two way impact.
Hayes and Unseld held the Celtics under 42% in the paint, forced them to take mid/long range shots in 1975. I don't see why they wouldn't replicate such performance, especially with Dandridge on the team.

A solid frontcourt defense was a matchup nightmare for the Celtics in the mid '70s. Every time they achieved something, they did so against bad to average frontcourts from 1974 to 1976.

The Celtics do not have enough, aggressive firepower to win this series.

Vote: The Bullets in 6.

Not that I disagree with your conclusion, but you'd rate the '74 Bucks frontcourt as "average"?

My wording wasn't on point, you're right. Achieve wasn't the word for it.
From 1974 to 1976, the Celtics played 2 series against good frontcourts out of 8 series. They underperformed in both because they couldn't handle defense around the rim.
The Bucks were the only other team the Bullets faced with above average frontcourt and the Bucks gave them hell.
Their performance against the Bucks in '74 one of the things I had in mind and wanted to point out. But again, poor choice of word.

[sansterre]

I know their roster and play style got changed in 4 years but the Bullets were arguably better in 1979, Dandridge is a bigger matchup issue than Chenier for the Celtics, especially considering two way impact.
Hayes and Unseld held the Celtics under 42% in the paint, forced them to take mid/long range shots in 1975. I don't see why they wouldn't replicate such performance, especially with Dandridge on the team.

A solid frontcourt defense was a matchup nightmare for the Celtics in the mid '70s. Every time they achieved something, they did so against bad to average frontcourts from 1974 to 1976.

The Celtics do not have enough, aggressive firepower to win this series.

Vote: The Bullets in 6.

Not that I disagree with your conclusion, but you'd rate the '74 Bucks frontcourt as "average"?

My wording wasn't on point, you're right. Achieve wasn't the word for it.
From 1974 to 1976, the Celtics played 2 series against good frontcourts out of 8 series. They underperformed in both because they couldn't handle defense around the rim.
The Bucks were the only other team the Bullets faced with above average frontcourt and the Bucks gave them hell.
Their performance against the Bucks in '74 one of the things I had in mind and wanted to point out. But again, poor choice of word.

Interestingly, comparing the defenses for the Bullets between '75 and '79, there was a small dropoff in shot defense, but the big swing was that they went from the 2nd best turnover forcing team in the tourney to the absolute worst. Which suggests that the frontcourt defense was still fairly intact, that it was the loss of defensive guard play that hurt.

Can anyone else speak to this? If we accept as premises 1) the mid-70s Celtics struggled against strong defensive frontcourts and 2) the '79 Bullets had a strong defensive frontcourt . . . then that result in '75 looks a lot more applicable.

I actually think I'll change my vote to "Bullets in 6" unless someone else can bring up a counter to this position.

[Odinn21]

Interestingly, comparing the defenses for the Bullets between '75 and '79, there was a small dropoff in shot defense, but the big swing was that they went from the 2nd best turnover forcing team in the tourney to the absolute worst. Which suggests that the frontcourt defense was still fairly intact, that it was the loss of defensive guard play that hurt.

Can anyone else speak to this? If we accept as premises 1) the mid-70s Celtics struggled against strong defensive frontcourts and 2) the '79 Bullets had a strong defensive frontcourt . . . then that result in '75 looks a lot more applicable.

I actually think I'll change my vote to "Bullets in 6" unless someone else can bring up a counter to this position.

In terms forcing turnovers, 1975 was a clear outlier for the Bullets.
1974- 11th of 17 with -0.2% relative rate
1975- 2nd of 18 with +2.1% relative rate
1976- 14th of 18 with -0.9% relative rate
1977- 20th of 22 with -1.6% relative rate
1978- 21st of 22 with -2.1% relative rate
1979- 22nd of 22 with -2.9% relative rate

1975 was not the trend for them. It's a clear outlier.

In 1975 playoffs, the Bullets held their opponents 3.2% lower than their reg. season fg% in 3 series.
From 1976 to 1979, the Bullets held their opponents 2.7% lower than their reg. season fg% in 10 series.

I don't think there's a particular trade off between ball pressure and something else. And the strong frontcourt defense was always there.

[70sFan]

I think that Odinn made me change my vote for Bullets in 6-7 games. Their frontcourt dominated Celtics in 1975 and the addition of Dandridge would also be painful for Boston. On top of that, the combination of Hayes and Unseld is ideal to deal with scrappy Cowens and Dave would have a lot of work on the other hand.

I think that Havlicek started to slow down on both ends of the floor as well and as I said before - this could be a key factor. Dandridge went on even terms with prime Julius Erving, so I suppose he'd not be outmatched. Havlicek pretty much shut him down in 1974 series, but from what I've seen Dandridge offensive repertoire improved noticeably in the late 1970s. He became a better shooter, smarter passer and his shooting selection improved as well.

[sansterre]

I'm calling this 3-1 in favor of the Bullets, who advance to face the winner of the '71 Bucks and '71 Bullets.

But the real winner is Odinn, for flipping two votes with persuasive argument!