Post playoff predictions here

[RodyTur10]

EAST

Philadelphia 76ers (1) vs Washington Wizards (8 ) -- 4-1
Brooklyn Nets (2) vs Boston Celtics (7) -- 4-2
Milwaukee Bucks (3) vs Miami Heat (6) -- 4-3
New York Knicks (4) vs Atlanta Hawks (5) -- 2-4

Philadelphia 76ers (1) vs Atlanta Hawks (5) -- 4-2
Brooklyn Nets (2) vs Milwaukee Bucks (3) -- 4-1

Philadelphia 76ers (1) vs Brooklyn Nets (2) -- 2-4

WEST

Utah Jazz (1) vs Memphis Grizzles (-8) -- 4-0
Phoenix Suns (2) vs Los Angeles Lakers (7) -- 4-3
Denver Nuggets (3) vs Portland Trailblazers (6) -- 2-4
Los Angeles Clippers (4) vs Dallas Mavericks (5) -- 4-1

Utah Jazz (1) vs Los Angeles Clippers (4) -- 3-4
Phoenix Suns (2) vs Portland Trailblazers (6) -- 4-2

Phoenix Suns (2) vs Los Angeles Clippers (4) -- 3-4

FINALS

Brooklyn Nets (2) vs Los Angeles Clippers (4) -- 4-2

Champions: Brooklyn Nets

[PhoSita]

Trivia for all of you picking the Nets:

When was the last time a team won the title after finishing bottom 10 in defensive efficiency for the season?


....



Closest I could find is the 2001 Lakers who finished 19th in team defensive rating.  They were top of the league in defensive rating just the season before, when they won the title, so they'd already proven they could lock down opponents.  Team defensive ratings only go back to the early to mid 80s, though, so maybe there's an example before that.

[RodyTur10]

Trivia for all of you picking the Nets:

When was the last time a team won the title after finishing bottom 10 in defensive efficiency for the season?
....

Closest I could find is the 2001 Lakers who finished 19th in team defensive rating.  They were top of the league in defensive rating just the season before, when they won the title, so they'd already proven they could lock down opponents.  Team defensive ratings only go back to the early to mid 80s, though, so maybe there's an example before that.

With Harden, Durant, Irving and Harris they have so much firepower that I don't think it will matter.
But (just like for most teams) health is crucial of course.

[Moranis]

The jazz are an underdog. They have home court advantage throughout though and that should help. Utah always has a solid home court edge.

They've got a deep and balanced team but it is true that they won't have the best player on the floor against the Mavs or Clips in the second round. Similarly they won't have the best or second best player in a series against the Lakers. 

But it would be awesome if they went to the Finals. That's what I'm rooting for.

I picked Utah to beat Memphis in 5, but I think Memphis has a better chance of beating Utah than Utah does of even making the Finals let alone win them.  Utah is better than the Raptors, pre-Leonard, but I think of them in a pretty similar vein (same with that 60+ win Hawks team).  A team with a lot of depth, some very good but not great players, that stayed relatively healthy and won a lot of games, but was never going to beat a solid team with a true top 5 player type talent.  Utah's two biggest strengths during the season i.e. health and depth, just won't have the same level of advantage in the playoffs.

[tstorey_97]

There will assuredly be at least one "upset."

I don't know the rest of the league like you guys, but, it won't be 100% chalk.

Nets v Lakers (chalk)

Clips
Jazz
Philly

To be honest, I don't like the Lakers to sweep through the top 3 and make it to the finals. Don't like their bench that much and they will get tough play from the top 3 in the west.

Not sure of the Nets this year. It is hard to be the favorite. Those three guys are great players though.

Perhaps the following:

Nets v Clippers

Or

Sixers v Lakers

[Goldstar88]

You aren’t going to win an NBA championship with a 6’1” guard as your best player and only all star.

OK this doesn't remotely describe the Jazz though

Also I picked the Bucks

The Jazz best player is a 6’1” guard in Mitchell. I doubt they  get past either of the LA teams to make it to the finals. Quite a few are picking the Jazz to win it all. For the record, I would love for them to win, just don’t see it happening. Need star wing players to go far in the postseason.

[PhoSita]

You aren’t going to win an NBA championship with a 6’1” guard as your best player and only all star.

OK this doesn't remotely describe the Jazz though

Also I picked the Bucks

The Jazz best player is a 6’1” guard in Mitchell. I doubt they  get past either of the LA teams to make it to the finals. Quite a few are picking the Jazz to win it all. For the record, I would love for them to win, just don’t see it happening. Need star wing players to go far in the postseason.

Mitchell is 6'1.75'' without shoes, which means he's 6'3'' in NBA height terms.

Also I think he and Gobert kind of share "best player / most important player" designation on that team.


Anyway, I acknowledge that the Jazz are an underdog. The "safe" pick is to have the Lakers or Clippers coming out of the West.  I'm not interested in making the "safe" pick because that will inevitably be an outcome I don't care to watch. 

[PhoSita]

Trivia for all of you picking the Nets:

When was the last time a team won the title after finishing bottom 10 in defensive efficiency for the season?
....

Closest I could find is the 2001 Lakers who finished 19th in team defensive rating.  They were top of the league in defensive rating just the season before, when they won the title, so they'd already proven they could lock down opponents.  Team defensive ratings only go back to the early to mid 80s, though, so maybe there's an example before that.

With Harden, Durant, Irving and Harris they have so much firepower that I don't think it will matter.
But (just like for most teams) health is crucial of course.

It'll be an interesting test.

If the Nets win a title it completely throws out any idea that defense or team cohesion are crucial ingredients for winning a title.  The Nets have never played defense all season and their stars have played just a handful of minutes together.

That feels like it should be important.  I want it to be a problem for them.  I fear that it won't be.

[Somebody]

Trivia for all of you picking the Nets:

When was the last time a team won the title after finishing bottom 10 in defensive efficiency for the season?
....

Closest I could find is the 2001 Lakers who finished 19th in team defensive rating.  They were top of the league in defensive rating just the season before, when they won the title, so they'd already proven they could lock down opponents.  Team defensive ratings only go back to the early to mid 80s, though, so maybe there's an example before that.

With Harden, Durant, Irving and Harris they have so much firepower that I don't think it will matter.
But (just like for most teams) health is crucial of course.

It'll be an interesting test.

If the Nets win a title it completely throws out any idea that defense or team cohesion are crucial ingredients for winning a title.  The Nets have never played defense all season and their stars have played just a handful of minutes together.

That feels like it should be important.  I want it to be a problem for them.  I fear that it won't be.

To be fair not every title winner can boast two all-time greats and another perennial superstar who're all offensively-inclined. This is like building a team with Russell and Garnett manning the pivot while Pippen/Moncrief/Frazier defend the perimeter, they can play meh offence and still win an NBA title by making every offence they face downright awful.

[Moranis]

You aren’t going to win an NBA championship with a 6’1” guard as your best player and only all star.

OK this doesn't remotely describe the Jazz though

Also I picked the Bucks

The Jazz best player is a 6’1” guard in Mitchell. I doubt they  get past either of the LA teams to make it to the finals. Quite a few are picking the Jazz to win it all. For the record, I would love for them to win, just don’t see it happening. Need star wing players to go far in the postseason.

Mitchell's height aside, the Jazz had 3 all stars this year and have 2 of the 3 finalists for 6th man of the year.  They don't fit the traditional champion as they lack a top 5ish player, but they are fairly similar to the 3 teams that won a title without a top 5 player i.e. 3 or 4 all star caliber players, a lot of quality legit NBA depth, and a defensive anchor (14 Spurs, 05 Pistons, 79 Sonics). 

[Somebody]

You aren’t going to win an NBA championship with a 6’1” guard as your best player and only all star.

OK this doesn't remotely describe the Jazz though

Also I picked the Bucks

The Jazz best player is a 6’1” guard in Mitchell. I doubt they  get past either of the LA teams to make it to the finals. Quite a few are picking the Jazz to win it all. For the record, I would love for them to win, just don’t see it happening. Need star wing players to go far in the postseason.

Mitchell's height aside, the Jazz had 3 all stars this year and have 2 of the 3 finalists for 6th man of the year.  They don't fit the traditional champion as they lack a top 5ish player, but they are fairly similar to the 3 teams that won a title without a top 5 player i.e. 3 or 4 all star caliber players, a lot of quality legit NBA depth, and a defensive anchor (14 Spurs, 05 Pistons, 79 Sonics).

And their best player is a 7'1 Gobert ('78 Bullets were also in that mould of 3-4 stars and a lot of quality role players FWIW).

[Moranis]

You aren’t going to win an NBA championship with a 6’1” guard as your best player and only all star.

OK this doesn't remotely describe the Jazz though

Also I picked the Bucks

The Jazz best player is a 6’1” guard in Mitchell. I doubt they  get past either of the LA teams to make it to the finals. Quite a few are picking the Jazz to win it all. For the record, I would love for them to win, just don’t see it happening. Need star wing players to go far in the postseason.

Mitchell's height aside, the Jazz had 3 all stars this year and have 2 of the 3 finalists for 6th man of the year.  They don't fit the traditional champion as they lack a top 5ish player, but they are fairly similar to the 3 teams that won a title without a top 5 player i.e. 3 or 4 all star caliber players, a lot of quality legit NBA depth, and a defensive anchor (14 Spurs, 05 Pistons, 79 Sonics).

And their best player is a 7'1 Gobert ('78 Bullets were also in that mould of 3-4 stars and a lot of quality role players FWIW).

I've always felt Hayes was a top 5 player that year.  Dr. J, Kareem, Moses, and arguably Walton (Walton missed a bunch of games which is why I say arguably) were the only guys I think you could clearly say were better than Hayes though I wouldn't nitpick if someone wanted to argue about the scoring guards i.e. Gervin or Thompson.  I just think Hayes was a better defender and more impactful player than those guys.

[liam]

You aren’t going to win an NBA championship with a 6’1” guard as your best player and only all star.

OK this doesn't remotely describe the Jazz though

Also I picked the Bucks

The Jazz best player is a 6’1” guard in Mitchell. I doubt they  get past either of the LA teams to make it to the finals. Quite a few are picking the Jazz to win it all. For the record, I would love for them to win, just don’t see it happening. Need star wing players to go far in the postseason.

Mitchell's height aside, the Jazz had 3 all stars this year and have 2 of the 3 finalists for 6th man of the year.  They don't fit the traditional champion as they lack a top 5ish player, but they are fairly similar to the 3 teams that won a title without a top 5 player i.e. 3 or 4 all star caliber players, a lot of quality legit NBA depth, and a defensive anchor (14 Spurs, 05 Pistons, 79 Sonics).

If the Jazz can keep shooting the way they have all season they will be a really tough out.

[Somebody]

You aren’t going to win an NBA championship with a 6’1” guard as your best player and only all star.

OK this doesn't remotely describe the Jazz though

Also I picked the Bucks

The Jazz best player is a 6’1” guard in Mitchell. I doubt they  get past either of the LA teams to make it to the finals. Quite a few are picking the Jazz to win it all. For the record, I would love for them to win, just don’t see it happening. Need star wing players to go far in the postseason.

Mitchell's height aside, the Jazz had 3 all stars this year and have 2 of the 3 finalists for 6th man of the year.  They don't fit the traditional champion as they lack a top 5ish player, but they are fairly similar to the 3 teams that won a title without a top 5 player i.e. 3 or 4 all star caliber players, a lot of quality legit NBA depth, and a defensive anchor (14 Spurs, 05 Pistons, 79 Sonics).

And their best player is a 7'1 Gobert ('78 Bullets were also in that mould of 3-4 stars and a lot of quality role players FWIW).

I've always felt Hayes was a top 5 player that year.  Dr. J, Kareem, Moses, and arguably Walton (Walton missed a bunch of games which is why I say arguably) were the only guys I think you could clearly say were better than Hayes though I wouldn't nitpick if someone wanted to argue about the scoring guards i.e. Gervin or Thompson.  I just think Hayes was a better defender and more impactful player than those guys.

I felt that '78 and '79 was Gervin's peak and while I was never the highest on him in All-Time drafts, I do think that his massive scoring in a hybrid on/off-ball package holds pretty good value on strong and weak teams, kind of like a homeless man's Kevin Durant before the three point line so I'd take him over Hayes (Gervin led some elite offences during his prime with good but not great support around him). But to me the 4-5 guys who were next level superstars were the 4 you listed and Gervin - all of the others just don't seem THAT good to me with the limited data and film we have.

I think Hayes was an excellent defender, but I'm pretty low on his offence: low efficiency black holes who make a few boneheaded decisions every game when the offence is running through them aren't valuable at all. To me his overall impact is similar to a guy like late-70s Unseld (obviously very different players, but I think they were on a similar level), which takes him out of that inner circle for me.

[Somebody]

You aren’t going to win an NBA championship with a 6’1” guard as your best player and only all star.

OK this doesn't remotely describe the Jazz though

Also I picked the Bucks

The Jazz best player is a 6’1” guard in Mitchell. I doubt they  get past either of the LA teams to make it to the finals. Quite a few are picking the Jazz to win it all. For the record, I would love for them to win, just don’t see it happening. Need star wing players to go far in the postseason.

Mitchell is 6'1.75'' without shoes, which means he's 6'3'' in NBA height terms.

Also I think he and Gobert kind of share "best player / most important player" designation on that team.


Anyway, I acknowledge that the Jazz are an underdog. The "safe" pick is to have the Lakers or Clippers coming out of the West.  I'm not interested in making the "safe" pick because that will inevitably be an outcome I don't care to watch.

Gobert is pretty clearly the best player on that team even accounting for his defensive value eroding a bit against specific teams in the playoffs. The 2017 Warriors aside (Gobert was doomed to fail with Utah starting a defensive sieve in Diaw next to him in the frontcourt), those Jazz defences had rDRTGs of -1.5 against the 2017 Clippers, -3.1 against the Rockets in 2018 and -6.2 the next year. All of those offences were led by guards who theoretically could 'kill slow bigs who camp inside the paint' like Gobert, yet Gobert retains decent value against them. There's the series against the Nuggets in the bubble where the Jazz defence got absolutely shredded, but I think most people can agree that it was the perfect storm of really unique circumstances coming together.

Throw in Gobert's improvement on the offensive end of the court this season and you now have a defensive giant who's a small to decent plus on offence, which to me is a top 15-20 player even against less favourable matchups, heights that Mitchell still can't reach.