Possible Advanced Stats Theory About the Bucks

[Somebody]

A good stat to look at might be Simple Rating System(SRS). Every champ this century except one has been over 4.5 and all but three over 5.0.

Following that stat, only 6 teams in the league, right now have an SRS over 5.

Milwaukee 11.18
Lakers 7.26
Boston 6.12
Clippers 6.09
Toronto 5.91
Dallas 5.84

No other team in the league is above 3.85.

So if I am picking a champ for this year, I would say it is one of those 6 teams.

Man, Milwaukee really crush that metric, huh? I definitely don't know if they're good enough to have such a crazy margin between them and the other teams (not calling into question the method, just think it won't last like that in the playoffs). I've definitely watched the Bucks and not been blown away (like watching the old GSW teams, or the Miami Big 3, or even the best Spurs teams), but that might just be me

It's basically margin of victory, which we all know is highly predictive, adjusted for schedule.

That and win-loss tell you a lot. The Bucks are on pace for more than 70 wins, and out of the teams with records that good (high 60s to 70+), well more than half win championships.

This was always one of the weird things about 2008. We were 66-16 and had a margin of 9.30, which is historically good, and the Lakers were worse on both margins. We should have been favored in that series, perhaps heavily.

Tell the bolded to the NBA voting panels that give out accolades , but yeah we should've been heavily favoured to win the finals in '08.

[Somebody]

Hypothesis: The Bucks success this season is based on role players playing with space and getting a lot of possession per game. This has led to success with their offense during the regular season, but the game will slow down for the Bucks in the playoffs, and their role players will not be able to produce as well, which will limit their success.

Pertinent stats:
1. The Bucks have the fastest pace in the NBA by a significant margin: 105.38. Second place in the Rockets at 103.9. For perspective, that is the highest pace of the last decade by a long-shot.
2. Last year, the Bucks pace dropped by three points from the regular season to the playoffs. Coach Budz teams always drop in pace and offensive rating from the regular season to the playoffs.
3. If we exclude last year because of the Irving debacle, CBS teams raised their offensive rating from the regular season to the post-season in the previous two seasons.

I think the Bucks are a little bit of fool's gold. I'm not saying their not good. I'm saying they are not as good of a playoff team as people might realize.

Very interesting perspective. I'd be curious how pace in regular season vs pace in playoffs of all teams historically correlate. That might tell us a bit more about what to expect.

I don't have numbers handy at the moment, but I've looked at this in detail in the past.  Basically, average pace definitely slows down in the playoffs.  This is generally because better defenses tend to be better at transition defense - forcing opponents into half-court sets.

Also, I've looked back at the Celtics own history and found that, once you get out of the crazy 60s (when the team ran with insane pace numbers) & 70s, by far Celtic teams with higher pace rates in the regular season have not done well in the playoffs.  Most of the Celtic teams in the last 30 years that have made it at least to the ECF have tended to have below average pace rankings in the regular season.   All four of the last Celtic title teams were below average in pace in the regular season.

It makes logical sense.   As I noted, better teams with better defenses tend to be far less susceptible to transition -- not only do they make fewer mistakes (turnovers) but they also just plain tend to be better at getting back on D.   Thus, in the playoffs, half-court sets tend to represent a greater share of possessions than in the regular season.   And teams that are better, more experienced at executing in the half court (both on offense and defense) are going to be better off than teams that are not.

Obviously, there are going to be exceptions.

It's also interesting to note that the opposite was almost true back in the Red-Russell-Heinsohn eras.   Back then, The Celtics ran the bejesus off everyone and sometimes had insane pace numbers.   But the game has changed a lot since then.

I'd like to elaborate on the 60s Celtics a bit. They are the exception to the rule when it comes to pace - their offence was never great in their 13 year run with Russell manning the pivot (they were always bang average in ORTG and were even below average or utterly bad in some years, even though the annals swear that they were an offensive juggernaut who made Russell ). So how does this affect them when the second season rolls around? Their offence took a further hit due to playoff defences being better at defending transition baskets, but their defence was so good that it didn't matter - opposing teams lost more on offence than what they gained from defence because the Celtics absolutely shut them down.

The 60s Celtics' offence was not an exception to general playoff norms - the Celtics just didn't need a great offence (or even an average one compared to their competition) to win playoff games due to their stifling defence. High paced offences not having a counter-heavy superstar/team usually don't fare well in the playoffs due to the reasons mmmmm listed above, but whether this year's Bucks are this sort of team remains to be seen, I do think they have some counters in a half court offence come playoff time (cough cough Khris Middleton, the lad has been setting nets on fire this season).

[Somebody]

A good stat to look at might be Simple Rating System(SRS). Every champ this century except one has been over 4.5 and all but three over 5.0.

Following that stat, only 6 teams in the league, right now have an SRS over 5.

Milwaukee 11.18
Lakers 7.26
Boston 6.12
Clippers 6.09
Toronto 5.91
Dallas 5.84

No other team in the league is above 3.85.

So if I am picking a champ for this year, I would say it is one of those 6 teams.

Man, Milwaukee really crush that metric, huh? I definitely don't know if they're good enough to have such a crazy margin between them and the other teams (not calling into question the method, just think it won't last like that in the playoffs). I've definitely watched the Bucks and not been blown away (like watching the old GSW teams, or the Miami Big 3, or even the best Spurs teams), but that might just be me

They're historically good in SRS (I think their current rating would get them in the top 10 in the history of the NBA), but that doesn't mean they're going to crush everyone come playoff time. Their offence isn't the most playoff friendly system due to their reliance in the Giannis one man wrecking crew - defences can still sag off of him (yes he's shooting threes at a clip that isn't horrible, but it's not exactly good enough to make teams pay for sagging off of him either) and wall him off in the paint while his passing is not good enough to zip high difficulty passes consistently to take advantage of the double/triple teams thrown at him in the paint, and he doesn't have a post/midrange game to be a playoff scoring machine either. Their key in the playoffs is probably Middleton - he's having an insane year when in shooting efficiency and has apparently improved his scoring and passing skills from my eye test as well as what Bucks fans I know tell me, which could make him a more playoff friendly player. Their calling card will probably be defence though, their DRTG is nuts and it'll likely still work in the playoffs (they only have 2 players in their rotation who aren't strong defensively in Ersan and Korver). Overall I'd expect them to be one of the favourites to win the title, but I think they can be knocked out by the right team in a series.

[Celtics4ever]

I think the Bucks are a little bit of fool's gold. I'm not saying their not good. I'm saying they are not as good of a playoff team as people might realize.

That fool's gold kicked our butt last post season rather handily.   What are your thoughts on us, then?

[Somebody]

I think the Bucks are a little bit of fool's gold. I'm not saying their not good. I'm saying they are not as good of a playoff team as people might realize.

That fool's gold kicked our butt last post season rather handily.   What are your thoughts on us, then?

Absolute Edited.  Profanity and masked profanity are against forum rules and may result in discipline.e due to a two faced saboteur who claimed to be a basketball genius.

[gouki88]

A good stat to look at might be Simple Rating System(SRS). Every champ this century except one has been over 4.5 and all but three over 5.0.

Following that stat, only 6 teams in the league, right now have an SRS over 5.

Milwaukee 11.18
Lakers 7.26
Boston 6.12
Clippers 6.09
Toronto 5.91
Dallas 5.84

No other team in the league is above 3.85.

So if I am picking a champ for this year, I would say it is one of those 6 teams.

Man, Milwaukee really crush that metric, huh? I definitely don't know if they're good enough to have such a crazy margin between them and the other teams (not calling into question the method, just think it won't last like that in the playoffs). I've definitely watched the Bucks and not been blown away (like watching the old GSW teams, or the Miami Big 3, or even the best Spurs teams), but that might just be me

They're historically good in SRS (I think their current rating would get them in the top 10 in the history of the NBA), but that doesn't mean they're going to crush everyone come playoff time. Their offence isn't the most playoff friendly system due to their reliance in the Giannis one man wrecking crew - defences can still sag off of him (yes he's shooting threes at a clip that isn't horrible, but it's not exactly good enough to make teams pay for sagging off of him either) and wall him off in the paint while his passing is not good enough to zip high difficulty passes consistently to take advantage of the double/triple teams thrown at him in the paint, and he doesn't have a post/midrange game to be a playoff scoring machine either. Their key in the playoffs is probably Middleton - he's having an insane year when in shooting efficiency and has apparently improved his scoring and passing skills from my eye test as well as what Bucks fans I know tell me, which could make him a more playoff friendly player. Their calling card will probably be defence though, their DRTG is nuts and it'll likely still work in the playoffs (they only have 2 players in their rotation who aren't strong defensively in Ersan and Korver). Overall I'd expect them to be one of the favourites to win the title, but I think they can be knocked out by the right team in a series.

I agree with this, for sure. I don't think they run particularly deep, which will probably hurt them come playoff time. When you compare their top 5 vs say, the Clippers, or ours, I think it's notably worse. Better at the top, but worse 2-5

[Somebody]

A good stat to look at might be Simple Rating System(SRS). Every champ this century except one has been over 4.5 and all but three over 5.0.

Following that stat, only 6 teams in the league, right now have an SRS over 5.

Milwaukee 11.18
Lakers 7.26
Boston 6.12
Clippers 6.09
Toronto 5.91
Dallas 5.84

No other team in the league is above 3.85.

So if I am picking a champ for this year, I would say it is one of those 6 teams.

Man, Milwaukee really crush that metric, huh? I definitely don't know if they're good enough to have such a crazy margin between them and the other teams (not calling into question the method, just think it won't last like that in the playoffs). I've definitely watched the Bucks and not been blown away (like watching the old GSW teams, or the Miami Big 3, or even the best Spurs teams), but that might just be me

They're historically good in SRS (I think their current rating would get them in the top 10 in the history of the NBA), but that doesn't mean they're going to crush everyone come playoff time. Their offence isn't the most playoff friendly system due to their reliance in the Giannis one man wrecking crew - defences can still sag off of him (yes he's shooting threes at a clip that isn't horrible, but it's not exactly good enough to make teams pay for sagging off of him either) and wall him off in the paint while his passing is not good enough to zip high difficulty passes consistently to take advantage of the double/triple teams thrown at him in the paint, and he doesn't have a post/midrange game to be a playoff scoring machine either. Their key in the playoffs is probably Middleton - he's having an insane year when in shooting efficiency and has apparently improved his scoring and passing skills from my eye test as well as what Bucks fans I know tell me, which could make him a more playoff friendly player. Their calling card will probably be defence though, their DRTG is nuts and it'll likely still work in the playoffs (they only have 2 players in their rotation who aren't strong defensively in Ersan and Korver). Overall I'd expect them to be one of the favourites to win the title, but I think they can be knocked out by the right team in a series.

I agree with this, for sure. I don't think they run particularly deep, which will probably hurt them come playoff time. When you compare their top 5 vs say, the Clippers, or ours, I think it's notably worse. Better at the top, but worse 2-5

I'm actually not sure about us being better than them at 2. Middleton is playing like a monster this season, I think he's every bit as good as Tatum (if not better, but I haven't taken a deep look at his defence yet so I'll give Tatum a sizeable advantage to even it out for now). But yeah they aren't the deepest team.

[Moranis]

Bucks aren't great 2 to 5, but have perhaps the best 6 to 11 in the league along with the best player at the top.  And I do think people generally undersell Middleton and Bledsoe, especially Bledsoe.  He is an all league defender that can score 20 at any given time (he was a 20+, 6+, 4+ player the 2 years before Milwaukee).  Very good all around player, just as Middleton is.

[DefenseWinsChamps]

Bucks aren't great 2 to 5, but have perhaps the best 6 to 11 in the league along with the best player at the top.  And I do think people generally undersell Middleton and Bledsoe, especially Bledsoe.  He is an all league defender that can score 20 at any given time (he was a 20+, 6+, 4+ player the 2 years before Milwaukee).  Very good all around player, just as Middleton is.

As many have pointed out, your 6-11 doesn't matter as much during the playoffs.

I'm not completely sold on Bledsoe. I know he played better last off-season at times, but he still seems so inconsistent on defense and offense. Watching Terry Rozier dominate him a couple seasons ago in the playoffs might have forever lowered his status in my eyes.

Middleton is good enough where I think he's a little better than Hayward. I do think you can take advantage of his poor athleticism though.

Having the best player on the court (and in the world) matters a lot in the playoffs too--that's something we can agree on.

My point isn't that they are terrible. My point is that this historic pace they are on is a little inflated, and they probably won't be quite that good in the playoffs.

[nickagneta]

In a Bucks-Celts matchup, Milwaukee has the best player but I think a case can be made the next 4 best players in the series would all be Celtics.

[gift]

Hypothesis: The Bucks success this season is based on role players playing with space and getting a lot of possession per game. This has led to success with their offense during the regular season, but the game will slow down for the Bucks in the playoffs, and their role players will not be able to produce as well, which will limit their success.

Pertinent stats:
1. The Bucks have the fastest pace in the NBA by a significant margin: 105.38. Second place in the Rockets at 103.9. For perspective, that is the highest pace of the last decade by a long-shot.
2. Last year, the Bucks pace dropped by three points from the regular season to the playoffs. Coach Budz teams always drop in pace and offensive rating from the regular season to the playoffs.
3. If we exclude last year because of the Irving debacle, CBS teams raised their offensive rating from the regular season to the post-season in the previous two seasons.

I think the Bucks are a little bit of fool's gold. I'm not saying their not good. I'm saying they are not as good of a playoff team as people might realize.

Very interesting perspective. I'd be curious how pace in regular season vs pace in playoffs of all teams historically correlate. That might tell us a bit more about what to expect.

I don't have numbers handy at the moment, but I've looked at this in detail in the past.  Basically, average pace definitely slows down in the playoffs.  This is generally because better defenses tend to be better at transition defense - forcing opponents into half-court sets.

Also, I've looked back at the Celtics own history and found that, once you get out of the crazy 60s (when the team ran with insane pace numbers) & 70s, by far Celtic teams with higher pace rates in the regular season have not done well in the playoffs.  Most of the Celtic teams in the last 30 years that have made it at least to the ECF have tended to have below average pace rankings in the regular season.   All four of the last Celtic title teams were below average in pace in the regular season.

It makes logical sense.   As I noted, better teams with better defenses tend to be far less susceptible to transition -- not only do they make fewer mistakes (turnovers) but they also just plain tend to be better at getting back on D.   Thus, in the playoffs, half-court sets tend to represent a greater share of possessions than in the regular season.   And teams that are better, more experienced at executing in the half court (both on offense and defense) are going to be better off than teams that are not.

Obviously, there are going to be exceptions.

It's also interesting to note that the opposite was almost true back in the Red-Russell-Heinsohn eras.   Back then, The Celtics ran the bejesus off everyone and sometimes had insane pace numbers.   But the game has changed a lot since then.

Very interesting, thanks! I knew pace slowed in the playoffs. But hearing about specific results related to pace could be worthwhile markers.

[gift]

I'm not criticizing because I certainly don't have the time to look into it at the moment. But this thread is full of anecdotal Pace and SRS champion cases. If anyone wanted to deep dive into Pace-regular season X Pace-playoffs X Success-in-Playoffs (not just championships) the hypothesis could be better tested.

[Somebody]

I'm not criticizing because I certainly don't have the time to look into it at the moment. But this thread is full of anecdotal Pace and SRS champion cases. If anyone wanted to deep dive into Pace-regular season X Pace-playoffs X Success-in-Playoffs (not just championships) the hypothesis could be better tested.

Pace isn't the main factor causing high powered offences to dip in the playoffs though. The main driver of successful playoff offences is the ability to score reliably against a variety of coverages.This ability is usually achieved by a halfcourt maestro or a balanced team that can handle anything that playoff defences throw at them, and high paced offences might not necessarily lack that ability (see the 2015-2019 Warriors).

[gift]

I'm not criticizing because I certainly don't have the time to look into it at the moment. But this thread is full of anecdotal Pace and SRS champion cases. If anyone wanted to deep dive into Pace-regular season X Pace-playoffs X Success-in-Playoffs (not just championships) the hypothesis could be better tested.

Pace isn't the main factor causing high powered offences to dip in the playoffs though. The main driver of successful playoff offences is the ability to score reliably against a variety of coverages.This ability is usually achieved by a halfcourt maestro or a balanced team that can handle anything that playoff defences throw at them, and high paced offences might not necessarily lack that ability (see the 2015-2019 Warriors).

That's fine, but more anecdotal. I'm curious if there is something related to pace that is significant.

[Moranis]

In a Bucks-Celts matchup, Milwaukee has the best player but I think a case can be made the next 4 best players in the series would all be Celtics.

Obviously things change as the season plays out but at the start of the year ESPN in their annual Top 100 had

1 - Giannis
17 - Walker
35 - Tatum
36 - Middleton
51 - Brown
65 - Hayward
67 - Bledsoe
80 - B. Lopez
87 - Smart

While some of those guys are clearly under-ranked, I do think that is probably the correct order or at least awful close to the correct order.  Middleton is clearly a top 5 player on those 2 teams, and at this point I'd probably have Bledsoe ahead of Hayward, though they are pretty close together

If I was tiering the players it'd be something like this

Giannis

Walker, Tatum

Middleton, Brown

Bledsoe, Hayward

Smart

Then a smattering of Bucks players i.e. Lopez, Hill, DiVincenzo, Connaughton, Matthews with Kanter and Theis in the same general range.