Defense Wins Championship

[mr. dee]

Pretty much all the time. The only exception was that 2016 Cavs.

It doesn't matter how many superstars you have if you're not good enough defensively, you won't win anything. All the teams that have won it all were Top 10 defensively or at least have multiple players with defensive accolades. Of course, chemistry is also a factor.

Bucks may not win it all but all the remaining teams actually have good defenders and system (Minus the Hawks who have the least chance of advancing in the finals).

The actual recipe for a championship team is "surround your superstar/s with very good defenders and role players", instead of searching for another "superstar". Not only they are much cheaper but they also have a chance to develop into a homegrown superstar if it's a young enough player (Siakam, Rondo, Draymond, Klay, Parker, etc.)

[Moranis]

Except you know like half the time when the champion's offense is ranked higher than its defense.  And the Cavs aren't even the worst defensive team to win recently (they were ranked 10th that year, GS' last title they were 11th). 

Pretty much the only thing championship teams have in common is they have an all time great player with another all time great player or a bunch of really really good players. 

[Roy H.]

I think point differential and Net Rating correlate more strongly with title teams.  The key is regularly outscoring opponents by a wide margin, regardless if that is due to great play on both ends of the floor or just being truly dominant on one side.

[Tr1boy]

Pretty much all the time. The only exception was that 2016 Cavs.

It doesn't matter how many superstars you have if you're not good enough defensively, you won't win anything. All the teams that have won it all were Top 10 defensively or at least have multiple players with defensive accolades. Of course, chemistry is also a factor.

Bucks may not win it all but all the remaining teams actually have good defenders and system (Minus the Hawks who have the least chance of advancing in the finals).

The actual recipe for a championship team is "surround your superstar/s with very good defenders and role players", instead of searching for another "superstar". Not only they are much cheaper but they also have a chance to develop into a homegrown superstar if it's a young enough player (Siakam, Rondo, Draymond, Klay, Parker, etc.)

Naw

Defense keeps you in the game. Timely offense wins games

Celts need to stop with the 3 pt baskets/and 1s attempts(most of the game). Thats what Brad/analytics wanted

Making 2s...especially in the playoffs (any way you can)... is how teams win.  GSW is the exception. You need all time great 3 pt shooters to pull that off.

[Ogaju]

Pretty much all the time. The only exception was that 2016 Cavs.

It doesn't matter how many superstars you have if you're not good enough defensively, you won't win anything. All the teams that have won it all were Top 10 defensively or at least have multiple players with defensive accolades. Of course, chemistry is also a factor.

Bucks may not win it all but all the remaining teams actually have good defenders and system (Minus the Hawks who have the least chance of advancing in the finals).

The actual recipe for a championship team is "surround your superstar/s with very good defenders and role players", instead of searching for another "superstar". Not only they are much cheaper but they also have a chance to develop into a homegrown superstar if it's a young enough player (Siakam, Rondo, Draymond, Klay, Parker, etc.)

Naw

Defense keeps you in the game. Timely offense wins games

Celts need to stop with the 3 pt baskets/and 1s attempts(most of the game). Thats what Brad/analytics wanted

Making 2s...especially in the playoffs (any way you can)... is how teams win.  GSW is the exception. You need all time great 3 pt shooters to pull that off.

This….take the twos.

[Muzzy66]

Pretty much all the time. The only exception was that 2016 Cavs.

It doesn't matter how many superstars you have if you're not good enough defensively, you won't win anything. All the teams that have won it all were Top 10 defensively or at least have multiple players with defensive accolades. Of course, chemistry is also a factor.

Bucks may not win it all but all the remaining teams actually have good defenders and system (Minus the Hawks who have the least chance of advancing in the finals).

The actual recipe for a championship team is "surround your superstar/s with very good defenders and role players", instead of searching for another "superstar". Not only they are much cheaper but they also have a chance to develop into a homegrown superstar if it's a young enough player (Siakam, Rondo, Draymond, Klay, Parker, etc.)

Naw

Defense keeps you in the game. Timely offense wins games

Celts need to stop with the 3 pt baskets/and 1s attempts(most of the game). Thats what Brad/analytics wanted

Making 2s...especially in the playoffs (any way you can)... is how teams win.  GSW is the exception. You need all time great 3 pt shooters to pull that off.

Couldn't agree more!

I wanted to give 5 TP's for this answer but sadly cannot without waiting for half an hour

When it's the 4th quarter in a tight playoff game, everything is on the line, there's a 1 point difference, 30 seconds on the clock.  I dont care which team has the lead, I will take a 2 PT attempt over a 3 PT attempt any day.

Analytics are all well and good, but at the end of the day in that scenario all that matters is that you make a shot.  Doesn't matter where it comes from - make a shot and there's a good chance you win the game.  Miss a shot and you most likely lose the game.  Probability of making a 2PT shot is much higher then a 3PT shot, especially if contested. 

I'd take a made two over a missed three any day.

[mr. dee]

Pretty much all the time. The only exception was that 2016 Cavs.

It doesn't matter how many superstars you have if you're not good enough defensively, you won't win anything. All the teams that have won it all were Top 10 defensively or at least have multiple players with defensive accolades. Of course, chemistry is also a factor.

Bucks may not win it all but all the remaining teams actually have good defenders and system (Minus the Hawks who have the least chance of advancing in the finals).

The actual recipe for a championship team is "surround your superstar/s with very good defenders and role players", instead of searching for another "superstar". Not only they are much cheaper but they also have a chance to develop into a homegrown superstar if it's a young enough player (Siakam, Rondo, Draymond, Klay, Parker, etc.)

Naw

Defense keeps you in the game. Timely offense wins games

Celts need to stop with the 3 pt baskets/and 1s attempts(most of the game). Thats what Brad/analytics wanted

Making 2s...especially in the playoffs (any way you can)... is how teams win.  GSW is the exception. You need all time great 3 pt shooters to pull that off.

Nets have that all around offensive talent. Look what happened when you pressured them hard enough. I'm not saying offense is not relevant but you need defense to win a championship. It's a proven formula. Not everyone on the team will/should score as there is only one ball to shoot.

You can't have role players taking away shots from our star players, unless they are ice cold and struggling to score. Even if there are 5 Harden on the team, they will not win anything as they lack other aspects such as rebounding and defense.

[smicker16]

I agree with Roy that net rating is really the best way to see if a team is a contender or not.  I know the best players matter quite a bit and impact that for sure, but that is also a bit relative to come up with the top 5-10 best players.  Net rating is a bit more defined and leaves less up for interpretation.  Over the last 20 years only 4 teams that won were outside the top 5 in net rating.  Never was a team outside the top 10 in net rating that won the championship.  In general, over the last 10 years teams have been more succesful with a higher offensive rating than defensive rating.  Since 2010 the teams that won have an average offensive rating of 4.6 and defensive rating of 5.7 with a net rating of 3.2  This seems like a pretty good way to see if you are a legit contender or not.  The Suns, Clippers and Bucks are all top 5 in net rating this year with the Hawks being 11th, which would be the first time in over 20 years that has happened.  However, they are top ten since the all star break. 

[Who]

Not true anymore. Offense is king now.

This is outdated thinking - unfortunately. The league has fiddled with the rules and enforcement of the rules over and over again and they have turned it into an offense dominated league. They have made it impossible for defenses to dictate games. Everything is on the terms of the offensive player / team. It is an offensive league now.

Offense wins titles. Build the best offense you can while maintaining a passable / adequate defense. You do not need a high functioning defense. It will cost you too many assets and it will not be able to compete with the high functioning offenses it faces.

This is the new NBA. Both the good and the bad of it. This is it. Offense rules the day.

What used to be true 20-30 years ago even 5-10 years ago is no longer true today. This is a different league. They fiddled the rules. This is the new NBA.

[BudweiserCeltic]

Not true anymore. Offense is king now.

This is outdated thinking - unfortunately. The league has fiddled with the rules and enforcement of the rules over and over again and they have turned it into an offense dominated league. They have made it impossible for defenses to dictate games. Everything is on the terms of the offensive player / team. It is an offensive league now.

Offense wins titles. Build the best offense you can while maintaining a passable / adequate defense. You do not need a high functioning defense. It will cost you too many assets and it will not be able to compete with the high functioning offenses it faces.

This is the new NBA. Both the good and the bad of it. This is it. Offense rules the day.

What used to be true 20-30 years ago even 5-10 years ago is no longer true today. This is a different league. They fiddled the rules. This is the new NBA.

Worth mentioning, for the most part as I don't want to overly generalize, were also [dang] good offensively. So if you're good offensively and very good defensively, I still think you have an advantage over super offensive oriented powerhouse.

That said, some of this super offensive oriented powerhouses are that because they have quite a few of the top players in the league, which few if any other team can compete against. That's a big issue since the amount of defensive pressure you can exert over them is severely limited.

But for example, the teams that are currently in the Conference Finals, I think defense would play a big role.. a team with great defense would have an advantage over these teams.

[Walker Wiggle]

This is a good point but let me phrase another way:

The Celtics already have one of the premier playoff scorers in the league who will only continue to get better, plus another 25 ppg scorer.

Next year, their easiest path to going deep in the playoffs will be double down as a big, physical defensive team that can switch everything and has no weaknesses. That's what a lineup of Smart, Brown, Tatum, Fournier (or similar replacement), and Rob Williams would be.

As for a year from now, if you can land a legit third offensive superstar, you do it, even if it means taking a step back in defense.

[Somebody]

Not true anymore. Offense is king now.

This is outdated thinking - unfortunately. The league has fiddled with the rules and enforcement of the rules over and over again and they have turned it into an offense dominated league. They have made it impossible for defenses to dictate games. Everything is on the terms of the offensive player / team. It is an offensive league now.

Offense wins titles. Build the best offense you can while maintaining a passable / adequate defense. You do not need a high functioning defense. It will cost you too many assets and it will not be able to compete with the high functioning offenses it faces.

This is the new NBA. Both the good and the bad of it. This is it. Offense rules the day.

What used to be true 20-30 years ago even 5-10 years ago is no longer true today. This is a different league. They fiddled the rules. This is the new NBA.

Of which the two most recent champions were better defensive teams than they were offensively - the Raptors had a +2.7 rORTG and a -3.3 rDRTG while the Lakers had a +1.4 rORTG and a -4.3 rDRTG. The modern NBA definitely favours offence over defence, but to say that a high-level defence cannot win titles against high-level offences is asinine when a team from Los Angeles just dictated games with it last year in an environment that fostered incredible offensive performances from teams.

[gift]

I caught part of a video where Scal mentioned he heard the competition committee is interested in trying to allow more physical defense on the perimeter. Whether that's true, actually comes about via the committee, or manifests in real games is uncertain. But I certainly hope we get to see more impactful defense in the average nba game going forward. The past maybe three years have just been too randomized aesthetically for my taste.

[Tr1boy]

I caught part of a video where Scal mentioned he heard the competition committee is interested in trying to allow more physical defense on the perimeter. Whether that's true, actually comes about via the committee, or manifests in real games is uncertain. But I certainly hope we get to see more impactful defense in the average nba game going forward. The past maybe three years have just been too randomized aesthetically for my taste.

They have to allow it...because some things now are BS imo

- the dribble, stop,  jump back and bait into fouls (Trey Young and Curry move)
- the hand into chest,  shoot through the arm needs to be explored.  Because 99 percent of the time, the player has no intention in making that jump shot

- Jump shooters jumping off axis into a defender
- Lowry rule - jumping into a retreading defenders for foul calls - needs to go away
- Block attempts at the rim.   It should be all ball, but a little scrape at the hair or small part of hand.... just let it go.   

- Players who go down too easily (trying to draw charges)
- Another Lowry rule -  trying to take charge on pass attempts.  Comical if you ask me

Unfortunately with all of these proposed(mine) changes, it will be less beneficial for guys like Smart, Beverlys, Harrell of the world.

Just stop with these "soccer" like attempts to draw fouls/acting.   I don't mind the technical foul reviews for obvious harsh non basketball fouls.  Otherwise needs to go back to 2010 ish type basketball.   Take the refs out of the game as much as possible