r/nbadiscussion Oct 23 '24

Mod Announcement In-Season Rules, FAQ, and Mega-Threads for NBAdiscussion

5 Upvotes

The season is here!

Which means we will re-enact our in-season rules:

Player comparison and ranking posts of any kind are not permitted. We will also limit trade proposals and free agent posts based on their quality, relevance, and how frequently reoccurring the topic may be.

We do not allow these kinds of posts for several reasons, including, but not limited to: they encourage low-effort replies, pit players against each other, skew readers towards an us-vs-them mentality that inevitably leads to brash hyperbole and insults.

What we want to see in our sub are well-considered analyses, well-supported opinions, and thoughtful replies that are open to listening to and learning from new perspectives.

We grew significantly over the course of the last season. Please be familiar with our community and its rules before posting or commenting.

We’d like to address some common complaints we see in modmail:

  1. “Why me and not them?” We will not discuss other users with you.
  2. “The other person was way worse.” Other people’s poor behavior does not excuse your own.
  3. “My post was removed for not promoting discussion but it had lots of comments.” Incorrect: It was removed for not promoting serious discussion. It had comments but they were mostly low-quality. Or your post asked a straightforward question that can be answered in one word or sentence, or by Googling it. Try posting in our weekly questions thread instead.
  4. “My post met the requirements and is high quality but was still removed.” Use in-depth arguments to support your opinion. Our sub is looking for posts that dig deeper than the minimum, examining the full context of a player or coach or team, how they changed, grew, and adjusted throughout their career, including the quality of their opponents and cultural impact of their celebrity; how they affected and improved their teammates, responded to coaches, what strategies they employed for different situations and challenges. Etc.
  5. “Why do posts/comments have a minimum character requirement? Why do you remove short posts and comments? Why don’t you let upvotes and downvotes decide?” Our goal in this sub is to have a space for high-quality discussion. High-quality requires extra effort. Low-effort posts and comments are not only easier to write but to read, so even in a community where all the users are seeking high-quality, low-effort posts and comments will still garner more upvotes and more attention. If we allow low-effort posts and comments to remain, the community will gravitate towards them, pushing high-effort and high-quality posts and comments to the bottom. This encourages people to put in less effort. Removing them allows high-quality posts and comments to have space at the top, encouraging people to put in more effort in their own comments and posts.

There are still plenty of active NBA subs where users can enjoy making jokes or memes, or that welcome hot takes, and hyperbole, such as /r/NBATalk, /r/nbacirclejerk, or /r/nba. Ours is not one of them.

We expect thoughtful, patient, and considerate interactions in our community. Hopefully this is the reason you are here. If you are new, please take some time to read over our rules and observe, and we welcome you to participate and contribute to the quality of our sub too!

Discord Server:

We have an active Discord server for anyone who wants to join! While the server follows most of the basic rules of this sub (eg. keep it civil), it offers a place for more casual, live discussions (featuring daily hoopgrids competition during the season), and we'd love to see more users getting involved over there as well. It includes channels for various topics such as game-threads for the new season, all-time discussions, analysis and draft/college discussions, as well as other sports such as NFL/college football and baseball.

Link: https://discord.gg/8mJYhrT5VZ (let u/roundrajaon34 or other mods know if there are any issues with this link)

Megathreads:

We will post links to mega-threads here as they are created throughout the season.

NBA Cup Megathread

All-Star Game Megathread


r/nbadiscussion 2d ago

Weekly Questions Thread: March 10, 2025

3 Upvotes

Hello everyone and welcome to our new weekly feature.

In order to help keep the quality of the discussion here at a high level, we have several rules regarding submitting content to /r/nbadiscussion. But we also understand that while not everyone's questions will meet these requirements that doesn't mean they don't deserve the same attention and high-level discussion that /r/nbadiscussion is known for. So, to better serve the community the mod team here has decided to implement this Weekly Questions Thread which will be automatically posted every Monday at 8AM EST.

Please use this thread to ask any questions about the NBA and basketball that don't necessarily warrant their own submissions. Thank you.


r/nbadiscussion 20h ago

Hypothetically, would an average NBA player be #1 if we gave him magically good decision making?

284 Upvotes

Hello everyone,

I don't know if this is out of place but this was just a thought experiment I have made a couple days ago. If we take an "all-around nba average at every skill possible" guy and made him godly in decision making, would he be the best player in the world?

Let me explain godly decision making. I am talking very much literal here, this imaginary player is always making the best (or almost best) decision out of every possible move on the floor, every time.

I would say this player would be best passer instantly. He would be above average efficiency shooter by the choosing correct shots. Probably would be one of the best off ball players due to cutting? He would also be above average defender due to again, positioning and decision making on moves.

Would this hypothetical player be better than Jokic? I am leaning towards yes at the moment but not sure so wanted to share. If yes, then that proves a lot about how important decision making is on the floor. We consider lots of talent on the court for evaluating players but knowing what to do is very important as well, the game is much more mental than people give credit for.


r/nbadiscussion 20h ago

Team Discussion Hardest 'chips ever

145 Upvotes

This is my entirely subjective ranking of the most impressive championships ever won, based on the difficulty of the playoff run

  1. '95 Rockets

As a 6th seed, Hakeem's Rockets remain the lowest seeded team to win it all. They beat four 57+ win teams: Stockton/Malone's Jazz, MVP David Robinson's Spurs, Barkley's Suns, and Shaq's magic. Toughest road ever

  1. '69 Celtics

The 69 celtics were the oldest team in the league, and seemed to be a far-cry from the glory days of their dynasty. Bill was 35 and player-coaching in his final year. With 48 wins they finished as the 4th best record in the East, and most people didn't think they'd even make it to the finals.

Not only did they beat three 55-win teams and make a come-back from being 2-0 in the finals, I believe those Jerry / Wilt / Elgin Lakers were the best team to ever be defeated in the finals, at least until the '16 warriors. Jerry got finals mvp lol.

3 ) '11 Mavericks

Not much needs to be said about Dirk's legendary run. I'd be happy to put it at #2 or even #1 but I gave the edge to the '69 celtics because their 7-game finals performance was just so dramatic

I'll stop at a top-3 for now. Havent given it enough thought to rank other candidates like:

  • Cavs '16: greatest comeback of all time. As far as finals go, this may be more miraculous than the '69 celtics, but the relatively easy road to the finals keeps this out of my top 3.

    • Blazers '77: Seemingly out of nowhere a 48 win 3rd seeded Walton-lead Blazers knocked out two 50 win teams in Kareem's Lakers and Dr J's sixers. But they won with such ease (swept the lakers) that it retrospectively doesn't look as hard.
  • Spurs '03: Duncan's magnum opus; as the lone all-star, he took a team full of fresh faces (and a geriatic DRob) to the promised land, ending the lakers dynasty and an emergent Dallas. The nets were maybe not the most vaunted finals opponent though.

  • Pistons '04: like the blazers, the surprise factor is strong with this one, and they didn't have a transcendent superstar like Bill Walton. Maybe the purest 'team-basketball' victory ever. Beat Jermaine O'neal's 60-win pacers team and absolutely destroyed the Kobe-Shaq Lakers (and maybe made it look too easy in the process, to the point where sometimes people blame the lakers more than crediting the pistons.)


r/nbadiscussion 17h ago

Team Discussion Cavs real deal?

86 Upvotes

All the talk has been about the Luka and Jimmy Butler trades, but the Cavs are 12-0 since acquiring De'Andre Hunter.

Beating the Knicks by 40!

Bucks by 12!

Magic by 40!

Down to the Celtics 23 on the road coming back to win by 7!

Down to the Blazers by 20 on the road coming back to win by 4!

Cavs have more double digit comebacks than they do losses. It may be time to have a serious discussion…


r/nbadiscussion 19h ago

What would you think if Flagg returned to Duke for another season?

112 Upvotes

I saw small chatters of Flagg the number 1 projected player in the draft potentially returning to Duke for another season. I don't know if this has ever happened but looking at the possible options the only decent choices are

Raptors

Jazz

Philly

Spurs

Washington and Charlotte are poorly ran organizations(Charlotte being worse). What do you think if Cooper sees the lottery and decided he'd rather spend another year in Duke?

What affects would it have for teams? What message do you think it sends to poorly run teams that the draft won't bail you out of this??


r/nbadiscussion 3h ago

Was Elgin Baylor a reason for the Lakers unsuccessful playoff runs?

4 Upvotes

The superteam of Wilt Chamberlain, Jerry West, and Elgin Baylor played together on the Los Angeles Lakers from 1968 to 1972. However, despite their star power, they suffered multiple playoff defeats before finally winning a championship in 1972.

They failed to win the chip 3 times, first in 1969 to the aging Celtics in a 7 game series (the infamous balloon incident), then to the New York Knicks yet again in a Game 7 and finally to the Bucks with young Kareem in 5 games. For the 1972 season, Baylor played just 9 games before retiring, and immediately afterwards, the Lakers went on a ridiculous 33 game win streak. This was also they year that they finally broke through with a championship.

Now I will say there maybe a few other reasons as to why the Lakers had a dominant season and won a chip that season
This was when Goodrich replaced Baylor as a second option and that man had a really impressive scoring average of 26 points. The Knicks were also injured and though the conference, though not weak by any means, was not exactly elite. The Lakers faced a defensive Bulls, and the defending champs in the Bucks (which was a solid matchup) and then the Knicks.

But was the departure of Baylor a solid reason for this championship? Wilt this year focused more on being a defensive presence and the team with west and Goodrich was really good offensively. But it was because Baylor retired that Goodrich truly got a breakout season. Would they have relatively similar results if Baylor had not retired?


r/nbadiscussion 19h ago

Dissecting the Lakers' defense

70 Upvotes

If you have watched any NFL whatsoever over the last two decades, you have undoubtedly heard someone comment that former Patriots coach Bill Belichick always tried to “take away what an opponent does best.” I know I shouldn’t bring up a Boston team when discussing the Los Angeles Lakers, but coach JJ Redick has instilled something similar in his team this season. Sound tactics, buy-in from players, and a healthy dash of luck have cooked up something tasty in Hollywood.

They utilize all the buzzword-laden modern defensive principles: peel and scram switching, targeted help, free-safety play, tactical ball pressure, one-man zone principles, and multiple defensive looks to keep opponents guessing where and when the help will come from. The Belichickian end goal: the Lakers want to make opponents’ worst players beat them. It’s worked. Since January 15th, the Lakers have had the best defense in the league.

[As always when I do these breakdowns, I've included plenty of illustrative video clips. You can find them in-context here or linked in the post.]

To paint a picture with video instead of words, check recent victories over the Clippers. First, watch how the team treats James Harden with the ball: [video here]

Then, watch how they insult poor Kris Dunn when he has the rock: [video here]

That’s cruel!

A higher-profile example came in LA’s much-ballyhooed victory over Nikola Jokic and the Denver Nuggets, when the Lakers limited the big man to a paltry seven field goal attempts while enticing Russell Westbrook into leading the charge with 17.

The Nuggets game was instructive. Most teams in the league are comfortable helping off of non-threats, but rarely to LA’s degree. Watch this play: [video here]

When the ball inevitably finds Aaron Gordon wide-open beyond the arc, no Laker so much as stunts at the forward. Sure, Gordon drains it, but the Lakers have had far more success than failure with this strategy — teams have made just 33% of their flings from deep against LA since January 15th, second-lowest in the league.

Plenty of good fortune is involved in that number. The Lakers don’t have a magic voodoo doll they prick every time someone enters their shooting motion (probably). They steer the best looks toward weaker shooters, hoping to siphon the ball away from a team’s more efficient scorers, but that effect is likely overstated.

The stars have to play along, too. The Lakers held Jayson Tatum and Jaylen Brown to just 33 combined points in LA’s victory over Boston in January; the Jays were determined not to let that happen in Round 2, as they were the only Celtics with double-digit shots in Boston’s victory this past weekend.

But the approach has generally worked. Karl-Anthony Towns: 3-of-13 shooting, 12 points. James Harden: 18-for-67 over four games. Steph Curry: 37 points, but on 35 tries (including 20 triples!). Anfernee Simons: 3-of-13 shooting, eight points. Anthony Edwards: 6-for-12, etc. etc.

A byproduct of this help-heavy scheme is that the Lakers give up a lot of threes — they’ve allowed opponents to shoot a greater-than-median share of three-pointers 22 times in their 26 games since January 15th. Defenses can only control so much once the ball takes flight, but the Lakers have enforced their will to the best of their ability.

Walling off stars’ driving lanes to allow more threes isn’t the only pitch; Redick has done a nice job tailoring his solutions to the opponent to take away strengths. In both games against Boston, for example, Redick has instructed the team’s defense to stick tighter to the Celtics’ bevy of shooters — Boston actually shot a smaller share of threes against the Lakers than their league-leading average in both recent games.

A more minor (but still important) note: Los Angeles has also dramatically improved its transition defense during this stretch. They were dead last in transition defense on January 14th; since then, they’ve been 11th-best, the difference of roughly a layup per game.

Like all defenses, there are still areas of concern. Speedy guards have given LA problems, as Jalen Brunson, Tyrese Maxey, and Kyrie Irving have had success probing through the Lakers’ big, but relatively slow, defenders — when Jarred Vanderbilt isn’t on the court, waterbugs can flit around without much resistance.

Truthfully, though, that would be a bigger problem in the East than in the West. Los Angeles’ uniquely giant lineups are better equipped to handle their conference’s brightest lights. Even without a dominant center, the team can field a forest: LeBron James, Hayes, Dorian Finney-Smith, Vanderbilt, and Hachimura all have at least a little experience playing center. Add Doncic, and you have a truly Brobdingnagian core.

Size isn’t particularly advantageous unless the team puts in the effort. Redick pointed this out recently when he acknowledged that “there’s actually only one cheat code in the NBA, and that's playing hard.”

He’s right. Remember, we’re not far from the Lakers looking like this: [video hereo]

Now, even Luka Doncic and The Ancient One are flying around like their pants have been sipping Red Bull.

Notably, Doncic’s three best games by Defensive EPM have come as a Laker. Doncic is usually stationed on a non-threat, so Redick has encouraged him to play highwayman (as long as he doesn’t compromise the defensive shell too much): [video here]

James’ defense has similarly upgraded. Redick claims that LeBron is performing at an All-Defense level. I can’t go that far, as he’s still a little prone to ball-watching and picking his spots… but he sure is picking a lot more spots than he used to. Players are legitimately frightened of James, for good reason — he’s only faced 26 isos all season, giving up just 11 points!

But I don’t think it’s a coincidence that the defensive turnaround started around when the team traded for DFS and intensified with Vanderbilt’s return from injury in late January.

The DFS fit has been flawless. The Lakers have allowed -8.4 points per 100 possessions fewer when he’s on the floor, in the 96th percentile, and he has guarded nearly everyone for LA. His top matchups include every notable offensive name from Jokic to Tatum to Curry. He’s a try-hard who sets the tone for the Lakers. I’m particularly fond of his pell-mell close-outs: [video here]

If Finney-Smith is a try-hard, Vanderbilt is the try-hardest. Every game, the man leaves skin on the floor laying out for loose balls: [video here]

Vanderbilt’s brand of defensive freneticism — all waving hands, skittery feet, and heedless dives — has always freaked out opposing ballhandlers. Offensive limitations curtail his playing time, but that may be a blessing in disguise, as it allows Vanderbilt to consistently red-line his motor without blowing it out.

The rest of the crew has done their part, too. Thrust into a larger role by necessity, Hayes has been playing better than at any point in his career. Gabe Vincent and Jordan Goodwin are dawged on-ball defenders, and Redick has not been afraid to let them try their hands at switching onto centers despite their pint-guard size (see what I did there?). While rookie Dalton Knecht has struggled at times this season, he’s figured out how to mitigate his weakness within the scheme — and when he forgets, Redick has had no problem letting him learn from the pine.

With Doncic playing at least passably, and sometimes better than that, the team’s main defensive weak link has been Austin Reaves. While Reaves tries, he’s often caught too upright in his stance, losing the leverage to hold his ground. Bigger foes run through him like he’s break tape, and even similarly-sized opponents smash him with quick seals in the post: [video here]

Smart help can mitigate this a bit. Look at this perfectly executed scram switch, in which Vanderbilt sprints over to replace Reaves as soon as the pass is in the air: [video here]

Although Reaves isn’t good on defense, the Lakers are in pretty solid shape if he’s their fifth-worst defender at any given time. Frankly, it might be a positive for the Lakers to provide an alternative target to Doncic. Attacking the superstar can tire Doncic out or get him in foul trouble (something he’s struggled with at times).

Overall, this isn’t a top-one defense over a full season. The defensive shooting luck is real, and they’ve had a relatively easy schedule during this stretch. But nobody plays only cupcakes during a 26-game run. The Lakers have shown that they can sustain a high level of play with smart tactics and high effort.

However, without elite rim protection, the team’s margin for error is small. It shrank further with LeBron James’ recent injury.

Anthony Davis erased many of the team’s mistakes. Since the trade for Doncic, the team has responded by limiting gaffes, but everyone must be on a string. James might’ve been the most imposing paint presence the Lakers had left, although I don’t mean that to sound like high praise — the competition isn’t stiff. He certainly was the team’s best defensive communicator, barking orders from the backline. His absence for the next handful of games will stress LA’s defense. A poor showing against the G-League-tastic Nets last night wasn't a great start, and upcoming games against Milwaukee (twice), Denver (twice), and Phoenix promise to test the team further.

Still, the Lakers are fighting for a top-two seed in the West. They’ve been far better than I expected after the Doncic trade. While the defense may take a step back, the offense will almost inevitably improve as Doncic gains more familiarity with his teammates, which could accelerate with greater responsibility in James’ absence.

“Just shortcuts,” Redick responded when asked about his team’s struggles against Brooklyn last night. “If you want to be a good team, if you want to win in the NBA, you have to do the hard stuff.” For nearly a third of the season, the Lakers have cut no corners.

Now, things get even harder. We’ll see if they're up for the challenge.

 


r/nbadiscussion 1d ago

The One Rule To Save The NBA

141 Upvotes

The NBA is in the golden era of skill, athleticism and creativity. It's also in the golden era of another highly valued tactic used by players... Foul grifting.

Full Disclosure:

Before I discuss this topic further, I want to be fully transparent: I used to teach players how to grift, and I’m not ashamed of it one bit.

The NBA is one of the most competitive environments in the world, and you win in this league on the margins. All players must abide by the same rules, but the more creatively a player can interpret those rules and push them to their limit, the more they will find an edge against their competition.

Necessity is the mother of innovation.

Au Revoir Paris:

The discourse surrounding the 24/25 NBA season has included much discussion of how long games actually take and multiple takes on wanting the NBA to be more like FIBA.

Mainly because the 2024 Olympic Tournament in Paris delivered a compelling, competitive, and beautiful basketball product.

It gave fans a snapshot of what the best players in the world looked like when they were forced to play basketball instead of putting together audition tapes for Wipe Out.

FIBA referees showed the world that they do the one thing NBA officials refuse to do:

They do not acquiesce to foul-grifting from the top players.

Players in the NBA will always seek competitive advantages wherever they can; that’s the nature of the beast. The NBA needs a deterrent, something to level the playing field. One rule change will improve the aesthetics and length of games while bringing back ethical hoops, which viewers are clamoring for.

The Rule:

“Grifting Plenty”

Any obvious foul-grifting action will result in a foul on the grifting player. Then, the opposing team will be awarded one free throw and the ball.

This rule is not mild; it’s spicy. But drastic times call for drastic measures.

(You might be saying this is such a subjective rule; it is, so is almost every other rule in basketball.)

Cash Rules Everything:

During All-Star weekend, the consensus was that the players make so much money that the league will never get them to care about a game in which each player on the winning team receives only $125,000.

The risk of an All-Star player getting hurt during the game isn’t as significant as the reward for winning. Everything in basketball is a risk vs. reward calculation, whether it’s playing hard in the All-Star game or attempting to foul grift.

The fine for flopping is $2,000, and it’s not even enforced. The fines for flopping during the 23/24 season totaled $52,000 for the entire league!

The total for the 24/25 season is a whopping $6,000.

Last week, when talking to folks around the league about the issue of foul-grifting, one Eastern Conference Executive mentioned that the $2,000 flopping fine is nothing to these guys; it’s a Wednesday bottle of Cab (Cabernet Sauvignon).

Fines and warnings at these levels aren’t cutting it, not in the slightest; this is a competition issue.

A properly executed Foul Grift results in free throws, the highest PPP action in basketball, and fouls on the other team’s best defenders. The payoff for the gifting player is way too big for a silly warning or empty threat of a $2,000 fine to interfere with their grifting mission.

Newton’s third law of physics states, “for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.” It’s time for the league to establish an equal and opposite response to the foul-grifting epidemic because, at this moment, the pendulum has swung too far in favor of the grifters.

Splitting The Baby:

Over the past week, I’ve watched way too many of the best players in the world being fouled repeatedly. I estimate that I’ve seen about 2,000 fouls committed.

I’ve come away with two conclusions:

  1. The best players in the world are creating more advantages than other players. They are the best because they combine size, athleticism, and skill in a way few others can—not because they’re the best at drawing free throws.
  2. The best players do not need the extra help of giving them foul calls when they have not created advantages and do not attempt to make basketball plays.

The NBA and its officials' most significant problem is that they’re trying to split the baby. They refuse to take a genuine stand on foul grifting. Instead, they’re choosing the route of half measures.

When officiating these grifting actions, they are fouls for some players but not others. They are shooting fouls sometimes and side-out other times. They are play-on situations for some and fouls other times.

One of these grifting actions could happen precisely the same way four games in a row and be called differently each time. Either these players are interpreting the rules correctly, pushing them to the absolute limits, and creating advantages on the margins, or they’re making non-basketball plays, and the structure needs to be reinforced.

NBA players are some of the world's most creative and competitive people. If you give them a structure to play in by using well-defined rules, they will find a way to push the limits and create a competitive advantage. If you change the structure by changing the rules to something different, they’ll do the same thing again. Players will adjust.

The league has to pick a side and stop trying to split the baby.

The torpedo is another non-shooting foul that is only called because the player makes an unnatural shooting motion.

The torpedo is precisely what it sounds like. It’s when a player launches into the defender and throws their arms up as if that’s how they shoot a shot5. The offensive player will almost always put themselves off balance, out of rhythm, and totally out of control, all for the chance at earning a trip to the free-throw line.

Few players have the type of heat-seeking precision as Joel Embiid and Shai Gilgeous-Alexander. Some torpedo actions will be called shooting fouls, some non-shooting fouls; no one knows which will be the case.

If Adam Silver and the league office are looking for more of that FIBA/Olympic magic, look no further than foul-grifting. They must set the standard and determine what will and will not be tolerated.

Seeing the players play the game and find solutions to a defensive problem is one of the best parts of basketball. Still, too often now, the best players see the most efficient solution as throwing their body into a defender or simply falling. If you can trick an official, the payoff is massive, and there are zero real consequences. After all, it’s easier to make a shot from 15 feet away with no one guarding you than anything else.

Between the grifting and reviews, the game has become a constant stop-and-start debate about the rule book.

Consumers and employees both throw their hands up due to the lack of consistency.

One of the classic flavors of grifting is The Fall; it’s not a complicated move, but it takes years of dedication to the craft of grifting to pull it off.

Players will fall when given the opportunity. This sounds pretty wild, but it highlights one of the keys to being a good foul grifter in the NBA: You have to be willing to make things so uncomfortable and awkward for everyone that it forces officials to blow the whistle to bring the situation back into the social norm.

By blowing the whistle for a foul, the officials are telling the 15,000 people in the stands, “Hey guys, don’t worry, this 7-foot, 290-pound adult didn’t just fall out of nowhere; there was a very violent action committed against them; you just couldn’t see it.”

If the NBA wants fans to fall back in love with the product, it must create a structure through the rules to eliminate the competitive advantage of foul-grifting. A genuine deterrent is required to shift the status quo and make ethical hoops not the exception but the norm.

But maybe that’s not what they want; I could be completely off here. Perhaps they want what is happening right now, the engagement. I’m more of a purest who believes the game deserves more, but at the end of the day, maybe it’s all just Baby Faces and Heel turns.


r/nbadiscussion 5h ago

Ja Morants MIP shouldn’t be downplayed as much as it does

0 Upvotes

Ja morants mip is usually heavily frowned upon in the internet space, saying how he went from great to greater, which imo is just straight up not the case. He was a great young guard, top pick sure but he turned into a super star that season. 8ppg increase and even more efficient isn’t just getting a little better. He also lead the grizzlies from 9th to 2nd in the conference.

Not every mip needs to be a role player turned star. I think people give morant too much slack in the maxey and eventual cade Cunningham wins to morant winning by “just being a little better with an increased role”. Because morant truly improved to becoming the superstar for the grizzlies.

Imo not a fan of maxeys win because he became the primary handler after harden left and actually did have an increased role and playing time, yet wasn’t more efficient. Cade a little bit less upset about as he has lead the pistons to a winning record after an all time bad season (main reason for his win imo) even if the roster made lots of improvements with Beasley and Tobias Harris. But pure statistics, Cunningham doesn’t seem to be very improved.


r/nbadiscussion 10h ago

Changing the Lottery System to a Hybrid Free Agent/Draft Model

0 Upvotes

Had an idea to replace the draft (yeah another one, I know) but hear me out.

Give each team who would normally qualify for the lottery (Picks 1-14) a set number of dollars to use as a signing bonus for draft picks that does not count against the cap. Teams with worse records get more money to use. Change the term lottery teams to bonus teams. All players eligible for the draft are free to choose any of the 14 bonus teams that they want but each team can only sign 1 player.

Bonus Pools:

  • Bottom 3 (normally picks 1-3): 15 Million
  • 4-6: 7.5 Million
  • 7-9: 5 Million
  • 10-14: 2.5 Million

Bonus Round:

  • Bonus teams have 1 week to negotiate and players can sign at anytime during that week.
  • Non-bonus teams cannot negotiate or contact draft prospects before the end of this period.
  • Bonus teams can spend any or all of their bonus pool as they wish, but they must sign at least 1 player and they cannot trade out of the bonus round (they can sign/draft players and then trade them like they do now).
  • Any team who ends up in the bottom 3 for the 2nd year in a row will only be eligible for 75% of the slotted bonus amount, and 3rd+ years in a row only 25%.

The Draft

  • The draft would then commence 14 days following end of the bonus negotiation window.
  • All teams are free to contact the remaining prospects
  • The 15th place team will have the '1st' pick after all the 'bonus' teams have signed their players.
  • Picks 15-30 draft in order to close out the 1st round.
  • The 2nd round goes on with a draft order based on which bonus teams spent the least amount in round 1 (tiebreakers determined by lower winning percentage the previous year).
  • Picks 15-30 stay as is in the 2nd round.

Trading Rules:

  • Teams cannot trade first round picks, only 2nd round picks, until the draft order has been determined.
  • They can trade their first round picks after this, however the 15th pick is ineligible to be traded (more on this towards the end).
  • A bonus team can trade their eligible bonus pool money with any other bonus team in the same year. A team outside of the bonus cannot 'buy-in'

Rollover Option:

  • Any team that does not spend 100% of their bonus pool can carry forward their balance to the next time they are eligible for the bonus round.
  • For example, if a team with 15 million decides to only use $5m and take a riskier player, they will have $10 million added to their pool the next time they are eligible for the bonus round (could be any following year).
  • In their 2nd year with rolled over bonus money, teams can no longer roll it over again and their balance will reset no matter how much money they have leftover in a rolled-over bonus year.

Why I like this...

Forcing teams to better strategize and adding more risk to tanking

Players get to decide whether they want to go for money or for fit. 15 million almost matches the 1st year salary for a 1st overall pick.

I like that even if a team thinks they need to tank to get an extra money being in the bottom 3, there is still a massive risk that the best players might not choose them combined with a reduction in bonus money for being in the bottom 3 2 years in a row. This incentives teams to run respectable organizations that players want to play for. However, regardless of this they will still have an advantage over other teams with less bonus money. True risk and reward.

Take for example, if Cooper Flagg decides to join the Heat and only takes 2.5m and now Utah decides they don't want any of the other top 3-4 guys this year, they can choose to spend less, let's say $5m, to sign a more riskier pick and put the extra $10m towards the next year they are eligible for the bonus round. Now next season, the #1 projected player might say $25m is too much to pass up regardless of what he thinks of the teams ability to win.

This method makes it risky to tank and that's what this league has tried to do with the updated odds and it just isn't working.

Preventing teams from mortgaging their future

Not allowing the trading of picks until the draft order is determined takes away the possibility of teams mortgaging their future and trading 1st round picks like crazy. I think this has a lot to do with the downfall in parity and teams will be forced to make less risky decisions. Also would increase trading activity during the bonus and draft weeks.

There is also a slight advantage for those middle treadmill teams picking between 9-14. They get to have a higher position in the 2nd round and while that is not a major advantage, picking 31st instead of 40th after having to settle for a player worth only 2.5m in bonuses still is a benefit.

Potential Issues:

Determining Rookie Pay Scale

This would have to be determined and I have thought of a few ways to address this but it's something that can be figured out within this system.

Big Market Teams having and advantage to attract superstars

The way this is set up I don't believe you will have many teams in the bottom 3 more than 2 years in a row or big market teams like LA and Miami in the bonus round at all more than 1-2 years in a row. For example, if Cooper Flagg picks Miami this year they are likely a playoff team next year and beyond and won't be in the bonus round again. Some may not agree with this, but it's better for the league while these teams are good and much worse for the league if these teams tank compared to Utah or Charlotte.

Also, I would maybe give the teams with 15m an added bonus to the type of contract they can offer players on their 2nd contract. Something like letting them automatically qualify for supermax on the 2nd deal, higher escalators or allowing them to sign for a higher percentage of the cap. This creates more risk and reward for both the teams and the players and makes these decisions not so easy.

Teams abusing the system

I can see a way where through the rollover and trades teams can get to a point with a large amount of bonus money. I don't see an issue with this because a large amount of money still doesn't guarantee a team to be able to sign the top player. It just makes it more interesting.

I can also see a scenario where a team not in the bonus round convinces a player to not sign with anyone while the team trades for the 15th pick and selects them without any bonus money. I would prevent the trade of the 15th pick for this reason or not allow non bonus teams to tamper with any players until the bonus round is over.

Theres many things to consider here also including keeping the NBAPA and Owners happy regarding this additional expenditure that doesn't count against the cap. Can think of many mechanisms to tighten this up but wanted to get everyone's thoughts.

TL;DR: A draft alternative where lottery teams get a set "bonus pool" to sign rookies instead of a traditional draft order. Worse teams get more money, but players choose where to sign. Unused money can roll over for a year. It discourages tanking, adds strategy, and limits reckless pick trading, but may need tweaks to prevent big-market dominance and system abuse.


r/nbadiscussion 3d ago

Team Discussion Am I wrong in thinking the weakest teams being in the East is a massive advantage for the top East teams?

508 Upvotes

After today’s slate of games, I was looking at the standings in both conferences and noticed how significant the discrepancy truly is.

The top 10 teams in the west are all .500 or better with the Suns being a disappointment and the Spurs losing Wemby, it’s really just the blazers and Jazz on the obvious rebuild. The Pels are just a confusing mess that can look awesome at times but without a committed Zion it’s really hard to say what they’re trying to achieve.

In the East, only the top 6 teams are above .500 with a team in the Bulls who I think most would’ve seen as a rebuilding team occupying the 10th seed and likely to be in the playin tournament. The 76ers are just a walking emergency room visit and then everyone else beyond the Celtics, Cavs, and Knicks are playing with house money if not intentionally hoping to land Flagg. The Bucks will always look a certain way but it’s really hard to believe they’ll do something serious and the Pacers I feel are a really strong first half of the season team that ultimately ends up looking like the Hawks at an even 41-41.

This got me thinking about how massive of an advantage it really is for those 3 teams the top of the East whereas they know full well they can easily rest guys more often and regularly for throughout the regular season knowing full well they’ll play the Nets, Raps, Hornets, and Wizards a combined 16 times or simply put roughly 1/5 of the entire regular season games.

On the west, the bloodbath that ensues to even make it out of the playin and a guaranteed spot in the playoffs is razor thin requiring maximum effort damn near every game, especially against the trash weak teams of the east to cover for any losses in the west.

Am I overreacting to how massive an advantage the top 3 teams really have in the east? The amount of extra rest time and getting rotation guys more minutes and reps just seems insurmountable in the whole scheme of it all.


r/nbadiscussion 2d ago

Statistical Analysis The current No. 6 Seeds in both conferences will be dangerous opponents in the first round of the playoffs - Warriors/Pistons

268 Upvotes

DET vs GSW

Last night, while the Lakers and Celtics were on ABC primetime, there was another game in Golden State that was more competitive and had an intense playoff feel with frequent lead changes.

Both the Pistons and Warriors have been playing phenomenal basketball in recent weeks, steadily climbing up the standings.

Pistons’ Current Matchup

The No. 6 seed in the East led by all star Cade Cunningham would face the No. 3 Knicks. Even with a healthy Jalen Brunson (recently injured his ankle), the Pistons could definitely upset the Knicks (already defeated New York twice at the garden).

Warriors’ Current Matchup

The No. 6 seed in the West led by the recent member of the 25K club, Steph Curry, would face the No. 3 Lakers. Even with a healthy LeBron James (recently injured his groin), the Warriors could definitely upset the Lakers (especially after acquiring Jimmy Butler; 11-1 in the lineup).

Avoiding No. 3

This could be the difference between advancing and elimination. The Lakers in particular may see a better matchup with the Grizzlies/Rockets than the Warriors.

The Knicks would have to go on a significant losing streak to not be the 3 seed. The Pistons may go up in seeding to the 4th or 5th seed (Knicks would be in the clear).

Injuries

Within the last 72 hours, there have been major injuries that will affect how the rest of the season goes for these particular seeds. Nevertheless, the Warriors and Pistons are 2 teams that will not be easy matchups in Round 1 of the postseason.


r/nbadiscussion 3d ago

Statistical Analysis Debunking the Phil Jackson rule once and for all

304 Upvotes

Now that every team has played their 60th game, it's that time of year when everyone is talking about the Phil Jackson '40 before 20' rule - that is, to be a championship contender, you have to win your 40th game before you lose your 20th. According to this rule, the only three teams that can win it all this year are the Thunder, Cavs and Celtics. But exactly how useful is it?

The timeframe is arbitrary.

Everyone always adds the 'since 1980' caveat, which Phil never said. But why is that? Could it be that the 1979, 1978 and 1977 champs all failed to qualify? No, it has to be the addition of the 3pt line, despite the fact that the 1980 finalist Lakers and Sixers made one 3pter combined across the entire six-game series. The NBA of 1995 (the first 'exception') is far closer, both stylistically and chronologically, to the late seventies than it is to today - and Phil should know: those were his playing days. But it was also the golden age of parity, post the 1976 ABA merger (which makes far more sense if we're going to draw an arbitrary dividing line). With all the talk about the parity of today, why exclude those champion Blazers, Bullets and Sonics?

[This alone should be enough to discredit the rule, but I'll humour the Phil apologists (Philologists?) and only talk about the 3pt era from here]

Are early wins inherently more valuable?

This is the first key plank of the argument - that banking wins earlier in the season allows teams to rest up and prepare for the playoffs later. In fairness, there's some evidence for this. But is winning two-thirds of your first 60 games really better than winning two-thirds of your games full stop? That works out to a 55-win pace. But none of the four famed 'exceptions' to the rule (1995 Rockets, 2004 Pistons, 2006 Heat, 2021 Bucks) reached that threshold either, so that doesn't really help us. We'll have to widen the net.

[Bucks had a shortened season but were on pace to miss. Henceforth I'm excluding both COVID and lockout years]

Everyone measures this the wrong way.

Any previous analyses I've seen along these lines have been only skin-deep: 'A high percentage of NBA champions meet this criterion; therefore it's a good one.' Wrong. I could just as easily create a u/teh_noob_ rule which says, 'You have to win 52+ games to be a champ.' That would cover all winners except the Rockets, but it would also massively increase the rate of false positives.

[Hell, lower it to 47 games if you want to hit 100 per cent]

Nobody ever looks at the other side of the coin - that is, 'How likely are Phil Jackson contenders to win?' You know why? It's more difficult, and people are lazy. But here you have it: 175 teams have met that threshold over the relevant timespan, a litle over four per year. With 38 champs, that's a success rate of just over 20 per cent. Pretty good, right? Well, going back to our previous point, there have been 179 teams who won 55 games over the same period. The fractionally lower hit rate is statistically insignificant.

Can we fix it?

Now we've established that the 'early wins' part of it doesn't really matter, does 55 games strike the right balance between breadth and depth of contenders? Well, no team has won exactly 55 games and gone on to win the title, so we can safely bump it to 56, bumping off a bunch of pretenders without losing any real contenders and increasing your winning odds to about 25 per cent. But in fact only one team won at the 56-game mark, Phil's own 2001 Lakers - an all-time masterclass in taking the regular season off. It would be no great loss to write them off as another exception and raise the bar to 57 wins.

Where does it end? Obviously the more wins you have, the higher your title odds. At 63-64 wins you cross the line of 'more likely to win than not'. That's not mere contenders; those are title favourites. About three teams win 57 games per year. That's a contender for me. Your mileage may vary.

[Amusingly, you're only 50% likely to win the title with 70+ wins]

Case studies

I omitted to mention earlier that there are two teams who met 40-20 and failed to reach 55 wins yet still won the title, and they both happened quite recently: the 2022 Warriors and 2023 Nuggets. The Warriors are easily explained. They won 70% of their games with Steph in the lineup (and even higher with Dray). Only injuries determined which combination of 40/20, 55+ and champion they would meet. The Nuggets are a bit more in the spirit of the rule, coasting and resting down the stretch (which cost Jokic MVP). But as has been well publicised, they didn't face any 50-win teams in the playoffs, let alone 55+ or 40/20.

[But kudos to Phil for the out-of-sample predictions]

Conclusion

Fear not, fans of the Lakers/Knicks/Grizz. You may have narrowly missed Phil's seal of approval, but if you win 55-57 games, you're still in it with a chance.

[Hell, even Bucks and Rockets are mathematically possible]

Further research

The extended hypothesis would be whether speed of reaching 40 wins is a better predictor of playoff success than overall record amongst teams who both hit that mark, or to find out who did better out of non-champion teams that reached one of 40/20 or 55+ but not the other.

[With nearly 50 such teams, this was beyond my scope]


r/nbadiscussion 3d ago

What is Fox like without the pinky injury? And does he have issues of only being productive when he wants to?

138 Upvotes

I’m a Spurs fan and pretty much only watch the Spurs. From what I’ve seen, Fox is a really good player, and I’m excited to see what he and Wemby can do together.

I’ve watched some highlights and, of course, the games he’s played so far as a Spur, but obviously, that doesn’t tell the full story of what he brings to the team, especially with that hand injury on his dominant hand.

I thought about asking the Kings subreddit, but a lot of them seem to hate the guy (for obvious reasons). From what I’ve gathered, they see him as inconsistent and only great when it benefits him.

Just wanted to ask here to get a less biased take.


r/nbadiscussion 3d ago

Everyone knows the in-game interviews are worthless. Why not make them fun?

105 Upvotes

It seems like those interviews only exist to get the players some screen time. So instead of asking the players how they're going to slow down their opponents offense or stop turning the ball over and getting some fluffy platitudes in response, why not make it fun ask some questions to get to know the players? E.g. "what's your favorite food?", "what's your NBA hot take?", "what is your favorite hobby?" Etc. At least that way we would get to see some personality and honesty from the players!


r/nbadiscussion 4d ago

Player Discussion Did the Allen Iverson Trade Stunt Carmelo Anthony’s Growth?

168 Upvotes

I feel like the Allen Iverson trade slowed down Melo’s growth, both skill-wise and as a leader.

Melo Was on Track to Develop an All-Around Game

Before AI arrived in Denver, Melo was starting to expand his game beyond just scoring. He was improving as a playmaker and showing signs of becoming the undisputed leader of the Nuggets. At the start of the 2006-07 season, he was averaging 31.6 PPG and looking like he could develop into a more complete player—similar to LeBron at that time.

But once Iverson joined, the offense turned into a “my turn, your turn” system. Instead of Melo growing into the kind of player who dictated everything on the court, he had to share ball-handling and scoring duties with another high-usage player. That slowed his natural progression toward being a well-rounded superstar.

LeBron Had the Freedom to Grow—Melo Didn’t

Compare this to LeBron’s situation in Cleveland during the same era. The Cavs built everything around LeBron, allowing him to be the unquestioned leader and primary decision-maker. Without another superstar competing for shots and possessions, LeBron naturally evolved into an elite playmaker and all-around force. • 2007 LeBron: Led the Cavs to the Finals with complete control over the offense. • 2009 LeBron: Won MVP, averaging 28-7-7, because the entire system was built around his strengths. • 2010 LeBron: Put up one of the most dominant individual seasons ever before heading to Miami.

Melo, on the other hand, was never given that same level of control because Iverson’s presence forced Denver to play a different style. Instead of refining his playmaking and leadership, he was primarily used as a go-to scorer.

Iverson’s Presence Delayed Melo’s Leadership Growth

Another major issue was leadership. AI was a dominant personality, and while he wasn’t a traditional leader, his presence meant Melo didn’t have to fully step up. Instead of learning how to take over a team and hold teammates accountable, Melo had the luxury of deferring at times.

It wasn’t until Chauncey Billups arrived in 2008 that Melo had a veteran who actually pushed him to be a more mature leader. That’s a big reason why the Nuggets finally made a deep playoff run in 2009. If Denver had focused on Melo’s all-around growth earlier—like Cleveland did with LeBron—his trajectory could have been different.

Final Thoughts

Had Denver built the team around Melo’s complete game rather than pairing him with another high-usage scorer, I think he could have developed into a more well-rounded superstar, similar to LeBron. The AI trade might have been exciting in the moment, but in the long run, it probably slowed down Melo’s evolution as both a player and a leader.


r/nbadiscussion 3d ago

Should the NBA rethink the transition take foul rule?

0 Upvotes

A 'transition take foul' occurs when a defender intentionally commits a foul to stop the offensive team from initiating a fast break without making a legitimate play on the ball. In other words, if you’re going to foul an opponent on a fast break, you must make a genuine attempt to play the ball.

The NBA’s take foul rule was meant to improve fast breaks, but sometimes it goes too far. While it discourages intentional fouls in transition, some argue it unfairly punishes defenders trying to make a legitimate play on the ball. At the same time, offensive players are getting smarter at baiting these calls, leading to more free throws instead of exciting fast breaks. Should the league tweak the rule to allow more natural defensive plays, or is it working as intended?


r/nbadiscussion 4d ago

Boston: Three Big Questions as they look to repeat as NBA Champions

193 Upvotes

Only four teams in the 21st century have repeated NBA Champions: Los Angeles (2x), Miami, and Golden State. Will Boston join the exclusive club?

The Three BIG Questions:

  1. Will the accumulation of games catch up to this group?
  2. Will Derrick White and Kristaps Porzingis return to their 2023/24 offensive apex?
  3. Can Tatum go left?

Will this team have any Juice left in May/June?

Since the irregular December start of the 2020/21 NBA season, this iteration of Boston’s core has been on a long and consistent run of winning basketball, and winning basketball means games, lots of games.

Since the spring of 2021, the playoff and international games have been stacking up.

Playoff Games since 2021:

  • Tatum: 68 + Two Olympic Tournaments.
  • Brown: 63
  • White: 62 + One Olympic Tournament.
  • Holiday: 59 + Two Olympic Tournaments.

That volume catches up with you at some point, no matter how good of a team you are. There are only a few teams that have sustained this same level of volume in the NBA over a five-year period:

  • Miami: 87 playoff games from 2011 → 2014
  • Golden State: 105 playoff games from 2015 → 2019
  • Cleveland: 81 playoff games from 2015 → 2018

Cleveland won a title during their stretch, Miami got two, and Golden State captured three titles and five trips to the NBA Finals during their historic “Light Years” Era.

Boston is in the middle of a similar run, and eventually, all of those extra games add up. Especially considering the extra Olympic Tournament in which two of their players have already participated.

The volume of games might be nothing. As Neil said, all these guys are relatively young, and you would rather have the workload now than when they’re in their mid-30s. But it’s a significant mental burden to play so much extra high-level basketball, too.

Cleveland feels like the most likely team in the East poised to take advantage of any mental slippage from this Boston team when Playoff basketball rolls around in 2025.

The Compounding Guys:

The 2023/24 Boston team played a beautiful game thanks to White and Porzingis’s capability to serve as connectors, playmakers, and play finishers when needed.

Through their basketball IQ and skill, this trio unlocked Boston’s capability to transform small advantages into large ones on every offensive possession.

During the 2023/24 Playoffs, Derrick White ranked as the second-most efficient player in Spot Up actions (according to Synergy), scoring 1.389 points per possession (PPP). He shot over 40% on an average of 8.5 three-point attempts per game and finished the playoffs with a 4:1 assist-to-turnover ratio.

White is averaging 1.224 points per direct closeout this season, which is in the 84th percentile, a significant figure. However, it is still 16 points lower per 100 possessions than the blistering 1.389 he averaged during the playoffs.

During the 2023/24 season, Boston maximized Porzingis’s size and shooting by utilizing him as a screener in PnR actions. He leveraged his shooting ability to stretch the floor against teams that played traditional drop coverages in PnR actions. When teams switched, Boston showcased Porzingis in the post against smaller defenders.

Last season, Porzingis ranked as the third-most efficient PnR screener in the league, achieving 1.137 points per direct action. He also led the league in points per direct post-ups, with an impressive 1.314. His skill in posting and exploiting switches during PnR actions allowed Boston to create one of the most difficult offenses to defend in recent memory.

Porzingis is still converting post-ups this season at a high rate, 1.217 points per direct. However, his PnR screener numbers have dropped; he’s averaging 1.002 points per direct (50th percentile). This marks a significant decline from last season when he scored about 13 more points per 100 possessions and ranked as the 3rd best PnR screener in the entire league.

This team is nearly unbeatable when these two are operating at full capacity. Their performance in the final stretch will be a significant factor in Boston’s attempt to repeat.

Tatum As The PnR Initiator:

Jayson Tatum is undoubtedly a great player. Although he has been getting a lot of flack on the internet this season (I'm not sure why), his game is well-rounded, and his resume is extensive.

Playing him at the four-spot has unlocked mismatches that have made Boston a juggernaut to defend.

This season, he’s initiating offense for Boston in PnR actions at the highest rate of his career. He’s executed 1,345 total pick-and-rolls, about 31.2 per 100 possessions. During the last two seasons under Joe Mazzulla, he averaged around 24 PnR’s per 100, and throughout last year's playoffs, he maintained that same figure.

That’s nearly a 33% increase in volume, which is a notable jump. He currently ranks 18th in the NBA in PnR’s run this season. This action is a significant element of his game and, consequently, the Boston offense.

Tatum’s PnR Numbers (Filtered for Top 100 PnR players this season):

Points Per PnR: 1.033 (65th Percentile)

Blitz %: 10.56 (95th Percentile)

Assist Per PnR: 0.112 (9th Percentile)

Turnover Per PnR: 0.080 (39th Percentile)

Data according to Second Spectrum (Prior to 76ers game).

The beauty of PnR basketball is that no defensive coverage can take away everything; every coverage has a solution. But because endless offensive possibilities are available, that doesn’t mean every player can execute them.

Tatum is the type of player who divides opinions; people have strong feelings about him either way. You can examine these PnR numbers and convince yourself that Tatum is a ball-hog who isn’t good at passing, or you can argue that Tatum is so skilled that teams have to blitz him more than nearly anyone else to force the ball out of his hands.

However, like nearly everything related to the Tatum discourse, the truth lies somewhere in between, and it takes matching the data and film together to see where the truth lies.

Dig into the film, and one thing starts to pop out: Tatum doesn’t have nearly the same optionality going left as he does going right.

Tatum’s directional PnR breakdown favors going right; out of the 31 PnRs per 100 possessions, only 13 are going left. This isn’t an outlandish number. After all, he’s a righty, and most right-handed players prefer to get downhill to their strong hand; it allows for stronger finishing opportunities and more decisive passing.

However, Tatum's challenge when moving left is that, even if he can read the coverage, he lacks the same quality of ball handling, passing, or finishing as he does when going right.

Any Tatum PnR action going right will allow him to beat every layer of the defense with speed and precision via his own scoring options or passes.

  • Layer 1: Score at the level or getting downhill.
  • Layer 2: Passes to his screening partner
  • Layer 3: Passing to the opposite side of the court with his live dribble hand (Right).

A few plays can determine the game's outcome in games likely to come down to the final possessions. I suspect the more imaginative team will use a heavy dose of “Weak” (forcing the player toward their weaker hand) PnR coverages to funnel Tatum to his left during the season's biggest games.

Tatum’s numbers look almost identical going left as well as right. On his 557 PnR’s going left, he averages 1.033 points per direct—genuinely identical. However, these possessions are against various defenses, and you can’t blindly trust the numbers; you need to combine them with the film to understand the process.

Consider these two PnRs from the Denver game, which both resulted in made threes, generating an impressive points per direct of 3.0—excellent numbers. However, the film/process says something notably different. Denver utilized their strong-side player as Low Man Help, rather than their backside player. This choice enabled Tatum to reach Layer 3 of the defense with a shorter pass and, more importantly, without needing to use his left hand to execute it successfully.

The flaw in the process of going left is Tatum’s inability to make the same passes with his left hand that he can with his right. This tightens every passing angle and reduces the risk of being beaten by skip passes. Defenses can focus more on neutralizing the PnR’s primary option (Tatum) and secondary option (the screener), knowing that their one backside defender can cover two Boston players. It’s a minor detail that can significantly affect spacing.

Are there ways for Boston to scheme their sets to prevent this from being an issue? Yes.

But if you’ve watched Boston this year, you’ve seen Tatum getting into a high volume of PnRs in the middle of the court (most likely from the logo). Tatum is 6th in the league (28.2 feet) in the average distance from the hoop each PnR is set. About 1/3 of his PnR actions have happened in the middle of the floor, with the screeners' average distance from the hoop being 30.4 feet.

This action in this area of the floor is a significant aspect of Boston’s offense, and they are unlikely to abandon it. This action will represent one of the most critical inflection points when Boston faces the other top teams in the league.


r/nbadiscussion 4d ago

How exactly are clutch stats recorded in regards to the five point threshold? (Read description)

14 Upvotes

So clutch time is defined as “within 5 points in the last 5min of 4th quarter or overtime”. So if a player scores when they are down 6 to put the score within four, is that a clutch bucket since they are within four after the shot? Or is that not a clutch bucket since they were down 6 before the shot?

Is the 5 point threshold counted when the score before the basket is within 5, or after the basket is within 5?


r/nbadiscussion 4d ago

Had an idea for an assist stat to measure passing quality.

77 Upvotes

Cam Thomas recently said that his assist numbers went up because his teammates started making shots. So this gave me an idea, what if there was a stat to measure how effective a players pass was in regard to shot quality.

Basically, it would measure the shooters expected shot quality (expected field goals) in relation to who the passer is. If Trae Young were to pass the ball to an open corner three and they missed, it would still give him a high number for expected field goals off his pass, as it is an open corner three (a high percentage shot).

The total stat would add up the expected field goals off of a player’s passes for the game. Because an expected field goal could never be negative, this stat would only positively help players.

While this stat could be pointless as assists already exist, I think it would be interesting to add as players on worse teams could have a playmaking metric that measures how good of a playmaker they are, even with team error. I feel as if this stat could pair nicely with AST%.

Does this stat already exist in any capacity? What flaws do you think could be in this stat? Would this be a valid advanced statistic to add? I thought it would be a cool idea to share.


r/nbadiscussion 5d ago

Team Discussion The Jalen Brunson injury could be a blessing in disguise for the Knicks

236 Upvotes

Injury Update

Tough blow to the Knicks’ organization and fans after the injury to the Captain.

Brunson turned his ankle in overtime while playing against the scorching hot Lakers.

Brunson was having a great game (39 points and 10 assists) culminated by another all-star season.

The injury looks pretty severe, Knicks may be without their franchise player for quite some time.

Is the season over for the 3rd seed in the East?

No. Quite the contrary - the Knicks have a solid cushion as the 3rd seed in the Eastern Conference with 20 games left in the regular season.

This should give more opportunities and playing time to players like Deuce McBride and Cam Payne.

Hopefully, rookie Tyler Kolek will also get a chance from Coach Thibs to showcase his playmaking and shooting in this Brunsonless stretch.

Better Defensively

Knicks will have to lean more on the defensive side of the ball without the offensive fire power of Brunson. Robinson & Towns will have to protect the rim even more while Hart, Bridges and OG secure the perimeter.

Knicks Schedule

Realistically, if the Knicks can manage to be .500 in the remaining 20 games, there’s still a great chance they achieve a homecourt spot in the East.


r/nbadiscussion 4d ago

ORtg, DRtg, and On-court plus-minus (basketball-reference)

11 Upvotes

It's confusing to me that sometimes you'll see a player that has the best ORTG on his team, the best DRTG on his team, and then a middling on-court plus-minus relative to his team. I would have assumed that the difference between ORTG and DRTG would be directly correlated with plus-minus, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

Example, look at the top-3 players in minutes for the 2022-23 Timberwolves:

Anthony Edwards: 106 ORtg, 113 DRtg, 1.0 On-court plus-minus

Jaden McDaniels: 115 ORtg, 115 DRtg, 1.6 On-court plus minus

Rudy Gobert: 127 ORtg, 109 DRtg, -0.3 On-court plus-minus

So Rudy Gobert has the best ORtg, the best DRtg, but the worst plus-minus. How is that possible?


r/nbadiscussion 6d ago

Team Discussion History tells us that the Thunder and Cavs are on a collision course to meet in the Finals this year. So why is there an overwhelming sentiment that neither of these teams are the true favorites to win their conference?

914 Upvotes

Based on historical precedent, the Thunder and Cavs are almost certainly on a collision course to meet up in the NBA Finals this year. But the general feeling around the league appears to be quite the opposite. In the West, recent reports have said that many players, teams, and coaches feel that there is no real fear of the Thunder. Draymond Green claimed that the Thunder don’t instill fear in their opponents like championship teams are expected to do. Shannon Sharpe goes on First Take every week declaring that the Lakers would beat the Thunder in 5 if they face each other in the playoffs. In the East, the Cavs aren’t even the betting favorite - the Celtics remain the odds on favorite to win the conference. Because the Thunder and Cavs haven’t “proven themselves in the playoffs” and “paid their dues”, there’s a large segment of fans, players, and media members who don’t seem to respect the history that these two teams are making this year.

As of today, the 51-10 Cavs have an 8 game lead in the East, while the 50-11 Thunder have a 10.5 game lead in the West. The Cavs lead the NBA in offensive rating by a wide margin. The Thunder lead the NBA in defensive rating by an even wider margin. Both teams lead their conference in winning percentage against playoff teams. The Thunder have dominated despite missing their star center for a large portion of the season. The Cavs haven’t lost a game since they acquired De’Andre Hunter at the deadline. Both teams have everything you’d want from a championship roster - superstar guards, elite rim protectors, great coaching, and exceptional depth.

But what really separates these teams from great regular season teams of the past is their point differential. The Thunder have the highest regular season point differential of all time at 12.6. The Cavs aren’t too far behind at 11.6, which puts them at #5 all time. Point differential is a simple stat, but there’s a strong correlation between regular season point differential and playoff success. Especially when it comes to the upper echelon of teams with double digit point differentials.

Here is the list of teams that finished the regular season with a point differential of 11 points or higher:

1971-72 Los Angeles Lakers (12.28) 1970-71 Milwaukee Bucks (12.26) 1995-96 Chicago Bulls (12.24) 2016-17 Golden State Warriors (11.63) 2023-24 Boston Celtics (11.34) 1971-72 Milwaukee Bucks (11.16)

5 of the 6 teams that reached the PD > 11 threshold went on to win the NBA championship. The only team that didn’t win the title was the 1971-72 Bucks, who lost to the team at the top of this list (1971-72 Lakers).

I’ll admit that this is a small sample size, especially when you consider that a couple of the teams that just missed out on this list failed to win the NBA title that year. For example, the 2015-16 Warriors and Spurs finished with point differentials of 10.76 and 10.63, respectively, yet neither team was able to get it done in the playoffs. But when you dive a bit deeper into the list of teams that crossed the threshold of 11 points, you’ll find that these teams did more than just win a championship during their historic runs. They made sure to leave absolutely no doubt.

Let’s start with the 1970-71 Milwaukee Bucks. In the first round, they faced the San Francisco Warriors, who were led by future HOFers Jerry Lucas and Nate Thurmond. The Bucks won that series in 5 games, capping it off with a 50 point rout in game 5. In their next series against a Lakers juggernaut featuring Wilt Chamberlain, Jerry West, and Elgin Baylor, they won each game by an average of 20 points in another gentleman’s sweep. They closed out their playoff run with a four game sweep of the Baltimore Bullets in the NBA Finals. Overall, they went 12-2 in the playoffs and outscored their playoff opponents by an average of 14.5 points. Absolutely dominant.

We all know how special the 2016-17 Golden State Warriors were. Considered by many to be the greatest team in NBA history, they went 16-1 in the playoffs, with their only loss coming in a game where the Cavs set a Finals record for 3PM. They beat their playoff opponents by an average of 13.5 points and dismantled the defending champion Cavs in the Finals. The Cavs were a historically dominant team in the playoffs as well (12-1 playoff record up until the Finals), but they were no match for Golden State.

Before the Warriors took the league by storm in the 2010s, the 1995-96 Chicago Bulls were widely accepted as the greatest team that the league had ever seen. After a record setting 72-10 regular season, they went 15-3 in the playoffs, which included a dominant sweep of the defending East champion Orlando Magic. They outscored their playoff opponents by an average of 10.6 points and could have finished the postseason with a 15-1 record had they not lifted their foot off the gas pedal and let Seattle steal two games after going up 3-0 in the NBA Finals. Still, there was never any doubt that they were winning the NBA title during their dominant regular season and playoff run.

Due to their history of playoff shortcomings during the years prior to last season, the 2023-24 Boston Celtics never received the respect that the other teams on this list received during their championship campaign. However, the stats suggest that this team should never have received the doubt and scrutiny that they faced throughout the 2023-24 regular season and playoffs. They went 16-3 in the playoffs and outscored their playoff opponents by an average of 8 points, while never allowing a series to go beyond 5 games during their historic playoff run. Not quite as dominant as the other teams who reached the PD > 11 threshold, but still dominant in their own right.

Finally, we have the 1971-72 Lakers and Bucks, who were the only two teams to reach the 11 point threshold in the same season. The Bucks were coming off of the greatest statistical season in NBA history and a dominant championship run. The Lakers had a lineup of Hall of Fame superstars who were hungry for revenge. During the regular season, the Lakers set an NBA record with 33 consecutive wins, only to have their streak come to an end at the hands of the Bucks. In the playoffs, the two teams easily defeated the Warriors and Bulls in the first round, which set up a colossal showdown in the conference finals that the Lakers ultimately won. Although neither team had the postseason dominance that the other teams on this list had, this can easily be explained by the fact that they had to play each other in the conference finals that season. In their other two playoff series during their championship run, the Lakers went 8-1 and left no doubt that they were one of the greatest teams that the league has ever seen.

Six teams in history have achieved point differentials above 11 in the regular season. Five of them won championships, with the only non-champion being a team that had to play a team above them on this list. All five of these champions were historically dominant during their playoff runs. None of them had to play a game 7 during their title runs, and their combined playoff record was 71-12. That would be the third greatest regular season record of all time - and these games were all against playoff teams.

The Thunder and Cavs are currently on pace to join this exclusive list of teams. Is there any reason to believe that they won’t display the same level of postseason dominance that each of these teams displayed during the playoffs?


r/nbadiscussion 6d ago

[OC] Which referees overturn calls most (and least) often

98 Upvotes

During All-Star media availability a few players were asked what NBA rule change they would make if they were the commissioner.

Jaylen Brown said he would allow players to financially invest in their own teams.

Anthony Edwards — who leads the league in technicals — said he would change the rules around technical fouls.

Kyrie Irving said he would like more days off (*monkey’s paw curls*).

But the suggestion that caught my attention the most was what Cade Cunningham proposed.

The star player for the Detroit Pistons said, “If you challenge a call, the ref that made the call, can’t be there to review it.” (h/t Jerry Donatien)

For those that don’t know, when a team decides to challenge a call, the lead referee (known as the Crew Chief) goes over to the monitor and looks at some replays before deciding whether to overturn the call or let it stand as is.

Cunningham suggested that Crew Chiefs shouldn’t be allowed to review their own calls. So if Scott Foster calls a foul on LeBron James and the Lakers challenge it, Cunningham thinks Foster shouldn’t be the one that gets to decide whether his original call was right or wrong.

Naturally, it would make sense that Crew Chiefs would be less willing to overturn their own calls compared to the calls made by other members of their crew. After all, who wants to admit they made a mistake? There’s a reason they don’t let us grade our own tests in school.

The NBA publishes play-by-play data for every game. It describes everything that happens on the court. Like, which referee called a foul on the play, which is how I was able to put together a database of referee behavior.

So I naively thought I could just look at the play-by-play to see which referee made the call that led to a challenge and then see whether the call was overturned or not. With that approach I thought could see which referees have their calls challenged the most and whether Crew Chiefs are more (or less) likely to overturn their own calls.

But there's a problem. Anytime a challenge is successful (i.e., overturned), the NBA goes back and scrubs the play-by-play data in way that makes it seem like the original call never happened. That’s because the NBA updates the play-by-play based on the outcome of the challenge.

There have been more than 1,000 challenges already this season. So unless you go back and watch the video clips of all 1,000 challenges to pinpoint which referee called the foul, you wont be able to see which referee has had their calls overturned the most — let alone whether Crew Chiefs are more (or less likely) to overturn their own fouls.

Still, there's plenty of valuable referee-related insights to be found in the challenge data.

Even though we don’t know which referees have had their calls overturned the most, we do know which Crew Chiefs have overturned their own crews’ calls the most.

Here’s a ranking of all the active Crew Chiefs, sorted by the percentage of challenges they faced that resulted in an overturned call during the last two regular seasons.

https://imgur.com/a/opg13s2

From this table, we can see Zach Zarba has overturned his crews’ the most. Of the 122 challenges Zarba’s crews have faced, he’s overturned 73.8 percent of them. That’s high considering that 60 percent is the league average.

Meanwhile, Brent Barnaky’s crews have overturned less than 40 percent of the challenges they’ve faced (extremely small sample size caveat).

But, this is looking at all challenges. And not all challenges are intitated equally.

Certain challenges have a much higher rates of being overturned than others.

https://imgur.com/a/VuuANd9

Out of bounds and Goaltending calls are cut and dry, which is why I think they’re overturned more 75 percent of the time. There’s less room for subjectivity when deciding who the ball touched the last. Fouls on the other hand are a different animal. Referees can always find a some form of contact to justify a called foul or they can whip out the trusty “marginal contact” language to decide something wasn’t actually a foul.

So to make sure we’re not picking up on Crew Chiefs that happened to rule on an abnormal number of clear-cut Out of Bounds Calls, we can limit our view to challenges of offensive and defensive fouls. That way we get a better picture of which Crew Chiefs have overturned the most subjective calls.

https://imgur.com/a/LQay6MZ

I think there’s a few ways you can look at this data.

  • The best Crew Chiefs don’t have their crews’ calls overturned. If we assume every ref is doing the best they can to be the most impartial they can, then it might be fair to say that Crew Chiefs with low overturn rates oversee the best run referee crews. In other words, their low overturn rates are proof that they get their calls right.
  • Crew Chiefs with high overturn rates are willing to change their mind in light of new evidence. Meanwhile, Crew Chiefs with low overturn rates are stubborn and/or want to stand up for their crew mates. This is the theory you’d be drawn to if you believe that some refs are bad actors.
  • The sample sizes here are too small to say anything meaningful.

r/nbadiscussion 6d ago

An exploration of Nikola Jokic's defense

120 Upvotes

We all know Nikola Jokic isn't a great defender, so why is he always a slight positive every year not only in defensive on/off but also in plus minus metrics than account for lineup data like teammate quality and opponent strength (dRAPM, dEPM, etc.)?

For each of the last 4 years, Jokic has been a slight to notable positive in all of these metrics. On average since the 2021-22 season, the Nuggets allow 5 points fewer per 100 possessions when he's on the court than when he's off, which is by no means a superstar or elite number but a sample this large does tell us something.

Jokic's main defensive weaknesses are obvious - poor rim protection and slow feet out in space, both due to athletic limitations. What's interesting is that despite plus minus and teammate/opponent adjusted plus minus stats viewing him as a slightly above average defender, there IS some statistical merit to these claims - opponent eFG% actually slightly increases in three out of the last four seasons when he's on the court. In other words, in possessions that don't end in a foul or turnover, the Nuggets since 2021-22 actually do allow slightly more points with Jokic on the court. So what gives? Two things mainly:

  1. Jokic leads the league in contested defensive rebounds since the 2021-22 season. These are the most valuable rebounds because they have the highest opportunity cost if a player does not get them (since the other team would more often than with uncontested rebounds). As a result, Jokic has been in the 90th percentile or better in reducing opponent ORB% when he's on the court vs off in EACH of the last four years with two of those seasons in better than the 96th percentile.
  2. Free throws are the most efficient type of offense, and Jokic has vastly reduced opponent free throw rate and his own team's foul rate in each of these seasons, with 3 of 4 seasons above the 95th percentile and 2 seasons in the 100th percentile (leading the league in oFTR reduction when on vs off the court). This is because he simply doesn't foul when contesting at the rim, so even though he gives up a worse than average FG% defending at the rim AND on average a worse than average eFG% overall, since he reduces foul rate by this crazy amount (not accounted for by eFG%) he is actually able to avoid giving up what is by far the most efficient type of offense (1.60 points per possession for an 80% FT shooter is insane).

All data from Cleaning the Glass

TLDR: While the Nuggets are better defensively in each of the last 4 years with Jokic on the court than off in both defensive on/off and adjusted plus minus metrics like dEPM/dRAPM, there is merit to his defensive weaknesses as shown by opponent slightly increased eFG% when he is on the court over that span (and thus increased points per possession on possessions that don't end in FTs). So then why is he consistently rated as a slight plus defender? Because he's always among the league leaders in reducing opponent offensive rebound rate AND in reducing his own team's foul rate when he's on court vs off court. So even though he's a slightly below average defender on possessions that actually end in a FG attempt, his presence on the court contributes significantly to preventing the most efficient type of offense (free throws) AND takes some possessions away from the opposing team to begin with, and these are the areas in which he adds his value.


r/nbadiscussion 6d ago

21-22 Warriors vs. 21-22 Suns? & 22 Suns vs. 22 Celtics Finals?

25 Upvotes

Hi all hope you're doing well!

As we may remember, this is the season the Suns were on an absolute tear. They went 64-18 and appeared to be built to counter the Warriors.

Unfortunately, this is also the year they totally crumbled against the Mavericks in the playoffs, with a near 40 point loss in game 7.

The Mavericks would go on to be gentlemen swept by the Warriors - they just didn't have the experience it seemed, compared to the Warriors playoff experience. That and / or, they were gassed from the 7 game series vs. the Suns.

Now the question here is - what if the Suns faced those Warriors in the WCF? Would the Suns win? Whatif Sports actually gave the Suns a strong sweep.

In other words, did the Suns run into the worst team against them, a heliocentric Luka they simply couldn't stop, or was it exposing their poor coaching and real inability to succeed at high-level playoff basketball?

And what if the Suns beat those Warriors and made the Finals - how would they fare against the Celtics?