It would appear Jaden McDaniels is an avid F5 reader and took this one personally, at least for one game. Great summary of the matchups to keep an eye on. Let’s go wolves!
1977 was the first year for widespread free agency in MLB. Whitey Herzog was talking about the Angels of that year, and said something like, “They needed a shortstop, a catcher, and a centerfielder. They signed Don Baylor, Bobby Grich, and Joe Rudi, and they still needed a shortstop, a catcher, and a centerfielder.”
The media was slow to realize that signing stars doesn’t mean your other holes magically go away. NBA teams are also slow to realize it. Inevitably, when you have a Big 3 in this era. 1 or 2 guys get hurt, and you wind up relying on guys like Jeff Dowtin, Guerschon Yabusele, Bol Bol, Oso Ighodero, and Ryan Dunn, and their weaknesses become more exposed the more you play them.
But yes, long-winded way of saying that the weakest link matters.
It is a unique way to look at teams and the playoffs. The modern NBA offense is built on a team's strongest link attacking their opponents' weakest link. It is why having no bad defenders is better than having one great defender, and vice versa on offense. It also shows why ensemble teams can be just as good as teams with the best player in the world.
I am of the opinion that we have made a full circle since the beginning of 2000s until now.
In the 2000s teams were looking to create squads with BIG3s or 2 Superstars and a couple of good starters, thinking that was all that it takes to win (see Amare/Melo Knicks, TMac/Yao Rockets and and even recently Luka/Kyrie Mavs before the last years mid season trades) when in reality all the championships squads went way deeper than their Superstars or Big 3s.
It seems to me that the misconception came from Jordan, he transcended the sport in the 90s. It seemed (especially to the casual fan) that he was unbeatable by himself, when in reality he had deep teams, especially during the second 3peat, which also coincided with the league's expansion to Canada and the dilution of talent.
Championship teams were always deep IMO, it is what it takes to win a championship.
The biggest difference in this era of basketball is that the parameters for being a weak link are more ruthless than ever... Either struggling to shoot the 3 consistently on offense or being a liability on defense (which you pointed out) disqualify you from playing meaningful playoff minutes without your team suffering.
This was first obvious to me while watching Dallas Mavericks in the 2011 playoffs, and the flip-flopping that Rick Carlisle went through with Peja Stojakovic in the playoffs. He went from being a starter and playing significant minutes against Portland, to being used sparsley against the OKC (see Durant), than getting significant minutes against the Lakers, since they could hide him on defense, and then almost not seeing the floor in the Finals against Heat.
I was thinking about how the US olympic team fits into this narrative until you added the quote from the Numbers Game:
"A team of very good players who have had their skills maximized by the use of an intelligent tactic can beat a team of superstars whose talents are exploited but not integrated."
It's pretty fair to say that any team USA should thrive in a weak-link basketball world, but we lack the tactics and investment in our national team to take advantage of these weak links. Given that that the biggest stars in the league are coming from all over the world now, it seems like the only way to maintain US dominance is to tap into tactics that leverage the weak links.
To be fair, this has been around in the playoffs for a while. I remember Tony Allen and Roy Hibbert getting run off the courts in the playoffs due to the inability to shoot and guard the perimeter, respectively. The Jokic championship came with his squad with the fewest weak links (all of whom left). Same with the Lakers, who had a solid supporting cast around LeBron and AD, but seemingly dismantled them for bigger names with bigger weaknesses.
When did this era start? After the GSW dynasty (which was also surprisingly deep)? The Heatles (who started small ball by starting Bosh over Haslem to eliminate a weak link)? Shaq and Kobe?
When did this era start? not sure. You could make case for the Raptors championship season being the official start. But i think i really first started buying into the concept around 2022-23 - that year Luka, SGA, and Dame all averaged 30 points a game and each were on an All-NBA team. But heres the thing, all three missed the playoffs. Thats when i was like, oh okay maybe we should be looking at each teams best player a little less when predicting how successful theyll be
It does seem like there are some nuances here. A team still needs a "strong link" on offense who can force the defense into rotation, and take advantage of shooting and cutting opportunities. Jokic is such a strong link that he routinely takes weak links on other teams (see Westbrook, Russell) and makes them look competent. Similarly a rim protector still seems to be a "strong link" that can make up for weaker defenders on the perimeter/change an opposing offense game plan (sadly, wemby may not be in the playoffs as a demonstration for a few more years)
But I do 100% agree that the weak links on both sides of the ball are being exploited more than ever, and this doesn't factor into analysis enough. The thunder aren't an awesome defense because any one individual is a top 10 defender, and apologies to Tatum, the same could be said about Boston's offense. Some commentators still instinctively want to reward individuals for team greatness with individual rewards, but this fails to understand what is going on. Having no weak points makes it so much harder for the other team to get stops or gain advantages, and that really adds up over a game
Outstanding. Stunning tables. But looks like full season data, at least for GSW. Any way you could re-do this for data since trade deadline, at least for data from nba.com? With teams like GSW and LAL, they’re obviously dramatically different since then? Your Substack rocks! Thanks!
It’s a fair question but I think whatever you gain from looking at things post trade deadline is washed out by the variance that comes with the smaller sample
It would appear Jaden McDaniels is an avid F5 reader and took this one personally, at least for one game. Great summary of the matchups to keep an eye on. Let’s go wolves!
credit where credit is due. he was incredible yesterday
And that’s why they play the games! Great stuff. From my broadcasters eye, the charts are next level, out of this world, dope!
1977 was the first year for widespread free agency in MLB. Whitey Herzog was talking about the Angels of that year, and said something like, “They needed a shortstop, a catcher, and a centerfielder. They signed Don Baylor, Bobby Grich, and Joe Rudi, and they still needed a shortstop, a catcher, and a centerfielder.”
The media was slow to realize that signing stars doesn’t mean your other holes magically go away. NBA teams are also slow to realize it. Inevitably, when you have a Big 3 in this era. 1 or 2 guys get hurt, and you wind up relying on guys like Jeff Dowtin, Guerschon Yabusele, Bol Bol, Oso Ighodero, and Ryan Dunn, and their weaknesses become more exposed the more you play them.
But yes, long-winded way of saying that the weakest link matters.
How did Jaden McDaniels end up as the weakest link? Lakers are a team full of weakest links.
It is a unique way to look at teams and the playoffs. The modern NBA offense is built on a team's strongest link attacking their opponents' weakest link. It is why having no bad defenders is better than having one great defender, and vice versa on offense. It also shows why ensemble teams can be just as good as teams with the best player in the world.
Amazing insights, a great read.
I am of the opinion that we have made a full circle since the beginning of 2000s until now.
In the 2000s teams were looking to create squads with BIG3s or 2 Superstars and a couple of good starters, thinking that was all that it takes to win (see Amare/Melo Knicks, TMac/Yao Rockets and and even recently Luka/Kyrie Mavs before the last years mid season trades) when in reality all the championships squads went way deeper than their Superstars or Big 3s.
It seems to me that the misconception came from Jordan, he transcended the sport in the 90s. It seemed (especially to the casual fan) that he was unbeatable by himself, when in reality he had deep teams, especially during the second 3peat, which also coincided with the league's expansion to Canada and the dilution of talent.
Championship teams were always deep IMO, it is what it takes to win a championship.
The biggest difference in this era of basketball is that the parameters for being a weak link are more ruthless than ever... Either struggling to shoot the 3 consistently on offense or being a liability on defense (which you pointed out) disqualify you from playing meaningful playoff minutes without your team suffering.
This was first obvious to me while watching Dallas Mavericks in the 2011 playoffs, and the flip-flopping that Rick Carlisle went through with Peja Stojakovic in the playoffs. He went from being a starter and playing significant minutes against Portland, to being used sparsley against the OKC (see Durant), than getting significant minutes against the Lakers, since they could hide him on defense, and then almost not seeing the floor in the Finals against Heat.
I was thinking about how the US olympic team fits into this narrative until you added the quote from the Numbers Game:
"A team of very good players who have had their skills maximized by the use of an intelligent tactic can beat a team of superstars whose talents are exploited but not integrated."
It's pretty fair to say that any team USA should thrive in a weak-link basketball world, but we lack the tactics and investment in our national team to take advantage of these weak links. Given that that the biggest stars in the league are coming from all over the world now, it seems like the only way to maintain US dominance is to tap into tactics that leverage the weak links.
To be fair, this has been around in the playoffs for a while. I remember Tony Allen and Roy Hibbert getting run off the courts in the playoffs due to the inability to shoot and guard the perimeter, respectively. The Jokic championship came with his squad with the fewest weak links (all of whom left). Same with the Lakers, who had a solid supporting cast around LeBron and AD, but seemingly dismantled them for bigger names with bigger weaknesses.
When did this era start? After the GSW dynasty (which was also surprisingly deep)? The Heatles (who started small ball by starting Bosh over Haslem to eliminate a weak link)? Shaq and Kobe?
When did this era start? not sure. You could make case for the Raptors championship season being the official start. But i think i really first started buying into the concept around 2022-23 - that year Luka, SGA, and Dame all averaged 30 points a game and each were on an All-NBA team. But heres the thing, all three missed the playoffs. Thats when i was like, oh okay maybe we should be looking at each teams best player a little less when predicting how successful theyll be
It does seem like there are some nuances here. A team still needs a "strong link" on offense who can force the defense into rotation, and take advantage of shooting and cutting opportunities. Jokic is such a strong link that he routinely takes weak links on other teams (see Westbrook, Russell) and makes them look competent. Similarly a rim protector still seems to be a "strong link" that can make up for weaker defenders on the perimeter/change an opposing offense game plan (sadly, wemby may not be in the playoffs as a demonstration for a few more years)
But I do 100% agree that the weak links on both sides of the ball are being exploited more than ever, and this doesn't factor into analysis enough. The thunder aren't an awesome defense because any one individual is a top 10 defender, and apologies to Tatum, the same could be said about Boston's offense. Some commentators still instinctively want to reward individuals for team greatness with individual rewards, but this fails to understand what is going on. Having no weak points makes it so much harder for the other team to get stops or gain advantages, and that really adds up over a game
Outstanding. Stunning tables. But looks like full season data, at least for GSW. Any way you could re-do this for data since trade deadline, at least for data from nba.com? With teams like GSW and LAL, they’re obviously dramatically different since then? Your Substack rocks! Thanks!
It’s a fair question but I think whatever you gain from looking at things post trade deadline is washed out by the variance that comes with the smaller sample
Super helpful! In case it’s of interest, I wrote about what the economic literature says on league expansion and how it would affect talent a while ago. https://open.substack.com/pub/wizardspoints/p/is-league-expansion-good-for-the?r=2svpr&utm_medium=ios
Analysis of GSW/Rockets was spot-on...tho Hield seems to be holding up