Bored and not sober and decided to ask the masses. Is there a reason why NBA teams rarely seem like there is any action away from the ball and people are stagnant? I can see just wanting to be ready for a kickout is about it.

Every team basically runs a 4-out or 5-out offense. A lot of 1-5 PNR with a shooter in the ball side corner. The other two guys at the wing and corner are just standing still all the time. Even a simple switch screen makes the defenders at least watch and make a decision (switch, stay, front the passing lane, etc). The ball doesn't even have to go there but if they're focused on their men then the rotation is slower and the primary action should work.

Never been a coach but a lifelong basketball guy. Am I missing something other than they just don't want to and conserving energy? Seems like GSW are the only team I watch with a lot of off-ball action and it clearly works.

My friend thinks James Harden is the best offensive guard ever, but I argue Kobe Bryant—and even Michael Jordan—are better scorers. Here’s why.

Harden’s offensive game is no joke. He can score in a ton of ways, especially during his Rockets years. He’s a master at getting to the free-throw line and has a signature step-back three-pointer that’s hard to stop. During the 2018-19 season, he averaged 36.1 points per game—huge numbers that prove his skill. Harden is efficient, smart, and has skills that have helped shape how guards play today.

But then there’s Kobe. Kobe’s offensive game was more complete and versatile. While Harden focuses a lot on threes and free throws, Kobe could score from literally anywhere on the court. His footwork, post-game, mid-range shots, and ability to hit deep shots made him incredibly tough to guard. Plus, Kobe thrived under pressure and was known for hitting clutch shots in big moments. He had that “Mamba Mentality”—the drive to win at any cost.

And of course, there’s Michael Jordan, who most still consider the best offensive guard ever. Jordan, like Kobe, was deadly in the mid-range and could attack the rim with unmatched aggression. He led the league in scoring ten times, doing so against extremely tough defenses. Jordan didn’t just score points; he dominated games and stepped up whenever his team needed him.

Harden’s game benefits from today’s style of play, which emphasizes three-point shots and spaced-out floors. But Kobe and Jordan each had a much wider skill set. They didn’t just score points; they brought intensity, versatility, and clutch performances, often in the toughest situations. So while Harden is amazing, Kobe and Jordan are still in a league of their own.

Today, I will appear as a guest on the Basketball Intelligence podcast to discuss the win totals for the upcoming NBA season.

In preparation for the podcast, I dug into both conferences and picked some of my favorite undervalued teams.

Here are my Top 5 (in random order) undervalued teams from the Eastern Conference for the 24/25 season.

Win Totals provided by Bet ESPN

Atlanta - 35.5 wins: (Over)

This is the year the Quinn Snyder “blender” era officially begins in Atlanta! I expect these Hawks to surpass the 40-win mark comfortably.

The Dejounte Murray trade is addition by subtraction. While Murray is a high-quality player in a vacuum, his skill set did not complement Trae Young’s, and in Atlanta, like him or not, everything revolves around Young.

Much of my belief in Atlanta comes from covering the Boomers during the Paris Olympics for The Pick and Roll AU and witnessing the summer of Dyson Daniels!

Daniels is an absolute demon on the defensive end of the court, and with an increased role, I fully expect Daniels to be in the All-Defensive conversation this year.

He is precisely what Atlanta needs: an All-Defensive guard who can provide cover for Young, be a 2nd side playmaker and thrive as a cutter when Young draws ten defensive eyes.

Sometimes, it’s just a matter of fit. Murray was a square peg trying to fit into a round hole in Atlanta. His game and skillset were too established and versatile to play the reduced on-ball role needed next to Young.

Young is like an aircraft carrier within the Atlanta offense. Everything comes to him. Daniel's game is ideally crafted to fit and be amplified by the defensive attention Young commands. His cutting and defensive energy will endear him as a fan favorite in Atlanta, and I suspect his biggest fan will be Young.

Last year, during the 23/24 season, Atlanta gave up 120.5 points per game; only Washington gave up more.

They ranked in the bottom 5 in the league in:

1. Opponents Made FGs.
2. Opponents Made Threes.
3. Opponents FG% and 3P%.

They know they’re allowed to try on that end of the court, right?! Daniels will help here, but he’s not a silver bullet.

I guess I’m banking on the fact that it can’t get worse on that end of the floor, can it?

Despite the abysmal defensive stats, their two most expensive players not fitting together, and lousy injury luck (MIP candidate Jalen Johnson missed 26 games due to injury), these Atlanta Hawks still amassed 36 wins.

With 19 games against Detroit, Brooklyn, Charlotte, and Chicago, this Atlanta squad has plenty of opportunities for wins.

Prediction: This team will easily cover the 35.5.

Don’t forget that Atlanta is circled on the calendar for players; we’re not talking about a road trip to Cleveland or Milwaukee. The city of Atlanta will always provide a few wins a year.

Milwaukee - 50.5 (OVER)

The 23/24 Bucks produced 49 wins during one of the most turbulent off-court seasons from a contender since the Brooklyn Nets employed KD and Kyrie.

Within a 365-day window, Milwaukee turned its world upside down multiple times:

• Championship-winning former coach; fired.
• New coach with a second-place record after 43 games; fired.
• The newly hired coach publicly says he didn’t want to take the job.
• Newly acquired superstar Damian Lillard begins his divorce proceedings.
• Kris Middleton’s comeback from surgery is less than ideal.

Some of this harm was self-inflicted, while others were out of their control. Either way, the damage was done, but even with said damage, this team still produced 49 wins.

Milwaukee’s Core 5 are the same as last year: Giannis, Dame, Lopez, Middleton, and Portis. The optimistic view would be that the growing pains of learning to play together have subsided, paving the way for cohesive and exciting basketball in the land of Beer and Cheese.

Lord knows low-hanging fruit is available to Milwaukee via an uptick in the Giannis and Dame two-man game volume.

No matter how poorly the previous 365 days went in Milwaukee, Horst and his staff knocked this offseason out of the park. Significantly upgrading the ancillary parts around the Bucks Core 5 players:

1. Malik Beasley → Gary Trent Jr.
2. Patrick Beverly → Delon Wright
3. Jae Crowder → Taurean Prince

All three of these swaps are massive upgrades for regular and postseason basketball; this Milwaukee team is a legitimate threat to win an NBA title.

1. Trent Jr. gives you a close enough facsimile to Beasley shooting-wise, plus a little more ball-handling and creation as a 2nd side playmaker.
2. Wright was hidden away from the casual NBA fan during his time in D.C., but sickos like me who watched Washington games saw he was outstanding. He consistently plays adult basketball, and his defensive tenacity and offensive self-awareness fit perfectly into what this Milwaukee team is all about.
3. Apex Jae Crowder is a better player than Prince; the only problem is that version of Crowder never made it out of Phoenix. Prince will be tasked with being an innings eater in the 3&D role to take the wear and tear off Middleton, Giannis, and Portis.

Add up the coaching and player continuity, *hopefully* injury regression, and the three role-player swaps, and you’ve got a 53+ win team.

Prediction: Milwaukee covers the over, and it’s not coming down to the wire; they’ll cover it with room to spare.

Charlotte - 29.5 (Over)

Adult basketball is coming to The Queen City—well, at least the most adult version Charlotte has seen in quite some time.

For the first time in a long time, Charlotte will have a group of players who are capable of playing adult basketball AND staying healthy at the same time.

In previous seasons, Charlotte had the necessary veterans, but they couldn’t stay healthy enough to play the minutes required to influence the younger players.

Add in the considerable generational divide between Steve Clifford and the Gen-Z-heavy roster, and it was a recipe for a complete detachment from any “care factor” on the court.

Hiring Charles Lee dramatically changes the status quo in Charlotte:

• His success in Boston will give him the cachet needed to get total buy-in from the young vets on the roster.
• The Charlotte offense will no longer be in the league's bottom half in 3PA per game.

Guys like Grant Williams, Miles Bridges (he’s pretty good at basketball, and I guess the NBA is okay with him playing), Cody Martin, and Josh Green know that winning here will cement their status in the league and almost guarantee they will reach the 10-year pension mark.

These young vets will be expected to be the adults in the room, setting the standard for young talent like Ball, Williams, and Miller.

Miller is the crown jewel prospect, a 6’9" wing who’s shown he has the potential to become an apex predator1 wing that every NBA team is constantly falling over themselves to acquire.

If Miller can take the second-year leap, a common trend among superstars, he will establish Charlotte as a serious team—something the Queen City has longed for since the days of Zo, Mugsy, and LJ.

Prediction: Over. Miller leaps; Lee pops as a coach, and serious basketball is returning to Charlotte (at some point in the future).

Orlando - 47.5 (3U Under)

Orlando snuck up on teams early last year. They weren’t just the hunter; they were camouflaged, sneaking up on their prey. This season that won’t be the case; everyone sees them coming, and they will get their opponent’s full attention nightly.

Orlando plays hard every game, which is not always a common trait during the NBA’s grueling 82-game season. Mosley has complete buy-in from his guys; you can see it on full display anytime you turn on an Orlando game; his guys would run through a brick wall for him!

This commitment to Mosley and playing hard every game helped Orlando dominate opponents during the 23/24 season in statistical categories that reflect their punch-first nature:

• Free Throws Attempted - First.
• Fouls Drawn - First
• Steals - 5th

At some point, their shooting becomes too much to overcome; you must be able to shoot the ball as a team.

Calling Orlando’s shooting numbers anemic is an understatement. Here’s a snapshot of the Orlando shooting shortcomings during the 23/24 season:

• 3 Pointers Made - Last.
• 3 Pointers Attempted - Second to Last.
• 3 Point Percentage - 24th.
• Turnovers - 24th.

To summarize, they don’t shoot many threes and don’t shoot them well—not exactly a potent combination in today's NBA. And yes, the turnovers are related to the shooting. Too often, Orlando players will turn down open shots and force drives into compressed defenses.

This commitment to Mosley and playing hard every game helped Orlando dominate opponents during the 23/24 season in statistical categories that reflect their punch-first nature:

• Free Throws Attempted - First.
• Fouls Drawn - First
• Steals - 5th

At some point, their shooting becomes too much to overcome; you must be able to shoot the ball as a team.

Calling Orlando’s shooting numbers anemic is an understatement. Here’s a snapshot of the Orlando shooting shortcomings during the 23/24 season:

• 3 Pointers Made - Last.
• 3 Pointers Attempted - Second to Last.
• 3 Point Percentage - 24th.
• Turnovers - 24th.

To summarize, they don’t shoot many threes and don’t shoot them well—not exactly a potent combination in today's NBA. And yes, turnovers are directly related to turning down shots and forcing drives into compressed defenses.

No one was a bigger culprit of these turnovers than Paolo Banchero, who finished in the Top 10 during the regular season with 3.1 per game and led the playoffs with 4.6 per game.

Unless something has drastically changed within Banchero’s shooting mechanics or his appetite for taking three-point shots has shifted, I can’t see this team making a giant leap forward.

Prediction: Under, by a hair. This one will be a sweat till the final day of the season. Mosley’s guys play hard, and in the NBA, that’s worth at least .500 when you have decent talent. Plus, they play Brooklyn, Washington, and Detroit twelve times.

Assuming Jokic is healthy as per usual.. given Murray’s Olympic struggles and/or injury, what’s your worst case scenario for the nuggets?

I’m not suggesting it’s the most likely scenario. But if Murray turns into Wiggins 2.0 where he’s not a useful piece, or at least not a reliable piece, what do you think the nuggets win total looks like at the end of the regular season? Are they still 50+? Is there a world where they drop down to a 500 team?

If you’ve got OKC and Dallas at the top, maybe Minnesota still. Grizzlies could be on a big comeback.

I look at the clippers/lakers/suns/warriors/kings and wonder where the nuggets land? They’re down Bruce brown and KCP from their championship year and Murray seems a lot shakier than you’d like to see.

Am I crazy? Are they a top 4 lock? Top 6? Or is there a world where they’re fighting it out in the play-in?

A player's perspective can change in an instant. Whether it's over a season, a playoff series, or a single game, a player's image can change for better or for worse.

For example, in the 2020/21 season, Trae Young's popularity increased as he led the Atlanta Hawks to the Eastern Conference finals. During this journey, he defeated the defensively-minded Knicks in the 1st round and overcame the favoured Philadelphia 76ers in the 2nd round before eventually losing to the eventual NBA Champions, the Milwaukee Bucks.

Since then Trae Young’s career in terms of image has been in limbo. With back-to-back 1st round exits and just recently missing the playoffs entirely.

Since the ECF run, a handful amount of players in the PG position have emerged such as Jalen Brunson, De’aaron Fox, and Ja Morant. Such players have provided much competition to Trae Young’s standing in the Point Guards list.

Even despite putting up very good numbers his recent lack of team success compared to his contemporaries is underwhelming. In constant arguments with other guards the constant pro argument for Trae is “Well he took the Atlanta Hawks to the Eastern Conference Finals in 2021”

So my question is how long can a player hold onto a moment?

I’m a Wolves fan. I love Kat because he is an amazing personality, but he’s so hard to watch play sometimes. I always defended him because I do think he’s talented, but I could see his flaws.

Pretty much everyone talked about how much of a liability he is throughout the playoffs this last year. He fouls out, has poor turnovers and cracks under pressure.

On the flip side I’ve seen Randle ranked over Towns on pretty much every power forward ranking list. And I’ve always agreed. Look at the stats the last five years. Randle has been a 2nd and 3rd team all pro over the last five years. Towns has made a single third team all pro in that time. Randle has been much healthier as well.

Within the blink of an eye Towns has become this elite game changer because he was traded to the Knicks. It’s actually funny. And on the flip side Randle is all of the sudden a nobody? Oh and Divi is basically nothing?

I think it’s obvious the Wolves have gotten better and deeper with this trade. Again, Randle has been better the last five years ago and Divi just had 18ppg on 41% three point shooting during the playoffs.

Someone who truly believes how the Wolves lost this trade please break it down for me.

I’m more of an NFL fan, but pay more attention to the NBA than the average fan. In the NFL, you see many assistant HC’s(offensive/defensive coordinator’s) be given the chance to be head coaches because of the potential they show, but also the fact that there’s intriguing unknowns that head coaches with lengthy resumes already just don’t have. You already know what you’re getting with certain coaches which then creates no room for stardom potential imo unless that team and coach was just a superior fit than before which happens from time to time. Though, more than likely, hiring a coach with a history of mediocrity will likely result in mediocrity sooner than later.

My question now, why don’t NBA teams take chances on younger assistants who show potential or even an assistant HC who’s intriguing.

It it just a difference in dynamics between the sports? I’d rather assume it’s relatively similar? Scheming up offensive plays, having a good defensive scheme, being able to know when to rotate players or not, knowing your strengths and weaknesses, being able to manage a team, knowing the potential in players, etc.

Would love to hear everyone’s opinion on this

I've seen these two discussed as two major "what-ifs" but if you look at their European league stats. Drazen actually putscores Sabonis overall. Euroleague is known for having slower pace and shorter time. Yet Petrovic was scoring 30+ ppg in euroleague during the 1980s. So was Petrovic considered the best player in Europe in that time period? Or were the two of them seen as peers?

Basically I'm writing a media theoretical undergrad paper on how sports statistics and analytics are not purely representative, but also contain programs of action for athletes. The obvious reason for that is that they have an individual interest to represent themselves in their (statistical) representations (an obvious case would be through stat padding), but I'm starting to wonder if that thesis is expandable.

Statistically tracked categories like Rebounds, Assists etc. are part of the NBA rule book, and I'm starting to wonder if the rulebook sets the standards for sports statistics, or sports statistics and analytics "define" these categories first, which then become part of our ways of understanding the game, and the NBA then implements rules picking them up to improve the game. Basically a chicken and egg problem.

Of course the answer does not have to be black and white, but I'm wondering if someone has an idea if that thesis holds any merit whatsoever, and where I could find answers to this question.

Looking for some help in regards to particular information regarding stats, specifically the technical definition of stats where they give data around a situation. For instance, "wide open" = no one within 6'; "open" = no one within 3'. Questions would include: I know stats are collected for designations like "PnR Ball Handler" and "Isolation", but what circumstances for these? I get the general case here, but if the ball handler ignores the screen or the screener slips the screen, then at what point is it no longer considered a PnR? Are there other designations like these that are out there and we know the technical definitions?

Also when does the outcome of the play no longer affect these stats? For instance, if Player A is determined to be a PnR ball handler but that goes nowhere and the entire O resets after a few seconds to to Player B determined to have an Iso, then does that the outcome of Player B's iso affect Player A's PnR Ball Handling stats? What determines where this cutoff is? (IIRC, it's a number of passes, but I figure someone will know exactly...)

For now, I'm more interested in where these edge cases lie but where is the best place to source this data? What is the best link to get there?

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.

I know Marcus Smart won just two years ago but it seems that was more of an anomaly compared to something that can be replicated. It was a result of voter fatigue (Gobert) + injuries (Green) combined with the media overly attributing the Celtics defensive success to a perimeter player rather than their anchor(Robert Williams.)

The reason I ask is this: Rudy Gobert's reputation just keeps getting pulled through the mud. From being pulled in playoff games to being pulled in Olympic games. I understand a lot of it isn't his defensive woes but rather his offensive inability but the media often runs with former argument in all aspects despite stats and eye test saying otherwise. But with that said, I feel going forward the media will be more critical of having players dominating the DPOTY award. When Ben Wallace and Dwight won 4 and 3 respectively, nobody was questioning whether or not they deserved it. If anything, a lot believed both deserved to win more. Kawhi Leonard winning b2b DPOTY also garnered a lot of controversy with many believing that Draymond deserved to win in 2015. In fact, Green actually finished with 8 more 1st place votes but 16 fewer overall points. But most people agreed that both players were deserving players.

I've never seen more controversy around an award than Rudy Gobert over the past few years. Statistically, Gobert deserved his DPOTYs. Same goes for the eye test. But in the social media age and age of viral clips, it takes just a few minutes of low-lights to define a player's game. We saw Curry and Harden make Gobert dance which led the narrative that Gobert is a liability on the perimeter. A few years later, we saw the Clippers run a 5 out offense which forced Gobert to be stuck in no-man's land debating between helping his teammates getting killed by every drive/cut or close out on his man. This narrative led to it being "easy to beat a Gobert led defense." We saw just recently with Jokic looking unstoppable against Gobert in single coverage and Gobert "can't guard the post" and then in the WCF, we saw Luka hit a game winner against Gobert and exploit the defense.

In 2022, it was probably the perfect scenario with everything falling into place. But in the Finals we ended up seeing how exploitable a top tier perimeter defender was. Statistically, having a Gobert switch onto you isn't an efficient offensive possession despite what the media and highlights say. It's a lot harder to get Gobert out the play due to how much room he covers. But with Marcus Smart, the Warriors constantly ran DHO and screens to get Smart off of Curry often with little resistance. Though, the Celtics scheme didn't really do them any justice either as they do prefer to switch everything. However, there were possessions when they did attempt to fight through screens (at least later on in the series.) The Warriors would then just repeat their DHO motions until they'd get a favorable matchup which would then draw Smart away from the play. As good as a help defender Marcus Smart is, a 6'9 wingspan perimeter player will not be able to cover as much of the court as a bigger, longer defender. We saw something similar with the Spurs and Kawhi Leonard when teams would put whoever Kawhi is guarding into the corner and out of the action and run a 4v4 offense.

What I'm asking is what kind of impact do you think a future backcourt player would need to be to win DPOTY? Or what kind of changes to the game would be required to also have it happen?

The KAT trade to the Knicks got me thinking about this, and I thought I'd ask the masses what y'all think.

On one hand, you have players that are complete freaks at their position, create huge mismatches no matter who they are playing against, and can naturally fit in to just about any team. Wemby is the perfect modern example. Prime KD and Lebron (and even modern versions of them, to a degree) are similar. Players who you can just add to the team, knowing they will fit just fine and likely make the team better.

But then there's the flip side, guys who are so talented, but you HAVE to build the perfect team around in order to succeed. I think KAT is a prime example of this type of player, and I'm honestly bummed for him that he didn't get a chance to gel a bit longer with ANT (whom I think was a really good pairing with him).

What other guys are prime "yeah, but..." players, where the only way you feel like they transcend into the monsters they can be is when they had (or eventually have) the perfect team around them?

In the wake of the recent Karl-Anthony Towns trade to the New York Knicks, I do have the better petition for every player around the NBA in the era of the new Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) and that is to just accept any team-friendly contracts instead of demanding for more money and this should also to generational superstars like LeBron, Steph, and KD as an example to don't let ego get in their way and just accept that certain less money.

We are in the era of the new CBA where the second apron was implemented for certain teams around the league to avoid getting over the luxury tax for consecutive years and this is why the LA Clippers lost Paul George for nothing, the Denver Nuggets lost Kentavious Caldwell-Pope in back-to-back offseasons in addition to losing Bruce Brown last offseason so they can avoid getting over the second apron which means their first round pick will be somewhere around the bottom of the draft.

Losing KAT from the Timberwolves perspective really sucks, we all know that, but we are in a reality where Commissioner Adam Silver simply wants to clamp down any future instances of certain teams around the league forming more superteams because of what we saw in the 2016 offseason where Kevin Durant joined the Golden State Warriors which is why Commissioner Silver implemented the "Kevin Durant 'Super Max' Rule" in the first place which pays a player about 35% of the cap + 8% salary increase each year but they have to meet some criteria like they must reach their 8th or 9th season, must be with the team that drafted them or the team that acquire that certain player is still under their rookie contract.

In addition, they must fill 1 of the 3 criteria which are the following:

1. Make the All-NBA team in either the season they immediately before signing the extension, or 2 of the 3 previous seasons

2. Win DPOY in either the seasons immediately before signing the extension, or 2 of the 3 previous seasons.

3. Win MVP at least once in the previous 3 seasons

This "Super Max Rule" was done in order to give advantage to small market teams to keep their homegrown superstars as they offer them most money. So that's all I got. To every team's front office and upper management around the league, please convince every single player to have the will to accept lesser money if they want to stick around and continue to play with that certain team in the new CBA era.

As a warriors fan in 2024 heading into the season. I am cautiously optimistic/realist. i know the team isnt a contender by any stretch, they are IMO pretty firmly in the play in. But like many teams (not all though) there are loads of questions about this roster, there is some healthy expectation for internal growth amongst the 4 core players they drafted.

But as the reality of the summer continued PG off the board, Lauri off the board etc. One begins to try out those players whos salary makes them heavily undesirable (looking at you zach lavine) in the trade machine "just to see"

Moving beyond the biggest names the ones weve all heard. Digging through each roster, trying to find Steph Curry some help (not like overall help they actually have TOO much help RN and redundant help at that) specifically someone who can fill the role as a shot creator beside steph.

I am thinking of young players like Immanuel Quickley–this sort of player. But not so obvious lol?

For example the first one that comes to mind is Colin Sexton. He is a pretty solid player, pretty good splits. Has shown utility a bit on the ball. Think Terry Rozier, Tyler Herro. (ideally actually theyre not all guards though)

Basically budget zach lavine

Who are these players? Were talking the 2nd/3rd option on tanking teams. Maybe a bench scorer on a play off/in team.

Collin sexton i think could help the warriors in this area. very far from perfect, and overlaps with a lot of positional need, but can handle the ball play on or off and create some shots

One of the most confusing things about this move was that they traded KAT to one place where they couldn’t get point guard depth.

Conley is incredibly important for their half-court offense, as we did see in the playoffs. Conelly did trade up to get Rob Dillingham but his profile seems terrible to fit into the Mike Conley role. He’s a rookie combo guard, and even if he pans out, his biggest strength seems to be his shot making, which Wolves now have plenty.

So what are their options now, considering that Conley is turning 37 and could easily regress or get injured. Giving and of the Ant/Donte/Rob starting PG minutes sounds like it would make their half-court offense significantly worse. Do they still do it, and hope that better shooting and defense make up for it?

Fairly often DPOY goes to the best defensive player on the best defensive team. This is not always true, but it tends to happen. It is almost unheard of for a player to win DPOY on a bad or average defensive team, but Victor Wembanyana was not that far away from doing this last year. There is also a tendency for defensive reputation to take time and if you have a great defensive season it might not be until your second or third time doing it to fully get recognition for being a great defensive player. This is especially true if you are a great defensive player, but you are not putting up massive block and steal numbers that everyone can see, so this does not really apply to Victor.

Overall though, I think the leading candidate should be the reigning DPOY Rudy Gobert. Minnesota had by far the best team defense last year and although they lost a good defensive player in Slo-Mo I still expect them to be the best defense in the league next year. Rudy Gobert has the reputation and my main hesitancy is that voter fatigue is likely high for giving Rudy Gobert another DPOY award. The new Randle trade will also add some uncertainty, but I expect this to be a fairly neutral move defensively. I felt a lot more confident in them being the top defense before the trade though, just because change is hard to predict. They may not be contenders for the top defense though if Randle is traded away.

OKC also has a very good chance of having the best defense in the league next year. They have great continuity, their young players will likely improve, and both the additions of Caruso and Hartenstein are both massive defensive upgrades. I could easily see the case for them being the leading candidate for having the best defense in the league. The main issue for them is that they have 4 players with a reputation for being great defensive players in Caruso, SGA (lead league in steals last year), Dort, and Chet Holmgrem. My guess is that either SGA or Chet will get most of the credit and votes, but I am really not sure which one will dominate or if they will split the votes and hurt their chances of winning.  They were 4th in defensive net rating last year.

Orlando, Boston, Miami, Cleveland, Houston, and the Knicks are the other teams that I think have a chance to be the top defense. In Orlando almost no one has the reputation of being a great defensive player even though they had the second best defense last year and Im not sure anyone has the name recognition yet to win the award. Maybe Jalen Suggs and KCP have a chance, but I think its slim. The addition of KCP will also be a boost to their defense. 

Boston was 3rd in defensive rating last year and is also full of good defensive players and I think it's hard to know who the media would vote for. Likely either Holiday or Derrick White. I also think their defense might slip due to them maybe caring less during the regular season after winning the chip. Also Horford and Holiday are another year older and may slip a bit defensively. 

Miami I think is likely to get slightly worse next year, but if they do have a top 2 defense then Bam would likely have a very good chance at winning the award. I do not see this as likely and they were 5th in defensive rating last year and I expect them to be slightly worse this year.

Cleveland actually has a pretty good chance at being the top defense if both Jarret Allen and Even Mobley play full seasons. I think the media would likely give most of the credit to Evan Mobley and he would win the award, but Jarret Allen might also get some attention.  Last year with pretty bad injury luck they were 6th in defensive rating.

Houston were 9th last year and are adding Steven Adams and will have some improvement from young players, so I expect them to be a better team defensively, but I am not sure they will make it all the way to the top, but they have a chance. Jabari, Adams, and Dillon Brooks would all likely get attention for this, but I think Steven Adams would get most of the credit by the media for being the new addition that pushed them over the top and already having a good defensive reputation. 

The Knicks were 10th last year in defensive rating, but have made some upgrades to their team. Its hard to tell though how much swapping Hartenstein for Mikal Bridges will help or hurt them though on defense. I don't think its likely they are the top defense, but they have a shot. I am also not really sure whether OG or Bridges would get most of the credit if they do pull this off. 

There is a fairly good chance though that for the first time I can remember a player wins DPOY that is not leading a top 5 defensive team and his name is Victor Wembanyana. His defensive stats are monstrous and I think the SAS will improve on defense next year, but even with massive improvement it will be difficult for them to be a top 10 defensive team in the league, let alone competing for the top spot. Victor is so popular though and puts up such crazy stats and defensive highlights that the voters may not care and very well might give it to him anyway. They were 22nd in team defense last year, but showed improvement throughout the year.

Title is the question. Me personally I don’t know why the hell the Knicks did this. If you ask me KAT was just a better/more proven version of Julius Randle and they lose Donte in this trade along with a first round pick (it’s a lottery protected pistons pick so that thing is never gonna convey to Minnesota but the Knicks could have used this at the deadline to add someone) I just feel like this was pointless for the Knicks

As for Minnesota I think this is good trade. They’re most likely going to move Randle to another team soon according to Shams and they’re probably going to get at least a first rounder and contributor for Randle. By trading Kat they will open up the 4 position for Naz Reid and get a player and pick they could use in a further down the line trade. They also get Donte who’s gonna help with the spacing they lose from KAT. For a team that got forced into trading KAT because of the cap I think the Wolves didn’t do terrible

🚨Update🚨 Minnesota has had discussions with the Hawks and Heat on a Randle deal according to several T-Wolves reporters. They don’t expect him to be traded immediately but probably about a week-ish from now since they want to hear offers on Randle

Feel free to add whatever your thoughts are on the trade in the comments

So it appears the knicks and the twolves are close to agreeing in a huge trade that sends Julius Randle and 2 first round picks to the Twolves for Karl Anthony Towns!!

This is crazy big to be, as Towns will move back to playing Center with the Knicks and give them a huge advantage on the offensive end! No he is not a great defensive anchor but with all those wing defenders he should suffice, especially with an offense that has 5 guys that can hit 3s at a near 40% clip or better!!

I'm not sure how i like it for the wolves. Randle is underrated overall and a pure power forward that does fit the team as a secondary playmaker and shot creator that plays inside and can hit the three. They'll also get 2 first rounders though they'll likely be in the 20s of the first round. I also assume they get one more player to make the contracts work, I've read Divencenzo was in the trade then not... he would really help the depth of minny.

I'm just very surprised this trade is actually happening and I think it brings the Knicks right there with the Celtics ... if not just behind them. I think it's a big question mark for the Twolves but Randle could surprise and be a sleeper team. They also have Naz Reid the 6th man if the year who can play both PF and C.

What do you all think? Does this make the Knicks better? The same? Worse?

While the question is self-explanatory, i will add context. I am currently researching into the commercialization of basketball, and while it is easy to find about already popular talking points (Jordan, globalization, broadcasting, expansions, mass media, emphasis on star players and marketing of them) what are the little things not really known by the average public that were important for NBA to become such a powerful money making machine?

Just to clarify because it's a confusing title. So I noticed this discussion in a social media post about Paolo Banchero; How he's becoming one of the most underrated stars in the NBA and nobody is talking about him or how he "carried the Magic to the 5th seed." One of the responses basically claimed he was fairly rated or, potentially, overrated because of people's desire to label one player as the main reason for a team's success.

Basically if you look into it, while Paolo was the Magic's best offensive player, the Magic were a bottom 10 offense that played at a really slow pace, drew a lot of fouls,and just a flat out horrible scoring team. On the other hand, they were 2nd best defense in the NBA, 3rd best defensive rebounding team and best team at forcing opponent turnovers. Paolo wasn't really a key cog in any of their defensive success. He wasn't bad but players like Jalen Suggs, a relatively healthy Johnathan Isaac, a great shot deterring center rotation between Goga and Wendell Carter Jr, and other good defensive role players contributed more to the defensive end. I don't watch many Magic games so I can't comment too much and I really don't know.

But point is, how many other teams in NBA history have this sort of description? Where people want to credit a player for a much larger amount of success than they're actually responsible for? Or potentially downplaying the teammates because none of them stand out as much as the star player (either on offense or on defense.)

Thunder

Previous Wins: 57

Major additions: Caruso, Hartenstein

Subtractions: Josh Giddey

Young players expected to grow: Chet, Dort, Jalen Williams, Cason Wallace, Isaiah Joe, Jaylin Williams

Regression Candidates: No one 

PTS/G: 120.1 (3rd of 30) Opp PTS/G: 112.7 (11th of 30)

SRS: 7.36 (2nd of 30) Pace: 99.8 (8th of 30)

Off Rtg: 119.5 (3rd of 30) Def Rtg: 112.1 (4th of 30) Net Rtg: +7.4 (2nd of 30)

Expected W-L: 58-24 (2nd of 30)

Thoughts:

One knock on OKC I could think of is that it was that it was a really healthy year for the team overall last year and they may not be so lucky this year, but this team is at least 11 deep with solid players, so they probably are fine with a few more injuries in the regular season.

They lack a proven secondary playmaker and struggled when SGA was out last year (record 2-5), but the hope would be that one of the young players takes a leap forward this year and can fill/grow into that role.

There is also a question of how much Chet and Hartenstein will be able to play together. Clearly Hartenstein is a much better backup center than who they had before, but we will have to see if they are able to play effectively together. Moving Chet to the 4 might take him away from his greatest strength of protecting the rim and it is yet to be seen how much if at all they will be able to play together effectively.

Caruso is an upgrade from Giddey last year in terms of what they need and Hartenstein was very impressive last year (14th highest EPM in the league, 27th highest BPM) and they lost nothing. 

If relatively healthy, I expect this team to win around 60 games and if everything goes their way it might even be 65+ wins, but a lot of it also depends on how much OKC wants to win in the regular season and how much time they give to project players like Ousmane. It might only take fifty something wins to be the best team in the west and OKC might not care to win more than that. The year GSW broke the regular season wins record they had the SAS pushing them all season winning like 66 games and there is a chance no other team in the west is really pushing OKC to win every possible game.

I think Caruso and Hartenstein are going to fit in seamlessly and at least one of the young players will take a big leap this year, not sure which one, but it seems likely at least one of them will.

If Boston follows the trend of championship teams not caring as much in the regular season I think OKC might pretty easily be the best regular season team in the league.

I will note that I do not think that means they will be the best playoff team. Being 11 deep is a lot more helpful for winning in the regular season than in the playoffs and they do not have the playoff experience yet that other contenders do.

I actually think there is a good chance Sam Presti consolidates assets and trades for an upgrade this year because they are just too deep to be giving everyone reasonable minutes for their talent level.

Across the many threads on Rose in the aftermath of his retirement, I'm seeing quite a few edgy Redditors claiming Rose didn't deserve to be MVP in 2011.

Obviously these edgy Redditors don't know too much about basketball beyond BPM/VORP/PER/any other impact metric they don't even understand the calculation of.

Rose's case is stacked:

• Their two main bigs - Boozer and Noah - missed significant time, 23 games and 34 games respectively.

• Rose still led the Bulls to the best record in the league at 62-20.

• He was the entire offense - their offensive rating was 110.9 with him on (equivalent to a top 10 team that year) and 101.2 with him off, which would be WORSE than the WORST offense in the league that year (the Brandon Jennings Bucks)

• He had the best counting stats, plus minus, and on-off splits of anyone in the top 10 of the Bulls' rotation - clear evidence that he was the proverbial "best player on the best team"

• He was the only player in the league in the top 10 in PPG and APG. This was despite the fact that the Bulls played at a low pace (23rd in the league), which depressed his counting stats.

• His advanced stats (for the Reddit "analysts") were good enough for MVP consideration given the context of him completely carrying a team with injuries - 2nd in VORP, 3rd in BPM, 1st in OBPM, 5th in Win Shares.

The voting wasn't even close as Rose received 113 of 121 first place votes. However for good measure let's quickly cover why the other two main candidates didn't deserve it.

LeBron: sure there was a negative media effect from The Decision (and the fact his individual numbers dipped) but ultimately he had two prime star teammates and a host of veteran players and ended up with a worse record in the East. LeBron was more productive per minute, but that didn't translate to a better team outcome than Rose with less help. The Bulls also swept Miami 3-0 in the regular season.

Dwight: led team to 10 fewer wins than the Bulls with a supporting cast that was similar quality to the Magic teams that were championship contenders in 2009 and 2010. Worse advanced stats in BPM and VORP. Magic also went 1-3 vs. the Bulls, confirming the belief that Rose was the best player on a significantly better team.

With that said, considering the relevant contextual factors, Rose was a deserving MVP in 2011. No need to discredit his huge achievement of becoming the youngest MVP in league history.

Westbrook is technically not a bad pickup, but he can't shoot. Nuggets were already not a good shooting team. The nuggets replacing their 3rd best shooter with Reggie Jackson and West Brook is really horrible..

Not to mention, kcp was probably their 2nd best defender, and his ability to play up to keep the offensive player from destroying the jokic at the rim was big.

Their defensive scheme was built on not allowing players to get to rim since if they do, it's a free point (pretty sure opposing players had the highest rim fg against jokic when compared to all centers) Nuggets were 2nd to last in opponent rim fg attempts.

Don't be surprised when teams with paint heavy offenses who were a bad match up against the Nuggets last years suddenly become their best match-up. Ie( pacers and lakers

Nets

Over/Under: 18.5-19.5

Previous Wins: 32 

Major additions: Killian Hayes, Bojan Bogdanovic, Zaire Williams, Maybe Ben Simmons

Subtractions: Mikal Bridges, Spencer Dinwiddie, Royce Oneal, Lonnie Walker, Dennis Smith

Young players expected to grow: Keon Johnson, Trendan Watford, Jalen Wilson, Cam Thomas, Day'Ron Sharpe, Nic Claxton, Killian Hayes

Regression Candidates: Bojan Bogdanovic

Thoughts: lost 5 of their 9 highest minute players last season, so lots of changes. Going to be relying and hoping for growth in a lot of the young players that were in and out of the rotation last season. Of course losing their best player Mikal Bridges as well.

Overall though I think there are lots of young players expected to grow. Cam Thomas and Nic Claxton are likely the future of this team and will lead this team with some solid role players like Bojan and Cam Johnson, and young players that might be reasonable role players next year like Keon, Trendan, Jalen, Sharpe and Hayes. I think there is too much talent here to lose this many games and the betting odds are overvaluing the contribution Mikal bridges made to the team last year. I do not expect them to lose 13 more games than last year due to these changes. 

A wildcard that would help with the over is if Ben Simmons puts up anything close to reasonable production. Not saying the chance is high, but maybe like a 25% chance he can come back and be a solid player for 50 games next season. 

Losing Dinwiddie will hurt as well, but I think Bojan can make up for his production next season likely. 

They also have no rookies to play big minutes, and rookies are almost always a negative their first season even if they are putting up good counting stats.

Why do some players in the NBA, especially those who have played for many years, never really develop into an all-star caliber player and just stayed the same for their whole career? Some of them played reasonable minutes, some even became starters. What’s the main reason they never achieved their full potential? Injuries, opportunity, competition, skill level, etc.?

Im writing an essay in school about the analytics revolution, one of the topics is when Golden STate chose to keep Curry and trade Monta, by now we all know it was the correct decision 100%, but what about situations where it went the other way? Where teams chose to ignore or didnt have access yet to advanced metrics and kept the least efficent player?

Edit: I made this post in a hurry during class and I might've not explained myself correctly. I understand there is a lot of things to consider when evaluating a player and advanced metrics are not the end all be all. What I should've asked, is times that teams chose the Monta Ellis (the one traditional stats would seem ok but would've seen jn the future as inefficient or the archetype would be lost like a slow C or non shooting PF) instead of the efficient shooter or any modern archetype that has now replaced the old style players.

I'll start out by saying that I'm not much of a basketball fan/watcher, but the structure of the NBA intrigues me, especially when it comes to the G League. I watch a lot of the NHL, and they have an equivalent league in the AHL.

The difference I'm curious about is the limit on two-way contracts for the NBA. For the NHL, players can move between the two teams basically whenever. The only thing is that non-entry-contract players have to pass through waivers to be assigned to the AHL affiliate.

I guess I'm wondering why the NBA doesn't do something similar because the current structure feels like it limits how much NBA teams can develop their prospects. I don't think most players would be finished products by the age of 19 so it would make more sense if they could fluidly move between the NBA and the G League so they could get playing time.

Do you think something like this could happen in the future and G League teams could become more full-fledged farm/development teams?

RealGM is doing an update of its Retro Player of the Year Project which ranks the top 5 players (and now the top 3 attackers and defenders) for every season in NBA HISTORY. We're at 1973 but since the posters here claim to have an appreciation of history, I'll catch y'all up one post at a time (we started in year 1950).

Project Purpose

While we create a Ranked List as a part of this project, and that List then becomes an entity we can analyze, it is important to understand that the List itself is not the primary purpose of the project.

The project's purpose is to encourage deep thought among those who participate and read by forcing participants to consider players in depth thread-by-thread and having them make arguments and debate along the way.

And the hope in doing this is to build a community and that community's institutional knowledge.

Project Details:

• Original RPOY started in 2010
• All prospective participants had to say they wanted to vote before the 1970 thread closed barring a long history of participation in previous projects (no one has been admitted post-deadline yet). 32 voters are registered.
• Unlike 2010, Voters can also vote for the 3 best defensive players and 3 best offensive players
• One can vote for OPOY, DPOY or POY separately or together
• POY Ballots needed to include 5 players with a bare-minimum level of reasoning to be valid. OPOY and DPOY needed 3. Project results for any of the three only become official if there's at least 5 valid ballots.
• Voters voted to not count 2010 ballots in votes and to have 2014 be the final year voted on.
• Voters have at least 3 days to submit ballots. Project Runner said they were okay extending the deadline if discussion is alive.

Thread Info

• Season: 1950
• 11 people voted for POY
• 8 people voted for DPOY
• 7 people voted for OPOY

Thread Link

Results

POY

1. George Mikan (1.000)

T-2. Dolph Schayes (.591)

T-2. Alex Groza (.591)

4. Bob Davies (0.118)

5. Jim Pollard (0.073)

OPOY

1. George Mikan (0.886)
2. Alex Groza (0.657)
3. Dolph Schayes (.200)

DPOY

1. George Mikan (1.000)
2. Annie Risen (.225)
3. Al Cervi (.200)

Topics for 49-50

• Mikan Dominates
• Data/Film Scarcity
• Risen underrated?
• How did no shot-clock affect game play?

I understand how the gather step works and it requires precise footwork and skill to abuse the rule like so many NBA players are capable of today. But what is the logistical reason of making that step the zero step? Why not just make the gather step one like how everyone else plays basketball? Fiba also adopted that rule as the zero step. So I’m guessing some teams in Europe and a lot of international play follow that rule. I don’t think Fiba did it to accomodate the NBA but I could be wrong, so there must be a logical reason.

One thing I saw was that the NBA also uses the gather step rule off the catch on the run. So that’s why you can take two steps off the catch without dribbling and make a layup or pass which to me seems fine. That might be a reason why the gather step doesn’t count as a step, but why not make a rule to distinguish between a pass gather and dribbling gather.