2012 General NBA Playoffs Thoughts Thread

[Mike G]

...average playoff offensive efficiency is the lowest since the Pistons won the title in 2004...

The top 13 defensive teams made the playoffs, including 7 as good or better than 101.8, which is what all teams are averaging for playoffs.
Just 9 of the top 13 ORtg teams were in the playoffs.

[Mike G]

In just 1 of 8 first round series did the team getting more rebounds win the series: Ind (45.8 rpg) vs Orl (37.6)
In the 2nd round, the only team that's winning the boards and losing the series is the Lakers (42.0 to 38.3) vs Okla.

The better shooting percentage teams were 8-for-8 in round 1, and 4-4 (so far) in round 2.

The team with fewer turnovers won 7 of 8 series -- exception: Den vs LA.
Both East teams that are leading their 2nd round series also have had more TO.

[Mike G]

Thunder-Lakers:
Westbrook had 5 turnovers in OKC's first playoff game (vs Dal); 5 more over the next 2 games; and just 2 total in his last 4 games.
That's 133 minutes, 76 true shot attempts, 20 assists, and 2 TO.
Thunder averaging just 8.7 individual turnovers per game, to Lakers' 14.

Bynum is averaging > 12 rebounds per 36 in the series, and Perkins gets < 4.
Gasol is out-rebounding Ibaka by merely 11 to 8.5, per 36.

Celts-Sixers:
Garnett seems to be the defacto C for Boston and is getting almost 12 Reb/36, with no other Celt over 7.
Backup Ryan Hollins has 3 boards in 55 min. Stiemsma hasn't played much and has 4 in 24 min.
SF and 7th-man Pietrus has one reb in 59 min. Celts losing on the glass by 3.5 RPG.

Philly starters Hawes, Brand, and Turner all shooting < .400 eff%
Meeks had been almost excised from the rotation, and now he has 29 pts in 41 min., shooting .725

[EvanZ]

If the semi-finals end up being PHI/IND and OKC/SAS, I can imagine that the tv ratings will be the lowest in a long time, except it would be a fantastic pair of series for actual basketball fans who like to watch team-oriented, um, basketball. It would also suggest that small market teams* really can compete by drafting well and having good or great coaching.

*I realize Philly isn't really a "small market", but it also doesn't appear to be a major attraction for top free agents either. I guess I'd call it a second tier market, with the first tier (right now, anyway) consisting of Los Angeles, Miami, and New York.

[Mike G]

Miami averaged 8.9 steals per game in the season; in playoffs they've averaged 9.2 vs NY, 7.5 vs Ind, and after 4 games with Bos, just 5.5 per game.
The Celts got 7.5 in the season, 9.0 vs Atl, 8.1 vs Phl, and now 5.3 vs Miami.

In the season the Celtics were average in opponent steals allowed, and the Heat were tied for 4th worst in the league.
Is it that starters are playing more minutes and taking better care of the ball?
Or are those same starters now too tired to go for steals, due to the extra minutes?

[J.E.]

With all the praise Popovich got this year, and deservedly so, I reaally don't like the fact that he's playing Splitter that many minutes. I know Bonner hasn't shot the ball well this series, but Splitter just seems like a walking illegal screen/stupid defensive foul/offensive interference, with stone hands. More Bonner, Blair or Diaw (who could probably play 5m more each game), please

[Mike G]

During the season, Splitter led the team in FTA/36 min (5.8), just ahead of Duncan; and he hit .691 of them.
In playoffs, he's way up in FTA (9.5/36), twice Duncan's rate; and he's hit just .372 (16 of 43).
Without that going for him, his worth is dulled somewhat.

His foul rate is up about 25% from the season, but Bonner's has about tripled.
Splitter's playoff TO% is down from the RS (17.1 to 12.0), while Bonner's is up (3.8 to 8.1)

[J.E.]

Heat down 4 with 41s to play, Boston in possession. Rondo, a particular bad free throw shooter dribbles it up, never gets fouled and takes a shot ~2s before a shot clock violation.
I have a hard time believing that was optimal from a Heat standpoint.

Don't you have to always foul here, even if the player with the ball shoots >60% on FTs?

[browning]

Heat down 4 with 41s to play, Boston in possession. Rondo, a particular bad free throw shooter dribbles it up, never gets fouled and takes a shot ~2s before a shot clock violation.
I have a hard time believing that was optimal from a Heat standpoint.

Don't you have to always foul here, even if the player with the ball shoots >60% on FTs?

Interesting question.. I don't know the answer , I think its close

Another situation, with 14 seconds left down by 4, JVG was saying Miami should take the 2 if its available and that is what Lebron did.
But, I think you really have to take a 3 there.
If you take a 2, make it a 2 point game and foul. You have to hope they miss 1 free throw. Which seems unlikely against a good team with a good coach because they are going to get it in the hands of a good free throw shooter. Even if they do miss a free throw, you still need to make a 3 after that to extend the game. Seems like you are better off just taking the 3 at 14 seconds. Gives you time to get a long rebound if you miss and puts the game in your control vs having to hope for a missed free throw.

[J.E.]

Another situation, with 14 seconds left down by 4, JVG was saying Miami should take the 2 if its available and that is what Lebron did.
But, I think you really have to take a 3 there.
If you take a 2, make it a 2 point game and foul. You have to hope they miss 1 free throw. Which seems unlikely against a good team with a good coach because they are going to get it in the hands of a good free throw shooter. Even if they do miss a free throw, you still need to make a 3 after that to extend the game. Seems like you are better off just taking the 3 at 14 seconds. Gives you time to get a long rebound if you miss and puts the game in your control vs having to hope for a missed free throw.

This is part of game theory; the problem with _always_ going for the 3 is that, once the defense knows this, they will defend 3s like crazy and your % to hit a 3 drops significantly. I would think you have to mix up 2s and 3s here.

[Mike G]

As with 99% of game situations, you should take what the defense gives you.
But I tend to agree that the value of 3 points (vs 2) is greater than normal.

[browning]

This is part of game theory; the problem with _always_ going for the 3 is that, once the defense knows this, they will defend 3s like crazy and your % to hit a 3 drops significantly. I would think you have to mix up 2s and 3s here.

Yea, you can mix it up during the regular season.. but in a big game you have to choose the best play.
They won't know for sure you are going to take a 3 @ 14 seconds. In fact, Lebron had 1 on 1 against rondo at the top of the key, he could have risen up for a straight on 3 over rondo.

However if you take a 2, get lucky with a missed free throw , and get the ball back with 5 seconds down by 3, they will know 100% that you are going for a 3 then. So you still will need to make a hero 3.

[kjb]

I sorta think that the smart coaching move is to extend the game.

If you're down 4 and miss the 3 with 14 seconds left, the game is effectively over (assuming Boston gets the defensive board -- and, odds are they're going to get it). Because then you still need at minimum two possessions plus multiple missed free throws from the opponent.

You end up in the same situation, of course, with a missed 2, but it's more likely to get a 50-50 2pt shot with Lebron or Wade than it would be to get a 50-50 3pt shot.

My math may be all facacta, but actually the strategies look to be equally farfetched. Figure a .333 chance of making a 3 and a .5 chance of making a 2. Figure that with an 80% free throw shooter, there's about a 36% chance of him missing one (1- 0.8 x 0.8). So, the Heat needed a 3 and a 2 plus a missed FT to tie. Whether you go for the 3 first or the 2 first, it looks like either strategy would have about a 6% chance of succeeding.

Eh -- I'm probably doing something wrong.

[J.E.]

I don't see anything wrong with the math

When it's Rondo though, the chance of missing at least one is 64%, with a 16% that he misses both.

With a 64% of missing at least one, chances of tying seem to be 10.5%

[browning]

My math may be all facacta, but actually the strategies look to be equally farfetched. Figure a .333 chance of making a 3 and a .5 chance of making a 2. Figure that with an 80% free throw shooter, there's about a 36% chance of him missing one (1- 0.8 x 0.8). So, the Heat needed a 3 and a 2 plus a missed FT to tie. Whether you go for the 3 first or the 2 first, it looks like either strategy would have about a 6% chance of succeeding.

Eh -- I'm probably doing something wrong.

I think your math is missing the case where the opponent makes both free throws.
If you make a 2 first then the game is basically over.
If you make a 3 first then you still have a .333 chance at the tie.

so if you go 3 first , the chance is .333 * ((.36 * .5) + (.54 * .333))
Its still not great odds, but it almost double your chances to go for 3 first.
( i hope my math is right there )