Minnesota Sports Forum

khans2k5 wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:I think Khans is shortchanging Indiana a bit.

It's not like Oladipo wasn't around for the first part of the season.

The East has four legit teams... that are as good as anybody in the West, sans GSW. Milwaukee, Toronto, Philadelphia and Boston are very good.

Indiana is pretty good. Granted... everybody else sucks balls to various degrees.

Those 4 teams are talented. Toronto is the only one of the 4 not in the top 10 of easiest schedules in the NBA. Indiana has had the easiest schedule in the league to date. Philly 21, Milwaukee 22, Boston 26, Indiana 30. So how many extra wins are they getting because of that fact? 3-4. I'm just saying their perceived conference strength is getting a little skewed because they just aren't playing as many trying and tough games that can grind you down as the season goes on.

You're right about the East not being as tough of a grind top to bottom. But whoever finishes first in the conference standings will have finished on top of 4 other really good teams. Better teams than I believe Golden State has to contend with at the top. I think Milwaukee, Toronto, Philly, and Boston are all better than the 2nd best team in the West. No shame in winning the East this year.

CoolBreeze44 wrote:

khans2k5 wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:I think Khans is shortchanging Indiana a bit.

It's not like Oladipo wasn't around for the first part of the season.

The East has four legit teams... that are as good as anybody in the West, sans GSW. Milwaukee, Toronto, Philadelphia and Boston are very good.

Indiana is pretty good. Granted... everybody else sucks balls to various degrees.

Those 4 teams are talented. Toronto is the only one of the 4 not in the top 10 of easiest schedules in the NBA. Indiana has had the easiest schedule in the league to date. Philly 21, Milwaukee 22, Boston 26, Indiana 30. So how many extra wins are they getting because of that fact? 3-4. I'm just saying their perceived conference strength is getting a little skewed because they just aren't playing as many trying and tough games that can grind you down as the season goes on.

You're right about the East not being as tough of a grind top to bottom. But whoever finishes first in the conference standings will have finished on top of 4 other really good teams. Better teams than I believe Golden State has to contend with at the top. I think Milwaukee, Toronto, Philly, and Boston are all better than the 2nd best team in the West. No shame in winning the East this year.

I'm impressed with what Indiana has done this season. They've gone much of the season without their best player, Oladipo. The Pacers are a good example of the difference coaching can make in the NBA. That said, I don't see Indiana among the elite teams in the NBA this season. Golden State remains in a class by itself. After that, I'd put Toronto, Philly, Boston and Denver in the next grouping. Then there are some very good teams, all in the West - OKC, Portland, Houston (if healthy). I agree with Kahns that strength of schedule needs to be accounted for. But I haven't looked at the specific wins and losses to know how much weight to give it when evaluating the top teams in the East. For all I know, some or all of those top 4 East teams have faired particularly well against the better Western Conference teams.

Giannis or Harden I wouldn't argue with either guy winning it. Personally I would take Harden. I just think what he is doing is pretty incredible with all the injuries and guys the roster lost from last year. They have gotten arguably worse since last year and after a terrible start and bunch of injuries they are are in position to fight for home court advantage. Not too shabby.

lipoli390 wrote:

CoolBreeze44 wrote:

khans2k5 wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:I think Khans is shortchanging Indiana a bit.

It's not like Oladipo wasn't around for the first part of the season.

The East has four legit teams... that are as good as anybody in the West, sans GSW. Milwaukee, Toronto, Philadelphia and Boston are very good.

Indiana is pretty good. Granted... everybody else sucks balls to various degrees.

Those 4 teams are talented. Toronto is the only one of the 4 not in the top 10 of easiest schedules in the NBA. Indiana has had the easiest schedule in the league to date. Philly 21, Milwaukee 22, Boston 26, Indiana 30. So how many extra wins are they getting because of that fact? 3-4. I'm just saying their perceived conference strength is getting a little skewed because they just aren't playing as many trying and tough games that can grind you down as the season goes on.

You're right about the East not being as tough of a grind top to bottom. But whoever finishes first in the conference standings will have finished on top of 4 other really good teams. Better teams than I believe Golden State has to contend with at the top. I think Milwaukee, Toronto, Philly, and Boston are all better than the 2nd best team in the West. No shame in winning the East this year.

I'm impressed with what Indiana has done this season. They've gone much of the season without their best player, Oladipo. The Pacers are a good example of the difference coaching can make in the NBA. That said, I don't see Indiana among the elite teams in the NBA this season. Golden State remains in a class by itself. After that, I'd put Toronto, Philly, Boston and Denver in the next grouping. Then there are some very good teams, all in the West - OKC, Portland, Houston (if healthy). I agree with Kahns that strength of schedule needs to be accounted for. But I haven't looked at the specific wins and losses to know how much weight to give it when evaluating the top teams in the East. For all I know, some or all of those top 4 East teams have faired particularly well against the better Western Conference teams.

If that's the case... it also tells us how random finding a difference-making coach is... as well as WHEN a team finds that coach.

Consider Nate McMillan was decent or solid in two previous stints, but not difference-making enough to keep either gig. Even when Indiana promoted him, it was met mostly with "meh ok, coulda been worse."

McMillan has been known largely for one thing... playing at a slow pace. That didn't help defensively in his first 10 years at coach with the team finishing in the bottom half for defensive efficiency every season. But he has had some good offensive teams... which is interesting considering that even the Wolves shoot 3 more three pointers per game than the Pacers...

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:

CoolBreeze44 wrote:

khans2k5 wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:I think Khans is shortchanging Indiana a bit.

It's not like Oladipo wasn't around for the first part of the season.

The East has four legit teams... that are as good as anybody in the West, sans GSW. Milwaukee, Toronto, Philadelphia and Boston are very good.

Indiana is pretty good. Granted... everybody else sucks balls to various degrees.

Those 4 teams are talented. Toronto is the only one of the 4 not in the top 10 of easiest schedules in the NBA. Indiana has had the easiest schedule in the league to date. Philly 21, Milwaukee 22, Boston 26, Indiana 30. So how many extra wins are they getting because of that fact? 3-4. I'm just saying their perceived conference strength is getting a little skewed because they just aren't playing as many trying and tough games that can grind you down as the season goes on.

You're right about the East not being as tough of a grind top to bottom. But whoever finishes first in the conference standings will have finished on top of 4 other really good teams. Better teams than I believe Golden State has to contend with at the top. I think Milwaukee, Toronto, Philly, and Boston are all better than the 2nd best team in the West. No shame in winning the East this year.

I'm impressed with what Indiana has done this season. They've gone much of the season without their best player, Oladipo. The Pacers are a good example of the difference coaching can make in the NBA. That said, I don't see Indiana among the elite teams in the NBA this season. Golden State remains in a class by itself. After that, I'd put Toronto, Philly, Boston and Denver in the next grouping. Then there are some very good teams, all in the West - OKC, Portland, Houston (if healthy). I agree with Kahns that strength of schedule needs to be accounted for. But I haven't looked at the specific wins and losses to know how much weight to give it when evaluating the top teams in the East. For all I know, some or all of those top 4 East teams have faired particularly well against the better Western Conference teams.

If that's the case... it also tells us how random finding a difference-making coach is... as well as WHEN a team finds that coach.

Consider Nate McMillan was decent or solid in two previous stints, but not difference-making enough to keep either gig. Even when Indiana promoted him, it was met mostly with "meh ok, coulda been worse."

McMillan has been known largely for one thing... playing at a slow pace. That didn't help defensively in his first 10 years at coach with the team finishing in the bottom half for defensive efficiency every season. But he has had some good offensive teams... which is interesting considering that even the Wolves shoot 3 more three pointers per game than the Pacers...

Good post Abe. I looked up some various numbers from the last 2 years. Pacers are #2 in defensive efficiency this season!

Yeah, defense can be the great equalizer (to a point). On paper, the Pacers may have one of the more "meh" rosters in the league. Hell, the once maligned Thad Young is their starting PF for God's sake!

Yet, they play consistently great defense. What is the key? Head coach? Turner? A defensive assistant coach guru? Easier schedule? Luck? Who knows. The ability to play good defense in the NBA on a consistent basis is still a pretty big mystery to me. There is some alchemy of factors required that is hard to put a finger on.

Pretty solid two-way stretch-four they have starting in Indiana. Might have at least something to do with their success...

Q12543 wrote:Yeah, defense can be the great equalizer (to a point). On paper, the Pacers may have one of the more "meh" rosters in the league. Hell, the once maligned Thad Young is their starting PF for God's sake!

Yet, they play consistently great defense. What is the key? Head coach? Turner? A defensive assistant coach guru? Easier schedule? Luck? Who knows. The ability to play good defense in the NBA on a consistent basis is still a pretty big mystery to me. There is some alchemy of factors required that is hard to put a finger on.

Myles Turner is getting DPOY buzz.

Sadly, Indiana isn't one of the NBA's tv darlings so I've hardly seen him play this season. We're right back to where these discussions always go... coaching vs. player improvement.

My pragmatic, non-committal mind settles on "a bit of everything"... as you touch on.


[Note: Pro sports is a copycat profession, by and large. If something is effective, other teams are going to try to emulate it. But not everybody has GSW level talent for example. NBA defense usually has a few basic principles... and the success is in the execution from the players.]

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

Q12543 wrote:Yeah, defense can be the great equalizer (to a point). On paper, the Pacers may have one of the more "meh" rosters in the league. Hell, the once maligned Thad Young is their starting PF for God's sake!

Yet, they play consistently great defense. What is the key? Head coach? Turner? A defensive assistant coach guru? Easier schedule? Luck? Who knows. The ability to play good defense in the NBA on a consistent basis is still a pretty big mystery to me. There is some alchemy of factors required that is hard to put a finger on.

Myles Turner is getting DPOY buzz.

Sadly, Indiana isn't one of the NBA's tv darlings so I've hardly seen him play this season. We're right back to where these discussions always go... coaching vs. player improvement.

My pragmatic, non-committal mind settles on "a bit of everything"... as you touch on.


[Note: Pro sports is a copycat profession, by and large. If something is effective, other teams are going to try to emulate it. But not everybody has GSW level talent for example. NBA defense usually has a few basic principles... and the success is in the execution from the players.]

And the blind eye by the officials. Funny how teams like SA, GS, HOU, BOS, and now the Lakers are allowed to continually swat at the ball, but don't get called for half the fouls they commit. I am pretty sure it is in their scouting report. Not sure if they know they will get the benefit, or just figure they will only call so many.

sjm34 wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

Q12543 wrote:Yeah, defense can be the great equalizer (to a point). On paper, the Pacers may have one of the more "meh" rosters in the league. Hell, the once maligned Thad Young is their starting PF for God's sake!

Yet, they play consistently great defense. What is the key? Head coach? Turner? A defensive assistant coach guru? Easier schedule? Luck? Who knows. The ability to play good defense in the NBA on a consistent basis is still a pretty big mystery to me. There is some alchemy of factors required that is hard to put a finger on.

Myles Turner is getting DPOY buzz.

Sadly, Indiana isn't one of the NBA's tv darlings so I've hardly seen him play this season. We're right back to where these discussions always go... coaching vs. player improvement.

My pragmatic, non-committal mind settles on "a bit of everything"... as you touch on.


[Note: Pro sports is a copycat profession, by and large. If something is effective, other teams are going to try to emulate it. But not everybody has GSW level talent for example. NBA defense usually has a few basic principles... and the success is in the execution from the players.]

And the blind eye by the officials. Funny how teams like SA, GS, HOU, BOS, and now the Lakers are allowed to continually swat at the ball, but don't get called for half the fouls they commit. I am pretty sure it is in their scouting report. Not sure if they know they will get the benefit, or just figure they will only call so many.

The Bruce Bowen Principle.

I'm still upset about he was able to tug, grab, push and shove Steve Nash in the final two games of the 2007 Playoffs.

To be fair... a lot of NBA officiating-related things about that series remain upsetting.