Quote:
Originally Posted by mburke05
i dont think its outlandish to say the NBA has become more game theory optimal over the last 20 years, and so assuming that talent levels are constant (when in reality this is impossible to debate because talent is always relative and sample sizes are so small with pro athletes and removing for fluke extreme outliers) or rising (the more real case given nutritional science, kinetics analysis, game flow optimization through system modelling, coaching decision making).
so iggy probably used hyperbole because it's a really uncertain and unprovable hypothesis, but i actually agree with him. (it's easier to say these two teams are better or worse than the last years best two teams or even two years removed; but its much more improvable to use 2 teams from 20 years ago)
nice, high level post burke - said a lot with just a little. some good points.
not that you were, but i would stop far short of putting this spurs team anywhere near the utah teams.
the utah teams were pretty game-theory optimal, despite not shooting as many 3's.
they had the #1 offense in the league with a 112.7 offensive rating, higher than the spurs this year who had 108.3.
and utah's pace was only 89.3 (21st of 29), so they were really grinding it out but still maintained elite efficiency on offense.
keep in mind that in 1998 utah drubbed a 56-win pop/drob/duncan team 4-1 in ecsf, (when drob was still really good), so duncan/pop is not somehow unbeatable by utah - worth a mention so as to not get the perceptions warped by recency....
then the jazz SWEPT the loaded lakers (shaq, kobe, eddie jones, van exel, elden campbell, rick fox, derek fisher, robert horry !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!).
i highly doubt this spurs team would do that well against a team like that.
then the rosters compare in utah's favor.
prime malone (28 PER, 27ppg) > current duncan
stockton (22 PER) more of less = parker 23 PER
hornacek 19 PER = ginobili 19
the supporting casts are a wash (i.e. danny green < shandon anderson even without the 3's - anderson had higher offensive rating and ows) and supporting casts as we know are in large part fillers/placeholders around the guys dictating the action.