this is honestly a pretty reasonable point. a lot of the young teams who win championships aren’t as young as people think. steph and shai were both 27 - the teams around them were younger but it does seem like there needs to be a steadier hand with a bit of experience in the very different atmosphere and intensity of the playoffs.

magic, russell, and walton all won in their first playoffs, but had kareem, cousy, and two time aba round winner maurice lucas to provide a bit of experience (though honestly this makes walton look even more impressive.) it’s hard for a team like the pistons to reestablish themselves within memory of things like that historic losing streak. it’s not that what they’re doing is fraudulent, but this progress should be appreciated in itself and they shouldn’t spiral if they don’t make it to the finals first time. winning takes a while. 

I don’t think I’ve ever seen this many posts about some shit Phil said, even with 11 chips lol

So Thunder repeat is what you’re telling me?

Also the 40-20 rule has been broken before?

You can probably find something that was a “first” like this with many of the NBA champions who did pass the 40-20 rule too though. This is a pretty significant stat sure, but out of the contenders, if it’s not the Thunder, I would not be surprised if the Pistons or Spurs pulled it off. But the inexperience is worrying too. They could both be out before the Conference Finals and I also would not be surprised.

The 40-20 rule is so dumb. It’s not even 100% (91% I believe)

Firsts happen literally every year.

I love my Spurs but I see them panicking and rushing when things get tight. They’ve been able to pull it out recently but I see that being a big detriment in the playoffs.

“Top 2” is subjective to a point. Many times “you know it when you see it”, but that type of framing strikes me as silly. What are you judging by? Scoring? Talent level? Was Klay the 2 for the Warriors? Dray? Parker for the Spurs? Manu? It’s weird to shoehorn people into these arbitrary hierarchies.

If we have to play that game, Wemby and Castle are the top 2 on the Spurs anyway IMO. Castle will dictate their level more than Fox. Very young and green duo. Very talented though. Barnes and Kornet have climbed the mountain. Fox and Vassell are vets, even if not decorated playoff guys. Spurs have some veteran savvy to them, even if they’re a young team.

We have to consider the weird dynamics that kept them out last season too. Not sure exactly where SA was in the standings when Wemby got the blood clot. I think they still had a fair shot to be a play-in or playoff team. From there, who knows? They missed on a technicality in a certain sense. Wemby is a third year guy who has played high intensity international games, including an Olympic final.

What if the rule was first to 40 before 20 in your last 60?

Who is still eligible?

phil jackson is a bitch

I feel like this is similar to people saying it would be unprecedented for a team as young as the Thunder to win last year. And you can find similar lazy heuristics people used to doubt every champion before they won. Celtics don’t have a top 4 guy. Denver’s defense is league average and they don’t have rim protection. The Warriors shoot too many jump shots. Jordan can’t win cause teams need a dominant big man. And so on.

You can find commonalities between all the champions but it’s still such a small group that there’s no way every different way of winning one has been found or seen.

if you want to hold a conversation based on records and stats, you have to come up with something more tangible than “top2”. What if I just decide that the top2 of Pistons this season is Duncan Robinson? Of course I don’t think so, but the point is that you have to define clearly how top2 is decided, whether it is points, playing time, margin, or whatever.

With such little experience between each I expect both will be out in the second round. Maybe the spurs will surprise and reach OKC

Doesn’t “collectively and individually” exclude people like Magic and the 1980 Lakers?

RemindMe! 2 months

I fully expect OKC to repeat, but Pistons and Spurs (barring limited roster turnover and no season ending injuries) should be the finals matchup next season.

The 2004 championship Pistons were 33-20 all we need is Kevin Huerter to turn into Rasheed Wallace.

Pistons fan here. If they make the finals I’ll be exceptionally impressed. Especially that Cade kept it up through three playoff series, or Duren emerged as a go-to second option.

Funny enough, I like Detroit’s chances if they were to meet the Spurs.

Duncan Robinson is ready to lead them back to finals, a familiar place for him.

This is the only reason I don’t have the Spurs as title locks. All the other western playoff teams are battle tested. And in the east a healthy Celtics are going to out class someone. Knicks or Detroit…

,b.. Is mm

>so far in league history since the merger, there has been no NBA champion whose top 2 players, 

the ‘top 2 players’ part makes this a somewhat contrived stat. The 2015 Warriors only had 1 playoff series win (in 2013), prior to winning it all.

If I’m the Spurs, I’d be very worried if the Lakers and Warriors finished 7th and 8th.

If I’m Detroit, I also don’t want to face Giannis in round 1. He can easily win a playoff series by himself.