NBA Playoffs 2012 - Page 231

On June 08 2012 05:35 XaI)CyRiC wrote:


I don't think it's accurate to say that the Lakers and Mavs were built to compete against the Celtics formula.

The Lakers had Kobe, Odom and Bynum prior to BOS getting their big 3, and Gasol was just a great acquisition period. It's not like they were looking at what the Celtics were building and then built up their monster frontcourt and added Kobe in esponse. Also, it's not like they were being unique in that it had been widely accepted (and still is) that talented bigs were/are a valuable commodity.

The Mavs built their team to compete against the Lakers, not the Celtics. The Lakers were the defending champions when they started putting together that championship roster, and they knew they had to get out of the Western Conference before BOS would even become an issue. They already had Dirk and Terry, they got Kidd because he was a great player in general and wanted someone to set up Dirk, and got Chandler and Haywood to counter the Lakers frontcourt.

As for the Celtics formula for this current team, it was basically assembling three HoF players all on one team and build around them with whatever you could afford. Not exactly rocket science. They got lucky with Rondo developing into an allstar PG and Perkins developing into a solid defensive big man, no one expected either to happen at the time. I would go so far as to argue that Rondo and Perkins' development is a direct result of having the big 3 on their team. Rondo was a talented coaching nightmare. Having 3 HoF teammates tends to humble a player and make him fall in line, particularly when KG is one of them. Plus, having three superstars who can knock down perimeter shots and easily score 20 ppg goes a long way towards helping a young PG that can't shoot. Perkins definitely owes a lot of his development to playing alongside KG, and has said so himself. The last piece was Thibodeau providing his brilliant defensive system that worked perfectly with an anchor like KG, and you had a championship roster. The key to their success wasn't "strong inside presence and star players from beyond the line", so much as it was "tank for Oden/Durant -> lottery fail -> Ray is available and McHale just offered KG to Boston/Ainge (just kidding... sort of) -> assembling three superstars that can carry teams on their own = no brainer".

TL;DR - Lakers and Mavs didn't follow Celtics model. Celtics mode is not "strong inside presence and star players from beyond the line" so much as assemble three superstars talents and build around them.

I'm not sure if your description of the Lakers/Mavs/Celtics models (which are quite different by the way) as being "aged" was intended as a criticism, but I believe they can still work and would have been more successful in a normal season with more continuity and fewer injuries.

I'm not ready to write off the Lakers model of having a dominant frontcourt with an elite wing talent as no longer being viable like some others. It's not as insta-win as it once was prior to the anti-Shaq zone defense rules, but I still believe having a dominant frontcourt that can control the paint on both sides of the court is a huge advantage that works particularly well in the postseason. It's not like the Lakers were terrible this season. They were still championship contenders who had performed well and defeated the best teams in the league despite all of the crap they had to deal with. They were still able to give the Thunder a tough time and were pretty close to having a series lead but for fourth quarter collapses that were not due to a lack of speed/athleticism. If it wasn't for the salary cap/financial issues and the chemistry issues with Gasol post-CP3 trade, I would fully support the Lakers making another run with this roster while replacing some of the role players and giving the team and their coach/system a full regular season to familiarize themselves with each other. I'll still take a dominant frontcourt who can score in the post over a talented backcourt that scores along the perimeter.

The Mavs system is actually not that different from the Thunder system, which isn't surprising because both were built to beat the Lakers. Both teams put together a big and tall frontcourt that could keep the Lakers frontcourt under control on defense, and got a strong wing defender to defend Kobe. On offense, both teams surrounded their superstars with 3pt shooting to counter the Lakers frontcourt. I firmly believe the Mavs of last season would have been championship contenders this season as well, but that team got gutted to chase Deron and/or D12. It was the loss of Barea and Chandler more than being older or slower/less athletic that caused them to lose to OKC.

The Celtics are showing that their system still works. They haven't gotten younger or more athletic, and would only be helped by having more size. The plus-minus numbers for when KG is on/off the court is staggering, which shows how important having a strong frontcourt still is.

TL;DR - Still think that LAL/DAL/BOS rosters can compete against more athletic/quicker OKC-type teams. In particular, think Lakers formula of having dominant post offense is superior to having OKC formula of having dominant perimeter offense.