The Regular Season
by Corey
Three posts in five days—what is this, 2004?
As we endure the interminable march toward meaningful Cavaliers playoff games, but before we get too far removed from the regular season, I wanted to make a couple of points about that regular season, and what it suggests about the 2009 Cavs' place in history. Plus, I needed an excuse to run more Cavs graphs, as required by my contract.
To begin, here is a running point differential for the Cavs' 2009 regular season (click to enlarge):
The line is nice and steep, and relatively smooth, to boot. But still, that's not a very interesting graph to look at without a little context. Here's one displaying a running point differential for every Cavs team since 2004 (i.e., every LeBron team):
There we go. Talk about unprecedented. The turquoise line represents the 2007 season, when the Cavs made the Finals, but even that one doesn't come close. Meanwhile, the depressing yellow line represents last season—talk about improvement!
Okay, now here's one showing the Cavs alongside the other so-called "elite" teams of 2009 (Boston, L.A., and Orlando):
As you can see, the Celtics had a couple of chances to challenge the balance of power, but the Cavs have mostly been the obvious #1 since November.
The big question, of course, is how the 2009 Cavs rank among the best teams of all time. You may recall my December post pointing out that they were, at the time, the best team ever. And while the Cavs didn't manage to hold on to that particular title, they did finish as the 5th-best team of all team, by Pythagorean win percentage:
Admittedly, that graph is a little busy, and the Cavs' maroon line can be hard to track, but you can still see how they leveled off a little, relative to the competition, at around game #36.
That leaves just one final question: are the 2009 Cavs at least the best home team of all time? I'm afraid the answer is still no:
However you slice it, the Cavs are historically good. Of the all-time top ten in Pythagorean win percentage, eight won the NBA championship, while a ninth had the misfortune of facing the '97 Bulls in the Finals. (The '94 Sonics, on the other hand, lost to an 8th seed in the first round, in what has got to be the worst playoff choke in NBA history.) Of course, the 2009 Cavs may have to face tougher playoff competition than those other eight teams did. The lesson, I suppose, is that there are no sure things—only really solid things with good odds for success. Personally, I like the Cavaliers' chances to win the championship this year. By that, I mean that their chances are higher than any other team's—we're talking somewhere in the 40% range, instead of the 25-30% range usually earned by the #1 overall seed. My point is, there's still a 60% (or so) chance that the Cavs don't win it all—but even if they don't, it wouldn't change the fact that they are (and likely always will remain) one of the best teams ever to play in the NBA.
As we endure the interminable march toward meaningful Cavaliers playoff games, but before we get too far removed from the regular season, I wanted to make a couple of points about that regular season, and what it suggests about the 2009 Cavs' place in history. Plus, I needed an excuse to run more Cavs graphs, as required by my contract.
To begin, here is a running point differential for the Cavs' 2009 regular season (click to enlarge):
The line is nice and steep, and relatively smooth, to boot. But still, that's not a very interesting graph to look at without a little context. Here's one displaying a running point differential for every Cavs team since 2004 (i.e., every LeBron team):
There we go. Talk about unprecedented. The turquoise line represents the 2007 season, when the Cavs made the Finals, but even that one doesn't come close. Meanwhile, the depressing yellow line represents last season—talk about improvement!
Okay, now here's one showing the Cavs alongside the other so-called "elite" teams of 2009 (Boston, L.A., and Orlando):
As you can see, the Celtics had a couple of chances to challenge the balance of power, but the Cavs have mostly been the obvious #1 since November.
The big question, of course, is how the 2009 Cavs rank among the best teams of all time. You may recall my December post pointing out that they were, at the time, the best team ever. And while the Cavs didn't manage to hold on to that particular title, they did finish as the 5th-best team of all team, by Pythagorean win percentage:
Pyth. W%Here's a graph showing these 10 teams' running point differentials. The 2009 Cavs' rather slow pace factor hurts them a little in the area of point differential, which is a cumulative stat; nonetheless, here you go:
1. 1996 Bulls .850
2. 1997 Bulls .824
3. 2008 Celtics .818
4. 1992 Bulls .801
5. 2009 Cavaliers .787
6. 1999 Spurs .782
7. 1994 Sonics .778
8. 2007 Spurs .778
9. 1997 Jazz .777
10. 2000 Lakers .776
Admittedly, that graph is a little busy, and the Cavs' maroon line can be hard to track, but you can still see how they leveled off a little, relative to the competition, at around game #36.
That leaves just one final question: are the 2009 Cavs at least the best home team of all time? I'm afraid the answer is still no:
Home Pyth. W%The Cavs may have nearly tied the mark for best home won-lost record, but in terms of all-time home Pythagorean record, the Cavs finish 3rd. You'll notice that the 1986 Celtics, whose 40-1 home record the Cavs were chasing, aren't even in the all-time top ten. In fact, the '86 Celts rank an astonishing 40th among all home teams ever, with a Pythagorean win percentage of .837. They're only the 3rd-best home team in Celtics history. Meanwhile, the 1989 Cavaliers are also in the top ten.
1. 1996 Bulls .920
2. 1997 Bulls .899
3. 2009 Cavaliers .892
4. 1971 Bucks .892
5. 1972 Bucks .886
6. 1999 Spurs .882
7. 1989 Cavaliers .881
8. 2002 Kings .880
9. 1996 Sonics .880
10. 2008 Jazz .879
However you slice it, the Cavs are historically good. Of the all-time top ten in Pythagorean win percentage, eight won the NBA championship, while a ninth had the misfortune of facing the '97 Bulls in the Finals. (The '94 Sonics, on the other hand, lost to an 8th seed in the first round, in what has got to be the worst playoff choke in NBA history.) Of course, the 2009 Cavs may have to face tougher playoff competition than those other eight teams did. The lesson, I suppose, is that there are no sure things—only really solid things with good odds for success. Personally, I like the Cavaliers' chances to win the championship this year. By that, I mean that their chances are higher than any other team's—we're talking somewhere in the 40% range, instead of the 25-30% range usually earned by the #1 overall seed. My point is, there's still a 60% (or so) chance that the Cavs don't win it all—but even if they don't, it wouldn't change the fact that they are (and likely always will remain) one of the best teams ever to play in the NBA.
1 Comments:
Post a Comment
« Home