System Supplanting Superstar?

[octothorp]

I've always compared building a team like building a good deck in any TCG. You need to have an idea of how you want the deck to play, you need to have the right cards to let it play that way, and you need a good player who can play that way and with that deck. There are always cards that are deemed the best and everyone wants them, and cards that cause people to be split on its usefulness, and cards that are just filler.

Heh, I'm actually working on designing a basketball deckbuilding game, because I think the mechanics of a DBG are pretty close to the process of building an nba roster; unlike a standard TCG, you usually can't pick a strategy and then find the cards that you need to fill in that strategy... you need to be highly reactive to the cards that become available. Balance building your strategy around your cards, vs. choosing your cards to fit your strategy. (ie. You've decided that you want to build a defense-first deck, but James Harden has just become available, and if you don't take him, your opponent probably will... stick to your guns and leave him, or pick him up and hope that you can modify your strategy around him?) And you start with a certain amount of filler, but you need to find a way to convert that filler into something useful, without them simply bloating your otherwise efficient deck.

[OldSkoolCool]

I think what OldSkool is saying is that when it comes down to the end of the playoffs when it's the two best teams, the talent on both sides of the floor are so good that it comes down to which system is better or being run better. The Heat/Spurs match up is a great example of this.

Earlier on in the playoffs when a number 1 seed is playing a number 8 it really doesn't matter how great the system the number 8 is employing because the number 1 team is usually so much more talented that they can over come the better system they are playing. At least in theory.

What mediumcore said

[planetmars]

Atlanta will be a very good test case for the talent/system debate this post season.

How do you define "talent" though? The Hawks had four all-stars of which two were multiple time all-stars. Would they not be considered talented? Or is talent defined by having a once in a generation type of talent like Lebron James? And in that case then does only one team in the league have talent?

If Atlanta gets out of the East did they do it because of their system or because of talent or both?

[Bendit]

Atlanta will be a very good test case for the talent/system debate this post season.

[Mediumcore]

There's no doubt that an effective system (substitution patterns, exploiting mismatches, adapting in-game, etc.. are all part of 'system'/coaching in my book) is required to win a championship, but it typically comes down to which team running an effective system is the most talented.

A group of average to above-average players running a superb system will be able to overcome some talent deficiency, but I'd argue that talent is still supremely important. That list shows that the team able to maximize both is usually crowned king in the NBA.

I think what OldSkool is saying is that when it comes down to the end of the playoffs when it's the two best teams, the talent on both sides of the floor are so good that it comes down to which system is better or being run better. The Heat/Spurs match up is a great example of this.

Earlier on in the playoffs when a number 1 seed is playing a number 8 it really doesn't matter how great the system the number 8 is employing because the number 1 team is usually so much more talented that they can over come the better system they are playing. At least in theory.

[CalgaryRapsFan]

System > Talent. But, as always the reality is more grey than black and white. For example, over the last decade:

2014: Spurs vs Heat - Spurs win via system
2013: Spurs vs Heat - Heat win via talent
2012: OKC vs Heat - Heat win via system
2011: Dallas vs Heat - Dallas win via system
2010: Lakers win via talent
2009: Lakers win via talent
2008: Celtics via system
2007: Spurs via system
2006: Mavs via system
2005: Spurs via talent+system
2004: Det via system

Also consider that the Lakers had Phil Jackson coaching...an amazing system overshadowed by the incredibly talented Kobe...

Reality is you need both, but when it comes to championships the team with the stronger system will win out more often than not because the talent gap between the two teams in the finals is a lot smaller that what we are used to as Raptor fans...

There's no doubt that an effective system (substitution patterns, exploiting mismatches, adapting in-game, etc.. are all part of 'system'/coaching in my book) is required to win a championship, but it typically comes down to which team running an effective system is the most talented.

A group of average to above-average players running a superb system will be able to overcome some talent deficiency, but I'd argue that talent is still supremely important. That list shows that the team able to maximize both is usually crowned king in the NBA.

[raptors999]

The Heat improved their overall talent in 2012. They signed Shane Battier, who was a top perimeter defender. Smuggling Battier away from other contenders greatly reduces other teams' chances of winning. Who contained KD in that series? It was Battier not Lebron.

System make incorporating guys like Battier easier. Arrest played a similar role on the Lakers. Defensive systems are also systems. Kawhi fills a similar role on the Spurs, likewise MKG on CHA and PG on Indy. Casey has JJ yet can't devise a defense that is even average.

[2KJ]

Heat had the same talent the year before and lost to a worse Mavs team. Next season they solidified roles and beat a talented but flawed Westbrook ISO heavy OKC team. Every good team had a system coach who is usually competitive with different rosters. System coaches IMHO are defined by the output of non-star players. Players who contribute more than they would anywhere else. Jackson got a lot out of role players.

The Heat improved their overall talent in 2012. They signed Shane Battier, who was a top perimeter defender. Smuggling Battier away from other contenders greatly reduces other teams' chances of winning. Who contained KD in that series? It was Battier not Lebron.

[raptors999]

2006, heat won (due to indivitual talent from D-wade + perhaps refs, but thats another conversation)

2008, boston had a crazy amount of talent (rondo, pierce + Garnett + allen at their best, perkins playing decent + tony allen off the bench). add to it bynum was injured

2012 was also talent. harden was a complete no show. anytime u have lebron + d wade + bosh on your team, your going to win via talent.

the rest ill agree with yeah.

Heat had the same talent the year before and lost to a worse Mavs team. Next season they solidified roles and beat a talented but flawed Westbrook ISO heavy OKC team. Every good team had a system coach who is usually competitive with different rosters. System coaches IMHO are defined by the output of non-star players. Players who contribute more than they would anywhere else. Jackson got a lot out of role players.

[2kfeen]

System > Talent. But, as always the reality is more grey than black and white. For example, over the last decade:

2014: Spurs vs Heat - Spurs win via system
2013: Spurs vs Heat - Heat win via talent
2012: OKC vs Heat - Heat win via system
2011: Dallas vs Heat - Dallas win via system
2010: Lakers win via talent
2009: Lakers win via talent
2008: Celtics via system
2007: Spurs via system
2006: Mavs via system
2005: Spurs via talent+system
2004: Det via system

Also consider that the Lakers had Phil Jackson coaching...an amazing system overshadowed by the incredibly talented Kobe...

Reality is you need both, but when it comes to championships the team with the stronger system will win out more often than not because the talent gap between the two teams in the finals is a lot smaller that what we are used to as Raptor fans...

2006, heat won (due to indivitual talent from D-wade + perhaps refs, but thats another conversation)

2008, boston had a crazy amount of talent (rondo, pierce + Garnett + allen at their best, perkins playing decent + tony allen off the bench). add to it bynum was injured

2012 was also talent. harden was a complete no show. anytime u have lebron + d wade + bosh on your team, your going to win via talent.

the rest ill agree with yeah.

[Mindlessness]

System > Talent. But, as always the reality is more grey than black and white. For example, over the last decade:

2014: Spurs vs Heat - Spurs win via system
2013: Spurs vs Heat - Heat win via talent
2012: OKC vs Heat - Heat win via system
2011: Dallas vs Heat - Dallas win via system
2010: Lakers win via talent
2009: Lakers win via talent
2008: Celtics via system
2007: Spurs via system
2006: Mavs via system
2005: Spurs via talent+system
2004: Det via system

Also consider that the Lakers had Phil Jackson coaching...an amazing system overshadowed by the incredibly talented Kobe...

Reality is you need both, but when it comes to championships the team with the stronger system will win out more often than not because the talent gap between the two teams in the finals is a lot smaller that what we are used to as Raptor fans...

I guess you could say you need talent to make it far, but systems to have it all.

Not a rapper.

[OldSkoolCool]

System > Talent. But, as always the reality is more grey than black and white. For example, over the last decade:

2014: Spurs vs Heat - Spurs win via system
2013: Spurs vs Heat - Heat win via talent
2012: OKC vs Heat - Heat win via system
2011: Dallas vs Heat - Dallas win via system
2010: Lakers win via talent
2009: Lakers win via talent
2008: Celtics via system
2007: Spurs via system
2006: Mavs via system
2005: Spurs via talent+system
2004: Det via system

Also consider that the Lakers had Phil Jackson coaching...an amazing system overshadowed by the incredibly talented Kobe...

Reality is you need both, but when it comes to championships the team with the stronger system will win out more often than not because the talent gap between the two teams in the finals is a lot smaller that what we are used to as Raptor fans...

[2KJ]

Spurs have the greatest PF of all time and he's been consistent for almost 2 decades. Parker, Manu, and now Leonard are talented enough to be stars.

Hawks also have a solid big man in Al Horford. He may not be as highly rated as a Lebron, KD, etc., but he is a star. They also have a solid, up and coming young point guard in Jeff Teague.

You do need both superstar talent and a great system to win. Look at Denver years back during George Karl's last season with them. They had a great system, won 50 games without a legit superstar (though Ty Lawson has potential to be one as well and is among the top pgs), yet they lost in the first round to a more star-studded Warriors team.

A great system can make a mediocre team good, but you need talent to make a good team great. This is why I agree with most of Charles Barkley's stance on "analytics vs. talent". Analytics is a great way of managing talent (talented players), but you will always need talent to be successful.

The only team I can think of that has won without a superstar is the 2004 Pistons who ironically destroyed a star-studded Lakers team (yes Malone and GP were past their primes but they still had Kobe and Shaq). Were they able to repeat as champions? No, they lost in the finals the next year in 7 games to a more talented Spurs team.

[distorsun]

See my post below.

Good god Demar Derozan's ranking in that stat would be last among all qualified nba players

[distorsun]

There are a couple of websites in that article, but I'll keep digging ...see if I can find another one.

http://sircharlesincharge.com/2015/0...ronto-raptors/

http://nbasavant.com/shot_search.php

http://nbasavant.com/player.php?player_id=201942

distorsun if you ever track down that website please share. I feel like I should waste a sunday evening going through that...