Knicks · 106.5PPG....85, 93, 96 (page 2)
JrZyHuStLa wrote:martin wrote:Juice wrote:The 106.5ppg was what we scored during the season btw in case anyone didn't catch that. The other scores are what we've produced against the Celtics in this series so farLakers 2 years ago scored 106.9ppg in the regular season. Not sure that stat really tell us anything special.
Why didn't you include the fact that they were a respectable 13th in OPP PPG and 6th in OPP FG%?
probably because unlike you he's not trying to hijack every single thread into a d'antoni/defense thread 
martin wrote:BlueSeats wrote:martin wrote:BlueSeats wrote:nixluva wrote:There was nothing wrong with the D in the 1st 2 games. 2 tough defensive games by the Knicks and today one bad one. We come into this game and lay an egg. Did Mike suddenly stop coaching them for this game? Did the players simply not focus in and defend with the same energy? Did the C's just have one of those games where guys just get hot from outside? Whatever the reason, this team played 2 of the 3 playoff games with intensity on D so let's not exaggerate this one game.'luva, if you're honest with yourself you'll admit that the defensive intensity was surprisingly good for the first two games. When that level of intensity is no longer surprising but the norm then this coach will be getting a pass on defense, but not until.
I thought Amare was a big reason in game 3 for the dropoff. I know he was hurt, but he stood around looking a balls that were like 3-5 feet away from him while Rondo sprinted, grabbed and then hit Ray for open 3s. Horrible.
I had trouble getting a solid feed for the 1st quarter, but my sense is they shut off Melo, took the wind out of our sails and pounced. And Amare was a mannequin all game.
But the point remains, why style the regular season on scoring 110 pts and "making them adjust to us" only to do a 180 for the post season? Do we really want good defensive intensity to be a surprising treat?
I'm not in the "fire D'Antoni" camp, I'm in the let him finish out his contract next year camp. D' seems to have been adjusting the system to the roster since the trade (not like he had a choice w/ Felton gone.) We're getting a sense of how this team could play d (in spite of the excuse that we don't have the defensive players for it) and I think we all like it when they do. If they pick up where they left off next year then MDA might get an extension, if not, he had his chance.
I think you answered your own question: "why style the regular season on scoring 110 pts": The Knicks have had 2 entirely different teams from start to finish, and realistically they now have a 3rd'ish team to adjust playing style to over the past 2 games now that Amare is out and TD has replaced Billups (TD can't push and he can barely do PnR).
I never understood the correlation between the offensive output - whether it be 85 points, 106.5ppg, or 110ppg - and the tact of pinning that number to defense. You either play defense or you don't, and just because you score 110 vs 85 isn't an indication of whether you are playing defense or not.
The Knicks need interior defense, and they need Amare to actually play defense and rebound, no doubt about it. I think Amare/MDA/Knicks used the excuse of both a thin front line regarding size (AR, Moz provided zero for the first half season+ while Turiaf was effective for about half games cause of injury and only 20 or so minutes when he could play) and thin in terms of offensive focus if Amare was not playing, and that all added up to Amare playing less defense so as to be on the floor more (we all know he turned to matador when getting 2 fouls in first half or 4 in second half of games).
With Melo on roster, Amare has zero excuse with the foul trouble thing. JJ/Sheldon provide some depth at the C/PF spots, although both are seriously flawed.
I am in the same boat you are with MDA. The first 2 years everyone should have known they were going to be losing efforts and you can't really get much value from watching and making a determination. This year was about getting to playoffs and Knicks still had too much turnover and 2 really ill-timed injuries during playoffs. C'est la vie.
MDA gets until about mid-season for me, especially if Melo and Amare are healthy. I am guessing Billups will be back too.
I'll ask you to consider than 9 out of the top 10 lowest scoring teams are in the playoffs, vs, 2 of the top 10 highest scoring teams.
Also consider that the 2 from the highest scoring camp are NY and Denver, both unlikely to advance.
I think it's important to be practiced at grinding out games, turning up the intensity, getting stops, executing in late game scenarios, etc.
The Knicks are not a team that can flip a switch and be in Championship form, nor is Magic Johnson walking thru the door. They need to be better practiced in playoff style ball.
BlueSeats wrote:martin wrote:BlueSeats wrote:martin wrote:BlueSeats wrote:nixluva wrote:There was nothing wrong with the D in the 1st 2 games. 2 tough defensive games by the Knicks and today one bad one. We come into this game and lay an egg. Did Mike suddenly stop coaching them for this game? Did the players simply not focus in and defend with the same energy? Did the C's just have one of those games where guys just get hot from outside? Whatever the reason, this team played 2 of the 3 playoff games with intensity on D so let's not exaggerate this one game.'luva, if you're honest with yourself you'll admit that the defensive intensity was surprisingly good for the first two games. When that level of intensity is no longer surprising but the norm then this coach will be getting a pass on defense, but not until.
I thought Amare was a big reason in game 3 for the dropoff. I know he was hurt, but he stood around looking a balls that were like 3-5 feet away from him while Rondo sprinted, grabbed and then hit Ray for open 3s. Horrible.
I had trouble getting a solid feed for the 1st quarter, but my sense is they shut off Melo, took the wind out of our sails and pounced. And Amare was a mannequin all game.
But the point remains, why style the regular season on scoring 110 pts and "making them adjust to us" only to do a 180 for the post season? Do we really want good defensive intensity to be a surprising treat?
I'm not in the "fire D'Antoni" camp, I'm in the let him finish out his contract next year camp. D' seems to have been adjusting the system to the roster since the trade (not like he had a choice w/ Felton gone.) We're getting a sense of how this team could play d (in spite of the excuse that we don't have the defensive players for it) and I think we all like it when they do. If they pick up where they left off next year then MDA might get an extension, if not, he had his chance.
I think you answered your own question: "why style the regular season on scoring 110 pts": The Knicks have had 2 entirely different teams from start to finish, and realistically they now have a 3rd'ish team to adjust playing style to over the past 2 games now that Amare is out and TD has replaced Billups (TD can't push and he can barely do PnR).
I never understood the correlation between the offensive output - whether it be 85 points, 106.5ppg, or 110ppg - and the tact of pinning that number to defense. You either play defense or you don't, and just because you score 110 vs 85 isn't an indication of whether you are playing defense or not.
The Knicks need interior defense, and they need Amare to actually play defense and rebound, no doubt about it. I think Amare/MDA/Knicks used the excuse of both a thin front line regarding size (AR, Moz provided zero for the first half season+ while Turiaf was effective for about half games cause of injury and only 20 or so minutes when he could play) and thin in terms of offensive focus if Amare was not playing, and that all added up to Amare playing less defense so as to be on the floor more (we all know he turned to matador when getting 2 fouls in first half or 4 in second half of games).
With Melo on roster, Amare has zero excuse with the foul trouble thing. JJ/Sheldon provide some depth at the C/PF spots, although both are seriously flawed.
I am in the same boat you are with MDA. The first 2 years everyone should have known they were going to be losing efforts and you can't really get much value from watching and making a determination. This year was about getting to playoffs and Knicks still had too much turnover and 2 really ill-timed injuries during playoffs. C'est la vie.
MDA gets until about mid-season for me, especially if Melo and Amare are healthy. I am guessing Billups will be back too.
I'll ask you to consider than 9 out of the top 10 lowest scoring teams are in the playoffs, vs, 2 of the top 10 highest scoring teams.Also consider that the 2 from the highest scoring camp are NY and Denver, both unlikely to advance.
I think it's important to be practiced at grinding out games, turning up the intensity, getting stops, executing in late game scenarios, etc.
The Knicks are not a team that can flip a switch and be in Championship form, nor is Magic Johnson walking thru the door. They need to be better practiced in playoff style ball.
And I'll counter with efficiency numbers, as long as your efficiency number - both defensively and offensively - are good, you tend to make playoffs and do well.
RK TEAM PACE OFF EFF DEF EFF
1 Denver 97.9 109.5 104.8
2 San Antonio 94.6 109.4 102.8
3 Miami 93.2 109.3 100.7
4 Oklahoma City 95.3 108.6 104
5 New York 98.1 108.3 106.9
6 Houston 96.9 108 106.2
7 LA Lakers 93.4 107.9 101.3
8 Dallas 93.4 107.6 102.3
9 Phoenix 96.8 107 107.4
10 Orlando 93.5 105.7 99.1
11 Portland 90.5 105.6 104.2
12 Chicago 92.9 105.5 97.4
If you rank team according to both Offensive and Defensive efficiency, and then total those ranks, you probably find the best teams in the league (whose rank totals are low).
So, if Chicago is 12th in Offense and #1 in Defense, their rank total is 13. San Antonio is #2 in Off and #11 in Def, also 13.
Maybe throw in some minor variable factor for # of years team has been together and "balance" of team (starters, bench, injury).
http://espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/teamsta...
I would guess that Regular Season records prove that out pretty close.
If this team can somehow improve the PG position and give Mike what he needs to effectively play his style it would help both Amar'e and Melo too. Remember that Amar'e excels playing in Mike's offense. He's not a low post player. He's a faceup big and a finisher and he hasn't been able to get enough easy attempts to finish. He has to work hard for everything he gets. Amar'e is also not a big physical presence on D and we need an enforcer that can actually play extended minutes without breaking down and can lock down the boards and score.
It's not a Knock on Mike that he needs a good PG. What do you call Rondo or Rose? A lot of teams have PG's that can break down a defense and create better looks for the team. It's just part of building a great team. We have inadequate PG play and inadequate Center play and once we improve those areas it will make a HUGE difference. D'Antoni is far from our biggest issue. Fix the PG and C positions and this can be a title team.
Remember when Rick Carlisle had O'neal/Artest/Jackson suspended for 30-40% of the season and still managed to get his team to perform at a high level? He had little talent to show for. Rick Adelman when T-Mac and Yao went down for 30-40% of the season? McMillan when his bigs and Roy go down for 30-40% of the season....Thibs when Boozer/Noah go down for 30-40% of the season....
martin wrote:BlueSeats wrote:martin wrote:BlueSeats wrote:martin wrote:BlueSeats wrote:nixluva wrote:There was nothing wrong with the D in the 1st 2 games. 2 tough defensive games by the Knicks and today one bad one. We come into this game and lay an egg. Did Mike suddenly stop coaching them for this game? Did the players simply not focus in and defend with the same energy? Did the C's just have one of those games where guys just get hot from outside? Whatever the reason, this team played 2 of the 3 playoff games with intensity on D so let's not exaggerate this one game.'luva, if you're honest with yourself you'll admit that the defensive intensity was surprisingly good for the first two games. When that level of intensity is no longer surprising but the norm then this coach will be getting a pass on defense, but not until.
I thought Amare was a big reason in game 3 for the dropoff. I know he was hurt, but he stood around looking a balls that were like 3-5 feet away from him while Rondo sprinted, grabbed and then hit Ray for open 3s. Horrible.
I had trouble getting a solid feed for the 1st quarter, but my sense is they shut off Melo, took the wind out of our sails and pounced. And Amare was a mannequin all game.
But the point remains, why style the regular season on scoring 110 pts and "making them adjust to us" only to do a 180 for the post season? Do we really want good defensive intensity to be a surprising treat?
I'm not in the "fire D'Antoni" camp, I'm in the let him finish out his contract next year camp. D' seems to have been adjusting the system to the roster since the trade (not like he had a choice w/ Felton gone.) We're getting a sense of how this team could play d (in spite of the excuse that we don't have the defensive players for it) and I think we all like it when they do. If they pick up where they left off next year then MDA might get an extension, if not, he had his chance.
I think you answered your own question: "why style the regular season on scoring 110 pts": The Knicks have had 2 entirely different teams from start to finish, and realistically they now have a 3rd'ish team to adjust playing style to over the past 2 games now that Amare is out and TD has replaced Billups (TD can't push and he can barely do PnR).
I never understood the correlation between the offensive output - whether it be 85 points, 106.5ppg, or 110ppg - and the tact of pinning that number to defense. You either play defense or you don't, and just because you score 110 vs 85 isn't an indication of whether you are playing defense or not.
The Knicks need interior defense, and they need Amare to actually play defense and rebound, no doubt about it. I think Amare/MDA/Knicks used the excuse of both a thin front line regarding size (AR, Moz provided zero for the first half season+ while Turiaf was effective for about half games cause of injury and only 20 or so minutes when he could play) and thin in terms of offensive focus if Amare was not playing, and that all added up to Amare playing less defense so as to be on the floor more (we all know he turned to matador when getting 2 fouls in first half or 4 in second half of games).
With Melo on roster, Amare has zero excuse with the foul trouble thing. JJ/Sheldon provide some depth at the C/PF spots, although both are seriously flawed.
I am in the same boat you are with MDA. The first 2 years everyone should have known they were going to be losing efforts and you can't really get much value from watching and making a determination. This year was about getting to playoffs and Knicks still had too much turnover and 2 really ill-timed injuries during playoffs. C'est la vie.
MDA gets until about mid-season for me, especially if Melo and Amare are healthy. I am guessing Billups will be back too.
I'll ask you to consider than 9 out of the top 10 lowest scoring teams are in the playoffs, vs, 2 of the top 10 highest scoring teams.Also consider that the 2 from the highest scoring camp are NY and Denver, both unlikely to advance.
I think it's important to be practiced at grinding out games, turning up the intensity, getting stops, executing in late game scenarios, etc.
The Knicks are not a team that can flip a switch and be in Championship form, nor is Magic Johnson walking thru the door. They need to be better practiced in playoff style ball.
And I'll counter with efficiency numbers, as long as your efficiency number - both defensively and offensively - are good, you tend to make playoffs and do well.
RK TEAM PACE OFF EFF DEF EFF
1 Denver 97.9 109.5 104.8
2 San Antonio 94.6 109.4 102.8
3 Miami 93.2 109.3 100.7
4 Oklahoma City 95.3 108.6 104
5 New York 98.1 108.3 106.9
6 Houston 96.9 108 106.2
7 LA Lakers 93.4 107.9 101.3
8 Dallas 93.4 107.6 102.3
9 Phoenix 96.8 107 107.4
10 Orlando 93.5 105.7 99.1
11 Portland 90.5 105.6 104.2
12 Chicago 92.9 105.5 97.4
These efficiency rankings can get pretty esoteric. Each listing seems to use it's own definition of efficiency. Here's another ranking:
http://www.hoopsstats.com/basketball/fan...
I don't know about you but I don't glean much from it. Here's the top 10:
Denver
Oaklahoma
Houston
San Antonio
NY
LA
Dallas
Phoenix
Mia
Golden State
It's a hodgepodge. NY is at #5 and Boston #14. Chicago with the best record in the league is at 11.
Meanwhile, you give D'Antoni just half a season more while he's got us playing at #5. Clearly he deserves better with such a high measure, if that's such a relevant statistic, no?
BlueSeats wrote:These efficiency rankings can get pretty esoteric. Each listing seems to use it's own definition of efficiency. Here's another ranking:http://www.hoopsstats.com/basketball/fan...
I don't know about you but I don't glean much from it. Here's the top 10:
Denver
Oaklahoma
Houston
San Antonio
NY
LA
Dallas
Phoenix
Mia
Golden StateIt's a hodgepodge. NY is at #5 and Boston #14. Chicago with the best record in the league is at 11.
Meanwhile, you give D'Antoni just half a season more while he's got us playing at #5. Clearly he deserves better with such a high measure, if that's such a relevant statistic, no?
I literally have no idea what that stat you are showing is, and there is zero explanation of what it comprises. I have heard of Off Eff and Def Eff (generally points per 100 possessions - so it takes into consideration pace), but your link just shows "Efficiency" with zero explanation for what it is measuring, they might as well call it their Alba rating.
You are correlating my half season gauge and trying to tie it to a statistic somehow and which is CLEARLY different than what I posted? I'd just like to see the coach with a cohesive unit for a measurable duration. I think what you just said is that because MDA's team is ranking 5th at something, clearly I should/would give him more time. Is that how you came up with your half season? Not me.
nixluva wrote:I'm tired of the constant change. I want to see this team build some chemistry and upgrade the roster with certain things already in place.
Same was said before the trade. Fans wanted to see the homegrown talent mature and stop making deadline trades. The one thing that has remained constant(coach) with the same mediocre ho-hum results. Get us a different guy on the bench and the confidence in the players should remain right? You still believe in Amar'e and Melo right?
martin wrote:BlueSeats wrote:These efficiency rankings can get pretty esoteric. Each listing seems to use it's own definition of efficiency. Here's another ranking:http://www.hoopsstats.com/basketball/fan...
I don't know about you but I don't glean much from it. Here's the top 10:
Denver
Oaklahoma
Houston
San Antonio
NY
LA
Dallas
Phoenix
Mia
Golden StateIt's a hodgepodge. NY is at #5 and Boston #14. Chicago with the best record in the league is at 11.
Meanwhile, you give D'Antoni just half a season more while he's got us playing at #5. Clearly he deserves better with such a high measure, if that's such a relevant statistic, no?
I literally have no idea what that stat you are showing is, and there is zero explanation of what it comprises. I have heard of Off Eff and Def Eff (generally points per 100 possessions - so it takes into consideration pace), but your link just shows "Efficiency" with zero explanation for what it is measuring, they might as well call it their Alba rating.
You are correlating my half season gauge and trying to tie it to a statistic somehow and which is CLEARLY different than what I posted? I'd just like to see the coach with a cohesive unit for a measurable duration. I think what you just said is that because MDA's team is ranking 5th at something, clearly I should/would give him more time. Is that how you came up with your half season? Not me.
You brought up efficiency, not me. And NY is ranked at 5 on the list you posted as well. Forgive me for thinking you valued something you seemed to be ascribing value to.
BlueSeats wrote:martin wrote:BlueSeats wrote:These efficiency rankings can get pretty esoteric. Each listing seems to use it's own definition of efficiency. Here's another ranking:http://www.hoopsstats.com/basketball/fan...
I don't know about you but I don't glean much from it. Here's the top 10:
Denver
Oaklahoma
Houston
San Antonio
NY
LA
Dallas
Phoenix
Mia
Golden StateIt's a hodgepodge. NY is at #5 and Boston #14. Chicago with the best record in the league is at 11.
Meanwhile, you give D'Antoni just half a season more while he's got us playing at #5. Clearly he deserves better with such a high measure, if that's such a relevant statistic, no?
I literally have no idea what that stat you are showing is, and there is zero explanation of what it comprises. I have heard of Off Eff and Def Eff (generally points per 100 possessions - so it takes into consideration pace), but your link just shows "Efficiency" with zero explanation for what it is measuring, they might as well call it their Alba rating.
You are correlating my half season gauge and trying to tie it to a statistic somehow and which is CLEARLY different than what I posted? I'd just like to see the coach with a cohesive unit for a measurable duration. I think what you just said is that because MDA's team is ranking 5th at something, clearly I should/would give him more time. Is that how you came up with your half season? Not me.
You brought up efficiency, not me. And NY is ranked at 5 on the list you posted as well. Forgive me for thinking you valued something you seemed to be ascribing value to.
Blue, you are better than that. Clearly I was matching your PPG number against Offensive Efficiency, that's the initial context. And I follow mentioning BOTH defensive AND offensive numbers are keys to long term success. No where in there did I correlate or come to a conclusion to that about MDA (regarding offensive numbers) and a long term look. Clearly the Knicks' defensive efficiency numbers are poor.
martin wrote:And I'll counter with efficiency numbers, as long as your efficiency number - both defensively and offensively - are good, you tend to make playoffs and do well.
Juice wrote:nixluva wrote:I'm tired of the constant change. I want to see this team build some chemistry and upgrade the roster with certain things already in place.Same was said before the trade. Fans wanted to see the homegrown talent mature and stop making deadline trades. The one thing that has remained constant(coach) with the same mediocre ho-hum results. Get us a different guy on the bench and the confidence in the players should remain right? You still believe in Amar'e and Melo right?
Some change is warranted! We upgraded with Melo and now we're set at SF and PF. We've now got to upgrade the other key spots @ center and PG. The coach is the least of our Problems. We could've won the 1st 2 games with a fully healthy roster or a bit of luck.
Improve the roster around STAT and MELO. Then worry about coach b
martin wrote:BlueSeats wrote:martin wrote:BlueSeats wrote:These efficiency rankings can get pretty esoteric. Each listing seems to use it's own definition of efficiency. Here's another ranking:http://www.hoopsstats.com/basketball/fan...
I don't know about you but I don't glean much from it. Here's the top 10:
Denver
Oaklahoma
Houston
San Antonio
NY
LA
Dallas
Phoenix
Mia
Golden StateIt's a hodgepodge. NY is at #5 and Boston #14. Chicago with the best record in the league is at 11.
Meanwhile, you give D'Antoni just half a season more while he's got us playing at #5. Clearly he deserves better with such a high measure, if that's such a relevant statistic, no?
I literally have no idea what that stat you are showing is, and there is zero explanation of what it comprises. I have heard of Off Eff and Def Eff (generally points per 100 possessions - so it takes into consideration pace), but your link just shows "Efficiency" with zero explanation for what it is measuring, they might as well call it their Alba rating.
You are correlating my half season gauge and trying to tie it to a statistic somehow and which is CLEARLY different than what I posted? I'd just like to see the coach with a cohesive unit for a measurable duration. I think what you just said is that because MDA's team is ranking 5th at something, clearly I should/would give him more time. Is that how you came up with your half season? Not me.
You brought up efficiency, not me. And NY is ranked at 5 on the list you posted as well. Forgive me for thinking you valued something you seemed to be ascribing value to.
Blue, you are better than that. Clearly I was matching your PPG number against Offensive Efficiency, that's the initial context. And I follow mentioning BOTH defensive AND offensive numbers are keys to long term success. No where in there did I correlate or come to a conclusion to that about MDA (regarding offensive numbers) and a long term look. Clearly the Knicks' defensive efficiency numbers are poor.
martin wrote:And I'll counter with efficiency numbers, as long as your efficiency number - both defensively and offensively - are good, you tend to make playoffs and do well.
This started with you thinking there's no correlation between high points and good defense. I noted that there is a pretty good correlation between low scoring and making the playoffs. You countered that high offensive EFF would make an even better determinant that's how your list was ranked), but you've yet to establish that. You also seemed to be defending D'antoni against charges his style is wrong for the playoffs, yet you've got him on a short half-season leash for next year. In truth, putting all stats and numbers aside, your points are lost on me. I really don't see the case you are making.
If anything this experience has shown this team the level of effort you need to win. This was a stiff challenge and except for one game the team was up for it. Mike has done a good job.
nixluva wrote:Juice wrote:nixluva wrote:I'm tired of the constant change. I want to see this team build some chemistry and upgrade the roster with certain things already in place.Same was said before the trade. Fans wanted to see the homegrown talent mature and stop making deadline trades. The one thing that has remained constant(coach) with the same mediocre ho-hum results. Get us a different guy on the bench and the confidence in the players should remain right? You still believe in Amar'e and Melo right?
Some change is warranted! We upgraded with Melo and now we're set at SF and PF. We've now got to upgrade the other key spots @ center and PG. The coach is the least of our Problems. We could've won the 1st 2 games with a fully healthy roster or a bit of luck.
Improve the roster around STAT and MELO. Then worry about coach b
Coach is most certainly part of our problems we have a few of them. Once again most coaches can win with a talented roster. We were pretty much set at small forward before we made the trade. If we had acquired Deron I could see your point to an extent but your understanding of what we've been doing and where we're going is foggy at best.
nixluva wrote:In this series and even the end of the regular season Mike was getting results. His overall record includes some great reg season and playoff runs. I dont expect him to fail if we can make some needed improvements. This should be one of the top teams next year.If anything this experience has shown this team the level of effort you need to win. This was a stiff challenge and except for one game the team was up for it. Mike has done a good job.
No this series has been an example of who we've been all season Pre Melo/With Melo. What has Melo/Amar'e/D'AnToni learned about this series, they didn't know before considering you and many others want 60% of the roster turned over next year? Those 3 have been to CF. Think about what you post sometimes.
BlueSeats wrote:This started with you thinking there's no correlation between high points and good defense. I noted that there is a pretty good correlation between low scoring and making the playoffs. You countered that high offensive EFF would make an even better determinant that's how your list was ranked), but you've yet to establish that. You also seemed to be defending D'antoni against charges his style is wrong for the playoffs, yet you've got him on a short half-season leash for next year. In truth, putting all stats and numbers aside, your points are lost on me. I really don't see the case you are making.
Let's start over.
Your initial statement: "I noted that there is a pretty good correlation between low scoring and making the playoffs." "I'll ask you to consider than 9 out of the top 10 lowest scoring teams are in the playoffs, vs, 2 of the top 10 highest scoring teams."
http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics/team/_...
RK TEAM PPG
1 Denver 107.5 Playoffs
2 New York 106.5 Playoffs
3 Houston 105.9
4 Phoenix 105
5 Oklahoma City 104.8 Playoffs
6 San Antonio 103.7 Playoffs
7 Golden State 103.4
8 Miami 102.1 Playoffs
9 LA Lakers 101.5 Playoffs
10 Minnesota 101.1RK TEAM PPG
21 Washington 97.3
22 Detroit 97
23 Boston 96.5 Playoffs
24 Portland 96.3 Playoffs
25 Cleveland 95.5
26 Atlanta 95 Playoffs
27 New Orleans 94.9 Playoffs
28 New Jersey 94.2
29 Charlotte 93.3
30 Milwaukee 91.9
Looks like the opposite it true.
I think what you meant (perhaps) to say was something else, not points scored?
What I countered with was Offensive Efficiency:
RK TEAM PACE OFF EFF DEF EFF
1 Denver 97.9 109.5 104.8 Playoffs
2 San Antonio 94.6 109.4 102.8 Playoffs
3 Miami 93.2 109.3 100.7 Playoffs
4 Oklahoma City 95.3 108.6 104 Playoffs
5 New York 98.1 108.3 106.9 Playoffs
6 Houston 96.9 108 106.2
7 LA Lakers 93.4 107.9 101.3 Playoffs
8 Dallas 93.4 107.6 102.3 Playoffs
9 Phoenix 96.8 107 107.4
10 Orlando 93.5 105.7 99.1 Playoffs
11 Portland 90.5 105.6 104.2 Playoffs
12 Chicago 92.9 105.5 97.4 Playoffs
I still stand by saying that just because you have high pace/high scoring doesn't mean you can't have good defensive numbers.