Height & Championships (1 Viewer)

[handiman]

Why do you think it's so rare for an NBA finals champion to have their best player be 6'-2"? Totally random that it rarely happens?

Data points would be an easy explanation. Only one position is likely to see a player be 6'2" or less, while the other four positions almost always do. Then you have to take out tall PG's like Magic, and the pool of candidates for your stat is quickly sliding toward 10%.

 

[Tince]

Data points would be an easy explanation. Only one position is likely to see a player be 6'2" or less, while the other four positions almost always do. Then you have to take out tall PG's like Magic, and the pool of candidates for your stat is quickly sliding toward 10%.

The average NBA players is 6'6". 100% of the last 13 finals MVPs were 6'6" or over. Shouldn't we expect it to be 50/50 if height were a non-factor?

 

[RoseCityRebel]

Wings have been a huge part of success for years....and Giannis was available to put with Dame. Instead, Olshey duplicated what he already had and got another smallish scoring guard who didn't play defense. It shocks me that D69 knew ADAMANTLY months before the Draft that Antetokounmpo was WAY undervalued and Olshey (among others) completely missed. It's the duplication that bothers me. They had a small scoring guard....why select another when historically 2 small, scoring, no-defense guards hasn't won an NBA championship in what, 5 decades?

It was so simple. I remember D69 and the usual gang being over for the Draft and as pick after pick went by and Giannis was still availble, we were beyond ecstatic. It would be the perfect balance, length, defense and a rim attacker to offset Dame's outside shooting, passing and court management.

And then...ugh. Nice player, but you could just feel that it would destine the team to a decade of mediocrity....which is about what has happened.

Olshy trying to outsmart history. Brutal!

Eh, the Blazers still had Aldridge then as the franchise player as a big and if you look back, CJ’s pick is validated considering the chumps taken ahead of him other than Oladipo, who is comparable to CJ.

Blaming Olshey for picking CJ seems like revisionist history. That was a garbage draft.

 

[blazerkor]

Eh, the Blazers still had Aldridge then as the franchise player as a big and if you look back, CJ’s pick is validated considering the chumps taken ahead of him other than Oladipo, who is comparable to CJ.

Blaming Olshey for picking CJ seems like revisionist history. That was a garbage draft.

I agree, I think that Olshey was going for BPA. At the time we had a whole team around Aldridge and Dame that made sense and a good scoring option off the bench was too good to pass up. I didn't see a lot of mock drafts that had Giannis above CJ. However, I think Olshey should have long ago realized that the Dame/CJ back court experiment was not a success and that CJ has much more to give in other situations on other teams and we can get more value back for CJ because it is about a player or players that fit both ways over purely offensive talent and skills. That's right I said it CJ's game is just offensive and this team needs something more defensive or even better something balanced.

 

[SharpesTriumph]

LeBron and Jordan won a third of these MVPs your talking about.

Would the Blazers be better if they had LeBron or Jordan instead of Lillard? Of course.

I'm not sure how your "point" gives any insight or help to the Blazers. Sure they would have a better chance at winning a title if they had an MVP wing player like LeBron, Kawhi, or pre injury Durant.

Wade won titles and was not a tall wing. Nash was an MVP of contending Suns teams that could've easily won titles. Tony Parker led the offense for multiple Spurs titles. Steph lead the offense for Warriors titles and the best record ever. Billups was a scoring PG for a title team.

The NBA is different today that 10 years ago, teams are scoring more from the PG position whereas historically PG was more for facilitating SG or bigs. Its really a different game. So these 30 year trends have little meaning.

If wings are the be all end all why didn't Boston make the finals with two great ones against Dragic? Why did the Clippers lose to a PG offense of Jamal Murry?

 

[TBpup]

Eh, the Blazers still had Aldridge then as the franchise player as a big and if you look back, CJ’s pick is validated considering the chumps taken ahead of him other than Oladipo, who is comparable to CJ.

Blaming Olshey for picking CJ seems like revisionist history. That was a garbage draft.

Not sure how that was revisionist. I shared what with thought (influenced by D69) and how we reacted during the Draft. That is turned out to be 100%.....not sure either of those is revisionist.

 

[wizenheimer]

If wings are the be all end all why didn't Boston make the finals with two great ones against Dragic?

because the Heat had the best wing in Butler, and they also had Crowder, Robinson, Herro, & Iggy, as well as the perimeter-inside ability of Adebayo. Miami had an elite wing, and they had better complementary wings with several solid-to-excellent defenders

Why did the Clippers lose to a PG offense of Jamal Murry?

c'mon now....the Clippers lost because they are a flawed team with the flaw being bad chemistry & fit. That was obvious. And to say that the Nuggets have a PG offense is a little crazy considering they may have the best passing C of all time, and their offense features Jokic in high post and elbow sets. And of course, the Nuggets wilted against the Lakers because they didn't have anybody who could match up against the wing-like games of Lebron and AD

Obviously, there are more templates to being a championship contender than just loading up on wings. But that doesn't mean there's a template out there that has little more than crappy, flawed wings. Compare Miami and Portland. The Heat have Butler, Crowder, Robinson, Iggy, Jones & Herro. Portland was trying to counter with Trent, Melo, & Hezonja. That's a laughable counter, even when you include the 6'3 CJ

and yeah, I know the Blazers were missing Ariza and Hood. But Ariza, who is the best two-way version of a wing, is 35 years old, and Hood had a ruptured Achilles. Who knows what the future of those two will be. The point being that while a team does not have to go all-in on a loaded wing roster, they can't ignore it either. And they sure can't try and cheap-screw together a vet minimum and below average collection of wings and expect to compete for a title. Portland has invested too heavily in the Dame/CJ back court, and that's impeding them from being competitive at wing.

 

[handiman]

The average NBA players is 6'6". 100% of the last 13 finals MVPs were 6'6" or over. Shouldn't we expect it to be 50/50 if height were a non-factor?

If 6'6" is the question, then yes. I was responding to your line about 6'2" guys, though.

 

[kjironman1]

Correct, he was not. He had an MVP next to him in 2 of the 3 finals wins. 2 all-stars (one elite shooter, one elite player maker) and a finals MVP around him in the other. Would expect Dame to get less defensive attention if he had Durant, Klay, and Green on the court with him. You agree?

Why do you think it's so rare for an NBA finals champion to have their best player be 6'-2"? Totally random that it rarely happens?

But But But Stotts.....
You notice there is no reply to this.

 

[Wizard Mentor]

When the playoffs come, teams will scheme to take away options. It's my belief that it is much harder to take away players who have a size advantage, so I wanted to take a look at the height of the last 10 NBA Finals MVPs. Here it is:

View attachment 34039

The average finals MVP is 6'-9.6" . I don't think it's random that the teams who are able to nagivate their way to an NBA championship have have an elite, versitile player. Expecting the Blazers to win a title without that player is unrealistic; am I off base?

1) They were Tall, OK
2) They could shoot
3) They played with (or were) LBJ or Duncan, or played for one of these teams:
****Market Size Ranking Team
1-2 New York Knicks / Brookyn Nets
3-4 Los Angeles Lakers / Los Angeles Clippers
5 Chicago Bulls
6 Toronto Raptors
7 Philadelphia 76ers
8 Dallas Mavericks
9 Washington Wizards
10 Houston Rockets
11 Golden State Warriors
12 Atlanta Hawks
13 Boston Celtics
14 Phoenix Suns
15 Detroit Pistons

If you were to go back in time even more (even all of the way to 1980), you would find that the 1st 2 wouldn't hold up, but the third one would.

#dropmic_lol

 

[Tince]

LeBron and Jordan won a third of these MVPs your talking about.

Would the Blazers be better if they had LeBron or Jordan instead of Lillard? Of course.

I'm not sure how your "point" gives any insight or help to the Blazers. Sure they would have a better chance at winning a title if they had an MVP wing player like LeBron, Kawhi, or pre injury Durant.

Wade won titles and was not a tall wing. Nash was an MVP of contending Suns teams that could've easily won titles. Tony Parker led the offense for multiple Spurs titles. Steph lead the offense for Warriors titles and the best record ever. Billups was a scoring PG for a title team.

The NBA is different today that 10 years ago, teams are scoring more from the PG position whereas historically PG was more for facilitating SG or bigs. Its really a different game. So these 30 year trends have little meaning.

If wings are the be all end all why didn't Boston make the finals with two great ones against Dragic? Why did the Clippers lose to a PG offense of Jamal Murry?

I get what you're saying, but I think you're missing a big point:

I'm not saying a team with good wing like Boston is automatically going to win the finals. I'm saying NO TEAM, lead by a player of below average height/length has ever won a title and be finals MVP. Meaning, a team winning a championship, needed a player of above average height to play at a series MVP level to win.

We're in a league where there are a ton of great PGs, yet, despite people saying the game has changed in favor of the PG, they are the ones more likely to see their productivity reduce in the playoffs and the teams with the elite wings are at an advantage.

I keep asking this question... In the next five years, what players to do you expect to win more championships:

Elite 6'4" under players : Curry, Dame, Harden, Westbrook, Kyrie

Elite 6'8" and over players: James, Giannis, Leonard, Doncic, Durant

 

[Tince]

If 6'6" is the question, then yes. I was responding to your line about 6'2" guys, though.

I guess my point is that if the last 13 finals MVPs were all over 6'6", the odds that a 6'2" player will be an MVP seems pretty low, agreed? In fact, I would bet it won't happen any time soon either.

Our roster isn't missing a nice role player, it's missing an all-nba wing. Until that wing is on the Blazers roster, we're just not winning championship. I don't care how much we belly-ache about CJ, scheme, coaches, etc. this roster is still a massive piece from being a serious contender. History would back this up.

 

[Tince]

You started out saying 6'9.5" and then you went to over 6'4". The fact is you need big guys to win but your team cornerstones don't need to be big guys to win big.

I like and agree with the majority of your post (which I did not quote).

I never set or moved any goal line. My first posted stated a fact, the average height of the NBA finals MVPs. I never said every championship team going forward would have to have an MVP level player over 6'-9.5". I'm using the 6'-9.5" average to contrast the odds that a team will win a finals on the back of someone 5 inches shorter (outside the bell curve) because I believe, in a series, a team can come up with a lot more schemes to reduce the impact of a 6'4" player than a 6'10" player. I'm surprised that take is even controversial at all, but it seems to be with some.

 

[SharpesTriumph]

I get what you're saying, but I think you're missing a big point:

I'm not saying a team with good wing like Boston is automatically going to win the finals. I'm saying NO TEAM, lead by a player of below average height/length has ever won a title and be finals MVP. Meaning, a team winning a championship, needed a player of above average height to play at a series MVP level to win.

We're in a league where there are a ton of great PGs, yet, despite people saying the game has changed in favor of the PG, they are the ones more likely to see their productivity reduce in the playoffs and the teams with the elite wings are at an advantage.

I keep asking this question... In the next five years, what players to do you expect to win more championships:

Elite 6'4" under players : Curry, Dame, Harden, Westbrook, Kyrie

Elite 6'8" and over players: James, Giannis, Leonard, Doncic, Durant

Steph Curry was PG on the best team of all time. Sure Iggy won a series MVP but ita delusional to say he lead that team more than Curry.

Elite wings are the hardest position to fill in the NBA and provide tons of value. That's true in the regular season and the playoffs.

 

[JoshuaHall]

I like and agree with the majority of your post (which I did not quote).

I never set or moved any goal line. My first posted stated a fact, the average height of the NBA finals MVPs. I never said every championship team going forward would have to have an MVP level player over 6'-9.5". I'm using the 6'-9.5" average to contrast the odds that a team will win a finals on the back of someone 5 inches shorter (outside the bell curve) because I believe, in a series, a team can come up with a lot more schemes to reduce the impact of a 6'4" player than a 6'10" player. I'm surprised that take is even controversial at all, but it seems to be with some.

Technically your 6’9.6 number is incorrect.

The actual number is 6’8.8 or 80.8 inches.

Also Doncic is 6’7.

Also, I think a more telling stat would be...
You need a top 3 player in the league to win a chip.

The exception is Dirk, who went nuts in those playoffs.

 

[JoshuaHall]

When the playoffs come, teams will scheme to take away options. It's my belief that it is much harder to take away players who have a size advantage, so I wanted to take a look at the height of the last 10 NBA Finals MVPs. Here it is:

View attachment 34039

The average finals MVP is 6'-9.6" . I don't think it's random that the teams who are able to nagivate their way to an NBA championship have have an elite, versitile player. Expecting the Blazers to win a title without that player is unrealistic; am I off base?

Best player in the league.
Best (healthy) player in the league.
Top 2.
Top 2.
Best player.
NR (Igoudala)
NR (Kawhi)
Best player.
Best player.
Top 5(ish).

The two true exceptions were the 4th “fiddle”, Igoudala and Kawhi, on absolutely loaded teams. (Steph, Klay, Dray) (Duncan, Parker, Ginobli)

So you need arguably the best player OR your 4th player has to be borderline all star quality.

Height probably does matter to a certain extent as well.

 

[kjironman1]

Best player in the league.
Best (healthy) player in the league.
Top 2.
Top 2.
Best player.
NR (Igoudala)
NR (Kawhi)
Best player.
Best player.
Top 5(ish).

The two true exceptions were the 4th “fiddle”, Igoudala and Kawhi, on absolutely loaded teams. (Steph, Klay, Dray) (Duncan, Parker, Ginobli)

So you need arguably the best player OR your 4th player has to be borderline all star quality.

Height probably does matter to a certain extent as well.

Notice the two exceptions were coupled with arguably the best or second best player in Steph or Duncan.

 

[Phatguysrule]

Technically your 6’9.6 number is incorrect.

The actual number is 6’8.8 or 80.8 inches.

Also Doncic is 6’7.

Also, I think a more telling stat would be...
You need a top 3 player in the league to win a chip.

The exception is Dirk, who went nuts in those playoffs.

And I hate to be that guy, but how much of this is due to biased officiating?

Not making excuses, but we need to get players of that caliber if we want to compete. The only one I can think of who didn't have that was Detroit after they picked up Sheed.

 

[RoseCityRebel]

I get what you're saying, but I think you're missing a big point:

I'm not saying a team with good wing like Boston is automatically going to win the finals. I'm saying NO TEAM, lead by a player of below average height/length has ever won a title and be finals MVP. Meaning, a team winning a championship, needed a player of above average height to play at a series MVP level to win.

We're in a league where there are a ton of great PGs, yet, despite people saying the game has changed in favor of the PG, they are the ones more likely to see their productivity reduce in the playoffs and the teams with the elite wings are at an advantage.

I keep asking this question... In the next five years, what players to do you expect to win more championships:

Elite 6'4" under players : Curry, Dame, Harden, Westbrook, Kyrie

Elite 6'8" and over players: James, Giannis, Leonard, Doncic, Durant

Davis is elite too. So is Jokic. Both are over 6-8”

 

[blazerkor]

I wanted to say although I've been making the argument throughout this thread that a lack of size in your most important players doesn't negate the possibility to win a championship, there is no argument to be made that height is an advantage in the game of basketball at every level. All of us have played basketball at some level. All of us have watched basketball at probably every level. There is no revelation here. Height has been seen as the greatest advantage a basketball player can have for the majority of the sport's existence. Now there are other advantages that have evolved to be seen as more or equally important but height is still the easiest of the great advantages you can have as a basketball player to identify. So the assertions that started this thread are not just accurate but obvious. The problem is that the assertion was used to imply the antiquated notion that height is the end all and be all of advantages in this sport. It also was implied that it's almost impossible to legitimately contend without your top player or at least one of your two top players having height and the average for that height was set at 6'9.5".

The Warriors went to two championships in a row and won one where the primary lineup they used didn't have a guy on it over 6'8"... in the 2015 NBA Finals that those Warriors won no player over 6'8" logged more than 19 minutes per game. Oh and by the way the 6'8" player was Harrison Barnes and was either the fourth or fifth option on the team. Also if KD didn't decide to tag along for the next couple of seasons I think it's obvious that the Warriors would have continued to contend for and likely win championships with that same lineup. Is that the most likely or easiest way to win in the NBA? No, height still matters but don't infer that height is a determining factor. Height does not determine the outcome of the NBA Finals or any game just look at the 2015 NBA Finals to figure that out and because that team played that same lineup in two straight Finals you can't write them off as fluky or just anecdotal. That primary lineup not only won the 2015 NBA Finals but won the most regular season games in league history in the 2015-1016 season. Just an opinion but if that team wouldn't have choked away the final three games of the 2016 NBA Finals then they would have been viewed as the greatest team in NBA history with their top 6 contributors being 6'8" or under (hell their top 4 guys were 6'6" and under). Another opinion that I think can be widely accepted about that team is, they didn't lose those last three games because of height. The narrative that started this thread is faulty. It's based on a very weird stat (the average height of Finals MVPs) and it just doesn't hold up to reality. Again height is a huge advantage in the game of basketball even at the highest levels, it's the easiest advantage to identify but just because it's obvious doesn't make it determinant... IT DOES NOT DETERMINE ANYTHING!

 

[Hoopguru]

If you can couple height with speed and shooting, now you got something.
Davis and The Greek Freak are examples and Im sure t6here are others. The joker cant jump but he runs the floor well, shoots and passes well.

 

[Hoopguru]

Im not sure the Lakers win the championship w/o Davis and his length.

 

[Tince]

Technically your 6’9.6 number is incorrect.

The actual number is 6’8.8 or 80.8 inches.

Also Doncic is 6’7.

Also, I think a more telling stat would be...
You need a top 3 player in the league to win a chip.

The exception is Dirk, who went nuts in those playoffs.

You're correct on the height, nice catch. Doesn't change the theory any.

Top 3 player is also a way of looking at it. How often is a top 3 player average or below average height/length for his position? My entire theory is you need to have players with additional height/length allowing their superior physical skills to combat teams trying to reduce their effectiveness with multiple bodies. You would agree with that, right?

 

[Tince]

. IT DOES NOT DETERMINE ANYTHING!

Just to understand, your conclusion is: The Finals MVP being at or above average height in 13 straight finals is totally random?

It just happened to be a coin flip that landed on heads 13 straight times? From a statistical standpoint, the odds of that happening would be 0.012%

 

[blazerkor]

You're correct on the height, nice catch. Doesn't change the theory any.

Top 3 player is also a way of looking at it. How often is a top 3 player average or below average height/length for his position? My entire theory is you need to have players with additional height/length allowing their superior physical skills to combat teams trying to reduce their effectiveness with multiple bodies. You would agree with that, right?

I do to an extent if the offense is executed correctly guys like Steph and Dame and AI and Isaiah before them can flourish and lead teams to a lot of success but yes they do usually need a lot of length around them to make those offenses work. Like I said, this is basketball so length will always be an advantage, especially when it is paired with athleticism and skill.

 

[JoshuaHall]

You're correct on the height, nice catch. Doesn't change the theory any.

Top 3 player is also a way of looking at it. How often is a top 3 player average or below average height/length for his position? My entire theory is you need to have players with additional height/length allowing their superior physical skills to combat teams trying to reduce their effectiveness with multiple bodies. You would agree with that, right?

This is an interesting question because I *think* that you just need the best player on the court, no matter what “size” they are — or you need to be absolutely LOADED.

An argument could be made that all of the “best players” tend to be taller because height is an advantage.

I would of course counter with MJ who was 6’4.88, Kobe who was 6’4 and some change, D Wade, Curry, Jerry West...

Anyhow, my true assertion would be this:
With Dame and CJ, we need to build like the Pistons. We would need something like Middleton, Aldridge, Nurk to round out the lineup.

OR

We need Dame + Giannis / LBJ / AD with a bunch of scrubs.

But like I said, height and “best player” may not be entirely mutually exclusive.