You do realize that among the 9 teams, Wade has faced the easiest two defenses by far right? 04 Pistons 95.4 01 76ers 98.9 08 Celtics 98.9 02 Nets 99.5 09 Magic 101.9 00 Pacers 103.6 10 Celtics 103.8 06 Mavs 105.0 11 Mavs 105.0
No, it's not. It's saying Terry played better than LeBron, and that's it. Sometimes a great player can play poorly, and sometimes a decent player can play great. A superstar receiving extra attention, something they see all the time, is not an excuse for them playing poorly or playing very passively. And in the case of Wade and Kobe, who this thread was about, one receives no more attention than the other.
Yes I do. However, Wade also has posted very good series against the Pistons and Celtics: 2005 vs Detroit http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/200505230MIA.html 2006 vs Detroit http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/200606020MIA.html 2010 vs Boston http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/201004170BOS.html I think he would be ok vs the tougher defenses.
The 2010 Celtics were very good defensively in the playoffs, after they coasted through the regular season. Go look at the numbers that Kobe posted against them in the 2010 Finals, when LA only broke 95 once. http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/201006030LAL.html Were the Pistons not the same in 2005? Wade was very good against them that postseason as well. And the 2006 Pistons were 3rd in the league in opponents PPG (90.2 a night). Are you suddenly not going by PPG anymore? The 2006 Pistons also had the best record in basketball that year, with the same starting five from their title team plus McDyess. Edit: Just noted that you are using the defensive rating measure. If being 5th in the league isn't very good then I would love to hear what ranking is very good to you.
04 Pistons were 2nd in the league in defense. Using your same measure (defensive rating), the 05 Pistons were 3rd defensively and the 06 Pistons, who also had the best record in basketball, were 5th defensively. Make those rankings 2nd (same as 04) and 3rd if you go by ppg allowed. The 2010 Celtics were 5th in both rankings. I think he would be ok vs the tougher defenses.
I think Wade would play worse against tougher defenses and Kobe would play better against weaker ones. The problem with only looking at the defensive ranking of the team for that given year is that it ignores the rule changes that make defense as a whole tougher or easier across the league and thus makes eye popping offensive numbers more or less rare.
Dream's playoff runs were top of the line. For the entire playoffs his 1994-95 season is probably unmatched. Personally, I thinks its number 1. His finals runs while great were not on the same all time level. Still fantastic though. Wade with ref help in 06 carried the worst team (IMO) in recent history to win a championship. It was an amazing performance.
But the numbers show that Wade still played great against tougher defenses. These are the same rule changes that were in place when you listed the 2008 Celtics as one of the very tough defenses that Kobe faced in the Finals. The fact is those Pistons and Celtics teams that Wade played well against were among the best in the league defensively.
No they don't. The "best" defense Wade faced in the playoffs would be a below average Finals opponent for Kobe. Its like comparing a couple of pick up artist. One guy is picking up women at Woodstock the other at BYU. The prudes at Woodstock don't compare to the prudes at BYU. The 08 Celtics were a historically great defense no doubt. The Pistons and 76ers were just statistically superior at limiting production on a per possession basis . The 2010 Celtics coasted during the regular season and turned it on in the playoffs. Especially on defense. Wade was superior in 2008 putting up numbers in a 5 game 1st round series loss compared to Kobe in a 7 game 5th championship winning slugfest. Good Job.
as great as wade was in 2006, we all know hed be bricking every shot if the whistle blows a little bit less.
No, the best defense that Wade faced in the playoffs would be some of the same teams that Kobe faced in the Finals. Some of the bench players for those teams were different (i.e. the Pistons) but the cores were still the same and no one in the core was old. For example, the 2004 Pistons shut Kobe down in the Finals. The 2005 Pistons almost won another title and this is how Wade fared against them in the ECF's that year (loss in 7 games, with Shaq): http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/200505230MIA.html Game 1 loss - 16, 6 dimes, 4 boards, 2 steals, 3 blocks, 2 tos, 7/25 fgs, 0/1 tres, 2/2 fts Game 2 win - 40, 8, 6, 1, 2, 4, 15/28, 0/0, 10/10 Game 3 win - 36, 7, 2, 0, 1, 2, 12/21, 0/0, 12/18 Game 4 loss - 28, 2, 6, 1, 0, 3, 10/22, 0/2, 8/10 Game 5 win - 15, 3, 4, 5, 0, 1, 4/9, 0/0, 7/8. Only 27 minutes this game due to injury. Game 6 loss - didn't play Game 7 loss - 20, 1, 4, 1, 0, 5, 7/20, 0/1, 6/7 The 2004 Pistons won 54 games, were 2nd in the league in defense per both ratings (ppg and def rtg) and won the Finals. The 2005 Pistons won 54 games, were 2nd and 3rd in the league in both defensive ratings and lost in Game 7 of the Finals, a series they may have won if Sheed doesn't leave Horry wide open like an idiot. Out of 24 playoff games, opponents only broke 90 eight times (3 of those were against Miami). In other words, please spare us this garbage that Wade wasn't facing great defenses, or that somehow the Pistons were great defensively when Kobe played them but not when Wade faced them one year later (same core, with McDyess added). It's quite laughable. It was a great job considering that one was playing with the likes of Beasley, J.Oneal, Haslem and Chalmers and the other was playing with the likes of Gasol, Bynum, Odom, Artest and Fisher. If Kobe could have produced like Wade then the series would not have been a slugfest and LA would have won easily, instead of needing Artest to bail them out in Game 7.
95.4 vs 101.2 The 05 Pistons gave up 5.8 more pts per 100 possessions when compared to the 04 Pistons. That's a huge amount. Thats a larger difference between the 1st ranked Bulls this year and 12 ranked Pacers. Its a larger difference than the 15th ranked Thunder and the 30th ranked Raptors this year. Ron Artest was 7 for 18 in Game 7 of the 2010 Finals. It's not like Kobe had LeBron James by his side.
2nd or 3rd in the league in defense, depending on which rating you want to use. Held teams under 90 points in 67% of their playoff games. Almost repeated in a Finals that was known for BORING DEFENSE, one freaking year later with the same core, plus McDyess. The bottom line is you are trying to argue that the 2005 Pistons weren't a great defensive basketball team, and that's a very silly argument to make. I doubt you can find anyone on earth that watched basketball in 2005, or any player from that season that won't say the 2005 Pistons were great defensively. That logic is as faulty as Yao Ming's foot. So I guess the 86 Celtics also weren't a great defense, since their rating was 102.6, which was higher than the Pistons rating? I'm highlighting them because any Rockets fan that was alive then should know just how solid that team was defensively. You have to guage the rating by how they compared to other teams that season. The Celtics were 1st that year, just like the Pistons were 3rd in 2005. It's silly to say any team that finished in the top 3 in defense in a season wasn't great defensively. I don't think Wade had LeBron James, or any other stud player by his side in the 2010 postseason.
No I'm pointing out that the 04 Pistons were significantly better than the 05 Pistons at limiting offensive production over the course of the season. That's not an argument. That's just a fact. If the 05 Pistons were great defensively the 04 Pistons were incredible and amazing. They were simply a step or two above the 05 Pistons.
