What it takes to win it all

With  pre season just around the corner I thought I would put down some numbers to illustrate what it has taken over the past 36 years to capture the title.  Starting in 1979-80 the champ has had in 31 of those 36 years, at least 2 all-league players who had averaged at least 16 points per game and or 8 rebounds per game in the years leading up to and including the championship year  or  for 4 of those 36 years  only had 1 all-league player but did have  at least I additional player that was an all-star. The only year that didn't qualify was 2003-04 when Ben Wallace was an all-league player but did not have any additional support.   34 of the 36 All-league players that I reviewed were of the highest level having been named to the all-star team in at least 66% of the years leading up to and including the championship year. Ben Wallace was the exception in 2003-04  
  The average winning per cent for the champ during those 36 years was .745. and only 3 teams with a winning percent of under .667 won the title.
  I have not researched it but my guess is that there were about 5 teams a year that qualified per above requirements and were legitimate contenders each year.
Note: I did not consider All-league players that were probably selected on the basis of assist but failed to qualify on the points per game factor.  ( I consider assist to be the most useless of all the stat line items)

Danny met those requirements back in 2007-08. Here's hoping he can accumulate those chips and players necessary to get the Celtics back to being a legitimate contender in the near future.  

 swish

swish wrote:  With  pre season just around the corner I thought I would put down some numbers to illustrate what it has taken over the past 36 years to capture the title.  Starting in 1979-80 the champ has had in 31 of those 36 years, at least 2 all-league players who had averaged at least 16 points per game and or 8 rebounds per game in the years leading up to and including the championship year  or  for 4 of those 36 years  only had 1 all-league player but did have  at least I additional player that was an all-star. The only year that didn't qualify was 2003-04 when Ben Wallace was an all-league player but did not have any additional support.   35 of the 36 All-league players that I reviewed were off the highest level having been named to the all-star team in at least 80% of the years leading up to and including the championship year. Ben Wallace was the exception in 2003-04  
  The average winning per cent for the champ during those 36 years was .745. and only 3 teams with a winning percent of under .667 won the title.
  I have not researched it but my guess is that there were about 5 teams a year that qualified per above requirements and were legitimate contenders each year.
Note: I did not consider All-league players that were probably selected on the basis of assist but failed to qualify on the points per game factor.  ( I consider assist to be the most useless of all the stat line items)

Danny met those requirements back in 2007-08. Here's hoping he can accumulate those chips and players necessary to get the Celtics back to being a legitimate contender in the near future.  

 swish

swish,

Were those All-League players you refer to ones that were then-current All League or ones that had at one point in their career been All-League? And does 3rd team All-League count as well as 1st team?


bob


.

bob

All league includes any years prior to and including the championship year. All-league whether its 1st, 2nd or 3rd team. All are included. Up until the 88-89 season it was only 2 teams. From 88-89 on its been 3 teams. A change was made to reflect the increase in the number of teams. With about 450 players in the league to be voted into the top 15 is certainly noteworthy.

swish

sounds about right, so there are at most 3-4 teams competing for the title each year.

I would note that in my opinion many times players BECOME all-league or all- stars once their teams become solid playoff teams.

chicken or the egg I guess.

how many all- league performers were on the Hawks before last years success?

Answer= ZERO

How many All-league players on the Warriors?

Answer= ONE Curry

you win, players start getting cred as best players. you lose its a lot harder.

kdp59

The Warriors had 3 players going into last year that were all- league. Bogut was all-league in 2009-10, Lee in 2012-13, and Curry in 2013-14. And of course both Curry and Thompson made All-League last year.
Atlanta Had 1 All-League player on their roster at the start of last year. Horford was All-League in 2010-11. They managed to win 2 series in the weak Eastern Conference before the Cavs swept them in the E C finals.
My research indicates to me that in the entire history of the NBA, the teams with the best chance of grabbing the brass ring are those teams with at least 2 super stars on the roster. With only 5 players per team on the floor at a time and if your team is fortunate enough to have 2 or more on the floor your in pretty darn good shape.

swish

well in that case we already have LEE

we just need to sign Andrew Bynum and we're on our way.

for some reason I thought you meant all-league players in the same decade...my mistake.

kdp59

Not so fast with the victory balloons. My response to you lacked the detail that I should have included But because I hate to type was too brief. In detail I would have noted that AT LEAST one of the all-leaguers must have been an all-star selections in at least 66% of the years leading up to the championship year. Its the presence of this Super star amongst the best which form the core of the best teams. Lee, while an all- leaguer,  is certainly not in the same class as many of the others like Bird, Jordan and Garnett just to name a few who were annual all-stars as well.

swish

swish,

Nice research.  And, it backs up the "eye test" that shows most of us that the current Cs are not yet ready to compete for an NBA championship.

But, that is OK as long as they continue to improve.  As kdp mentions there certainly can be some "chicken or the egg" potential in the mix as well every once in a while.  After Ainge traded away Garnett and Pierce I don't think that most Cs fans expected championship thoughts until the rebuild was at least 80% completed.

Now the key is how fast will Ainge and Stevens complete the rebuild to get us to the 80% level?  As Ainge mentioned this week, there are four ways that will have to be blended together (individual improvement, drafting, trading and free agency) to get the necessary talent to accomplish the goal of competing for banner #18.

I will say that I have been very impressed with the present coaching staff in its continuing efforts to develop individual players.  Free agency and drafting are always somewhat hit and miss while trading is often very opportunistic (see Garnett in the summer of 2007).

Right now, everything is on the right path from where I sit and watch.  Can't wait to start reading and seeing some new stuff that relates to players on both the practice and game courts.  I will stand by my prediction of Boston winning 50 games this year.

swish wrote:kdp59

Not so fast with the victory balloons. My response to you lacked the detail that I should have included But because I hate to type was too brief. In detail I would have noted that AT LEAST one of the all-leaguers must have been an all-star selections in at least 75% of the years leading up to the championship year. Its the presence of this Super star amongst the best which form the core of the best teams. Lee, while an all- leaguer,  is certainly not in the same class as many of the others like Bird, Jordan and Garnett just to name a few who were annual all-stars as well.

swish

that does clarify things a bit, thanks.

with that I can and do agree with your premise, though I still say sometimes the accolades come with winning.

I guess my main point was that this team is built more like Atlanta right now (noting that the Hawks have won nothing).

It's a good stat as far as it goes. BUT if you look at teams that have/had two all leaguers and still lost, that's probably an interesting stat, too.

There are too many variables to take into account. Injuries, for example (Russell's ankle, Havlicek's shoulder, Larry's back).

My personal preference is for a team that has all leaguers at every position. It's a Celtic tradition. Harumph.

First of all, miracles do happen, the Miracle Mets and the 2004 Detroit Pistons just to name two.  None of us want to hang our hats on that but anomalies do happen and #18 is #18 is #18 however we get there.  A combination of the evolution of NBA basketball being anticipated by Danny (Jeff Green was an aborted attempt by Danny to get us a Lebron-like player.  It's not Danny's fault Green couldn't achieve consistency.  He did, however, have the talent and that's what Danny bought) coupled with the genius of Brad (and his staff's player development efforts) could make us only a player away from contention.   Once you are a contender getting those additional pieces to make a Finals appearance an expectation rather than a mere hope, gets easier.  In other words the rich get richer.

Does it help if you have multiple go-to guys?  Of course.  How does one define a go-to guy?  All-league is a convenient and generally accepted way, but it is still completely subjective.  There are  lots of players who are not named All-League that are at least as deserving as some of the players who are.  Bubble players, including those on the bubble of All-League, lose out regularly.  Being this level of bubble still makes them pretty freaking good and maybe even hungrier and more driven.

Eddie House.  James Posey.  PJ Brown.  All key players who got us #17.  High quality role players can turn a series.  Leon Powe in game 2 of the 2008 Finals is a good example.  Our starters held their own, and that's about it, but it was The Junkyard Dawg that killed the Lakers. All of them go to guys in specific roles and at key times, players who won games for us and none of them ever even being close to All-League. All roads to #18 go through the playoffs and the playoffs are a maximum of 16 games. You don't have to carry the team all year, and earn All-League, to become a monster in the playoffs. Was Iggy ever All-League? No. How about Draymond Green? Nope again. Bogut was and he mostly sat.

Danny knows we need upgrades.   Why do you think he's signing Amir and Jonas to one year deals?  Why do  you think everything he has been doing for the last 2 years has been oriented towards flexibility and not towards locking up players long-term?

One deal, the right deal and not another re-shuffle of the deck deal, and the Celtics landscape will be very different.  If Danny gets a player who has never been All-League but has been good enough to be on the bubble, this year or next might be his year.  And he'll be in green and cheaper than a player who was All-League but isn't a perennial one.  The perennial ones are either ridiculously expensive, requiring a whole new rebuild around them, or just not available unless they are well on their way on the back 9.

And you know Trader Danny never sleeps.

If the players did their jobs this off-season and worked on their games Danny might finally have all the bait he needs.


bob


.

akaspike

Please note that I specified that it would only single out the legitimate contenders. On average, that's about 4 or 5 teams each year. I'll be very happy if and when the Celtics reach that plateau again knowing that Danny has put us in a position to win it all. Then like you say, other factors enter into the picture like injuries (see Cleveland last year ). Yeah, lady luck is a huge factor but what does one do about that. In all the Celtic championship years the team has always had at least 2 all-league players on the roster going into the championship season. Here's a detailed breakdown. 5 of those champs had 2 all-leaguers, 7 had 3 all-leaguers and 5 had 4 all-leaguers. We Celtic fans sure have been blessed with super stars that formed the core of all those great teams.

swish

"In detail I would have noted that AT LEAST one of the all-leaguers must have been an all-star selections in at least 75% of the years leading up to the championship year. Its the presence of this Super star amongst the best which form the core of the best teams."

One would like to think that the team game is mightier than the individual game. For example, what defeated the Kareem/ Big O Bucks wasn't so much Cowens' maniacal effort, as it was all the other guys playing just as hard, if not quite as loudly. Now, I'm not so sure. Maybe a team does need a superstar, as long as he plays his game within the context of the team game.

One aspect of the team-rebuilding the Celtics are currently undergoing, is the likelihood that Danny's careful acquisitions and draft picks will produce a flock of talented players. Grafting a superstar onto that rootstock would surely make certain critics re-evaluate Trader Danny. Bob's right: Danny's only one deal away.

akaspike

Both were very gifted teams. The Bucks had 2 all-leaguers, Jabbar and Robertson and the Celts had 2 all-leaguers, Hondo and Cowens plus JoJo who had been selected to the all star team in 3 of the 4 years leading up to the championship year. JoJo went onto become an all-leaguer in 1974-75.

swish