[Seuss]

GM/Coach has one day to get his gameplan up. Here's a gameplan template.

Offensive Plan:
Defensive Plan:
Overall Focus:

(#1) Indiana Pacers Team:

PG: Magic Johnson
SG: David Thompson
SF: Chris Mullin
PF: Dolph Schayes
C: Bill Russell

BENCH: Tom Chambers, Mark Jackson, John Starks, Jalen Rose, Michael Cage

(#4) St. Louis Hawks Team:

PG: Gary Payton
SG: Mitch Richmond
SF: Bernard King
PF: Buck Williams
CE: Tim Duncan

BENCH: Brad Daugherty, Andrew Toney, Paul Silas, Gus Williams, Richard Jefferson

[jericho]

Well, no question this is a tough series. Magic and Russell are as an intimidating pair as there is in this league, but let's look at how the matchups really work across the board and how the teams can really mesh in this contest

Offensive Plan:

Again, St. Louis is versatile enough to be opportunistic based on the looks the defense gives. We've got the horses to run (King, Richmond, Payton, Buck, Jefferson, Silas, etc.), and will be even quicker to push the pace than against Chicago since I don't see the Pacers' wings defending that well on the break.

But with an emphasis on a half-court attack, I'll take advantage of the fact that both my centers are great passers, and Duncan in particular has a fearsome mid-range jumper. They'll spend time in the low post using their superior size to work the post-up game against Russell, but will frequently step out and work the high post. Duncan especially will look to draw Russell out from the paint. If Slim Bill stays planted, Timmy shoots a high percentage on that banker. If Russell takes his shotblocking out of the paint, Duncan (or Payton or Gus or Daugherty) can hit one of many cutters for a high-octane drive to the iron.

With Richmond and Toney I can always have a solid deep threat on the court. Payton obviously doesn't have the size and strength advantages here that he enjoys against most other teams, so he'll run lots of screens off the high post big man and then either streak in for the kill or (more likely, if Russell's there waiting) swing the ball over to a shooter.

Also...Russell isn't a big offensive threat on his team, which allows me to field a twin towers look with Daugherty playing more minutes. I think Duncan at PF is way too much for Schayes to handle.

Defensive Plan:

This Indiana team can score every which way, but I'm not sure they have a clear offensive identity that utilizes all their strengths. Magic is probably their best post-up scorer, and Mullin is the only shooter I worry much about.

Mostly the Pacers are geared to run and run, and Thompson can certainly finish but is much more comfortable when he can dominate the ball and work an isolation opportunity. Just utilizing him as one of Magic's cogs in a Showtime attack honestly makes him easier to defend, putting him on a level of many other athletic wings in this league.

Russell can't be left alone, but whoever's guarding him can cheat a bit into the lane to make it tougher for penetrators.

I can't make a straight-faced case for shutting Magic down in this series, but Payton can bother him as much as any PG ever, and at least keep him from absolutely taking the game over and carrying it off on his back. Other Pacers will have to find a way to step up (and do so within the framework of a Magic-led offense. The Hawks can get away with single coverage, and when Mullin's out of the game can even lapse into zone, daring guys like Magic and Thompson to beat them consistently from the outside.

Rebounding is pretty much a toss-up in this season. I don't want to take anything away from Russell's dominance on the boards, but just bear in mind the difference in available rebounds per era; Russell was grabbing 20-25 rpg when his team was grabbing 70-80 rpg overall. When Duncan was grabbing 12-13 rpg, the Spurs overall were in the 41-43 rpg zone. Buck was consistently one of the best rebounders of the '80s, and Silas was strong as well.

Overall Focus:

Again, the Hawks can't stop Magic but they can irritate him, and he doesn't have ideal tools to work with. Russell is a factor of course, but he has to decide between giving up easy jumpers or counting on Mullin to stop King from driving in.

I think St. Louis' edges are: 1) King's ability to score on Mullin and Rose, 2) Duncan's versatility on offense, 3) Toney's ability to step up as a clutch assassin, and 4) a much stronger bench.

And of course, this is still Magic and Russell we're talking about. So I bow to the collective wisdom of this league's GMs!

[Sharpie]

I dunno about this... I see the Pacers almost as a six man team, the starting 5 plus Chambers. Russell can handle the minutes, so can Dolph Schayes and Magic, but Mullin and Thompson will have to catch some breathers which will make Starks and Rose play more minutes than they should. That could hurt the Pacers unless they play Mark Jackson as the seventh man, who is ok, I guess, here. On the other hand... Russell can really limit Duncan offensively (he isn't an offensive juggernaut to begin with) which will severely hamper the Hawks offense, and Magic can make Payton's defense and post up offense largely ineffective with his size.

EDIT: Thought about this some more... I have no idea who to even lean towards. The Pacers top heavy rotation... Or the Hawks depth. Hmm...

RE: Russell's rebounding vs Duncan's rebounding. In Duncan's best rebounding season he grabbed 12.9 out of the 42.6 rebounds the Spurs got that season on average. In Russell's best season he grabbed 24.7 out of the 64.1* the Celtics got that season on average. So, it's basically 30% of the Spurs' rebounds for Duncan and 39% of the Celtics' rebounds for Russell.

*The total rebound numbers basketball-reference has are wrong, in that 1964 season (80 game season) they have the Celtics getting 71.7 rebounds per game, but if you add up the rebounds of all their players they only get 64.1 rebounds per game.*

[Diophantos]

Originally Posted by Sharpie

RE: Russell's rebounding vs Duncan's rebounding. In Duncan's best rebounding season he grabbed 12.9 out of the 42.6 rebounds the Spurs got that season on average. In Russell's best season he grabbed 24.7 out of the 64.1* the Celtics got that season on average. So, it's basically 30% of the Spurs' rebounds for Duncan and 39% of the Celtics' rebounds for Russell.

*The total rebound numbers basketball-reference has are wrong, in that 1964 season (80 game season) they have the Celtics getting 71.7 rebounds per game, but if you add up the rebounds of all their players they only get 64.1 rebounds per game.*

The difference isn't that big. First of all, Russell played more minutes per game than Duncan, which you're not taking into account. Second of all, regard B-R.com's "error"; it's just as likely, IMO, that the individual rebounding stats are wrong and the team stats are correct. Not really sure about that one.

In any case:
Duncan, 2003, 2005:
2003 - Per minute on the floor, Duncan grabs 37% of the Spurs' rebounds.
2005 - Per minute on the floor, Duncan grabs 38% of the Spurs' rebounds.

Russell, 1964:
If you believe B-R's team rebounding, Russell grabs 37% of Celtics' rebounds.
If you use the sum of all the Celtics' players rebounds, Russell grabs 42% of Celtics' rebounds.

In either case, the difference is not really as big as you indicate.


As for the matchup itself, it's a certainly an interesting one. I'll come back to this thread once I think about it for a while.

[Sharpie]

That's a 10% difference (38% to 42%), significant, IMO.

And no, it's not as likely that they got the individual numbers wrong, the explanation is simple. Basketball-Reference, prior to 1969, counted team rebounds in with their rebound totals, after that they just counted the actual rebounds. That's why, according to B-R, in 1968 the NBA averaged 5431 rebounds per team, and the very next season in 1969 the average was 4667. If you count up and average the rebounds of every individual team in 1968 the NBA averaged 4742 rebounds per team.

[Diophantos]

Originally Posted by Sharpie

That's a 10% difference (38% to 42%), significant, IMO.

And no, it's not as likely that they got the individual numbers wrong, the explanation is simple. Basketball-Reference, prior to 1969, counted team rebounds in with their rebound totals, after that they just counted the actual rebounds. That's why, according to B-R, in 1968 the NBA averaged 5431 rebounds per team, and the very next season in 1969 the average was 4667. If you count up and average the rebounds of every individual team in 1968 the NBA averaged 4742 rebounds per team.

Ah okay, gotcha. Wasn't aware of that, thanks.

In any case, yes it's a significant difference, but certainly nowhere near the 39% vs. 30% you originally had. Duncan's a great rebounder, but I don't think many people would put him right with Russell in that respect, more like a tier down. Just trying to get a handle on how big the difference really is.

[Sharpie]

Yeah, and tier above Russell, and everyone else for that matter, is your man, Dennis Rodman.

[jericho]

I don't mean to suggest that Duncan and Russell are comparable rebounders--just making sure everyone's aware that the spread isn't nearly as far as the raw numbers suggest. And thinking of a head-to-head matchup in a legends league makes for a very interesting analysis, on both ends of the floor.

[Sharpie]

Yeah, this is the most intriguing series for me because of Russell and Magic being on the same team. I would love to vote for them but I have two problems:

1. How do they combat the depth of the Hawks? Toney, Daugherty, Silas, and Williams off the bench are a devastating group, especially in comparison to Chambers and Mark Jackson.

2. How can you expect Russell, and Russell alone, to defend against their whole team? He's the best ever, so I can see him limiting Duncan and Williams, Daugherty, AND Silas (none of them were near the level of Wilt and Bob Pettit), and I can see Magic's size dominating Payton, but what do you do about King, Richmond, and Toney? Again, Russell was the best, greatest help defender of all time, but even the best needed the perimeter help of great defenders like K.C. Jones and John Havlicek.

It's going to be tough convincing people that the Pacers can handle this team, even though personally, I think Russell and Magic can find a way to make the starting five and Tom Chambers unstoppable, not sure if that would be enough though.

[Knick_Killer31]

No way is Tim Duncan a better rebounder or a better defender then Bill Russel.

[Knick_Killer31]

Offensive Game-Plan


The game-plan is for scoring to come from everyone and for my team to use it's height advantage. If Mullin and Thompson get tired from my teams run 'n' gun system Tom Chambers will come in at Small Forward and Magic will move to Shooting guard so Mark Jackson can come in at Point and take over the playmaker role and use all of the teams creative weapons. If we choose to go this route he can either give it to Magic to post up on whoever decides to guard him, and if help comes onto Magic he can kick it back out for someone to drive or give it to a wide open Russel. Jackson could give it to Chambers so he can use his height advantage on whoever guards him or he could give it to Schayes to shoot. Russel will be the garbage man cleaning up all the missed shots and putting them in himself. Or Mark Jackson if needed Mark Jackson can attempt to score off the ol' pick 'n' roll.
Now if Thompson and Mullin are in, Magic can either create a scoring chance for himself by posting up or he can go in to post and cause them to double him and he can kick it out to an open Mullin to shoot or Thompson to cause an ISO for himself. Once again Russel will clean up all the garbage and put the missed shots in the bucket himself.
Our offence will be fast fast fast and will be doing something different on every possesion to confuse the Hawks defenders.


Defensive Game-Plan

Duncan and King are most likely to do most of the Hawks scoring. Everyone will be playing a Zone except for Bill Russel who will be roughing up Tim Duncan constantly. The goal is to make Tim Duncans life hard as possible. The Zone will be designed that every player will be immediately met by a defender. We want Gary Payton to be forced to do all the scoring himself. If they somehow get the ball to T-Duncan he will be double teamed immediately and everyone will move over a space to make sure no shooters are left open. King will also be found double-teamed and just like with Duncan everyone re-position themselves to make sure nobody is left open. Like i said before, the goal is to force Gary Payton to try to score all by himself.


Overal Game-Plan:

Well my game-plan consists of the team using mainly 7 players. So yes the Hawks have a stronger bench but really how often are you going to see Magic and Russel on the bench? Not very often...if ever. The plan is really tire out and frustrate the Hawks and make them go to players they usually dont go to. The plan is to have Gary Payton score the most points for the Hawks and to make sure he cannot use his 2 offensive weapons in King and Duncan.

I just think my starting 5 is all around quite better and that Tim Duncan and Bernard King cannot beat Magic Johnson and Bill Russel. I just feel his two main scoring options wont cause all that many problems and that Gary Payton won't really phase Magic Johnson all that much.

[jericho]

Originally Posted by Sharpie

2. How can you expect Russell, and Russell alone, to defend against their whole team? He's the best ever, so I can see him limiting Duncan and Williams, Daugherty, AND Silas (none of them were near the level of Wilt and Bob Pettit), and I can see Magic's size dominating Payton, but what do you do about King, Richmond, and Toney?

I realize Pettit has nothing to do with this series, but just out of curiosity, do you really think Duncan is nowhere near the level of Bob Pettit? In what sense? These days, discussions of the greatest PF ever tend to start with Duncan, Malone, Barkley, and Pettit, and occasionally someone will throw in Garnett and Hayes.