According to Nate Silver and his Elo rating—which ranks performances of NBA teams by point differential and quality of opposition—this year’s Warriors are the best team in history, edging out the 1995-96 Bulls. The 1996-97 Bulls are third, followed by the Warriors teams of the previous two years. So the Warriors already have three of the top five teams of all-time, though it must be said Silver has received a lot of criticism for a ranking that leaves out all the 1980s Lakers teams, all but one Celtics team, and includes the Cavaliers—not of the past three years, but from 2009, when they failed even to make the NBA finals.
https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/874675939355095041
Elo is calculated under several different conditions—peak, the highest point during the regular or postseason; average throughout the season; and at the end of the season. Silver ranks teams by an average of these three ratings, but this year’s Warriors also had the highest peak—right after their 3-0 start to the NBA finals—and the highest ending rating. The 2015-16 Warriors, the 73 win team, had the highest average, but their overall rating was pulled down by losing the NBA finals, resulting in a much lower end rating.
One of the great under-reported stories of this year’s NBA is that the Cavaliers, again, greatly out-performed their Elo rating in the playoffs. Just before the end of the season, Silver gave them only a 2% chance of winning the NBA finals, based on not only a relatively poor regular season record—by W-L, they finished in a 4-way tie for fifth, and by point differential they were only 8th—but they were playing particularly poorly at the end of the season. Like most performance metrics, Elo has a recency bias.
The past three years, the Cavs have averaged 15 fewer wins per season than the Warriors, yet every time the postseason has come around, they have blown through the Eastern Conference, and except for this year, played the Warriors very competitively in the finals. Why the discrepancy? Silver considers several possibilities, but I think the simplest one is the main one: the Cavaliers don’t try that hard during the regular season. I find this very ironic, because one of the great over-reported stories of the NBA this year is that teams rest their star players sometimes, to keep them fresh for the postseason, and the fans complain they get cheated when they pay to see a game and those players aren’t on the floor. But it seems to me the Cavs are basically resting their players much of the season, just going through the motions in a weak conference, then getting serious during the playoffs. If the fans really want to complain about being cheated, they ought to ask why the Cavs team they see during the regular season bears so little resemblance to the one that plays in the postseason, whereas with the Warriors, what you see is what you get.
When the Warriors began the 2015-16 season with 24 straight wins, it was a record not just for the NBA, but for any North American pro sport. I think their 16-1 postseason record should be considered in the same light. Of the four major sports, none has ever featured a team that went undefeated under the current extended postseason format, except of course the NFL, where each round is one game, so the SB winner is always undefeated in the postseason.
The last MLB team to go undefeated in the postseason was the 1976 Reds, who were 7-0, and that was when there was just one best-of-five league championship series preceding the WS. The best record in the current format, with one best-of-five division series followed by a best-of-seven championship series, then the WS, is 11-1, achieved by the 1999 Yankees and 2005 White Sox.
In the NHL, the last team to go undefeated in the postseason was the 1960 Canadiens, who played just two best-of-seven series, and thus finished 8-0. In 1968, a third best-of-seven series was added to the playoffs, and in that first year, the Canadiens went 12-1, which is the best ever for that format. In the current NHL format, begun in the 1980s, teams play four best-of-seven series in the postseason, just like the NBA, and I believe the best record for that was achieved by the 1988 Oilers, who went 16-2. That team strikes me as a lot like the current Warriors, an offensive powerhouse loaded with great players, beginning, of course, with Gretzky.
The former NBA record was 15-1, so the Warriors now have the best single postseason record of any sport that plays three or more short series. They also have the record for the most consecutive wins to begin a postseason, and I believe the record for the most consecutive wins within one or consecutive postseasons. Wrt the latter, the Cavs shared the old NBA record of 13, which they tied in their Game 2 win over Boston in the EC finals. The Warriors broke that record when they won Game 2 in the NBA finals.
jmdirt said:
A lot is being made of KD being the reason that GS won, but in a series like this, the starters tend to cancel each other out, and its the roll players/bench that make the difference. In this case, the Cle starters beat the GS starters, and it was the bench, Igu, who won the game.
LJ 41, KD 39
KI 26, SC 34
JS 25, KT 11
TT 15, DG 10
KL 6, ZP 0
C=113, GS=94
Bench C 7, GS 35
While the Warriors definitely had the edge in the bench, this scoring comparison is misleading, because it treats Iguodala as a bench player. Technically that’s true, because he’s not on the floor when the game begins, but he’s a starter in the more meaningful sense that in the postseason he plays about as much as the nominal starters do. His 38 minutes in Game 5 was fourth highest of the Warriors, after Green, Durant and Curry, and more than Thompson, let alone ZaZa. If you move Iggy’s 20 points from bench to starters, the bench edge is now just 15-7 (ZaZa didn’t score, so considering him as a bench player doesn’t affect this), while the starters comparison is 114-113, GS (though GS starters, including Iggy, played slightly more minutes than Cleveland’s front five did).