Every single sports show ive seen so far has pretty much said this Celtics team is the best defensive team in the modern era... a few have stopped at the 96 Bulls....
First of all ill say that i thought the 99 Spurs team was better defensively than any of the Bulls teams of the 90's, and also better than this Boston team.
The 99 SPurs allowed just 84.7 PPG compared to the Celtics 90.
To make it fair... the Defensive Rating metric adjusts for Pace... its basically a measure of PPG allowed per 100 possessions. (ie the lower the better)
08 Celtics = 98.9
99 Spurs = 95.0
Thats a pretty considerable difference considering
05 Spurs - 98.8
04 Pistons - 95.4
04 Spurs - 94.1 (Best Ever)
Comparing to the Bulls teams of the 90's
They were only the best defensive team in the league in one of their championship seasons and their best mark was 98.9... which is right at this years Celtics group.
I still believe the 99 Spurs team was the best SPurs group defensively despite giving up more points per 100 posessions than the 04 version (a team that was just a middle of the pack offensive team) because you had a relatively prime David Robinson manning the middle along side Duncan.
You could argue that nearly every Spurs team in the Duncan are before 05 was better than this Celtics team defensively.
Ill add one more thing...
The Spurs during the Duncan era
97-98 -- 99.4 (2nd)
98-99 -- 95.0 (1st)
99-00 -- 98.6 (2nd)
00-01 -- 98.0 (1st)
01-02 -- 99.7 (2nd)
02-03 -- 99.7 (3rd)
03-04 -- 94.1 (1st)
04-05 -- 98.8 (1st)
05-06 -- 99.6 (1st)
06-07 -- 99.9 (2nd)
07-08 -- 101.8 (3rd)
Pretty ridiculous Tim has never won DPOY
Well 1999 is not a modern era
Modern era is 2000, when they changed some rules and ultra offensive LA team blown the leauge.
The 1999 squad was amazing on D. PTB had good offense and spurs made them non-exsistance on that side of the floor.
You can't rank it according to concrete statistics. You have to take into account that the Celtics play in a major market and are a highly glamorous franchise. I estimate they should get roughly a five-point bonus for that. So when comparing them to the Spurs or Pistons, it's like they only gave up 93.0 pts/100p.
DRob, Tim, & Bruce on one team is sick.
The '99 Spurs and '08 Celtics had one thing in common -- Doc Rivers.
Many people forget that Doc basically coached the Spurs during the early season lock-out when only unofficial workouts were allowed. So Doc established the tough defensive mindset for both those teams right from the get go.
Loved Doc Rivers as a player. Love him as a coach. Whenever the day comes and Pop decides to hang 'em up, I'd have no problem with him coming back to coach the Spurs.The '99 Spurs and '08 Celtics had one thing in common -- Doc Rivers.
Many people forget that Doc basically coached the Spurs during the early season lock-out when only unofficial workouts were allowed. So Doc established the tough defensive mindset for both those teams right from the get go.
His injury in the playoffs Duncan's rookie season, IMO, prevented a MAJOR upset of the Jazz.
Thibodeau is the guy who was the main reason Celtics were so good on D and were able to win a le. Without him, they would proabably lost to the Cavs.
99 spurs > 08 Celtics
Before Thibodeaux & KG got there, nobody would have confused Rivers' teams with playing good defense.The '99 Spurs and '08 Celtics had one thing in common -- Doc Rivers.
Many people forget that Doc basically coached the Spurs during the early season lock-out when only unofficial workouts were allowed. So Doc established the tough defensive mindset for both those teams right from the get go.
THHHHHPPPPPTTTTBBBB!!1 That one goes to Coach Bud and Coach Bud only. Also see Thibodeaux comments above as well as the McHale donation.
Last edited by taps; 06-19-2008 at 01:54 PM. Reason: cleaned up the quote
Celtics are being way overhyped but that's not exactly a surprise. Their offense was ugly for most of the playoffs, so it has to be their defense that is hyped.
It's pretty comical considering the Spurs held the Lakers to less points per game than the Celtics did. The Spurs held last year's Cavs to 80.5 points per game. The Celtics held a worse version of last year's Cavs to 85.1 points per game. The Celtics allowed the Atlanta F'in Hawks to average more than 100 points per game in their three home wins. The Pistons averaged 89.8 points per game against the Celtics this year in the playoffs. The Cavs held the Pistons to 86 points per game last year and even the 76ers held them to 91 points per game this year.
Overall, there's no denying the Celtics are a very good defensive team. Great defensive team? Eh, I wouldn't go that far. Best ever? no. The Celtics weren't even the best defensive team in this year's playoffs. The Cavs were the best defensive team in the playoffs and would have beaten the Celtics if they had a halfway decent player to put next to LeBron.
Where the Celtics a better defensive team in the playoffs than the Spurs? I think it was probably close ... let's look at the stats.
Spurs Opponents - Regular Season Stats
Suns - 110.1 on 50%
Hornets - 100.9 on 46.6%
Lakers - 108.6 on 47.6%
Based on those stats and factoring in the number of games played against each opponent (5, 7 and 5) the Spurs should have allowed 105.9 points per game on 47.9% shooting. The Spurs actually allowed 94.9 points per game on 45.6% shooting from the field. So that's a difference of 11 points per game and 2.1% shooting difference.
Celtics Opponents - Regular Season Stats
Hawks - 98.2 on 45.1%
Cavs - 96.4 on 43.9%
Pistons - 97.5 on 45.9%
Lakers - 108.6 on 47.6%
Based on those stats and factoring in the number of games played against each opponent (7, 7, 6 and 6) the Celtics should have allowed 99.9 points per game on 45.5% shooting. The Celtics actually allowed 88.8 points per game on 42.6% shooting from the field. So that's a difference of 11.1 points per game and 2.9% shooting difference.
So basically in an off year with Finley getting a lot of playing time and the Spurs having no second shot blocker, the Celtics were all of .1 points per game and .8% better defensively than the Spurs. Yet these Celtics were obviously one of the best defensive teams in the history of sport.
^All true, but they had a much better team defensive game plan to stop Kobe. Pop's idea of making Kobe a jumpshooter and keeping him off the foul line and just putting Bowen on him one on one, didn't really help us get any stops when we needed to against the Lakers in crunch time when needed most.
Celtics did a much better job on Kobe as a team defensively than the Spurs did. That's why they were able to beat the Lakers and the Spurs weren't. You point to offensive woes as the reason the Spurs lost, and I do think that was a big part of the reason also, but I don't think the Spurs defense was able to get the stops it needed, especially against Kobe at crucial moments in the 4th quarters and that's why they were able to steal 4 games from us.
You can't count the '99 season. Shortened season, not a fair comparison.
Yeah, Alright.
The SAS did lock people down pretty well in the playoffs too that year, but a 50 game regular season is not a good comparison.
Having Duncan and Robinson was a great combo, especially since at that time David was still a pretty dynamic player - not yet beaten down by the bad back.
ok then to make the Spurs worthy to you... we'll look at the 04 Spurs who had the best defensive rating in NBA history
Unfortunately, when you say '04 I think 0.4.
noway the 99 defensive squad can be compared to 08 celts squad...put those 2 squads together and regardles of the score.......the spurs would eat this 08 celts squad...something we have lacked since 99 is someone to help duncan....all the defenses after david left, were defenses made up of the whole squad and the system...noone could alley-oop like they did game after game on us this yr....noone got easy layups on us like this season...put it this way....with such a horrible offense we had, timmy's lucky 3 against the suns is the only play that kept us alive thru the rest of the playoffs...imo...go spurs go
the pansy ass Celtics
damn you.Unfortunately, when you say '04 I think 0.4.
08 Celtics and it's not even close.
Idiotic statement - David Robinson and Tim Duncan back there far, far better than anything the Cs could put up. Duncan stil a better defender than Garnett despite the DPOY BS this year.
Moreover a healthy Spurs with Manu would have best Boston this year - give Boston their props but this will be there singular championship.
If you swapped team names, this year's Celtics defense would crack the top ten Spurs defenses all-time. That's about the best I can give them. They were consistently the best defensive team in the league this year, which is why they won the le.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
