Quick Thoughts

1.    What’s In A Start?: It’s still way too early to make grand or meaningful conclusions about the 2010-11 season.  The teams that have gotten the most notice (besides the Heat) are the ones that have come out of the gate very hot.  The Lakers, not so surprisingly, are 6-0.  More surprisingly, the Hornets and Hawks are also 6-0.  But small sample sizes can do funny things.  For example, the Nest are 2-4 but have a horrible -7.2 point differential, in large part because they have played the Heat or Magic in half of their games.  As for the Heat, they have the best point differential in the East (+13.1), despite the fact that they have only the fourth best record in conference.

So, we know the records at this point are mostly noise.  Still, can we expect great thing from the Hornets and Hawks?  I tend to think the nice run is just a fluke start.  Both are legit playoff teams but this start likely does not augur title contention.  In fact, the Hawks also started out the 1997-98 season 11-0, with a similar good but not great team (Mookie Blaylock, Steve Smith, Christian Laettner, and Dikembe Mutombo).  Atlanta remained pretty good the rest of the way (39-32) to finish 50-32 but was bounced in the first round by a decent Hornets team.

There is just too much data out there (for me at least) to assess hot starts generally but I thought we could look at the title teams of each year to see how they started out the first month to see what trends, if any, we see.  Here’s a look at all title teams since 1979-80 and there records before December 1 of that season:

1979-80 Lakers, 16-9 (overall 60-22)

1980-81 Celtics, 15-7 (overall 62-20)

1981-82 Lakers, 12-5 (overall 57-25)

1982-83 76ers, 13-3 (overall 65-17)

1983-84 Celtics, 12-5 (overall 62-20)

1984-85 Lakers, 12-6 (overall 62-20)

1985-86 Celtics, 15-2 (overall 67-15)

1986-87 Lakers, 12-2 (overall 65-17)

1987-88 Lakers, 9-2 (overall 62-20)

1988-89 Pistons, 11-3 (overall 63-19)

1989-90 Pistons, 9-5 (overall 59-23)

1990-91 Bulls, 9-6 (overall 61-21)

1991-92 Bulls, 13-2 (overall 67-15)

1992-93 Bulls, 9-3 (overall 57-25)

1993-94 Rockets, 14-0 (overall 58-24)

1994-95 Rockets, 10-3 (overall 47-35)

1995-96 Bulls, 12-2 (overall 72-20)

1996-97 Bulls, 15-1 (overall 69-13)

1997-98 Bulls, 9-7 (overall 62-20)

1998-99 Spurs, 6-8 (overall 37-13)(note this was the strike season that started in February and so the record is limited to that month)

1999-00 Lakers, 11-4 (overall 67-15)

2000-01 Lakers, 11-5 (overall 56-26)

2001-02 Lakers, 14-1 (overall 58-24)

2002-03 Spurs, 11-7 (overall 60-22)

2003-04 Pistons, 12-6 (overall 54-28)

2004-05 Spurs, 12-3 (overall 59-23)

2005-06 Heat, 9-6 (overall 52-30)

2006-07 Spurs, 11-5 (overall 58-24)

2007-08 Celtics, 13-2 (overall 66-16)

2008-09 Lakers, 14-1 (overall 65-17)

2009-10 Lakers, 13-3 (overall 57-25)

As one would expect, a good start is a good indicator of a good team. Five of the past 31 champs started out close to .500.  Of that group, the 1997-98 Bulls didn’t have Scottie Pippen (he was coming back from injury and quasi holding out because he was mad at management).  The Spurs were the only under .500 team but that came during the bizarre lockout season and doesn’t quite count.  The only undefeated team was the Rockets of the 1993-94.  The Rockets were strange in that they started out hot in both of their title years and still won titles but had pretty weak finishes to the regular seasons.  In all, the takeaway lessons is that a great start doesn’t necessarily guarantee a title but a weak one pretty much means you won’t be a title team (sorry Rockets fans).

2.    Droughts: The start of the season is also a nice time to take a step back historically speaking.  We know who the contenders likely are and we know who the great franchises and the not-so-great franchises are.  Still, it’s nice to take a look and actually see how long it has been since each franchise: (a) made the playoffs, (b) won a playoff series, and (c) won an NBA title.  Here’s a quick rundown of the success/futility of each of the franchises, including last playoff appearance, last time the team won a series, and the last time the team won a title:

Team First Season Last Playoffs Last Win Last Title
Charlotte 2004-05 2009-10 Never Never
Memphis 1995-96 2005-06 Never Never
New York 1946-47 2003-04 1999-00 1972-73
Portland 1970-71 2009-10 1999-00 1976-77
Milwaukee 1968-69 2009-10 2000-01 1970-71
Toronto 1995-96 2007-08 2000-01 Never
Philadelphia 1949-50 2008-09 2002-03 1982-83
Minnesota 1989-90 2003-04 2003-04 Never
Sacramento 1948-49 2005-06 2003-04 1950-51
Indiana 1976-77 2005-06 2004-05 Never
Oklahoma City 1967-68 2009-10 2004-05 1978-79
Washington 1961-62 2007-08 2004-05 1977-78
L.A. Clipper 1970-71 2005-06 2005-06 Never
Miami 1988-89 2009-10 2005-06 2005-06
Chicago 1966-67 2009-10 2006-07 1997-98
Golden State 1946-47 2006-07 2006-07 1974-75
New Jersey 1976-77 2006-07 2006-07 Never
Detroit 1948-49 2008-09 2007-08 2003-04
New Orleans 1988-89 2008-09 2007-08 Never
Dallas 1980-81 2009-10 2008-09 Never
Denver 1976-77 2009-10 2008-09 Never
Houston 1967-68 2008-09 2008-09 1994-95
Atlanta 1949-50 2009-10 2009-10 1957-58
Boston 1946-47 2009-10 2009-10 2007-08
Cleveland 1970-71 2009-10 2009-10 Never
L.A. Lakers 1948-49 2009-10 2009-10 2009-10
Orlando 1989-90 2009-10 2009-10 Never
Phoenix 1968-69 2009-10 2009-10 Never
San Antonio 1976-77 2009-10 2009-10 2006-07
Utah 1974-75 2009-10 2009-10 Never

We all remembered that the Knicks haven’t won a playoff series for a decade but I had forgotten that Portland had such a drought.  Sure, the Blazers have been all over the playoffs in the 2000s but haven’t actually won a series since back when they were a quarter away from beating the Shaq-Kobe Lakers in 1999-00.  Some of this is bad luck (the old Blazers drew the Lakers in first round several times in the early 2000s and had injuries last year when they were expected to win).

In the category of “time is moving too quickly”, we also note that some of the hot teams of the early 2000s (Sacramento, Indiana, Philadelphia) have been mediocre-to-bad for several years now.

So, that’s the current state of things.  For the history buffs, here are the longest playoff droughts for each franchise:

-Atlanta: 8 years (1999-00 to 2006-07)

-Boston: 6 years (1995-96 to 2000-01)

-Charlotte: 5 years (2004-05 to 2008-09)

-Chicago: 6 years (1998-99 to 2003-04)

-Cleveland: 7 years (1998-99 to 2004-05)

-Dallas: 10 years (1990-91 to 1999-00)

-Denver: 8 years (1995-96 to 2002-03)

-Detroit: 6 years (1977-78 to 1982-83)

-Golden State: 12 years (1994-95 to 2005-06)

-Houston: 5 years (1969-70 to 1973-74)

-Indiana: 5 years (1981-82 to 1985-86)

-L.A. Clippers: 15 years (1976-77 to 1990-91)

-L.A. Lakers: 2 years (1974-75 to 1975-76)

-Memphis: 8 years (1995-96 to 2002-03)

-Miami: 3 years (1988-89 to 1990-91)

-Milwaukee: 7 years (1991-92 to 1997-98)

-Minnesota: 7 years (1989-90 to 1995-96)

-New Jersey: 5 years (1986-87 to 1990-91)

-New Orleans: 4 years (1988-89 to 1991-92)

-New York: 7 years (1959-60 to 1965-66)

-Oklahoma City/Seattle 7 years (1967-68 to 1973-74)

-Orlando: 4 years (1989-90 to 1992-93)

-Philadelphia: 7 years (1991-92 to 1997-98)

-Phoenix: 5 years (1970-71 to 1974-75)

-Portland: 6 years (1970-71 to 1975-76)

-Sacramento: 8 years (1986-87 to 1994-95)

-San Antonio: 1 year (1983-84, 1986-87, 1988-89, 1996-97)

-Toronto: 4 years (1995-96 to 1998-99, 2002-03 to 2005-06)

-Utah: 9 years (1974-75 to 1982-83)

-Washington: 8 years (1988-89 to 1995-96)

Futility they name is Clippers/Warriors.  Both franchises have been almost totally inept since the late 1970s with a few notable exceptions.  Outside of those two, the Mavs of the 1990s were another legendarily awful franchise, unable to get the rebuilding effort going after the Derek Harper/Rolando Blackman squad got old.  On the other side, the Spurs have been amazing in not missing the playoffs in back-to-back years.

Leave a Reply