As the NBA season comes to a close (and I try to hold back the tears), I've been reflecting on the main storyline of the year. And I think I've finally come up with something: if you want to win games, don't score too much.
I know that seems counterintuitive, and probably dumb. But I think teams can really learn a lot from the fact that while the league seems to be heading in the direction of higher individual scoring, the two best teams are not following suit.
We all know by now that Kobe scored 81 one night a couple months ago and that he, Iverson and LeBron are all averaging over 30 points per game. In fact, plenty of players are racking up the points this season; there are ten different guys scoring more than 25 a night. But here's the interesting thing - not a single one of them plays for either of the two teams most favored to win the championship. Among the Pistons and the Spurs, Rip Hamilton is the highest scorer, and he's averaging a paltry 20.4 points per game.
That's right - while Tim Duncan, Tony Parker, Manu Ginobili, Chauncey Billups, Rasheed Wallace, and Ben Wallace are all stars, they are each averaging between seven and 19 points per contest. Both Detroit and San Antonio have team-oriented offenses, so that while no single guy scores too much, both teams are amongst the league leaders in assists per game. San Antonio dishes out over 16 dimes per night, meaning that 57 percent of its baskets have been assisted, while Detroit averages over 19 assists per night, good for 64 percent of its baskets. For the sake of comparison, the Cavs assist on 54 percent of their baskets, the Blazers assist on 53 percent of their buckets, and only 50 percent of Mavs' baskets are the result of assists.
So what's going on here? Do Detroit and San Antonio share the ball because they're good, or are they good because they share the ball? What can other teams take away from this year's Spurs and Pistons teams? How are they so good if they score so little, and what are the keys to their success?
The first thing to take from this scoring situation is that quantity does not equal quality. Not only do the two best teams not have any single great scorers, but their team averages are also fairly modest: Detroit scores 97 points a game while San Antonio scores 96. Both of these teams are going to win 60 games this year. The list of teams scoring over 100 points a game includes many bottom feeders, like the Celtics, the Bobcats, the Warriors, the Sonics, and the Raptors. The fact that San Antonio scores six points per game fewer than Charlotte but will win about 40 more games should tell us that scoring isn't everything.
All you need to do to win is to score more than your opponent, as opposed to scoring as much as possible, which brings me to the second thing we can learn from San Antonio and Detroit: defense is important. I know that seems pretty basic, but there has been an ongoing debate for decades over whether defense or offense is more important to win a championship. That topic could consume a whole column, but here's a statistic to tuck away for future reference. While nine teams score over 100 points per night, only three hold their opponents under 90: San Antonio, Detroit, and this season's guest star, the Memphis Grizzlies.
I think the final explanation for the coupling of the Pistons' and Spurs' low, balanced scoring with their fantastic success correlates with the high quality of their point guards. Chauncey Billups averages almost nine assists per game, and he also shoots almost 39 percent from the three-point line. That means that his opponents must play great perimeter defense on him, enabling him to swing the ball to his teammates and generate great ball movement. So even when he is not credited directly with the assist, Chauncey is great at drawing the defense out to the three-point line, and thus opening up the inside for the Wallaces to take care of business down low.
Tony Parker has a different game that is no less effective. He's perhaps the best slashing guard in the league, meaning that instead of drawing the defense out like Chauncey does, he draws them inside. His quickness and driving ability open up the court for Duncan to take his trademark bank shot, for Bowen to make a baseline three, and for Ginobili and Finley to get open looks outside.
In other words, what these two guys have in common is this: they force defenses to adapt to them. They are both so talented that they pull the defense either inside or out, thus creating open spaces around the court - and if the defense doesn't move, then Chauncey and Parker score themselves. It is largely because the defense must converge on the point guards that all sorts of guys get good looks, scoring is evenly distributed, and the offensive sets are well-executed. Detroit shoots 50 percent as a team, and San Antonio shoots, shockingly, over 51 percent. These aren't just numbers. They convert into championships.
I'm not saying that great scorers don't win championships, because obviously that would be historically inaccurate. But what the Spurs and Pistons have done is created an alternative model for success, one based on defense and ball movement as opposed to triple digit scoring. And even though I think the Spurs will be dethroned in this season's playoffs (stay tuned for next week's column), it's important to look at the way unconventional way in which these teams have become successful.
Leah Roffman is a junior majoring in philosophy and political science. E-mail her at leah.roffman@tufts.edu if you want to watch or talk basketball.
