Is "Purgatory" in the NBA a myth?

[idiot]

The Kings are not in NBA purgatory, they are in NBA hell.

Pretty sure purgatory means you are making the playoffs as a 7/8 seed some years, not constantly missing the playoffs.

I'm pretty sure I've been hearing "purgatory" a lot more than "hell" in how people talk about things. But in any case, I think the data here seem to indicate that the around-.500 records (which you seem to be focusing on) are really not any worse place to be than most other places. Sure, it's not as good as an above .600 record, but it's really no worse than having a bad record.

 

[idiot]

While I think your overall thought process is solid, I also think having solid team culture + a good head coach + a GM that can actually evaluate talent and has a good philosophy on team building (plus a little luck) are required to build a championship team.

Mediocre teams that get stuck in purgatory generally seem to be lacking two of those things. The plain and simple fact is that NBA post-season success is almost always star driven. A team’s goal (regardless of where they’re at in that process) should always be to identify and acquire those star players. I feel like Danny Ainge is actually pretty good at that. So, I’m hopeful.

Yes, this is exactly what I think the analysis seems to imply (or at least the interpretation I take from the data). It's not the record that's most important. It's having a good foundation in place that likely has the biggest impact.

 

[idiot]

I mean, having a middle-of-the-pack record isn't the sole component of NBA purgatory as people describe it.

If you're middle-of-the-pack, and it's not a result of injuries, and you don't have young talent, and you have a pretty barren chest of draft capital, and you have several aging vets, and your lone young star player is a virtual guarantee to leave at the end of his contract, then I'd say you don't have a very realistic path for improvement and you should consider blowing it up.

Right. The plan/path is more important than the record. The only place I think we might (slightly) disagree is in what the appropriate definition of "blowing it up" is. It's not going to be the same, necessarily, for every team's situation.

But I do agree that this summer has been a very appropriate time for the Jazz to blow it up.

 

[idiot]

This would be interesting to see based on market size. Maybe large, mid and small market teams and how their win rates differ. I would bet the large market teams recover faster and have overall better records than the smaller market teams. The effects of the phenomenon of players pushing to be in the large markets could be seen through this kind of analysis.

Yes, I agree. That's probably where correctly identifying the best path for your own team comes in. The biggest problem I see in trying to do this additional analysis is small sample sizes. We're already dealing with fairly small sample sizes in the analysis I've done (as well as coming up with a definition of small, medium, and large that everyone agrees on when it comes to NBA markets). And how far back can you go to get the proper sample size. Has the situation (with how teams strategize, the draft lottery, the relative monetary rewards for winning and losing, etc.) changed enough that what may apply for the 1980s no longer applies in the 2020s, for example?

And then you have other confounding factors. Let's take the latest Lakers championship, for example. Would you say that that happened because they properly recognized that they needed to be bad before they built back up to good again? Or would you say that they were just fortunate that they're the Lakers in LA and Lebron wanted to go there and then that Lebron had enough power to force AD onto the team? If you look at the trajectory of their record just by the numerical data, the first explanation looks possible, but in reality the second explanation may be better. The statistical data can't easily tell the difference between the two.

 

[idiot]

Extremely bad luck with injuries. Two career ending injuries to two guys that were probably destined to be top 20 players in the NBA over that time span.

Also they ran into GSW at their peak a lot, right?

And this is another problem with trying to figure out any step-by-step path to a championship -- there's just too much luck (good or bad) involved: injuries, bad draft class, a lower draftee blows up that nobody ever expected, lucking into a single transcendent and durable talent, etc., etc. You can try to increase your odds (and the consistently good teams do that pretty well), but that's all you're doing. What would we think of the Spurs franchise if they hadn't won the draft lottery for Tim Duncan when their odds were only 22%? They might still have had long-term success, but likely not the championship success we know them for.

 

[FrenchJazzFa]

Interesting data, thank a lot. And i agree, no miracle recipe to succeed, but getting as much pick as we can + getting some promising players ( Sexton) is probably a good way to try . As a fan, i would say, how many years of mediocrity can i accept? Probalby 2 or 3, not more. But i have been spoiled with the Grizz who bounce very fast by landing Ja and Bane...

 

[gomretat]

If we dont get real lucky with a few picks we are on the OKC path which will feel like purgartory to me. Would much rather be a playoff team that is tinkering to get to get better and taking some risks without blowing it up. Maybe some day I will see the value of trading two all stars who were still in their prime. Trading one of them and making a run at it would have been a much better move IMO.

 

[YoungJefe]

drafting top 5 is by far the most sure way to get that talent.

Looking at recent NBA finals history only the Spurs (Duncan), Heat (Wade), and Cavaliers (LeBron/Irving) won NBA Finals with a player(s) that they drafted in the top 5 as their top player.

Teams like the Heat, Suns, Bucks, Mavericks, and Warriors were all great because they hit on guys later in the draft.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

Looking at recent NBA finals history only the Spurs (Duncan), Heat (Wade), and Cavaliers (LeBron/Irving) won NBA Finals with a player(s) that they drafted in the top 5 as their top player.

Teams like the Heat, Suns, Bucks, Mavericks, and Warriors were all great because they hit on guys later in the draft.

Suns had Ayton… Steph was the 7th pick so not technically top 5 but damn close. This list is also somewhat incomplete… Boston had a couple top5 picks and Lakers built their team by using guys they drafted top 5 and trading for AD… if you aren’t a big FA destination the surest way to build a winner is by drafting in the top half of the lotto.

 

[YoungJefe]

Suns had Ayton… Steph was the 7th pick so not technically top 5 but damn close. This list is also somewhat incomplete… Boston had a couple top5 picks and Lakers built their team by using guys they drafted top 5 and trading for AD… if you aren’t a big FA destination the surest way to build a winner is by drafting in the top half of the lotto.

Agreed. Most championship teams that were built through the draft hit on unheralded guys though like Manu/Parker/Kawhi, FVV/Siakam, Draymond, Time Lord, Giannis/Middleton, Ibaka, etc.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

Agreed. Most championship teams that were built through the draft hit on unheralded guys though like Manu/Parker/Kawhi, FVV/Siakam, Draymond, Time Lord, Giannis/Middleton, Ibaka, etc.

For sure… you have to hit on a few different team building fronts

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

If only the Jazz drafted Bane....

 

[sip]

If we dont get real lucky with a few picks we are on the OKC path which will feel like purgartory to me. Would much rather be a playoff team that is tinkering to get to get better and taking some risks without blowing it up. Maybe some day I will see the value of trading two all stars who were still in their prime. Trading one of them and making a run at it would have been a much better move IMO.

What do you mean by the OKC path? They are entering year 3 of a rebuild and are building one hell of a young roster. It is a bummer about Chet but they still have a ton of young talent and should improve quite a bit this year with the trio of SGA, Giddey and Dort leading the way. As far as tinkering with our old roster goes that would have been a waste. We had a core group around Mitchell and Gobert that was aging out and there is no easy fix for that. Particularly when you lack draft picks and cap flexibility.

 

[sip]

If only the Jazz drafted Bane....

Or Simons instead of Allen and don't make the stupid Conley trade. I thought for sure the jazz would take Simons. It just made too much sense. With the depth that we had at guard at that point we were better off taking a project since whoever we took wouldn't get consistent minutes and he was friends with Mitchell. There were just so many knucklehead decisions over the last few years that slammed the Mitchell/Gobert window shut. What makes it even more frustrating is that each move was so obviously bad from the get go.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

If only the Jazz drafted Bane....

We needed home runs in FA and the draft and kept trying to loop singles. Bane was actually a super solid prospect... at very worst he was an NBA shooter that could be a 4th/5th wing. The rare high floor prospect that had some flashes/reasons to believe there could be more.

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

Or Simons instead of Allen and don't make the stupid Conley trade. I thought for sure the jazz would take Simons. It just made too much sense. With the depth that we had at guard at that point we were better off taking a project since whoever we took wouldn't get consistent minutes and he was friends with Mitchell. There were just so many knucklehead decisions over the last few years that slammed the Mitchell/Gobert window shut. What makes it even more frustrating is that each move was so obviously bad from the get go.

Allen > Simons thus far in their careers. It took a tanking year for Simons to get any positive play and he was still overall a net negative. He isnt close to Bane and would have not impacted the Jazz in any meaningful way.

 

[YoungJefe]

We needed home runs in FA and the draft and kept trying to loop singles. Bane was actually a super solid prospect... at very worst he was an NBA shooter that could be a 4th/5th wing. The rare high floor prospect that had some flashes/reasons to believe there could be more.

Some combination of Ayo Dosunmu / Herb Jones and Jaden McDaniels / Desmond Bane would've went a long way

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

Allen > Simons thus far in their careers. It took a tanking year for Simons to get any positive play and he was still overall a net negative. He isnt close to Bane and would have not impacted the Jazz in any meaningful way.

I think he's good but last year he was a looter in a riot. I also think its a worse fit with Dame than CJ was by a lot.

I think Grayson's playoff series has a lot of folks down on him... he got picked on... still a good player doe.