# Detroit holds 5th straight opponent under 70 points



## froggyvk

It was a record at 2, but it's still going and it's up to 5. Detroit held Philadelphia to 69 points today. The crowd was electric in the final minute encouraging them to get one more defensive stop.


----------



## Like A Breath

That's pretty amazing. A lot of analysts bash them for not picking Carmelo but it's clear why they wanted to stick with their guy Tayshaun. They wanted to establish their identity as a defensive team and Melo would've probably disrupted that chemistry.


----------



## nmuman

Greatest D ever!


----------



## Minstrel

Holy crap.

Could Bill Russell even break into this team's starting lineup?

:joke:


----------



## therealdeal

If a team let me shoot every single posession during a 48 minute game, I would not score only 70, but over a 100 points by myself against this Detroit team.

This is just more proof of how pathetic players are today.

No wonder NBA all stars get wooped by some countries with populations smaller than New York city area.

Tragic.


----------



## rainman

> Originally posted by <b>froggyvk</b>!
> It was a record at 2, but it's still going and it's up to 5. Detroit held Philadelphia to 69 points today. The crowd was electric in the final minute encouraging them to get one more defensive stop.


lets keep in mind froggy that the competition has been weak, but like in bowling you can only knock down the pins they put up in front of you. i was glad to see darko put up some defense to preserve the record. i still would like to see him more agressive on the offensive end. on that 2nd shot he put up against delambert i would have pumped faked and took one dribble and dunked it but that will come with time.

p.s. i'm purposely avoiding the last two comments about bill russell cracking the starting lineup and therealdeal scoring 100, i'm not falling for that bait.


----------



## therealdeal

But, I would score at least a 100.

in 48 minutes I could take 100 shots, given the fact that I shoot threes better than Peja I'd estimate making at least 50 shots, 30-40 of those threes, so on thress alone we are talking about 90-120 points.

For the record I can shoot from 32 feet out without having to force it. Without defense ( in practice ) I used to make 60-70 out of 100 shooting from NBA three point line to 30 feet out.

So using 4 guys on my team as screens and moving between them I'd make at least 1/2 of that percentage.

In a 7-8 hour long game way back I went 2 hours without missing a shot, shooting probably once every minute or two.


----------



## JNice

> Originally posted by <b>therealdeal</b>!
> the fact that I shoot threes better than Peja



:laugh:


----------



## speedythief

That's crazy. They are sending a big message before the playoffs begin.


----------



## Hibachi!

> Originally posted by <b>therealdeal</b>!
> But, I would score at least a 100.
> 
> in 48 minutes I could take 100 shots, given the fact that I shoot threes better than Peja I'd estimate making at least 50 shots, 30-40 of those threes, so on thress alone we are talking about 90-120 points.
> 
> For the record I can shoot from 32 feet out without having to force it. Without defense ( in practice ) I used to make 60-70 out of 100 shooting from NBA three point line to 30 feet out.
> 
> So using 4 guys on my team as screens and moving between them I'd make at least 1/2 of that percentage.
> 
> In a 7-8 hour long game way back I went 2 hours without missing a shot, shooting probably once every minute or two.


Unless your Larry Bird that traveled from the past when he wa in his prime i find this highly unlikely... And, why arent you in the NBA, if your that good...


----------



## Cap

Very impressive.

*therealdeal* [edit].


----------



## Minstrel

*Re: Re: Detroit holds 5th straight opponent under 70 points*



> Originally posted by <b>rainman</b>!
> 
> p.s. i'm purposely avoiding the last two comments about bill russell cracking the starting lineup


Uh, did you miss that "Just Kidding" smiley?


----------



## Johnny Mac

I think Sheed was the perfect addition to the defense. Hes a great post defender, and that makes Ben Wallace even more dangerous. Sheed is one of the best in the league at man defense in the post, not one of the best shotblockers, but man defense and making his man take a tough shot or pass it off. With BWallace on the helpside defense, and Sheed making the guy take a tough shot anyways, it makes it very hard to score on the inside on Detriot. Then you throw in their perimeter defense with Prince, etc. They are very good on defense.


----------



## MLKG

Can't forget Lindsey Hunter either.

He won't get any press for it, but he is one of the best lockdown defensive guards in the league. He hustles and traps like a madman and you can forget about taking him off the dribble. When Rip was out and Lindsey was starting, on two consecutive possessions Flip Murray tried to shake him and Lindsey ripped him both times and took it the other way, he ended up with 6 steals on the day.

Allen Iverson even told Larry Brown he's the best on-ball defender he's played against.

He was a big part of the first 3 games of the streak. Starting at shooting guard he held the opposing starting shooting guards to a combined 18 points and had 8 steals.

Gotta love role players who can make a difference.


----------



## Ron Mexico

> Originally posted by <b>therealdeal</b>!
> But, I would score at least a 100.
> 
> in 48 minutes I could take 100 shots, given the fact that I shoot threes better than Peja I'd estimate making at least 50 shots, 30-40 of those threes, so on thress alone we are talking about 90-120 points.
> 
> For the record I can shoot from 32 feet out without having to force it. Without defense ( in practice ) I used to make 60-70 out of 100 shooting from NBA three point line to 30 feet out.
> 
> So using 4 guys on my team as screens and moving between them I'd make at least 1/2 of that percentage.
> 
> In a 7-8 hour long game way back I went 2 hours without missing a shot, shooting probably once every minute or two.


Hmm yeah


----------



## JazzMan

> Originally posted by <b>therealdeal</b>!
> But, I would score at least a 100.
> 
> in 48 minutes I could take 100 shots, given the fact that I shoot threes better than Peja I'd estimate making at least 50 shots, 30-40 of those threes, so on thress alone we are talking about 90-120 points.
> 
> For the record I can shoot from 32 feet out without having to force it. Without defense ( in practice ) I used to make 60-70 out of 100 shooting from NBA three point line to 30 feet out.
> 
> So using 4 guys on my team as screens and moving between them I'd make at least 1/2 of that percentage.
> 
> In a 7-8 hour long game way back I went 2 hours without missing a shot, shooting probably once every minute or two.


:mrt: :no:


----------



## RollWithEm

Is Therealldeal Chris Mullin? I hear he hasn't missed in practice since the early 90's.


----------



## Masbee

A couple of weeks ago Steve Kerr, calling a Kings games, mentioned that Peja stays after every practice and shoots 100 threes and 100 free throws. Kerr said he watched him make 87 out of 100 threes. Kerr - the best percentage 3 point shooter in NBA history (albiet as a role player, not a featured scorer), said he had never done that or seen anybody do that before ever.


----------



## c_dog

I don't know.. I'm still not scared by detroit. The win over Portland was impressive, but since then they've been holding bad teams under 70 pts, which isn't all that hard. Denver has been struggling, and seattle, portland, and philly are just horrible horrible teams. Detroit is a good defensive team, we all know that, so holding those teams under 70 points isn't even that big of a surprise for me.

Let's see how they do against the Nets. If they hold a fast pace team such as the nets under 70 points, then i'll be truly impressed.:yes:


----------



## rainman

> Originally posted by <b>c_dog</b>!
> I don't know.. I'm still not scared by detroit. The win over Portland was impressive, but since then they've been holding bad teams under 70 pts, which isn't all that hard. Denver has been struggling, and seattle, portland, and philly are just horrible horrible teams. Detroit is a good defensive team, we all know that, so holding those teams under 70 points isn't even that big of a surprise for me.
> 
> Let's see how they do against the Nets. If they hold a fast pace team such as the nets under 70 points, then i'll be truly impressed.:yes:



you can only play the teams on your shcedule, i agree the competition is weak but detroit is better than they were, i hate to admit it because i dont like larry brown but he's got those guys playing some serious defense. heck their number 3 center(darko)is a better defender than most guys in the eastern conferance and he cant even get off the bench.


----------



## ScottVdub

man, dont listen to the real deal, the real deal is the pretend deal. hes like that jumk mail that says u win 10 million dollars, but when you open it up it says you have a chance to win 10 million. its all a hoax. anybody can shoot 39 ft jumpers, but they'd be some silly mother theresas for that.


----------



## irishfury

Yeah seeing since it's never been done before since shot clock even againt;s bad team yup not impressive 



> Originally posted by <b>c_dog</b>!
> I don't know.. I'm still not scared by detroit. The win over Portland was impressive, but since then they've been holding bad teams under 70 pts, which isn't all that hard. Denver has been struggling, and seattle, portland, and philly are just horrible horrible teams. Detroit is a good defensive team, we all know that, so holding those teams under 70 points isn't even that big of a surprise for me.
> 
> Let's see how they do against the Nets. If they hold a fast pace team such as the nets under 70 points, then i'll be truly impressed.:yes:


----------



## zeebneeb

Boy you guys are tough to impress. The Pistons set the record, and it's not just some record that's set every year.

First time EVER since the shot-clock. They even TIED the record earlier in the year before breaking it. It may be the single most incredible team record ever.

BAD TEAMS OR NOT. Besides, didn't one of those bad teams(Portland) go out and beat BOTH the kings AND T-wolves after we dismantled them?


----------



## SheedSoNasty

I'll give them props, their D is pretty intimidating. And Portland is gonna come around and make a lot of people eat their words. If not this year; next.


----------



## FlyingDragon

Detroit is doing great.


----------



## c_dog

> Originally posted by <b>irishfury</b>!
> Yeah seeing since it's never been done before since shot clock even againt;s bad team yup not impressive


Well, excuse me for being hard to impress. 

The talent in the east is just really diluted. But yeah, it's not Detroit's fault that they had an easy schedule.

Hey, I think it's impressive that they held the blazers under 70 points, as I already said. I'm just not impressed by their effort on the other teams, though, because those teams simply were bad teams. Detroit, as a good defensive team, SHOULD be holding them under 70 points, regardless of whether they're on a streak or not.

I congradulate detroit, but I'm just saying, I'm not intimidated. I guess I'm saying "good job, but don't expect to hold my team (grizzlies) under 70 points".

Yes, it's never been done before, but the east has never been this weak before either. And the scoring in the league overall has decreased thanks to defense. This isn't really that big a deal, especially for a non-piston fan, cuz we know that we can still beat the pistons anyday.


----------



## froggyvk

What's impressive about it is that, even if the opponents are bad, they still average way more than 70 ppg as a team.

Portland 90.9
Denver 97.4
Seattle 96.5
Chicago 88.7
Philadelphia 88.6

Don't tell me that it's just a fluke that we held five straight opponents under their season average by 20 points, and three of them on the road.


----------



## zeebneeb

> Originally posted by <b>c_dog</b>!
> 
> 
> Well, excuse me for being hard to impress.
> 
> The talent in the east is just really diluted. But yeah, it's not Detroit's fault that they had an easy schedule.
> 
> Hey, I think it's impressive that they held the blazers under 70 points, as I already said. I'm just not impressed by their effort on the other teams, though, because those teams simply were bad teams. Detroit, as a good defensive team, SHOULD be holding them under 70 points, regardless of whether they're on a streak or not.
> 
> I congradulate detroit, but I'm just saying, I'm not intimidated. I guess I'm saying "good job, but don't expect to hold my team (grizzlies) under 70 points".
> 
> Yes, it's never been done before, but the east has never been this weak before either. And the scoring in the league overall has decreased thanks to defense. This isn't really that big a deal, especially for a non-piston fan, cuz we know that we can still beat the pistons anyday.


I don't see what the EAST has to do with the streak at all. You bringing it up shows how very little respect you have for such a tremdous record.

Remember, this streak started in the WEST, ON THE ROAD. Portland, Denver, Seattle, THEN, Chicago, and Philly.

Poor teams?

Portland, after we beat them, managed to beat the Kings, and T-wolves TWICE.

Besides that, Detroit actually TIED the record earlier in the year;

5 Mon @ Boston W 78-68 22-13 R. Hamilton 15
B. Wallace 16

7 Wed Houston W 85-66 23-13 R. Hamilton 16
B. Wallace 15

Houston a poor team as well?

Detroit, of the 5 teams to EVER hold teams to under70 points more than once in a row, is on that list 3 TIMES, twice ALONE THIS YEAR.

Not to mention that they also hold the single season record of holding teams under 70. (9)

They also hold the longest streak for holding teams under 100, and by the end of the year will have the single season record of holding teams under 100.

We also have beaten Memphis twice this year. Now, I'm not trying to say that you, or your team should be afraid of them, but don't try and pretend that it's only becuase of poor teams, and an easy schedule.

It's something that only happens, oh, every 50-60 YEARS.


----------



## MLKG

Exactly, the whole "the east is weak argument" holds absolutely NO water because the Pistons set the record at 3 against western conference teams, they extended it to 5 in the east, but they achieved the record against Portland, Denver, and Seattle- all on the road. And Portland and Denver are both possible western playoff teams.

And I don't think Memphis fans really have any place to talk trash about the Pistons, considering they couldn't even beat them without Sheed.


----------



## c_dog

> Originally posted by <b>froggyvk</b>!
> What's impressive about it is that, even if the opponents are bad, they still average way more than 70 ppg as a team.
> 
> Portland 90.9
> Denver 97.4
> Seattle 96.5
> Chicago 88.7
> Philadelphia 88.6
> 
> Don't tell me that it's just a fluke that we held five straight opponents under their season average by 20 points, and three of them on the road.


It's true, they do average more than 70ppg. But like I said, Detroit is a defensive team, so it's only normal that they hold teams below their normal ppg.

It's not a fluke, they earned it. I'm just saying that this streak is not as big a deal as ppl make it out to be because they happened to have an easy schedule by coincidence. Of course, it's one thing to have an easy schedule and another to take advantage of it.

And I've said it already, the win over portland WAS impressive, but the others, weren't. Denver has been in a slump, and seatle, chicago, philly are amongst the worst teams in the league. That doesn't mean that most teams can hold them below 70points, and I congrat the pistons for hold them for 5 straight games.

I'm just saying, it's not that big a deal, cuz it really isn't. So they held bad teams(with exception of Portland) below 70ppg, good job, but so what? Can they do it against good teams? Can they even win against a western conference elite, not to mention holding them to 70 pts? The answer is "not likely". If they do I'd be *truly* impressed. In fact, if they can do it against the nets, then I'll admit that the pistons are really making a statement that they're not a team to be looked down upon come playoff time. Until then, I'm not that impressed.:grinning:


----------



## Minstrel

> Originally posted by <b>c_dog</b>!
> 
> 
> I'm just saying that this streak is not as big a deal as ppl make it out to be because they happened to have an easy schedule by coincidence.


I don't think that makes it less impressive. What you're not recognizing, perhaps, is that *every* team, every year, has a run of easy games.

Yet *no* team has ever done this, since the advent of the shot-clock.

If it's really not that impressive and largely a function of the schedule, why don't the Spurs do it during a run of weak Eastern teams on their schedule? Why didn't the Jordan/Pippen/Rodman/Harper Bulls (the best defensive team during my lifetime, in my opinion) ever do it during a run of easy teams on their schedule?

You're treating this like the Pistons got an unusually easy run of teams, but that's not true. *Some* portion of every team's schedule looks like this. And yet nobody has ever done it.

And of course it would come against not great teams. Nobody's holding the Showtime Lakers and the Jordan/Pippen Bulls and those types of teams to under 70 points per game five straight games.

So, the Pistons have done what no one else has ever done, and done it to a group of teams that are no easier than anyone else gets to face at some point.

So, what reduces the impressiveness?


----------



## therealdeal

If you hold your opponent to under 70 while you score 110, now that would be impressive. 

But when you score barely above 70 yourself, all that means is that it was a slow bricklaying festivity by both teams.

Like Lenny Wilkens, the winningest coach in history, sounds very impressive, untill you realize he's also the losingest coach in history.


----------



## MLKG

I don't think you understand how rare it is to even hold bad teams under 70 once. The old record for sub 70 point games in a season was something like 5 or 6 and the Pistons already have 9.

There is a huge difference between holding a team under their season average and holding them under 70. A couple of those games during this streak were the teams franchise lows for scoring.

It IS a big deal. It is completely unprecedented. Prior to these last couple weeks, holding even 3 teams under 70 was an even rarer feet than a single player scoring 100, it had NEVER happened. Now the Pistons have done it 5 in a row.

So the Bulls and the Sonics aren't the greatest of teams, it really doesn't matter, because even bad teams rarely get held under 70 points. And Denver isn't a bad team, they have one of the most high powered offenses in the league, and Detroit didn't even let a single player score 10 points, something else that has never been done in the shot clock era.

In terms of NBA history, it is even a bigger deal than TMac scoring 62 last week.


----------



## MLKG

> Originally posted by <b>therealdeal</b>!
> If you hold your opponent to under 70 while you score 110, now that would be impressive.
> 
> But when you score barely above 70 yourself, all that means is that it was a slow bricklaying festivity by both teams.


Barely over 70 themselves? Detroit won those 5 games by a combined 116 points. When you get blowout games like this, the starters leave early and scoring drops off at the end.

Wait, why am I even bothering refuting a realdeal post....


----------



## therealdeal

I don't think T-Mac's 62 is a deal at all.

Wil averaged 54 ( or something like that ) for the season.

Hell, let me shoot anytime I want I'll average 62 for the season against this competition. ( need a year to get in shape )


----------



## therealdeal

> Barely over 70 themselves? Detroit won those 5 games by a combined 116 points. When you get blowout games like this, the starters leave early and scoring drops off at the end.


Works for the other teams too.

So, they could have scored over 70 against Detroit, but their starters left the game early too.

So, it's not a big deal.


----------



## Minstrel

> Originally posted by <b>therealdeal</b>!
> 
> Hell, let me shoot anytime I want I'll average 62 for the season against this competition. ( need a year to get in shape )


Right, and give me a year (you know, to get into the necessary shape) and I could have averaged 57 points per game, 22 rebounds a game and 34 assists per game against the '80s NBA competition in their primes.

But you and I are supermen who would rock alien civilizations, if need be. It's not fair to compare mere mortals like Tracy McGrady and Wilt Chamberlain to *us*.


----------



## c_dog

Well, you have your opinion, I have mine. To me it's not that big a deal.

Detroit is a good defensive team. Add to the fact they played a couple bad teams during the streak. Then add to the fact that scoring in the league has dropped tremendously this season(I remember raptors had trouble reaching 80 points earlier this season, while their opponents had the same trouble).

Basketball used to be a high scoring game, especially when the shot clock was implemented. Scoring over 100 point was nothing special back then, yet now we only see fast pace teams like Mavs, and Kings do it. Defense was never as good as it is today, so it was nearly impossible to have a sub 70 point game. When someone does get a 70 point game, it wasn't because of good defense, but because the team sucked and couldn't hit a shot.

Detroit played good defense, yeah, and if they had done this back in the jordan era or something then I would have been impressed. But nowadays, games are really low scoring, so this streak doesn't make the pistons more intimidating. The scores are quite low this season, so this was likely to happen sooner or later. Heck, at this rate I think next season they'd be holding opponents under 60 points per game.

Still, it's not that big a deal. Good defensive teams play good defense, and good offensive teams score. Detroit holding opponents under 70 points is like Mavs scoring over 100. Yeah, it's pretty impressive, but not *that* impressive. I'm just being honest here.


----------



## The_Franchise

> Originally posted by <b>c_dog</b>!
> 
> 
> It's true, they do average more than 70ppg. But like I said, Detroit is a defensive team, so it's only normal that they hold teams below their normal ppg.
> 
> It's not a fluke, they earned it. I'm just saying that this streak is not as big a deal as ppl make it out to be because they happened to have an easy schedule by coincidence. Of course, it's one thing to have an easy schedule and another to take advantage of it.
> 
> And I've said it already, the win over portland WAS impressive, but the others, weren't. Denver has been in a slump, and seatle, chicago, philly are amongst the worst teams in the league. That doesn't mean that most teams can hold them below 70points, and I congrat the pistons for hold them for 5 straight games.
> 
> I'm just saying, it's not that big a deal, cuz it really isn't. So they held bad teams(with exception of Portland) below 70ppg, good job, but so what? Can they do it against good teams? Can they even win against a western conference elite, not to mention holding them to 70 pts? The answer is "not likely". If they do I'd be *truly* impressed. In fact, if they can do it against the nets, then I'll admit that the pistons are really making a statement that they're not a team to be looked down upon come playoff time. Until then, I'm not that impressed.:grinning:


I agree. What the Pistons are doing in these previous 5 games is what St. Joe's did in their 27-0 regular season, beating up on the weaker teams (Sorry Blazer fans, this was before everything started coming together for ya'll). Don't get me wrong, this is an amazing feat by Detroit, but I'd rather have Houston play the Pistons in the 1st round than any of the big 4. 

4 Thu @ Portland W 83-68
6 Sat @ Denver W 97-66 
7 Sun @ Seattle W 86-65 
10 Wed Chicago W 98-65 
14 Sun Philadelphia W 85-69 

It will be alot more impressive if they beat San Antonio on the 25th.

And look at their April schedule:

2 Fri Miami 
4 Sun Indiana 
6 Tue Orlando 
9 Fri Toronto 
10 Sat @ Orlando 
12 Mon Washington
13 Tue @ Toronto 

... wow.


----------



## MLKG

> Originally posted by <b>The Franchise</b>!
> 
> 
> I agree. What the Pistons are doing in these previous 5 games is what St. Joe's did in their 27-0 regular season, beating up on the weaker teams (Sorry Blazer fans, this was before everything started coming together for ya'll). Don't get me wrong, this is an amazing feat by Detroit, but I'd rather have Houston play the Pistons in the 1st round than any of the big 4.


Funny, seeing as how Houston was one of the teams that got held below 70 during their 2 game streak earlier this season.

As for scheduling, everybody plays the same teams, it is COMPLETELY different from St. Joe's.



> Originally posted by <b>c_dog</b>!
> Detroit played good defense, yeah, and if they had done this back in the jordan era or something then I would have been impressed. But nowadays, games are really low scoring, so this streak doesn't make the pistons more intimidating. The scores are quite low this season, so this was likely to happen sooner or later. Heck, at this rate I think next season they'd be holding opponents under 60 points per game.
> 
> Still, it's not that big a deal. Good defensive teams play good defense, and good offensive teams score. Detroit holding opponents under 70 points is like Mavs scoring over 100. Yeah, it's pretty impressive, but not *that* impressive. I'm just being honest here.


So the Pistons aren't more intimidating to teams today because they couldn't have done this back in 1992? That doesn't make sense.

And the Pistons holding an oppenent under 70 is absolutely nothing lik ehte Mavs scoring over 100. It's nowhere near even close to being the same thing. If you want to compare it to an offensive achievement, holding oppenents under 70 is about the equivelant of scoring 120 points without overtime.

Your logic doesn't make any sense, it's not an impressive feat because the Pistons are a good defensive team? That's like holding their own defensive talent against them. 

The fact is, there have been a lot of very talented defensive teams throughout the years, and none of them have been able to do this. And don't give me the "scoring is way down" thing because there were bad teams in Jordan's era too. 

If you think this streak is a result of bad teams missing shots rather than one team playing amazing defense than you are gravely mistaken and obviously haven't been watching.


----------



## Showtime84'

Please give me a freakin break.

In a league were only 2 teams can crack a 100 consistently while the rest of the teams struggle to put up between 80 and 90 points, specialy in the pathetic east, this record is absolutely meaningless.

What the Bad Boy teams of the 80's did, that was impresive!!! They were holding teams to the low 90's when the scores were usually in the 110's to 120+. That was a feat.

This scrub filled Pistons team isn't even the best defensive team in today's joke of league and when they get knocked out before the ECF's that's just gonna reinforce my point.


----------



## MongolianDeathCloud

You guys that are trying to argue the merit of the Piston's achievment should just give it up, because it's obvious these guys are being irrational here.

3 road games against non-cellar teams in the West is not that easy, it's something that every team does on their schedule at some point, and *NO ONE* has done it in the history of the NBA post-shotclock. This means that this Pistons team, post-Racheed, is one of the top defensive teams of *ALL-TIME*.

Some of these comments are ridiculous. Like comparing this to the Jordan era -- this lacks historical perspective. The Jordan era was more about Illegal D than Jordan himself; an era of ISO plays and sneaker dealers dominating the game. So of course no one during this period is going to set any defensive records because defense was being handicapped. 

However, the Bad Boys and Showtime Lakers came before the Illegal D (and before the silly 2-on-2 style high scoring business), were defensive pioneers (largely why the rule was implemented, as well as marketing Jordan), and yet never achieved this. Teams scored high then because Riley's Lakers and later the Bad Boys pioneered the defense that is used today. In fact, the Lakers and Bad Boys had things easier because they did not have all the directives that were in place in 1999-2000; probably the most significant being they could hand-check with abandon, which Riley's teams used ot pummel people that entered the paint and was not used much in the past.

And the comment of the Mavs scoring more than 100 being akin to the Pistons keeping 5 consecutive teams sub-70 is absolutely ignorant. Countless teams have scored 100+, five games in a row. Only one, in decades, has held five opponents under 70. How hard is it to understand?

I'm just kind of baffled by this because people will gush about some jive-*** star on some crappy team putting up 40+ points, yet will overlook the actual unique, significant things like how the Pistons are setting a handful of all-time records, the Rockets are close to beating the opp. FG% record set by the Spurs earlier (post-shotclock), and how Lebron's rookie stats are amazing when you compare it to the stats of other straight from HS players or the legends who were 22 or so when they entered the league.


----------



## zeebneeb

> Originally posted by <b>Showtime84'</b>!
> Please give me a freakin break.
> 
> In a league were only 2 teams can crack a 100 consistently while the rest of the teams struggle to put up between 80 and 90 points, specialy in the pathetic east, this record is absolutely meaningless.
> 
> What the Bad Boy teams of the 80's did, that was impresive!!! They were holding teams to the low 90's when the scores were usually in the 110's to 120+. That was a feat.
> 
> This scrub filled Pistons team isn't even the best defensive team in today's joke of league and when they get knocked out before the ECF's that's just gonna reinforce my point.


Okay I understand it now.


It's jealousy, plain and simple. Calling Detroit a "scrub filled team" shows your hate.


Nuff said. Blinded by homerism, that's all.


----------



## The_Franchise

> Originally posted by <b>Mike luvs KG</b>!
> Funny, seeing as how Houston was one of the teams that got held below 70 during their 2 game streak earlier this season.


The Rockets are a very poor offensive team, they only average 88.9 ppg (5th worse in the league, and has been boosted recently with a high scoring March month). What Detroit has done is a remarkable achievement, no doubt, but it's not like they are striking fear into the hearts of the West's top teams. Yet.


----------



## c_dog

> Originally posted by <b>Mike luvs KG</b>!
> 
> So the Pistons aren't more intimidating to teams today because they couldn't have done this back in 1992? That doesn't make sense.
> 
> And the Pistons holding an oppenent under 70 is absolutely nothing lik ehte Mavs scoring over 100. It's nowhere near even close to being the same thing. If you want to compare it to an offensive achievement, holding oppenents under 70 is about the equivelant of scoring 120 points without overtime.
> 
> Your logic doesn't make any sense, it's not an impressive feat because the Pistons are a good defensive team? That's like holding their own defensive talent against them.
> 
> The fact is, there have been a lot of very talented defensive teams throughout the years, and none of them have been able to do this. And don't give me the "scoring is way down" thing because there were bad teams in Jordan's era too.
> 
> If you think this streak is a result of bad teams missing shots rather than one team playing amazing defense than you are gravely mistaken and obviously haven't been watching.


That's not what I said. You misunderstood. I'm basically saying that the streak happened when scoring has reached an all time low. Coincidence? Naw, defense is just really good nowadays, and offense is also pretty bad.

I said the feat is impressive, just not "oh they must be the best defensive team ever assembled" impressive. I just think you guys are making way too big a deal out of this. If this is the best defensive team ever assembled, let's see if they can even hold their own against the west. Heck, let's see if they can even reach the finals.

OT: There were bad teams in the Jordan era, but few scored below 70. I remember. There were bad teams but they could still score.


----------



## spongyfungy

Defenses now are so much more complex. offenses haven't figured out the zone defense (however poor almost every team utilizes it) Pro sets can't crack it. Yeah, the shooting is poor now but the defenses have improved way more than the rate of offenses digressing.


Det 70
NJ 61 with 6 minutes left in the fourth.


----------



## Johnny Mac

haha, goodness. That game was way too competitive at the end for a 20 point blowout.


----------



## MiamiHeat03

Wow it was pretty close.
NJ breaks the record with a last second tip.


----------



## MLKG

The Nets foul with 13 seconds left to get an extra possession? Come on, seriously. Aaron Williams tips the ball in with his fist to get 71 and then pumps his fist like he just won an NBA championship.


----------



## spongyfungy

wow New Jersey got 71. Detroit really wanted it. It's nice to see a team that prides itself on the defensive end. Congrats on Detroit for officially grabbing a playoff spot. Now it's teams held under 75 or so.


----------



## reHEATed

that was hilarious.....Nj didnt want to be part of the streak, and i dont blame em...scorin under 70 is embarrasing and they didnt want to be part of it...still what they did wasnt right, but cnt blame em


----------



## spongyfungy

> Originally posted by <b>Mike luvs KG</b>!
> The Nets foul with 13 seconds left to get an extra possession? Come on, seriously. Aaron Williams tips the ball in with his fist to get 71 and then pumps his fist like he just won an NBA championship.


It's a dubious recognition to be part of the streak. 

Still, it's like bunting during a pitcher's perfect game in the late innings.


----------



## jvanbusk

Guys, that was flat out lame.


----------



## JT

Looks like the Nets won't be hanging up another Eastern Conference champ banner this year.


----------



## TheRifleman

> Originally posted by <b>jtx</b>!
> Looks like the Nets won't be hanging up another Eastern Conference champ banner this year.


You can say that again! The Pistons finally have that missing piece to the puzzle - Rasheed. Does anybody think the Pistons can't win it all now? I don't see any western teams that can take them. Larry Brown will finally "WIN" that ohhhh-sooo elusive trophy.


----------



## Charlie Brown

> Originally posted by <b>jtx</b>!
> Looks like the Nets won't be hanging up another Eastern Conference champ banner this year.


Why's that?

Detroit flat out played better than the Nets tonight. But it was one game, a regular season game at that. The previous two teams the Nets played in the ECF's had superior head to head regular season records vs. the Nets.


----------



## Petey

> Originally posted by <b>Petey</b>!
> It's way more likely for a team to benefit from a positive steak along with the wins, then just the wins themselves.
> 
> Their accomplishment is amazing. Lets say the Mavs hold teams to 80 and score 120 for the next 7 games. Is that pure dominance different then just winning 7 games? Yes it is.
> 
> As Nets fans when we had our win streak, and remember the streak we had in double digit victories? Our guys loved it.
> 
> I compare this to a team running away with a game and a team trying to make a stop. Instead of a game, it's the rest of the season. Instead of calling a time out, or fouling someone, we did what he had to deflate the Pistons a bit.
> 
> -Petey


I'm for 1 glad we stopped 1 streak tonight honestly.

-Petey


----------



## schub

> Originally posted by <b>Petey</b>!
> 
> 
> I'm for 1 glad we stopped 1 streak tonight honestly.
> 
> -Petey


Petey, I don't think you quoted yourself in the Bucks forum yet.


----------



## c_dog

Wow. The pistons might have something afterall. I'll be keeping my eye on them in the offseason.


----------



## Pinball

> Originally posted by <b>schub</b>!
> 
> 
> Petey, I don't think you quoted yourself in the Bucks forum yet.


He just likes to hear himself talk. Talk about conceited.


----------



## ToddMacCulloch11

> Originally posted by <b>jtx</b>!
> Looks like the Nets won't be hanging up another Eastern Conference champ banner this year.


how can you say that? Say it ends up kings vs. nets in the finals, I couldn't just say "Looks like the kings won't be winning" since the nets beat them the other day. You can't base it on one night. Yes, the nets aren't as good as the past few years, but its not like they are done for good, you don't know whats gonna happen


----------



## therealdeal

*Meaningless records*

Detroits 5 games holding opponents under 70 pts is meaningless and not impressive at all.

Why???

Because even a crappy team like Cleveland held opponts under 75 points 17 games in a row a few years ago.

Yes, only 5 points more allowed than Detroit, but for 17 games, not only 5 like Detroit.

Why Lebron's 20/5/5 are meaningless too despite people mentioning that only a few rookies had those kinds of numbers.

Because those other rookies all shot over 50%, that's why, ANYBODY can do it the Lebron way while shooting onbly 40% in 40 minutes.

How about this.

Adrian Dantley is the only player ever to average more than 30 points per game on better than 55% shooting

90% of people here don't even know who Adrian Dantley is, and according to those stats if we are to follow these meaningless stats scenarios he should be the best player ever.

The point of all this.

It's all nonsense, just Like Lebron hype and bricklaying teams like Detroit.

All that matters is real players shoot around 50% or better and most importantly win games.

A bricklayer like Lebron is crap and will always be crap as a player, and a 6'11" guy like KG who only shoots around 49-50% and cannot get out of the first round in 9 years can never be considered a great player, no matter what kind of other stats he puts up.

And a 6'11" guy like Jermaine O'Neal shooting only 43% is a piece of you know what, no matter what anybody says.

Don't even get me started on T-Mac , AI and guys like that.


----------



## kflo

*Re: Meaningless records*



> Originally posted by <b>therealdeal</b>!How about this.
> 
> Adrian Dantley is the only player ever to average more than 30 points per game on better than 55% shooting


and 2 of the 3 years he did it his teams won 28 and 25 games.


----------



## kflo

the league fg% hovered below 46% for much of the 70s. guess what happens in '77? the run-and-gun aba merges with the nba. guess what happens next? we see a steady increase in fg% until it peaks in '84 at 50%. it didn't start with magic and bird showing a new way to play the game. it was a simple change in style. by '87, we're already down to 48%.

fg%'s are down now for a number of reasons. so are scores. it's not just early entrants. i assure you if you drop byron scott into today's game, he doesn't shoot 54% from the field, as he did in '85, as good a shooter as he was. guarantee.


----------



## ToddMacCulloch11

I actually agree with the realdeal on something...never thought I'd see the day.

But yes, I agree, the streak is/was meaningless. As was the nets winning streak, as was the magics losing streak, as was any other streak this season. They're great while they are happening, but in the bigger picture, what does it matter. You could make the argument that the streaks had an effect on their record, but it doesn't matter if they come in a row or throughout the season. All that matters when the playoffs start is winning the games then.


----------



## kflo

he's also correct that it's not that meaningful because it is in large part reflective of the era.


----------



## MLKG

Realdeal, what makes you happy? Why are you wasting your time watching a league you obviously loathe so much and then wasting our time by writing about?


----------



## JazzMan

therealdeal, you go on about meaningless stats, but you also seem to hold FG% as the most important stat of all.

It's not really all that important. CONTRIBUTION TO SUCCESS is what matters, however you achieve that. Some players achieve it by scoring lots (regardless of their FG%) - some do it by getting lots of assists and rebounds. Some do it by playing limited minutes but scoring a high % in those minutes.

What matters is putting a team together whose COMBINED talents are enough to win ballgames. LeBron is a scorer. He is also very young. Most of the big scorers, especially the guards, shoot 45% or worse from the field, but they are still doing a good job (2/21 nights aside). For the Cavs, Lebron scores the most (as he is the most natural scorer on the team), Z posts up and defends big men, and shoots well from mid range, Boozer shoots a high % FROM CLOSE RANGE and gets the boards. McInnis and Williams have done a nice job in fitting round the 3 main pieces to good effect. 

FG% on its own is pretty meaningless.

Oh by the way, care to back up your statement about Cleveland with evidence? I have checked all the schedules back to 96/97, and no such streak exists in that time. The best they managed was 4 games in a row under 76 pts, which is nowehere near as good.

Detroits streak may be effectively meaningless, but it is nonetheless impressive.


----------



## Ballscientist

*Re: Meaningless records*



> Originally posted by <b>therealdeal</b>!
> Detroits 5 games holding opponents under 70 pts is meaningless and not impressive at all.
> 
> Why???
> 
> Because even a crappy team like Cleveland held opponts under 75 points 17 games in a row a few years ago.
> 
> Yes, only 5 points more allowed than Detroit, but for 17 games, not only 5 like Detroit.
> 
> Why Lebron's 20/5/5 are meaningless too despite people mentioning that only a few rookies had those kinds of numbers.
> 
> Because those other rookies all shot over 50%, that's why, ANYBODY can do it the Lebron way while shooting onbly 40% in 40 minutes.
> 
> How about this.
> 
> Adrian Dantley is the only player ever to average more than 30 points per game on better than 55% shooting
> 
> 90% of people here don't even know who Adrian Dantley is, and according to those stats if we are to follow these meaningless stats scenarios he should be the best player ever.
> 
> The point of all this.
> 
> It's all nonsense, just Like Lebron hype and bricklaying teams like Detroit.
> 
> All that matters is real players shoot around 50% or better and most importantly win games.
> 
> A bricklayer like Lebron is crap and will always be crap as a player, and a 6'11" guy like KG who only shoots around 49-50% and cannot get out of the first round in 9 years can never be considered a great player, no matter what kind of other stats he puts up.
> 
> And a 6'11" guy like Jermaine O'Neal shooting only 43% is a piece of you know what, no matter what anybody says.
> 
> Don't even get me started on T-Mac , AI and guys like that.


I agree with all of your post 67%. 

1. Pistons against 5 bad teams record: show they are one of the best defensive team.

2. Lebron stats: show he has good skills.

3. KG's Playoffs: I never consider KG is a great player. Only American reporter and the people who don't know basketball consider kg as MVP.


----------



## Arclite

> Originally posted by <b>JazzMan</b>!
> Oh by the way, care to back up your statement about Cleveland with evidence? I have checked all the schedules back to 96/97, and no such streak exists in that time. The best they managed was 4 games in a row under 76 pts, which is nowehere near as good.
> 
> Detroits streak may be effectively meaningless, but it is nonetheless impressive.


Their best stretch from 1985-current was when they held four opponents to 73, 62, 72, and 75 points in 1996.

Your arguments are more compelling without the bogus history lessons, but it's like comparing a rotten egg to spoiled milk.. smells bad either way, just a different kind of stink.. so preach on..


----------



## RunTMC

> Detroits 5 games holding opponents under 70 pts is meaningless and not impressive at all.
> 
> Why???
> 
> Because even a crappy team like Cleveland held opponts under 75 points 17 games in a row a few years ago.
> 
> Yes, only 5 points more allowed than Detroit, but for 17 games, not only 5 like Detroit.


An actual, valid point. I'm not sure if the fact you cite is correct, but it's a good point if it is.



> Why Lebron's 20/5/5 are meaningless too despite people mentioning that only a few rookies had those kinds of numbers.


The only other rookies to put up those numbers were MJ and the big O, not "only a few other rookies had those numbers." 



> Because those other rookies all shot over 50%, that's why, ANYBODY can do it the Lebron way while shooting onbly 40% in 40 minutes


Using FG% to say that one player is offensively better or more effective for his team than another is incorrect and ignorant. And before you argue, this doesn't mean I'm saying Lebron is offensively efficent. If you want to respond, respond with why FG% is the valid measurement for offensive efficency.



> How about this.
> 
> Adrian Dantley is the only player ever to average more than 30 points per game on better than 55% shooting
> 
> 90% of people here don't even know who Adrian Dantley is, and according to those stats if we are to follow these meaningless stats scenarios he should be the best player ever.
> 
> The point of all this.
> 
> It's all nonsense, just Like Lebron hype and bricklaying teams like Detroit.


You aren't making logical sense. First you bash Lebron for a low FG%, then you say the stats don't mean anything. Which is it?




> All that matters is real players shoot around 50% or better and most importantly win games.


This again is an ignorant statement. FG% is not an effective means of measuring the quality of a player, in fact, it isn't very effective in measuring offensive efficency.



> A bricklayer like Lebron is crap and will always be crap as a player, and a 6'11" guy like KG who only shoots around 49-50% and cannot get out of the first round in 9 years can never be considered a great player, no matter what kind of other stats he puts up.
> 
> And a 6'11" guy like Jermaine O'Neal shooting only 43% is a piece of you know what, no matter what anybody says.
> 
> Don't even get me started on T-Mac , AI and guys like that.


Basketball is not 1on1. The 11 other guys on your team matter. Quite a bit in fact.


----------



## Cap

Peja sucks.


----------



## Ballscientist

which is more important to win, shooting accuracy (fg) or point per game?


----------



## Kray_Z_Cat

"3. KG's Playoffs: I never consider KG is a great player. Only American reporter and the people who don't know basketball consider kg as MVP."


I put this quote on my IM Away message and got like 5 messages sayin I was "F***in retarded"... "should be banned from ever looking at another basketball... I had to tell them it was someone on a message board. Needless to say... I SLIGHTLY disagree


----------



## Ballscientist

> Originally posted by <b>Kray_Z_Cat</b>!
> "3. KG's Playoffs: I never consider KG is a great player. Only American reporter and the people who don't know basketball consider kg as MVP."
> 
> 
> I put this quote on my IM Away message and got like 5 messages sayin I was "F***in retarded"... "should be banned from ever looking at another basketball... I had to tell them it was someone on a message board. Needless to say... I SLIGHTLY disagree


talk to magic johnson in regard to KG's 7 years' playoffs, then you'll understand.

Remember it is playoff.


----------



## DaUnbreakableKinG

> Originally posted by <b>EHL</b>!
> Peja sucks.


Lakers SUCK


----------



## MongolianDeathCloud

Magic had a little more help than KG in his playoff endeavors, so he should just zip it and keep singing that dumb song in his SUV..


----------



## Priest

20/5/ and 5 is a record????? i thought the nets "winning streak" wasnt a record either


----------



## Kray_Z_Cat

KG has help this year.... now if they get ousted in the 1st round this year... then you have ME convinced.


----------



## jokeaward

Ohh, RD. Give Kareem some dap. Don't just state Dantley was the ONLY one to go 30 PPG/55%.

http://www.basketballreference.com/players/playerpage.htm?ilkid=ABDULKA01

1970-73, I believe. Bob McAdoo was very close in 73-74 whikle he played in the ABA.

As far as your point, stop obsessing over FG%. Just stop. If it were high, you'd probably blame bad defense.

Want high FG%? Look at Shaq. But I'm sure you think Shaq owns the refs, so you'd like the refs to not call so many fouls. But if they do that, there'll be more no-call muggings and missed shots. And I'm sure it will cycle on in some imperfect way, which sucks for a game for people with human players and refs. Psssh.


----------



## Anima

> Originally posted by <b>Ballscientist</b>!
> which is more important to win, shooting accuracy (fg) or point per game?


To me it's FG%. If you shoot a high % then you give the other team less opportunity for rebounds and fast break points, allows you defense to get back & setup, and you can control the tempo of the game.


----------



## nmuman

*Re: Meaningless records*



> Originally posted by <b>therealdeal</b>!
> Detroits 5 games holding opponents under 70 pts is meaningless and not impressive at all.
> 
> Why???
> 
> Because even a crappy team like Cleveland held opponts under 75 points 17 games in a row a few years ago.
> 
> Yes, only 5 points more allowed than Detroit, but for 17 games, not only 5 like Detroit.


Way to spout off like a re-re *edited*. This never happened and what Detroit has been doing is one of the most impressive things in NBA history. 

First and only team to hold 5 straight teams under 70 points. 

First and only team to win 8 straight games by 20 or more points.

First and only team to hold 10 teams under 70 points in one season.

If none of that was impressive then how come NO ONE ELSE has EVER done it? 

[strike]****[/strike]......:upset: 

But thank you for posting something about Cleveland that never happened. I just love made up stats and figures.

No need for name calling, thanks.


----------



## nmuman

> Originally posted by <b>Showtime84'</b>!
> 
> 
> This scrub filled Pistons team isn't even the best defensive team in today's joke of league and when they get knocked out before the ECF's that's just gonna reinforce my point.


This is a joke right???

If not then you have lost all credibility and should stop posting immediately.


----------



## Deeznuts420

Showtime84' said:


> Please give me a freakin break.
> 
> In a league were only 2 teams can crack a 100 consistently while the rest of the teams struggle to put up between 80 and 90 points, specialy in the pathetic east, this record is absolutely meaningless.
> 
> What the Bad Boy teams of the 80's did, that was impresive!!! They were holding teams to the low 90's when the scores were usually in the 110's to 120+. That was a feat.
> 
> This scrub filled Pistons team isn't even the best defensive team in today's joke of league and when they get knocked out before the ECF's that's just gonna reinforce my point.


That didn't age well


----------

