“The last 30 NBA champions’ paths to a title, ranked by average net rating”
- Thread starter 987654321
- Start date
get these nets
Veteran
Only major change in 30 years was changing the 1st round from best of 5 to best of 7 .
Each champ had to best 4 teams en route to ring. Can only play who is in front of you
Each champ had to best 4 teams en route to ring. Can only play who is in front of you
Bigblackted4
Superstar
Make sense
Another thing to consider is also if the the teams in the top are relatively better/worse or if the ones in the bottom are better/worse.
For example 3-8 basically being undecided until very late in the west this year as far as games goes, and that also lends over to net rating.
Or if there's a huge disparity between the bottom and the top.
Same if it's regular season net rating, then you might have a bunch of garbage in the bottom that everyone ran it up against.
How much could that affect the numbers.
So really I can't say anything about these numbers at least, too much brain exercise for a Friday
For example 3-8 basically being undecided until very late in the west this year as far as games goes, and that also lends over to net rating.
Or if there's a huge disparity between the bottom and the top.
Same if it's regular season net rating, then you might have a bunch of garbage in the bottom that everyone ran it up against.
How much could that affect the numbers.
So really I can't say anything about these numbers at least, too much brain exercise for a Friday
Another thing to consider is also if the the teams in the top are relatively better/worse or if the ones in the bottom are better/worse.
For example 3-8 basically being undecided until very late in the west this year as far as games goes, and that also lends over to net rating.
Or if there's a huge disparity between the bottom and the top.
Same if it's regular season net rating, then you might have a bunch of garbage in the bottom that everyone ran it up against.
How much could that affect the numbers.
So really I can't say anything about these numbers at least, too much brain exercise for a Friday
Someone in the comments figured out that the Rockets would have been up top or near the top if they calculated that far back. They also found the the pacers would have been head and shoulders above everybody else if they had won this year.
Raptors
Real recognize Real
Real recognize Real
Womb Raider
5* Gooneral
Where the Sixers at 
Man those plumbers, and accountants sure were tough 
Trojan 24
Veteran
3-Peat Lakers went thru wars to get them chips
3-Peat Lakers went thru wars to get them chips
Meh, 20 yr old Vince could’ve done it
The 90s was an expansion era, so it wouldn't really surprise me if the top teams from the late 90s thru the early 00s were significantly better than the medium cluster. Tho the list is kinda all over the place, regardless.
In theory, if a championship team played in a season with greater league-wide parity or teams that came on late (due to trade or health) they'd get penalized in this sort of ranking since the net ratings for those opponents would be lower.
i.e. the 1997 Atlanta Hawks the Bulls beat in the WCSFs had the 4th best net rating that season (+6.2) and won 56 games. Would they beat the 43-win 2023 Lakers team (16th in net rating at 0.6) that Denver beat in the WCFs? Doubtful. But w/o context, the numbers are the numbers.
In theory, if a championship team played in a season with greater league-wide parity or teams that came on late (due to trade or health) they'd get penalized in this sort of ranking since the net ratings for those opponents would be lower.
i.e. the 1997 Atlanta Hawks the Bulls beat in the WCSFs had the 4th best net rating that season (+6.2) and won 56 games. Would they beat the 43-win 2023 Lakers team (16th in net rating at 0.6) that Denver beat in the WCFs? Doubtful. But w/o context, the numbers are the numbers.