The Pistons Turn It On
April 2, 2006 – 10:47 pmI watched most of the second half of the Pistons-Suns game today, and wow, are the Pistons good or what? At halftime they were down by 14 points, and they ended up winning the game by 7 points, 109-102.
At the very end of halftime, Hubie Brown was talking about how easy the Suns were making things look offensively up to that point. He also mentioned that the fans in Detroit still pretty much expected the Pistons to win the game, because the Pistons have made coming back from double digit deficits a bit of a habit this season.
And what happened? The Pistons pretty much decided to play basketball and proceeded to dominate the Suns for the entirety of the second half. Rip Hamilton was lobbing alley oops to Ben Wallace like they were in warm-ups. Chauncey Billups was hitting threes like he was playing horse. It seemed like the Suns gathered themselves at halftime and said something to the effect of “Screw it. We’re not playing defense any more. Let’s score 150 and see if they can match us.”
But, the Pistons defense got in the way. Ben Wallace started blocking shots and ripping down rebounds, and Tayshaun Prince started deflecting passes left and right. The result was a 7 point Pistons victory, with the Pistons outscoring the Suns by 21 in the second half. They look ready to win another championship.
3 Responses to “The Pistons Turn It On”
I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: I’m not a fan of basketball. And as such, I don’t know much about the details of the game. However, since Tennessee’s men’s team actually made it to the NCAA tournament this year (and made it out of the first round… barely), I’ve been paying a *little* bit more attention than I used to. Here’s some observations that I’ve made:
I find it interesting that it’s not uncommon in the NBA to have games where both teams score 100+ points. Whereas, during the NCAA tournament, the high score has averaged around 70 and the low score around 60. Now, unless I’m wrong, the NBA has an extra 8 minutes to play, but that doesn’t account for enough to bring in 100+ point games on a regular basis.
Also, 40 minute games for the NCAA, and 48 minute games for the NBA. I realize this is somewhat hypocritical, since I’m no good at the game, but a game in under 50 minutes? For the kind of money that NBA players get? That seems kind of wimpy to me. The summer before grad school I would play 2 hour long games of Ultimate, in 80+ degree weather (with mosquitoes), three times per week. Heck, indoors with airconditioning we could’ve played an extra hour per game.
Anyway, I’ve run some numbers on the NCAA tournament, and here’s a breakdown of some stuff out of the 62 tournament games played so far (everything except the championship):
Highest Winning Score: 98 points
Lowest Winning Score: 50 points
Average Winning Score: 73.2 points
Highest Losing Score: 92 points
Lowest Losing Score: 44 points
Average Losing Score: 63.5
Highest Point Difference: 34 points
Lowest Point Difference: 1 point
Average Point Difference: 9.7 points
By Adam on Apr 3, 2006 at 3:30 am
You’re right that scoring increases disproportionately in the pro game. I’m not quite sure why that is. Obviously the average NBA player is more talented than the average college player, but that should affect both offense and defense.
Basketball might lack symmetry in terms of how talent affects offense and defense. Defensive skills may plateau earlier than offensive skills, so that when you take the best of the best, they score more on each other than lesser talented players would.
I think the rules might also have a bit of an effect. The shot clock in college is 35 seconds, while in the pros its 24 seconds. That can make a very big difference, especially if one team is nursing a lead late in the game.
By jjk on Apr 3, 2006 at 11:45 pm
Good point about the shot clock. That’d definitely force you to make quicker shots and hence get more points.
By Adam on Apr 4, 2006 at 4:10 am