TeamSPACE: Beasts of the East

May 4, 2015; Cleveland, OH, USA; Cleveland Cavaliers guard Iman Shumpert (4) shoots against Chicago Bulls forward Pau Gasol (16) in the second quarter in game one of the second round of the NBA Playoffs at Quicken Loans Arena. Mandatory Credit: David Richard-USA TODAY Sports

The second round of the NBA playoffs means that only eight teams remain. In the Eastern Conference, there are legitimate arguments for any of the four teams still standing – the Atlanta Hawks, Chicago Bulls, Cleveland Cavaliers, and Washington Wizards – to make it to the NBA Finals. Yes, fire up the hot take cannon – any of these four can make the Finals. So if this is the case, how do each of these teams compare to previous champs? Specifically, do the shot patterns (yes, Hunting Grounds and TeamSPACE yet again) match specific historically great teams?

Before the season started, I examined the scoring court space and overlapping Hunting Grounds for the starting lineup for every NBA Champ since 1996-1997 (here and here). Some interesting trends emerged; aside for the inherent value of a superstar, the use court space has shrank and the percentage of overlapping areas has increased over time. Remember these?

It’s not a perfect trend, but it’s indicative of valuing key floor spots — and abandoning the inefficient areas. So identifying the best fitting comp for the Eastern Conference Final Four is relatively easy; a simple weighted score of court scoring space, overlapping space, and the percentage of overlap-to-scoring gives us the closest comps. As you can see, there are some pretty strong matches.

Atlanta Hawks

If you’re like me, you probably expected a Spurs comp here. It’s certainly the narrative. However, the best match was actually those craft runnin’-and-gunnin’ Dallas Mavericks:

Really?!? Yes, really. The Hawks score from virtually all the same areas, just much more precisely. In that sense — and I safely state that most people haven’t made this leap — the Hawks have combined the ball movement of the Spurs with the shot activity of the Mavs. Fascinating.

Chicago Bulls

Of all the 22 teams (4 from the East, prior 18 Champs), this Bulls team actually most closely resembles this season’s Hawks. Since they may not even make it to the next round, that’s largely irrelevant. The Bulls next closest comp is the 2009-2010 Los Angeles Lakers — almost as if one player played on both teams. Huh.

Again, much like the Hawks comparison, the Bulls have very similar scoring areas to these Lakers, but much more precise Hunting Grounds. And obviously, a lot of that baseline and elbow activity can be attributed to Mr. Pau Gasol. Nobody is a “comp” for Kobe on this Bulls team, but a mishmash of Rose, Dunleavy, and Butler cover much of his activity. Three-for-one, sounds about right.

Cleveland Cavaliers

Two Lakers matches? Surprisingly, yes. I think conventional wisdom would have looked for a Miami Heat — or even a 1990s Bulls — comp. Alas, no narrative here. Lebron’s 2014-2015 starts to oddly resemble Kobe’s 2008-2009 midrange/elbow shooting.

There’s notable upticks from behind the arc for this season’s Cavs, but that midrange activity really drives this comp. Given the loss of Love, this sounds even more logical. The lack of midrange overlap for these teams is alarmingly similar; it’s indicative of different players getting points from different areas in the same general vicinity.

Washington Wizards

Well hello there, Cinderella. Before we even examine the historical comp, let’s first marvel in the uniqueness of this lineup compared to the other three. No other team remaining in the East overlaps this little. It’s seemingly visual evidence of the “take-what-the-offense-gives-you/shoot-the-open-shot” offensive scheme. Is it effective? That’s not for debate in this space. The interesting part is that we’ve witnessed this kind of shooting only a few seasons ago:

Spitting. Image. Like this year’s Wizards, these Heat (and particularly this lineup) were not heavy 3pt shooters. The Wade-Beal comparison (in terms of Hunting Grounds) is strong, very strong.

So What?

It’s interesting to note that the best comparisons for each team are no longer than six years old. There’s no Spurs similarities, no Bulls similarities, and none of the oddball Celtics or Pistons similarities. Some of these defy conventional wisdom a bit, but when you consider some of the positional similarities, they don’t seem all that strange. Bottom line: if any of these teams advance to the Finals, we shouldn’t be entirely surprised. None of them represent a completely unique, never-seen-before scoring style. However, which one of these teams actually advances and challenges Golden State is still largely up for grabs.

Data and photo support provided courtesy of NBA.com, Basketball-Reference.com, and data extraordinaire Darryl Blackport.