NBA: Do Teams Need a Top Scorer to Be Among the League's Elite?

Watching the Spurs-Lakers game, at some point I heard the announcers mention that Manu Ginobili led San Antonio in scoring this season, averaging 19.5 points per game.  

I found that interesting. Not that Ginobili, instead of Tim Duncan, led the team in scoring, but that he did it while averaging under 20 points (albeit slightly) per game.

That means that of the four remaining teams in the playoffs, three did not have a player average over 20 points during the regular season.  The Lakers, with Kobe Bryant at 28.3 ppg, are the exception.  Paul Pierce led the Celtics in the regular season averaging 19.6 and Richard Hamilton was tops for the Pistons at 17.3. 

In fact, Hamilton’s average was the lowest for any player who led his team in scoring.

Maybe it is more of an indication that I am bored, but those numbers got me wondering.  The numbers could mean nothing, or they could be a sign of something.  I am not sure.  I will let you decide.

Of the 30 NBA teams, 23 had at least one player average 20 or more points per game.  Twelve of the 23 were playoff teams.  Denver, New Jersey, Golden State, Houston, Washington and New Orleans each had at least two players score more than 20, with Golden State having three (Baron Davis, Monta Ellis, Stephen Jackson).  The teams with at least one 20-point scorer had a combined .477 winning percentage (899-987).

For the seven teams without a 20-point scorer, four made the playoffs – Boston, San Antonio, Detroit and Philadelphia.  Those seven teams had a combined .577 winning percentage (331-243).

The top five scorers in the league all played for teams that made the playoffs (LeBron, Kobe, Iverson, Carmelo, and Amare).  Four of the next five top scorers played for teams that didn’t make the playoffs (Wade, Kevin Martin, Michael Redd, Richard Jefferson).   The eight worst teams in the league all had a 20-point scorer, and the tenth-worst team (New Jersey) had two (Richard Jefferson, Vince Carter).  

League average in 2008 was 99.9 points per game.  Teams with a 20-point scorer averaged slightly higher at 100.5, and teams without averaged 98.1.

The highest scoring team without a 20-point scorer was Indiana, averaging 104.0 points per game.  The Pacers, it should be noted, had two players (Dunleavy, Granger) average over 19. 

The two lowest scoring teams in the league each had a 20-point scorer: Miami at 91.4 (although Miami's numbers are swayed due to Wade missing over 30 games) and the Clippers at 93.8.  

Three of the top ten scoring teams failed to reach the playoffs (Golden State, Indiana and Sacremento), and four of the bottom ten scoring teams reached the playoffs (Houston, Philadelphia, Cleveland, and San Antonio).

My conclusion is that these numbers show that if you have an elite scorer, you are probably going to have a good team, but having scorers alone (see Denver, Golden State, New Jersey) does not guarantee anything.  

Also, having a top scorer is not a requirement for going deep in the playoffs.  If you are not fortunate enough to have scorers like Kobe or LeBron, the way to put a team together from the offensive standpoint is to acquire as many quality options as possible – San Antonio has Duncan, Ginobili, Parker; Boston has Pierce, KG and Ray Allen; and Detroit has Hamilton, Billups, Wallace and Prince.

This might not exactly be splitting the atom, but give me a break - it is Memorial Day and I am at work (working hard obviously).