When I started The Chirp in 2020, I envisioned writing articles that were rooted in hypotheses I would have from observing sports. Many of my early articles were created from that genesis, including debating the pros and cons of signing a quarterback past his rookie contract, identifying individual shot creation as the most critical NBA skillset, and the illusion of an NFL team’s performance in one possession games and how we can utilize that to predict the following season. After taking an extended time off from creating Chirp content, I started to get the itch again, predominantly after Nico Harrison set my favorite sporting team on fire. That renewed energy towards sports blogging led me to finally work on an article that was attacking a hypothesis I have been stewing over for the past few seasons: why does every recent NBA champion have a similar archetype of role player?
Allow me to explain the origin of this hypothesis: during the 2021-22 NBA Finals, I was intrigued by one player in particular on the Golden State Warriors – Gary Payton II. No, I’m not trying to pull a Ryen Russillo and act contrarian, but I was fascinated by Payton’s impact on the Warriors. Here was a 6’2 guard who the Warriors would almost deploy as a big, a player who thrived in short rolls, cutting, finishing inside, hitting the occasional three, and creating havoc on the defensive end of the court. It was evident the Warriors were far better with Payton on the court and the numbers backed up the eye test, as Golden State was +8.6 points per 100 possessions better with Payton on the court. For as great as Stephen Curry was in the NBA Finals, along with terrific sidekick performances from Andrew Wiggins and Jordan Poole, the impact Payton had on the Finals and postseason run really stuck with me.
An interesting thing then happened the following season, when the Denver Nuggets won the NBA Finals and Bruce Brown played an integral role for that championship squad. The Nuggets were only +1.6 points per 100 possessions better with Brown on the court, but that is largely due to former head coach Michael Malone’s extreme staggering of starters and reserves (which he minimized more in the postseason, but there was still a stark difference). Brown was a nearly identical player to Payton; he’s 6’4 but has such a similar style where he thrives in short rolls, off cuts, finishing at the rim, hitting threes at a low volume, and making plays on defense. How could two teams constructed in vastly different manners win the NBA Finals in back-to-back years, yet both possess this certain archetype of a role player who was the ultimate “glue guy”?
Allow me to introduce a term for the ultimate “glue guy” the NBA Chameleons. These are players who serve as true shape shifters; they can effortlessly change their skill and style to accentuate the strengths of their star teammates or plug lineup deficiencies. They have flaws that have front offices consistently overlook them, only for them to show up in the NBA postseason and surprise with their seamless ability to elevate a team by doing the little things. The question naturally becomes: why are these “chameleons” so important, and how can teams proactively identify the next shape shifters to fortify their postseason rosters?
When the itch to write on The Chirp returned, I knew it was a goal of mine to publish this article in time for the start of the NBA Playoffs. As a quick aside before I dive into the meat of this article, this is probably the piece I have been most excited about for years. I hope you all genuinely enjoy the research and thoughts below. Big shoutout to Cleaning The Glass for providing much of the below data (their subscription is 100% worth the money).
Introduction to the NBA Chameleons
While my intrigue in my newly termed “NBA Chameleons” first started in the 2021-22 NBA Finals, it became apparent to me in preparing for this article that the impact Chameleons have had on the postseason stretches beyond that. Over the last five years, each title team has included an NBA Chameleon:
- 2019-20 Los Angeles Lakers: Alex Caruso
- 2020-21 Milwaukee Bucks: PJ Tucker
- 2021-22 Golden State Warriors: Gary Payton II
- 2022-23 Denver Nuggets: Bruce Brown
- 2023-24 Boston Celtics: Jrue Holiday
I quickly found a pattern amongst these five players that can be summarized through five key traits: Shot Diet & Accuracy Uniqueness, Possession Thievery, Defensive Playmaking, Off-Ball Versatility, and Point-of-Attack Defense. Let’s dive into each:
Trait #1: Shot Diet & Accuracy Uniqueness
All of the above Chameleons are 6’5 or shorter, yet their usage in terms of shot attempts and location was typical of a player far bigger than their size. All of these players took an abnormally high percentage of their field goal attempts at the rim compared to players at their position (courtesy of Cleaning the Glass) and nearly all finished at the rim significantly higher than others at their positions. PJ Tucker would be the lone exception, who was 36 years old and is a below the rim big. While his rim volume and efficiency were far below his peers, his 3-PT corner rate was significantly higher.
| Player | Rim FGA% | Rim FG% | FGA% / FG% Pctile |
| Alex Caruso (2019-20) | 42% | 64% | (83rd / 85th) |
| PJ Tucker (2020-21) | 17% | 43% | (12th / 3rd) |
| Gary Payton III (2021-22) | 54% | 81% | (99th / 100th) |
| Bruce Brown (2022-23) | 40% | 73% | (82nd / 87th) |
| Jrue Holiday (2023-24) | 23% | 64% | (50th / 67th) |
One other thing that stood out to me? Three of the five players we identified saw >20% of their shot attempts come from the area CTG designated as “short mid”, indicating the ability to thrive in short roll situations off defensive blitzes. Gary Payton II had a 35% short mid rate in the postseason, compared to just 13% in the regular season. Bruce Brown was at 28% in the postseason (compared to 23% in the regular season), and Jrue Holiday was at 21% in the postseason (compared to 23% in the regular season).
Trait #2: Possession Thievery
One statistic that rang true for all the Chameleons? Their offensive rebounding rate was significantly above positional average in the postseason:
| Player | Offensive Rebound Rate (Playoffs) | Off Rebound Pctile (Playoffs) |
| Alex Caruso (2019-20) | 2.7% | 75th |
| PJ Tucker (2020-21) | 7.1% | 96th |
| Gary Payton III (2021-22) | 7.5% | 95th |
| Bruce Brown (2022-23) | 3.3% | 74th |
| Jrue Holiday (2023-24) | 5.4% | 100th |
Outside of Alex Caruso, all of these players were also terrific positional offensive rebounders in the regular season as well. These players had a knack for creating extra possessions for their teammates through their ability to crash the glass despite all being 6’5 or shorter.
Trait #3: Defensive Playmaking
All of our Chameleons also thrived at generating steals, blocks, or both:
| Player | Block Rate / Block Pctile | Steal Rate / Steal Pctile |
| Alex Caruso (2019-20) | 1.3% / 100th | 2.0% / 95th |
| PJ Tucker (2020-21) | 0.2% / 13th | 1.4% / 70th |
| Gary Payton III (2021-22) | 2.0% / 95th | 3.3% / 100th |
| Bruce Brown (2022-23) | 0.9% / 74th | 1.8% / 78th |
| Jrue Holiday (2023-24) | 0.9% / 72nd | 1.3% / 44th |
As we will see in a later trait, all of these players also thrive as on-ball defenders, but their ability to create havoc on the defensive end of the court in the form of loose balls (blocks) or turnovers (steals) is extremely valuable.
Trait #4: Off-Ball Versatility
The majority of the players within our list were capable of playing off-ball, usually with a shot diet inclusive of minimal dribbles:
| Player | %FGA Off 0-1 Dribbles | Common Playtypes |
| Alex Caruso (2019-20) | 56.0% | P&R Ball Handler / Cutter |
| PJ Tucker (2020-21) | 91.3% | Spot Up Shooter / Cutter |
| Gary Payton III (2021-22) | 95.5% | Cutter / P&R Roll Man |
| Bruce Brown (2022-23) | 53.4% | P&R Ball Handler / Cutter |
| Jrue Holiday (2023-24) | 46.7% | P&R Ball Handler / Cutter / Spot Up |
Trait #5: Point-of-Attack Defense
In the postseason the league skews significantly heavier towards isolation play and, outside of PJ Tucker, all of these players proved to be very good individual defenders in isolation:
| Player | PPP Allowed vs Isolation / Pctile | DLEBRON |
| Alex Caruso (2019-20) | 0.74 / 78th | 0.95 |
| PJ Tucker (2020-21) | 1.00 / 32nd | 0.50 |
| Gary Payton III (2021-22) | 0.60 / 92nd | 1.80 |
| Bruce Brown (2022-23) | 0.87 / 67th | -0.16 |
| Jrue Holiday (2023-24) | 0.86 / 68th | 0.52 |
So What?
A few years ago, when Bob Voulgaris was a prominent character in the Dallas Mavericks’ lore, I read a lot of articles about his history as a famous gambler. Voulgaris had his own proprietary model that he would utilize to predict games and ended up performing significantly better than sportsbooks, which led to him getting limit capped or sportsbooks not accepting his wagers at all. I was fascinated by this story, primarily because the tidbits that were unveiled around his modeling and analysis, which were all rooted in the smallest unit in basketball: a possession.
It seems simple, right? The game of basketball is really boiled down to individual possessions and what you do with it. A possession can end in a turnover, shot attempt, or shooting foul. Given that the goal of basketball is to have more points than your opponent and, in order for that to happen, you must shoot and score the ball, it makes sense that maximizing possessions gives you a built-in advantage over your opponent.
The summary I would generate from our above five players is they thrive at the smallest margins, meaning they are terrific at maximizing shot attempts for their own teams while minimizing shot attempts for their opponents. How do they do this?
- Maximizing Own Shot Attempts: High Offensive Rebounding Rates
- Minimizing Opponents’ Shot Attempts: High Steal Rates
These players don’t just thrive on the shot volume margin but also excel at marrying volume with efficiency, which is more important than volume. The above players (outside of PJ Tucker) were terrific at converting the most efficient shot attempts outside of free throws (rim FGA) while minimizing efficient shot attempts from opponents due to high block rates and stout individual defense. Given these players are all 6’5 or under but play a style significantly larger, they enable teams to deploy lineups with higher versatility, more speed, and more quickness. These five players can subsequently be utilized in unique manners, such as in short rolls, outlets to double teams, corner spot-up shooters, or in crashing the offensive glass.
This naturally begs the question: while these players do thrive on the margins, why does this matter so much for postseason basketball?
How NBA Postseason Basketball Changes
Slower Postseason Basketball -> Fewer Possessions
A common refrain we often hear from the NBA broadcast is how when the postseason comes around, the game slows down. The eye test backs this up as well as players increase their effort; transition baskets become less common and a more methodical, half-court game takes precedent. It is why individual shot creation reigns supreme in the playoffs. If you don’t have 1-2 players capable of creating their own shot and generating good looks for others, odds are your team will likely flame out in the postseason.
Every year since 2019-20 we have seen a >2.5% reduction in possessions per game in the postseason compared to the regular season. While it seems minor, think of how many games are decided by 5-6 points (inclusive of the intentional fouls to extend the game). Those possessions make a huge difference. In that same time span, teams that have more free throw attempts + field goal attempts than their opponents have won 58.4% of games. Shooting efficiency is still the superior predictor amongst the four factors analysis, but shot volume is another indicator of performance. Teams that have won shot volume, plus had a higher offensive rebounding rate and a lower turnover rate have won 71.4% of games. In the ~28% of games they lost, it was the result of extreme shooting variance (one way or another).
I am not going to argue that shot volume exceeds in importance to shooting efficiency, but what I will argue is that having a shot volume advantage over your opponent naturally insulates your team from the whims of shooting variance. We have seen instances of this play style be successful to winning playoff series; the New York Knicks beat the Cleveland Cavaliers in 2022-23 despite being outshot, the Los Angeles Lakers beat the Golden State Warriors the same year and the Knicks did it again last year to the Philadelphia 76ers. It should be noted that neither the Knicks nor Lakers won the NBA Finals during those seasons, but it illustrates the ability for teams who maximize possessions to protect themselves from hot opponent shooting.
More Isolation Plays -> More Double Teams / Rising Popularity in Blitzes
Another trend that becomes noticeable is when the postseason comes around, we see a dramatic rise in isolation rates for every team. Teams want the ball in their superstars’ hands and, as a result, are willing to go 1-on-1 to make that happen. Look at the past five champions’ rises in isolation rate into the postseason:
| Team | Isolation Rate Increase |
| Los Angeles Lakers (2019-20) | +27.6% |
| Milwaukee Bucks (2020-21) | +36.1% |
| Golden State Warriors (2021-22) | +24.1% |
| Denver Nuggets (2022-23) | +10.9% |
| Boston Celtics (2023-24) | +54.4% |
As analytics have taken over the NBA, they can also be applied to the defensive end of the court. While teams can rightfully note that having their superstar operate in isolation is their most efficient form of half-court offense, defenses have access to the same data and can strategize to get the ball out of their opponents’ star player’s hands. As a result, star players are doubled at a higher rate than ever before, while defenses employ other creative tactics such as aggressively shrinking the floor on drives, daring stars to kick the ball out to their role players for 3-PT shots. We saw the Oklahoma City Thunder aggressively deploy this strategy against Luka Doncic and the Dallas Mavericks last season, a series Dallas won in large part because PJ Washington shot 46.9% from 3-PT range. A similar concept can be applied to pick-and-roll coverages, where opponents have adopted a “blitzing strategy”, where the player defending the roll man will aggressively shoot over the screen to effectively double team the ball handler. After the Minnesota Timberwolves’ drop coverage defense was exposed by Doncic and Kyrie Irving last year, the Wolves adopted this approach; Doncic’s passing wizardry combined with the dominance of Dereck Lively and Daniel Gafford rendered it a moot point, but blitzing is an effective strategy that often necessitates a wing or big man operating as an “escape valve” for the ball handler. In this instance, this player will operate in a 4-on-3 situation and be tasked with operating in the short roll for a floater, a kick out pass, or as someone who can cut for another option for the escape valve.
To better visualize this concept, look at this possession the Los Angeles Clippers had in Game 82, when Kawhi Leonard is doubled and Kris Dunn thrives as an escape valve:
These are the exact situations stars are often caught in during the postseason; Kawhi Leonard is doubled in a critical, late game situation, and Kris Dunn flashes to the free throw line and has a 2-on-1 situation that he executes flawlessly. Having these versatile players who can function as secondary playmakers in advantageous situations is becoming more and more of a necessity to surround your star player with.
And the below is an instance of Luka Doncic getting blitzed by the Wolves a year ago; Doncic’s size allows him to see over both Rudy Gobert and Jaden McDaniels, where he can either pass to Josh Green for a corner three, or hit Dereck Lively on the roll. Because Lively seals Anthony Edwards so effectively, this becomes an easy dunk:
Not all of our Chameleons need to be undersized guards, but having the ability to make plays off their star player getting doubled or blitzed makes them highly practical postseason performers. The numbers back this up as well; look at how much better these teams were with the Chameleons on the court, especially defensively (for defensive marks, negative is better, as it indicates fewer points per 100 possessions)
| Player | Defensive Rating On/Off (vs. Reg) | Net Rating On/Off (vs. Reg) |
| Alex Caruso (2019-20) | -7.8 / -1.4 | +4.6 / -2.1 |
| PJ Tucker (2020-21) | -9.2 / -19.2 | +7.7 / +14.1 |
| Gary Payton III (2021-22) | -10.8 / -6.5 | +8.6 / +4.5 |
| Bruce Brown (2022-23) | -2.7 / -4.7 | +1.6 / +7.2 |
| Jrue Holiday (2023-24) | -3.2 / -6.8 | +7.7 / +12.6 |
All of these teams were significantly better with these players on the court (and all saw pretty sizeable improvements over the regular season, outside of the Los Angeles Lakers with Alex Caruso). Not only that, we saw three teams be +7.5 points per 100 possessions better with their Chameleons on the court and three also saw a +7-point improvement over the regular season.
So far, we have established key traits that comprise an NBA Chameleon archetype and illustrated how these players’ skillsets allow them to release pressure from their star player in a different postseason environment. Still, why are these players important, and how can you effectively build a roster capable of winning a championship that includes Chameleons?
Finding Balance with Chameleons
When we again boil basketball down to its simplest form (a possession), we realize you can win a game through two extremes: shooting efficiency and shooting volume. Imagine a seesaw, with shooting efficiency on one end and shooting volume on the other. With efficiency, teams rely on excellent shot making to win games. They don’t win the volume battle, nor do they play a style conducive to generating extra possessions with offensive rebounds or forcing turnovers. With volume, these teams rely on winning through generating such a significantly higher number of shot attempts that they can insulate themselves against shooting variance, both for and against them.
The issue is, just like with a seesaw, too much weight towards one end of the extreme throws the equation out of balance. Having an elite shooting team is certainly great, but what happens when there is magically a lid on the rim? Their play style inherently doesn’t give them wiggle room where they can offset a poor shooting performance with a higher volume of shot attempts. While playing a style that relies on a high volume of shot attempts may mitigate variance, it is also a low upside way to play, as individual shot making is far more important than the number of shot attempts. Having more shot attempts can be a misleading statistic, for how you convert those shot attempts is far more important.
Better yet, we have seen evidence of teams leaning to one extreme over another being unable to win championships. In the past several postseasons, we have seen teams leaning too heavily towards one extreme suffer upsets or get eliminated early:
- 2021-22 Brooklyn Nets – Swept by the Boston Celtics in Round 1
- 2021-22 Phoenix Suns – Lost in 7 to the Dallas Mavericks in the WC Semifinals
- 2022-23 Memphis Grizzlies – Lost in 6 to the Los Angeles Lakers in Round 1
- 2023-24 Phoenix Suns – Swept by the Minnesota Timberwolves in Round 1
Building a roster full of Chameleons, or the guys who win at the margins (possessions) won’t bring you an NBA Finals trophy, just like building a roster with highly efficient scorers won’t win you a title. To win a championship, it takes finding balance. You certainly need the high-level, individual super stardom that only a select few players possess, but I would argue that building a roster around them that features the Chameleons is a significantly better way to construct a team than the traditional approach of adding 3-and-D wings or highly specialized players. Defenses and game strategy have evolved too far where surrounding your star with standstill shooters or volume scorers is no longer a viable team building construct. Too many players are capable of scoring 10-15 PPG, yet the players who can effectively play off their star players by operating in short rolls and inside the paint, create havoc defensively, add extra possessions through offensive rebounding, and defend at the point-of-attack offer significantly more value than your traditional 15 PPG role player.
Furthermore, what I find really interesting about the Chameleon Archetype is that these players struggle in one noticeable area that feels contradictory to the modern NBA; 3-PT shooting. None of our five-player sample are good, volume-based 3-PT shooters. Look at their percentage marks and on 3-PT attempts per 36 minutes to illustrate that, while these players hit three pointers at a strong mark, they came on relatively little volume:
| Player | 3PA Per 36 Minutes (Playoffs) | 3PT% (Playoffs) |
| Alex Caruso (2019-20) | 4.3 | 27.9% |
| PJ Tucker (2020-21) | 3.1 | 32.2% |
| Gary Payton III (2021-22) | 2.7 | 53.3% |
| Bruce Brown (2022-23) | 3.9 | 31.6% |
| Jrue Holiday (2023-24) | 4.3 | 40.2% |
For reference, 4.3 3PA per 36 minutes would rank ~167th in the NBA this season and is on par to marks made by Draymond Green, Derrick Jones Jr., and Jaden McDaniels. Gary Payton II’s 2.7 attempted per 36 minutes would be the equivalent to Onyeka Okongwu (200th out of 231 qualifiers). These are all very low volume 3-PT marks that theoretically should make these players relatively unplayable in the postseason (outside of Jrue Holiday, who is significantly better than the majority of these players). The fact they do so many other things well; play off traps, cut, rebound, create steals / blocks, and defend, illustrates to how valuable these players are. Chameleons are all about balance; their low volume 3-PT shooting makes it difficult to play 2-3 alongside a superstar, just like having 2-3 pure standstill shooters alongside a superstar is difficult because of their lack of off the dribble playmaking. Chameleons, however, serve as the perfect complementary pieces around an MVP-level superstar and top-tier supporting cast.
Who Are the Chameleons to Know?
In previous postseasons, we have seen the above five championship players make major impacts for their title winning teams. Entering this postseason, I am keeping my eye on the following names; it should be noted that I am not indicating you must have a Chameleon on your roster to win a championship, but rather I think it is an interesting pattern and trend which is developing across champions.
| Name | FGA% Rim / Pctile | FG% Rim / Pctile | OREB% / Pctile | STL% / Pctile | BLK% / Pctile | ISO PPP Allowed / Pctile |
| Kris Dunn (LAC) | 21% / 43rd | 69% / 79th | 3.3% / 59th | 3.2% / 98th | 0.8% / 76th | 0.70 / 85th |
| Tari Eason (HOU) | 46% / 90th | 66% / 57th | 8.2% / 96th | 2.8% / 97th | 1.8% / 94th | 0.84 / 60th |
| Amen Thompson (HOU) | 56% / 100th | 72% / 97th | 8.0% / 100th | 1.8% / 58th | 2.0% / 100th | 0.84 / 63rd |
| Cason Wallace (OKC) | 34% / 84th | 66% / 71st | 3.7% / 74th | 2.7% / 92nd | 1.0% / 84th | 0.70 / 85th |
| Andre Jackson Jr. (MIL) | 40% / 82nd | 67% / 62nd | 6.6% / 96th | 1.4% / 47th | 0.6% / 47th | N/A |
| Jrue Holiday (BOS) | 25% / 56th | 71% / 88th | 4.0% / 80th | 1.5% / 42nd | 0.7% / 72nd | 0.95 / 39th |
| Jarred Vanderbilt (LAL) | 69% / 79th | 62% / 16th | 11.9% / 83rd | 2.5% / 99th | 0.9% / 16th | 1.10 / 15th |
Kris Dunn (LAC): Perhaps there is no clearer example of a perfect postseason “Chameleon” than Kris Dunn. Dunn is an elite defender who thrives at the point-of-attack but also lives in passing lanes evident by his top tier steal rate. We already saw one clip in this article of how Dunn effectively shape shifts his role, going from a secondary ball handler to a safety valve off a Kawhi Leonard trap, to throw a lob to Ivica Zubac. The Los Angeles Clippers have the #1 net rating in the league over the past ten games and Leonard looks healthy. If you want a sleeper to emerge from the Western Conference, look no further than the Clippers. Kris Dunn would be a big reason why.
Tari Eason / Amen Thompson (HOU): There may be no better Chameleon in the NBA than Amen Thompson, who feels like the prototypical player for this role. Thompson thrives at everything on the court except shooting, yet the Rockets are significantly better with him on the court (+2.5 points per 100 possessions better). Thompson almost feels too obvious to include here, so I’m also giving a shoutout to Tari Eason, who thrives in all the margin areas as well. The Houston Rockets certainly lack the top-level star power consistent of previous NBA Finals winners and likely lean a bit too much to the “volume” end of our winning seesaw, but they ironically bare some resemblance to the New York Knicks teams we saw have some postseason success over the past two seasons. They don’t have a go-to offensive player like Jalen Brunson, but the duo of Eason and Thompson should resemble the impact Josh Hart and Isaiah Hartenstein have had on the Knicks’ previous postseason runs.
Cason Wallace (OKC): You can certainly include Alex Caruso, a well-documented Chameleon in this group as well, but I’d keep an eye out for Cason Wallace. Wallace is a terrific individual defender, evident by the standout job he did on Kyrie Irving a year ago. His 3-PT shooting can be inconsistent, but he’s one of the better shooters of this entire group, yet has the defensive playmaking, offensive rebounding, and interior play skillset we see from the Chameleon group. I initially compared Wallace to Jrue Holiday during the 2023 NBA Draft and I feel better about the comparison as time goes on. Perhaps no team is as artfully constructed to balance the efficiency / volume seesaw like the Oklahoma City Thunder are. Whether or not they have the true top-end talent yet remains to be seen, but if they do win the NBA Finals, my hunch is that Wallace will play a massive role.
Andre Jackson Jr. (MIL): When Andre Jackson Jr. declared for the NBA Draft, I had him rated as my #12 overall prospect. I wrote the following:
One observation I had during the NBA Playoffs was a niche player that has been apparent on winning teams. Look at Gary Payton III with Golden State during their 2022 championship, Bruce Brown Jr. with Denver this year and Josh Hart in New York. Those players serve as the blueprint for what Jackson can be at the pro level. Jackson’s best skill is his off-ball movement; he’s a terrific cutter, screener, and passer. That skillset will easily allow Jackson to unlock an entirely new dimension of a team’s offense that we’ve seen consistently lead to championships (see: Denver and Golden State). It may seem like a bold, if not an outlandish claim, but Jackson did just that at UConn this season. Not to mention, but Jackson is also a terrific athlete who plays above the rim, giving him extreme impact on the offensive glass.
Clearly, I’m biased here so I can prove myself to be correct, but Jackson’s play style perfectly resembles what an ideal Chameleon looks like. The problem? Doc Rivers barely plays Jackson, making me a bit skeptical he can get enough playing time to fully emerge in the postseason. Jackson has played 10+ minutes in just two games after the All-Star Break, and one of them was meaningless Game 82.
Jrue Holiday (BOS): My bet to win the NBA Finals this year (again) is on the Boston Celtics. Jrue Holiday would be a major reason why. Holiday’s individual defense has taken a slight hit this year, a minor problem considering the Celtics have two other elite perimeter defenders in Derrick White and Jaylen Brown, plus an elite rim protector in Kristaps Porzingis (if he’s healthy). Holiday is by far the most talented Chameleon we have seen, even as he is starting to hit his “past prime” years.
Jarred Vanderbilt (LAL): If there is one player with obvious flaws related to the key stats, it is Jarred Vanderbilt. That being said, the film highlights why he can be such an impactful player in the postseason. The isolation marks on defense aren’t kind to Vanderbilt, but he’s a menace off-ball and historically, is more than capable of holding his own in 1-on-1 situations. Given his classification as a big, his interior finishing marks aren’t great, but the gravity Luka Doncic creates should lead to some easy looks for Vanderbilt in the short roll area.
What to Watch For in the 2024-25 NBA Playoffs
Just like with a seesaw, an NBA roster requires balance. It requires managing the tradeoffs between efficiency and volume, top-end talent and complimentary bench pieces, and Chameleons and stars. That belief to me is why we have seen recent super teams fail more often than not; think about the Kevin Durant-led teams since his departure from Golden State, which have consistently underwhelmed despite being loaded with three All-Star level players. All of these lineups have dealt with injuries, but they have also been woefully thin on a supporting cast that can accentuate their star player’s strengths. On the flip side, teams that lack the true top-end superstar like the Memphis Grizzlies, Cleveland Cavaliers, and the old Utah Jazz teams have all failed to make the Conference Finals. While that seems likely to change this year for the Cleveland Cavaliers, all of those teams lack a first team All-NBA type of alpha.
One of the most obvious predictors of championship teams is whether or not they have an MVP winner on their roster. Since 2000, just three teams have won the NBA Finals without an MVP on their roster: the 2004 Detroit Pistons, the 2019 Toronto Raptors, and the 2024 Boston Celtics (you could argue that we should include the 2006 Miami Heat as well, given the fact that Shaquille O’Neal was way past his prime and was the MVP winner on that team). The Raptors, however, featured a previous Finals MVP (Kawhi Leonard), and the 2024 Boston Celtics had one of the highest net ratings in league history. The point? You really need an MVP-caliber player to win the NBA Finals or, at minimum, a first-team All-NBA player surrounded by a top-5 team in terms of net rating. It makes the list of serious contenders really minimal.
The Oklahoma City Thunder certainly qualify as one contender; Shai Gilgeous-Alexander may win his first MVP this season and has an All-Star alongside him in Jalen Williams. The Thunder have a plethora of Chameleons around SGA and Williams; Isaiah Hartenstein, Alex Caruso, and Cason Wallace all fit the label, while Lu Dort and Chet Holmgren are amongst the premier defensive players in the NBA. My concerns with Oklahoma City, however, are multifaceted. Jalen Williams is a terrific player, but I’m still a bit skeptical on his ability to be a #2 option on a title team. Oklahoma City’s #3 option (presumably Holmgren) is relatively weak when considering past champions, meaning the Thunder will either need more from Williams compared to historical data, or will need a tremendous village mentality which I’m skeptical of. The Thunder would almost deploy an identical approach to the Golden State Warriors 2021-22 title, where they had their superstar (Stephen Curry) and a supporting cast that thrived (Andrew Wiggins, Jordan Poole, Klay Thompson, Draymond Green, Kevon Looney, Gary Payton III). The problem? 2021-22 Curry is better than Gilgeous-Alexander and the Warriors’ supporting cast is better and more postseason proven than Oklahoma City’s. The Thunder’s time will likely come, but I’m not sure it is this year.
The Boston Celtics are, in my opinion, the clear frontrunner if they can stay healthy. They were not as formidable this year than last, but this is still a team whose style (3-PT heavy offense, can switch 1-5 defensively) gives them an inherent math advantage almost every night. The Celtics don’t have an MVP on the roster, but Jaylen Brown is a Finals MVP and Jayson Tatum is a recurring first-team All-NBA player. If Kristaps Porzingis can give Boston 24-28 minutes per night, they’ll be tough to beat.
The Cleveland Cavaliers boast an elite +9.2 net rating, but there is a lot of data indicating they aren’t a true title contender. Why? They have a very small backcourt that historically hasn’t won championships and don’t have a first-team All-NBA caliber player. Cleveland also lacks a “Chameleon” on their roster; one can certainly emerge to play that role in the postseason, but none of the underlying metrics lead me to believe one exists in their current group. I like the Cavaliers, but I don’t think they are a serious threat to win the Larry O’Brien Trophy.
One other team I’ll shout out? The Los Angeles Clippers. We mentioned the Clippers getting hot earlier in the article and they quietly have the 5th highest net rating in the league this season. They have a 2x Finals MVP (Kawhi Leonard), a regular season MVP (James Harden), a Chameleon (Kris Dunn), and one of the most underrated players in the NBA in Ivica Zubac. Oh, and they also employ Norman Powell (21.8 PPG), Derrick Jones Jr., Bogdan Bogdanovic, and a plethora of versatile wings like Nicolas Batum, Amir Coffey, and Ben Simmons. It is tough to bet against Nikola Jokic, who is arguably the best player in the world. Yet, the Clippers opening odds to win the series at +120 were far too low and frankly, I think them being +1700 to win the Western Conference is the shrewdest bet you can make.
Ultimately, I think my NBA Finals prediction will be the Boston Celtics over the Los Angeles Clippers in six games. The basketball nerd in me, however, will be more excited to watch the Chameleons at play and see which player emerges as the next shape shifter to add to our research booklet for next year.
The Chirp 