Welcome to a new era of NBA parity, where one franchise in each conference is seen as a strong favorite by Vegas, expected to outperform others by several games.
Wait … what?
Indeed, it’s accurate: In spite of the apparent rise in parity over recent years and various structural adjustments suggesting its continuation, the Boston Celtics and Oklahoma City Thunder commence the season as significant favorites in their respective conferences.
So, where do we stand at this moment, and what is the actual level of parity? The conversation surrounding parity in the NBA becomes quite intricate when you delve into the specifics, and the contradiction in my initial statement exemplifies this complexity well.
Let’s start from the top and analyze the current situation, its reasons, and whether this trend is likely to persist.
GO DEEPER
The NBA has entered a new era of parity. How did we get here and what’s next?
What do we mean by “parity”?
<pThe question of whether parity exists currently, and to what extent, initially hinges on the definition of “parity.”
On one hand, discussing parity may seem somewhat absurd when the Celtics have just concluded a season dominating the NBA, achieving the third-highest scoring margin in the last fifty years, while winning 80 out of 101 regular-season and playoff games and effortlessly claiming the championship. We’ll revisit their success — along with the emerging powerhouse Thunder team — shortly.
Nonetheless, by several metrics, there has undeniably been parity over the past five years.
This is particularly evident when discussing dynastic parity, which refers to the absence of one or two teams consistently dominating the league each season. During the middle of the last decade, the Golden State Warriors and Cleveland Cavaliers faced each other in four successive NBA Finals, but since then, we’ve approached the limits of playoff parity.
Within this span, six unique champions have emerged — with a new one each year — and nine different teams have made it to the finals. Additionally, five other teams have reached the conference finals, allowing nearly half of the league to experience late-May basketball in just over half a decade. While 14 teams have reached that stage at least once, only two teams (Boston and Miami) have made the conference finals more than twice.
Each franchise has seen a wild ride of highs and lows (with the exception of Detroit). For instance, the Warriors went from competing in the 2019 Finals to being the worst team in the league in 2019-20, and then sandwiched a championship season and a second-round playoff appearance around two other years that ended in the draft lottery. It’s been quite the journey.
They are not alone. The Heat participated in four Play-In games and only secured a top-four seed in the Eastern Conference once, yet they made two NBA Finals and won eight playoff series in the East during that time. The Atlanta Hawks and Minnesota Timberwolves both reached a conference finals and also found themselves at the bottom of the draft lottery within that same period. The Dallas Mavericks made it to both a conference finals and an NBA Finals in a three-year span while completely missing the Play-In during other years.
Moreover, there has been increased parity in terms of regular-season dominance. Prior to Boston’s success in 2024, six consecutive champions failed to achieve 60 regular-season wins*, with several not even coming close. Before the Celtics in the previous spring, three consecutive champions had the lowest win totals for a champion since Miami (52) in 2006: Denver in 2023 and Golden State in 2022 each had 53, while Milwaukee in 2021 had a pro-rated total of just 52.4 (that season featured 72 games).
(*The Lakers pro-rated to exactly 60 in the COVID-19 pandemic-shortened 2019-20 season, although they might have eased their efforts at times.
if they’d been required to play the final 11 games.)
Simultaneously, there has been an observable trend of a “fat middle” of teams winning between 40 and 52 games. Though it may seem mathematically improbable, last season, 17 out of the league’s 30 teams fell into this category; the previous year, it was 16. This phenomenon contributes significantly to the perception of parity, fostering a sense akin to Lake Wobegon where every team appears to be above average. With two-thirds of the league hovering in the “So you’re telling me there’s a chance…” range, it begins to resemble the NFL.
Moreover, we can look at the concept of playoff parity. Historically, the NBA has been quite predictable during the postseason, a trend that has persisted to some extent — 44 of the last 45 champions were seeded third or better, maintained a scoring margin of at least plus-3, and achieved no fewer than 52 wins in the regular season.
Yet, something unusual has emerged during the second round. Over the past six postseasons of this “post-Cavs-Warriors” era, the team lacking home-court advantage has triumphed in 14 of 24 second-round series, including notable upsets of teams with 64 wins (Dallas over Phoenix in 2022) and a pro-rated 63 (Miami over Milwaukee in 2020).
This highlights a greater randomness within the playoffs. In the last five years, a No. 8 seed and two No. 5 seeds have reached the finals, while two No. 7 seeds and another No. 5 seed made it into the conference finals. Notably, last spring’s Dallas-Minnesota matchup in the West finals marked the fourth instance in five years where neither of the conference’s top two seeds advanced beyond the second round.
In contrast, we have the counterexample known as struggle parity. It’s essential to remember that parity encompasses not only the top-tier teams but also those at the bottom. In this regard, parity has been virtually nonexistent.
The 2023-24 Pistons established an NBA record with 28 consecutive losses, while both the Pistons (14-68) and Wizards (15-67) recorded worse records than any team since the Sixers (10-72) in 2015-16. Last season, the Portland Trail Blazers, Charlotte Hornets, and San Antonio Spurs joined them in the 60-loss club, with seven teams losing at least 55 games.
This explains the origin of the “fat middle.” The NBA operates under a zero-sum framework where the wins and losses total 1,230 each year; it is impossible for 20 teams to each win over 40 games unless the 10 underperforming teams are significantly lacking. An economist might argue that the league’s Gini coefficient still reflects an uneven distribution when considering the struggles at the bottom.
To summarize our current situation: We see revolving champions, diminished dominance during the season, increased playoff randomness, a fat middle, and a struggling lower quarter of the league. Four out of these five elements could be characterized more as “parity” than not, suggesting that the trend line appears to be genuine.
What is driving this phenomenon?
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar and Bill Walton experienced individual success in the 1970s, yet for various reasons, their teams did not dominate the NBA’s previous era of parity. (Associated Press)
It is common to attribute a range of issues to the new collective bargaining agreement, which might indeed influence the persistence of the existing parity. However, it is important to note that we have experienced only one season under these new regulations, and Boston’s path to the title arguably demonstrated the least parity of the past five seasons.
Reflecting on the mid-to-late 1970s, when the league experienced its most significant era of parity, provides insights into our current situation. The era’s top players faced various challenges: Kareem Abdul-Jabbar lacked adequate support, Bill Walton endured frequent injuries, and Julius Erving was competing in a different league altogether. Once the Celtics, Lakers, and Sixers consolidated multiple superstars, the concept of parity vanished during the 1980s.
This observation can similarly apply to today. Teams like Toronto, Denver, Golden State, and Milwaukee each relied heavily on a single superstar; meanwhile, Boston boasts multiple stars without a top-five player in the league. The 2020 Lakers stand out as the only champions led by two elite stars. Since then, they have been constrained by roster issues reminiscent of the challenges Abdul-Jabbar faced in the 1970s.
Another overlooked factor is the failure of super teams. It wasn’t that the league obstructed their formations; instead, the teams that managed to assemble them often fell short of victory, with the Lakers serving as the only notable exception. The Brooklyn Nets sought to unify Kyrie Irving, James Harden, and Kevin Durant but ultimately could not achieve success after 2021. The LA Clippers experienced a single healthy playoff run, only to falter during a dramatic collapse in the NBA bubble. Additionally, Durant departed from a super team in Golden State, while Irving arguably did the same in Boston.
As for the 2023-24 season? The league’s star talent was so evenly distributed that the ten players who made the first and second All-NBA teams hailed from ten distinct franchises. This stands in stark contrast to the dynastic cores established by the Heat and Warriors over the past decade.
Will this trend persist?
This is where the new CBA plays a crucial role, as it is likely to have a significant effect on dynastic parity moving forward. To understand its implications, let’s revisit the CBA and clarify one point: it governs the agreements not only between the owners and players but also outlines the regulations among all thirty team owners.
During the 2023 negotiations, small-market owners successfully secured a critical concession. The regulations imposed on the highest-spending teams became significantly stricter, aiming to mitigate the financial advantages that franchises like the Clippers and Warriors had enjoyed.
than their lighter-spending counterparts. There has been considerable discussion surrounding the impacts of the second apron — a payroll threshold established this season that sits roughly $18 million above the luxury tax level — particularly concerning how it discourages teams from exceeding it for more than two seasons within a five-year span.
However, less attention has been given to the significantly steeper repeater penalty imposed on teams that exceed the tax three times across four years. This financial burden can hit certain clubs hard, even before a second-apron penalty comes into play. For instance, Boston faces a daunting tax bill for the 2025-26 season if it does not make substantial cuts to its salary, prompting the Celtics to streamline their payroll even ahead of any second-apron penalty that would take effect the following year.
Paradoxically, this situation may lead to decreased parity in the short term. If only a select few teams successfully assemble elite rosters under the stricter roster-building constraints imposed by the CBA, while other teams remain at a “pretty good” level despite having MVP-caliber players, we could very well witness a scenario that closely resembles the upcoming season.
The narrative of the greatest players in NBA history. Through 100 captivating profiles, top basketball journalists defend their choices and delve into the NBA’s history along the way.
The narrative of the greatest plays in NBA history.
Boston and Oklahoma City have skillfully assembled rosters that operate effectively under the new guidelines, aided by unique circumstances: Boston managed to finalize trades for Kristaps Porziņģis and Jrue Holiday just before the implementation of the new CBA, while Oklahoma City benefits from having many of its star players on advantageous rookie contracts. Other teams, however, appear to be left with a choice between being overly top-heavy or lacking key star power.
Even the Celtics and Thunder will face limitations on their most ambitious aspirations due to the apron and repeater rules. Under the current CBA, it seems that most teams will find themselves gambling on two-year windows of genuine contention, only to then consolidate in order to get below the second apron before making another attempt.
From the league’s perspective, this is not a flaw but rather an intended feature. The expectation is that teams will have to make tough roster decisions, that the era of top-heavy teams with three superstars is largely over, and that this will ultimately foster greater competitive balance. In many respects, this appears to be occurring: The “fat middle” of moderately strong teams and the relatively quick turnover of champions both seem to support this trend.
It is likely that parity is here to stay.
As for playoff unpredictability? We’ll find out if that also proves to be random or if it possesses lasting influence; I remain somewhat unconvinced.
In any given season, the notion of parity can often feel elusive. At the lower end of the spectrum, it doesn’t prevent a team like last year’s Pistons from facing obstacles. More significantly for most fans, this broader landscape doesn’t inhibit a team such as Boston from crafting a powerful two-year stretch, nor does it stop an emerging team like the Thunder from potentially distancing themselves from the rest of the Western Conference (as might occur in 2024-25).
So, let’s embrace our bold new CBA environment, everyone. We are still discovering all the implications and ramifications, both intended and unintended. However, one thing appears clear: whatever your take on “parity” may be, the recent shift towards increased parity is likely to continue for some time.
(Illustration: Meech Robinson: The Athletic; Photos: Jesse D. Garrabrant / NBAE; Hector Vivas / LatinContent; David Berding / Zach Beeker / Getty Images)
Navigating the New Era of NBA Parity: Understanding the Dynamics Behind Boston and Oklahoma City’s Dominance
Understanding NBA Parity
The NBA has entered a new era characterized by increased parity among its teams. Unlike previous decades dominated by a few franchises, the current landscape showcases competitive balance, with several teams, including the Boston Celtics and Oklahoma City Thunder, emerging as powerhouses. This article delves into the unique dynamics contributing to their success and how they navigate this competitive environment.
The Rise of Boston Celtics
The Boston Celtics, one of the most storied franchises in NBA history, have consistently been in the conversation for championship contention. Their resurgence in the Eastern Conference can be attributed to several factors:
- Strong Draft Classes: The Celtics have successfully utilized their draft picks to build a young, talented core. Players like Jayson Tatum and Jaylen Brown have become cornerstones of the franchise.
- Strategic Player Development: The Celtics emphasize player development, helping young talents refine their skills and maximize their potential.
- Coaching Philosophy: Head Coach Joe Mazzulla has cultivated a culture of accountability and teamwork, allowing players to thrive in their roles.
Key Players and Contributions
| Player | Position | Key Stats (2022-2023) |
|---|---|---|
| Jayson Tatum | Forward | 30.0 PPG, 8.0 RPG |
| Jaylen Brown | Guard/Forward | 26.0 PPG, 6.5 RPG |
| Marcus Smart | Guard | 11.5 PPG, 5.0 APG |
The Oklahoma City Thunder’s Rise
Similarly, the Oklahoma City Thunder have emerged as a formidable force in the Western Conference, showcasing their own unique approach to building a competitive team. The Thunder’s strategy highlights the importance of fostering young talent and creating a vibrant playing style.
- Asset Accumulation: The Thunder have strategically acquired numerous draft picks over the years, positioning themselves for future success. This wealth of assets allows them to build a young, competitive roster.
- Focus on Youth: The team emphasizes developing young players like Shai Gilgeous-Alexander and Josh Giddey, who have become integral to their success.
- Innovative Coaching: Head Coach Mark Daigneault has implemented a modern offensive system that prioritizes ball movement and spacing, making the most of the team’s athleticism.
Key Players and Contributions
| Player | Position | Key Stats (2022-2023) |
|---|---|---|
| Shai Gilgeous-Alexander | Guard | 31.4 PPG, 5.5 APG |
| Josh Giddey | Guard | 16.2 PPG, 8.0 RPG |
| Luguentz Dort | Guard | 14.0 PPG, 4.0 RPG |
Factors Contributing to Parity in the NBA
Several interrelated factors contribute to the newfound parity within the NBA, impacting teams like the Celtics and Thunder significantly:
1. Salary Cap Structure
The NBA’s salary cap system promotes competitive balance by limiting the amount teams can spend on player salaries. This mechanism prevents wealthier teams from hoarding talent, allowing smaller markets like Oklahoma City to compete against more prominent franchises.
2. Emphasis on Analytics
Teams are increasingly relying on data analytics to make informed decisions regarding player acquisitions, game strategies, and overall team management. This shift has leveled the playing field, as teams can now identify undervalued players and innovative tactics.
3. Player Movement and Free Agency
The dynamics of free agency have changed dramatically, with players willing to join forces in pursuit of championships. This trend has led to a more balanced league, as star players frequently change teams, redistributing talent across the NBA.
Benefits of a Competitive NBA Landscape
The current environment of parity in the NBA brings several benefits:
- Increased Fan Engagement: Fans are more engaged when multiple teams have a legitimate chance at winning the championship, making every game impactful.
- Rising Talents: Young players receive more opportunities to showcase their skills, leading to the emergence of new stars.
- Dynamic Rivalries: Competitive balance fosters exciting rivalries, enhancing the league’s narrative and drawing in viewers.
Practical Tips for Teams Aiming for Success
For franchises looking to navigate the new NBA landscape effectively, consider the following strategies:
- Invest in Scouting and Development: Prioritize scouting to identify young talent and invest in player development resources.
- Embrace Advanced Analytics: Utilize data analysis to inform decisions on player performance and game strategy.
- Build a Strong Culture: Foster a team culture that emphasizes hard work, accountability, and collaboration.
- Utilize Draft Picks Effectively: Develop a strategic approach to drafting and trading assets, maximizing the potential of acquired talent.
Case Studies: Success Stories of Boston and Oklahoma City
The Celtics and Thunder provide valuable case studies on how teams can achieve success in today’s NBA:
Boston Celtics Case Study
The Celtics have effectively blended veteran leadership with youthful exuberance. Their approach to development has seen former lottery picks exceed expectations, leading to a deep playoff run. The team’s emphasis on defense, combined with an efficient offense, has propelled them to become perennial contenders.
Oklahoma City Thunder Case Study
The Thunder’s strategic asset accumulation has paid off, positioning them well for future drafts. Their focus on developing young stars like Gilgeous-Alexander demonstrates the effectiveness of their long-term vision. As they continue to build around their core players, the Thunder are well on their way to returning to championship contention.
First-Hand Experience: Observing the Dynamic Play Styles
Attending games featuring the Celtics and Thunder reveals the different styles and philosophies employed by both teams:
- Boston Celtics: The Celtics exhibit strong ball movement, perimeter shooting, and a relentless defensive approach, making them a tough adversary.
- Oklahoma City Thunder: The Thunder play an up-tempo game, emphasizing fast breaks and versatile offensive sets, showcasing their athleticism and skill.
Conclusion
As the NBA navigates this new era of parity, teams like the Boston Celtics and Oklahoma City Thunder exemplify the successful strategies that can lead to sustained competitiveness. By investing in player development, embracing analytics, and fostering strong team cultures, franchises can position themselves for success in a dynamic league.
