The 2025 NBA playoffs have begun, marking the start of the two-month journey towards the Finals. But which teams are truly built to withstand the rigors of the postseason?
While every team that has reached this stage possesses strengths, the playoffs are also designed to highlight roster flaws. Each of these playoff squads carries statistical red flags – some more pronounced than others – that could potentially derail a deep championship run.
To pinpoint these potential vulnerabilities, I evaluated every team based on their performance relative to the league average across key regular-season metrics. These metrics included pace, shooting frequencies and percentages, turnovers, star power, and playoff experience. I then researched which categories have historically shown the strongest correlation with reaching the NBA Finals in the modern era (since the 2012-13 season, coinciding with the significant rise of 3-point shooting). Finally, I applied this research to the current playoff field, identifying teams whose primary weaknesses are magnified by their importance in the postseason.
The result is a tiered list of teams, grouped according to how detrimental their most concerning statistical area might be to their title aspirations.
Here is the breakdown:
Big Problems?
These four teams exhibit significant weaknesses in highly predictive statistics – issues that could seriously hinder a deep playoff push.
Orlando Magic
Orlando MagicStat Category: 3-point percentage (31.8%, 30th)
Why it matters: A team`s 3-point accuracy is one of the most crucial indicators of the ability to reach the Finals in the current NBA landscape. This past regular season saw a league record 42.2% of shots taken from beyond the arc, the first time ever over 40%. This trend leaves teams like the Magic, who ranked 18th in 3-point attempt frequency and last in the league in 3-point percentage (31.8%), somewhat out of step with prevailing winning strategies.
Neither Paolo Banchero nor Franz Wagner, the team`s leading scorers, have a strong outside game (both shot at least 11% worse than average from 3-point range). Additionally, the Magic`s most frequent deep shooters in the regular-season rotation, Kentavious Caldwell-Pope and Tristan Da Silva, also shot below the league average from 3. In fact, none of Orlando`s top 10 players by minutes played in the regular season shot above league average from 3.
Saving grace? Opponent block rate (8.7%, 10th). The Magic are difficult to deny at the rim, a valuable asset in the playoffs against strong shot-blocking bigs.
Houston Rockets
Houston RocketsStat Category: 2-point percentage (51.8%, 27th)
Why it matters: While the importance of the 3-pointer was just emphasized, it might be surprising that scoring efficiency inside the arc can be equally significant. Analyzing over a decade of NBA postseason data reveals that an offense`s 2-point field goal percentage carries even more weight than 3-point percentage when predicting a team`s likelihood of making the Finals. This presents a challenge for the Rockets, who are not a particularly strong shooting team overall.
They were below average in both 3-point accuracy and frequency, and also finished the regular season as one of the NBA`s worst 2-point shooting teams. Three of their five leading scorers (Jalen Green, Fred VanVleet, and Dillon Brooks) shot 48% or worse inside the arc. This deficiency is partially offset by having the league`s best rebounding rate, but teams heavily reliant on offensive rebounds haven`t had a strong track record of reaching the Finals recently.
Saving grace? Wins Above Replacement (WAR) of best player (Amen Thompson at 8.8, 8th). This metric highlights the significant impact of postseason stars. Although Thompson doesn`t have the high Usage Rate of other top stars, he is one of the most effective two-way players in the playoff field.
Denver Nuggets
Denver NuggetsStat Category: 3-point attempt rate (35.6% of FGA, 30th)
Why it matters: Unlike Orlando, the Nuggets are not poor 3-point shooters; their 37.6% from deep was well above average, ranking fifth best this regular season. Their offense, however, primarily focused on getting shots inside and/or drawing fouls to get to the free-throw line. This isn`t necessarily a poor strategy, especially when many of these shots are taken or created by Nikola Jokić. However, only one of the Nuggets` top seven players by minutes (Michael Porter Jr.) and only two of the top nine attempted 3-pointers at a higher frequency than the league average, indicating that the deep shot is a useful option but not a central focus.
In recent postseasons, contenders have needed to incorporate a significant volume of 3-pointers into their shot selection. Teams with an above-average 3-point attempt rate have tended to advance further, even when controlling for their accuracy. And there`s no sign this is changing under the new coach, David Adelman; the Nuggets` 3-point attempt rate (32.8%) in the final three regular-season games was actually lower than under the previous coach (35.7%).
Saving grace? WAR of their best player (Jokić at 17.9, 1st). Having a player of Jokić`s caliber, coming off one of his best seasons even by the standards of a three-time MVP, can compensate for most, if not all, team weaknesses.
Los Angeles Lakers
Los Angeles LakersStat Category: Team free throw rate (27.1 FTAs per 100 FGA, 1st)
Why it matters: Here we encounter a seemingly positive category – getting to the free-throw line frequently – that can actually become a disadvantage in the playoffs. Looking at postseason data, this makes sense. Teams that heavily rely on free throws for offense can perform very well in the regular season when fouls are called more frequently. However, when games are officiated more tightly in the playoffs (with FTA per 100 FGA decreasing in the last two postseasons), this strength can transform into a liability.
These Lakers provide a clear example of this trend, as their three highest-usage players by a significant margin – Luka Dončić, LeBron James, and Austin Reaves – all drew fouls at an above-average rate. Dončić and Reaves, in particular, were among the league`s most frequent foul-drawers.
Saving grace? Previous playoff experience (2183.8 minutes per player, weighted by 2024-25 minutes, 2nd). A consistent lesson from the NBA playoffs is the value of prior experience. Only the Boston Celtics have more cumulative playoff minutes on their roster than the Lakers.
Moderate Concerns
These statistical red flags aren`t necessarily fatal for these seven teams, but they still represent a risk, particularly against strong playoff opponents or when officiating doesn`t favor them.
Golden State Warriors
Golden State WarriorsStat Category: 2-point percentage (52.8%, 23rd)
Why it matters: Golden State`s interior shooting isn`t as poor as Houston`s, thus placing it in the moderate concern tier. Nevertheless, the Warriors aren`t a top-tier finishing team inside and were one of the least efficient midrange shooting teams in the NBA this regular season. While midrange shots aren`t a major part of their strategy, having more reliable conversion rates close to the basket would be beneficial for a team that ranked 15th in offensive efficiency.
Neither Stephen Curry nor Jimmy Butler III shot at or above the league-average rate on their 2-pointers this season. In fact, none of the Warriors` top nine players by minutes played had a 2-point percentage at or above the NBA average.
Saving grace? Previous playoff experience (1960.6 minutes per player, weighted by 2024-25 minutes, 3rd). Similar to the Lakers, the Warriors` roster is rich in prior postseason experience. This number increased with the midseason addition of Butler, a two-time NBA finalist.
Milwaukee Bucks
Milwaukee BucksStat Category: Free throw attempt rate (26.8 FTA per 100 FGA, 3rd)
Why it matters: As previously noted, a high free throw attempt rate can be a problem for potential contenders who rely too heavily on trips to the line when whistles become less frequent in the playoffs. The Bucks are partly responsible for this trend in the postseason data, as Giannis Antetokounmpo ranked third in free throw rate this regular season and consistently ensures the Bucks are among the teams that draw the most fouls each year.
While Antetokounmpo`s free throw percentage has sometimes been a playoff concern, his rate of getting to the line has also tended to decrease (relative to league average) in the postseason. The same holds true for Damian Lillard. Their combined ability to draw fouls largely powered Milwaukee`s exceptionally high regular-season FTA rate.
Saving grace? WAR of best player (Antetokounmpo at 12.5, 3rd). The 2021 NBA champion is such a dominant force that his capacity to carry the Bucks deep into the playoffs cannot be disregarded.
Detroit Pistons
Detroit PistonsStat Category: Opponent FT rate (27.6 FTA per 100 FGA, 27th)
Why it matters: Much discussion has focused on free-throw-dependent offenses performing worse than expected in the playoffs due to fewer calls. However, the opposite doesn`t appear to hold true – teams that foul opponents more and send them to the line frequently tend to reach the Finals significantly less often than teams that are more disciplined defensively.
Why might this be? One theory suggests that playoff games are slower and involve more half-court possessions, which increases the importance of every possession. Giving away easy points from the free-throw line becomes even more detrimental, and teams may have more control over their own fouling rate than their ability to draw fouls on offense.
Regardless, the Pistons sent opponents to the line frequently this season. While rim protection was important for a team that blocked a good number of shots, Isaiah Stewart, Ausar Thompson, and Jalen Duren were also among the NBA`s most frequent foulers.
Saving grace? Two-point percentage (55.0%, 16th). The Pistons receive credit here despite ranking in the middle of the pack because of the weight this statistic carries in predicting Finals teams. The same Detroit trio mentioned for their fouls also posted strong 2-point percentage numbers this season.
Oklahoma City Thunder
Oklahoma City ThunderStat Category: Opponent FT rate (27.2 FTA per 100 FGA, 26th)
Why it matters: The Thunder`s most obvious potential weakness – their youth and lack of playoff experience – has improved since last year. This leaves Oklahoma City in a similar position to Detroit regarding foul tendencies. OKC was one of the NBA`s most active defensive teams, leading the league in steals per 100 possessions (10.3) and ranking second in blocks per 100 (5.7), even with prolific shot-blocker Chet Holmgren missing 50 games.
There`s no doubt that fouling is the flip side of the defensive coin for the Thunder`s excellent numbers elsewhere. Still, if a concern must be found for a team that won 68 games and posted a net rating (+12.8) second only to the 1995-96 Chicago Bulls in the post-merger era, this is it.
Saving grace? WAR of best player (Shai Gilgeous-Alexander at 17.8, 2nd). Regardless of the order, Gilgeous-Alexander and Jokić were clearly the two best players in the league, and SGA is highly likely to win MVP. Players of this caliber disproportionately reach the Finals.
Memphis Grizzlies
Memphis GrizzliesStat Category: Opponent FT rate (26.7 FTA per 100 FGA, 25th)
Why it matters: This trio of foul-prone squads concludes with the Grizzlies, who, like the Thunder, were among the leaders in block and steal rates defensively, contributing to a top-10 unit on that side of the ball.
Achieving such disruptive defense from players like Zach Edey, Scotty Pippen Jr., Jaren Jackson Jr., and Brandon Clarke (who is out for the season) likely comes at the cost of sending opponents to the free-throw line. However, the Grizzlies fit the profile of a team whose defensive style might not be entirely conducive to a prolonged playoff run.
Saving grace? Two-point percentage (55.6%, 9th). Memphis is a solid shooting team inside the arc, with eight of their top 13 players by minutes converting at or above the league-average 2P%, and the remainder all within 5% of the average.
New York Knicks
New York KnicksStat Category: 3-point attempt rate (38.2% of FGA, 28th)
Why it matters: Like Denver, the Knicks are efficient 3-point shooters when they attempt them – New York shot 36.9% from deep during the regular season, ranking eighth best. However, the 3-pointer is not a significant part of the shot profiles for most of their frequently used players, with the exception of Miles McBride (who took 57% of his shots from outside).
Many Knicks players focus on interior scoring, whether it`s Karl-Anthony Towns` skills as an inside scorer and finisher or Jalen Brunson`s ability to attack the basket off the dribble. However, opponents have shown an ability to diagnose and counter New York`s primary offensive actions, which can become a particular problem in a seven-game series.
Saving grace? Two-point percentage (55.8%, 8th). The advantage of the Knicks` lower reliance on the 3 is that they are effective at converting the 2-point shots they take, doing so at the league`s fourth-highest rate per 100 possessions. Josh Hart made nearly 62% of his 2-pointers, an impressive rate for a versatile forward.
LA Clippers
LA ClippersStat Category: 3-point attempt rate (38.7% of FGA, 25th)
Why it matters: It is somewhat surprising that a team led in scoring by James Harden would be among the league`s least reliant teams on 3-pointers. However, the Clippers had an unusual distribution of shots among their rotation players. Some players shot more 3s than average (Harden, Norman Powell, Kris Dunn, etc.), others shot significantly fewer than average or none at all (Kawhi Leonard, Ivica Zubac, Derrick Jones Jr.), and only Nicolas Batum truly attempted 3s at a rate significantly exceeding a 50-50 mix of 2s and 3s (Batum took 85% of his shots from 3).
The Clippers might have the capability to increase their 3-point shooting volume more than other teams in this category, but it`s something to monitor.
Saving grace? Previous playoff experience (1820.7 minutes per player, weighted by 2024-25 minutes, 4th). A significant portion of this comes from Harden and Leonard, but Batum and Powell also contribute valuable postseason experience.
Minor Issues
This five-team group has less significant problems that could still matter in a close series or a specific matchup, but they are unlikely to be fatal flaws. These teams` weaknesses may not require a `saving grace` to offset them.
Miami Heat
Miami HeatStat Category: 2-point percentage (53.8%, 20th)
Why it matters: There are several larger reasons why the Heat are unlikely to make a Finals run, the most prominent being the first-round opponent they face as the first-ever 10-seed to advance from the play-in tournament: the 64-win Cleveland Cavaliers.
However, the Heat`s relatively weak 2-point conversion rate is another factor. This is perhaps best exemplified by the unusual 2-point shooting trend of Bam Adebayo, whose efficiency inside the arc dropped from a very good 56.5% in his first five NBA seasons to just 53.1% since – a decline from being 8% better than league average to 3% worse.
Indiana Pacers
Indiana PacersStat Category: 3-point attempt rate (40.0% of FGA, 21st)
Why it matters: The Pacers` strong connection to the play of Tyrese Haliburton, who is one of the league`s most prolific 3-point shooters among high-usage scorers, might obscure the fact that Indiana is not a team that relies heavily on shooting from beyond the arc. Apart from Haliburton, none of their top seven players by minutes took a significantly above-average share of their shots from 3-point range. Furthermore, Pascal Siakam, Bennedict Mathurin, Andrew Nembhard, and T.J. McConnell were well below league average in their 3-point attempt frequency.
Despite their lower rate of 3-point attempts, Indiana still ranked ninth in offensive rating, suggesting this might not be a major issue. However, they may be easier to defend from the outside compared to other teams at a similar level of title contention.
Boston Celtics
Boston CelticsStat Category: Opponent assist rate (opponents assist on 59.6% of made FGs, 29th)
Why it matters: The fact that such a seemingly minor category represents the Celtics` biggest statistical red flag among predictors of Finals teams speaks volumes. Boston performed positively against the league average in most metrics this season, particularly those most crucial in the playoffs. This required looking for less obvious weaknesses.
That being said, it is curious that teams allowing fewer assists – typically an indicator of effective ball-movement denial, at which Boston excels thanks to its numerous tough perimeter defenders – have historically fared worse in the playoffs.
Minnesota Timberwolves
Minnesota TimberwolvesStat Category: Free throw attempt rate (24.9 FTA per 100 FGA, 10th)
Why it matters: Led by Anthony Edwards, Julius Randle, and Rudy Gobert, the Timberwolves have been effective at getting to the free-throw line this season despite ranking 25th as a team in 2-point attempts per 100 possessions (2-pointers lead to drawing fouls far more often than 3-pointers). This efficiency in drawing fouls on 2-pointers contributes to their overall decent free throw rate.
While this does expose Minnesota to potentially not receiving the same level of calls in the playoffs, it`s worth noting that each of the Wolves` top five scorers last season (Edwards, Karl-Anthony Towns, Naz Reid, Mike Conley, Gobert) maintained or increased their regular-season FTA rate during the team`s surprising Western Conference Finals loss to the Dallas Mavericks. Clearly, a reduction in foul calls was not Minnesota`s primary issue in that series.
Cleveland Cavaliers
Cleveland CavaliersStat Category: Playoff experience (657.6 minutes per player, weighted by 2024-25 minutes, 15th)
Why it matters: Having prior experience on the biggest stage matters in the playoffs. The Cavaliers do have players with previous postseason minutes, most notably Donovan Mitchell (2,032 previous playoff minutes) and Max Strus (1,611) among their rotation members. (Tristan Thompson`s 2,616 previous minutes may not be as impactful if he doesn`t play significantly).
However, while the Cavs` roster average of around 658 minutes (weighted by each player`s minutes this season) is higher than the extremely low number seen from Oklahoma City last season, it`s still relatively low by historical standards for contending teams. Teams with between 500 and 1,000 previous postseason minutes on average tend to win slightly fewer games in the playoffs than would be expected based on their regular-season ratings. This makes it a minor concern for Cleveland, but a concern nonetheless.