I think we are both agreeing on a lot of things here.  I know that for me, it’s the “extreme defensive statistics” that I think do hold a whole lot more merit then general blanket ones.  Like you said though, it’s not like any of us have the time, energy or money to have our own assistants checking for “contested shot %” or “help defenders filling to the proper spots%” or “proper screen coverage %”.  General stats are and always have been a great way for we fans, casual or die hard, to just get a general sense of what’s going on, and to use as some kind of objective conversation piece to discuss.

It would be a very interesting study (and I’m sure professional stat geeks have done this on the pro and college levels) to make take a large pool of teams and compare the general stats like opponents ppg, opponents FG%, opponents 3 pt %, steals, blocks, etc…and then compare those types of stats to the more “extreme” defensive stats.  Obviously, one would think, that when the extreme detailed stats showed solid %’s, this would trickle down into the general stats…but it would be interesting to see what kinds of gaps and difference ratios there would be, because I’m sure it would prove inconsistent at times.

I’m a big fan of reading books written by successful coaches at different levels, and reading about how Dean Smith handled this kind of stuff was fascinating.  He was obsessed with tracking extreme stats, particularly “shots contested” on defense, and their own system for “proper shot taken” on offense, and he had his own little UNC statistical analysis team.  He would then break down game tape on these UNC detailed stats, and quiz the team as a whole, and other times bring individuals with him, to go over the game tape and both point out his own thoughts literally shot by shot for an entire game.  

He was always interested in seeing the differences in which individual players were able to see the statistical points he was trying to point out, and who disagreed, and Dean Smith developed this very improved way of mixing high level stats and intuitive coaching for analyzing his players roles, what they needed to learn to be a part of his system and more complete player,s and how to model this stuff into a whole.  

I think the only real point I was trying to make amidst all my earlier babble was that right now, I find that our Sixers team is a perfect example of a team that is proving to be in the top 7-10 in many defensive statistical categories…when in fact, due to my own totally subjective “by eye” analysis of the criteria I look for (as written in my previous post), I notice a very distinct gap between the statistics and what I’m actually watching in their performance.  

Again, I appreciate the thoughtful replies Dannie, thanks.

The sixers best point guard is Andre Iguodala who has the instincts and maybe they should work with him to work on some things (cut down on the fancy behind the back stuff, make the simpler passes, he has the vision but sometimes tries for flash over substance) and give me a ’second’ back court of Iguodala and Williams…but never ever green and williams.

The sixers are mediocre this year, they were mediocre last year, and unless some significant roster improvements are made they’ll be mediocre next year without a point guard.

Trust me I know all about what coaches track in terms of defense.  I had coaches that enlisted people just to count deflections, contested shots, how often players went under screens when the pre-game strategy was to fight over the top among other “extreme” stats.  That is why I am paying particular attention to how the Sixers contest shots tonight.

The problem is one person can’t track all that during a live game.  You can on a very cursory level but I argue stats are much more reliable and a better indicator than that very basic eye-balling.  I watch the game deeply just like the next diehard, but I couple that with hardcore statistically measures as well.

Also, I gave you rankings based on not 1 game but 15 games worth of data.  Sure a single game can be high or low but as the games increase and the data increases those stats and rankings become even more reliable and pretty much what they are a numerical depiction of what happened in the games and the season.

Also maybe we look at statistics differently.  For example having a good FG% defense and 3pt% defense is a result of all of the individual and team defensive movements and actions you presented above. 

The premise is simple: Over time if you don’t consistently contest shots, don’t fight through screens, don’t rotate to shooters well, don’t trap hard, don’t practice proper defensive positioning etc. you your resulting stat – FG% defense will be bad.  Conversely if you do all those things well and often enough your resulting stat will be favorable.  Those stats don’t just come out of thin air they are the result of what you did on the court over time.

Check out Basketball on Paper, by Dean Oliver.  Great book on what stats mean, how to interpret them, decipher what they are really telling you about how a team is playing etc.

Sounds like different philosophies again!  I think statistics analyzing defense are, in general, way off key, and it’s something that can’t be analyzed nearly as efficiently as other parts of the game.  To me holding a team to a FG% is probably the most important, but even there an opposing can be just missing lots of open shots or layups that night, having nothing to do with the defense of the team they are playing.

I don’t mean to sound like an old school fossil from the 1800’s when I say this, but I think good old fashioned, eye balling the game provides a lot more explanation for a “good” vs. “bad” defensive team.  I’ll try to explain why.

The reason I feel this way is because to me, and I’m sure others may differ with me here, successful defense should not be analyzed on how many points are scored, shooting %, etc.  The true barometer is “how tough we made them work for the shot.”  And there’s no way to statistically analyze that.  

How many plays are there in a basketball game, especially at the NBA level, where you can play excellent defense on a position, and the player comes up with some wild, acrobatic play that goes in?  And how many times a team play not so great defense, whether individual or in a team sense, but the offense just jacks up some horrendous shot that has a low % of going in in the first place?  This happens not just sometimes, but often in the NBA, especially due to the more individual nature of the game, and number of isolation plays, as opposed to the college or international game.  You add those types of plays off and that really skews a lot of defensive stats.

To me, the best bet is to literally analyze each play.  If I’m a coach, I’d use extreme statistics that point out obvious flaws in how we’d play, but what really measures how well of team or individual defense you play is to park the butt in front of a screen, watch it on replay, and watch for: 

a. How well the individual is guarding the ball.  Is the individual buying ridiculous pump fakes or following the ball to much, or is he staying rooted in place and playing with his feet?

b. Does the individual defender have his hands up at the proper times, or are they too low?  

c. Is the defender forcing the man into a particular direction…is he playing him too close, too far away, making the defender work, scanning the court to see what else is going on?

d. Are players B and C filling in quickly to help when player A gets burned on a drive? 

e.  Is player C rotating to the perimeter when the ball is swung weakside?  Is he too late for a reason?  Was he overplaying his man uneccessarily?

f.  Is player D in the lane aware of player’s A and B defensive situation in the backcourt, or is he zoning out?  Are the guards acting as one unit, playing near telepathically with the other and constantly shifting when one’s man makes a move, or are they each in their own little world?

g. Are the frontcourt players stepping out quickly and far enough to help the guards to fill seems?  Do the frontcourt players have each other’s back right away, or is there a time delay and they aren’t following the ball?

h.  Are we collectively fighting through screens?  Going underneath too often?  Switching too often?  Guarding the pick n roll effectively, or is one player doing the job, but another is getting hosed?

These are the things that make good defense.  If a team shows steady improvement in these areas, and gives a good effort 75% of the game, and shows the ability to understand these things, then this means the offense is truly being “worked” hard, and it is a good defensive effort.  The reason I don’t like stats is because too often a team can exhibit the above traits…and the shot still goes in.

There are many losing games where a team played pretty good defense but there’s a loss, and many winning games that was won more on offense or lucky shots in the 4th quarter.  That’s why, for me, it’s more important to simply closely analyze with eyeballing the above letter points, as opposed to evaluating a team’s defense through statistics.  

Statistics also need to be thrown out the window a large majority of the time given the opposite team’s style.  Defensive stats will be hugely effected if playing a run n gun team, vs. a half court team, vs. a jump shooting team, vs. a team that works more inside out due to their personnel. Not saying stats are important, but I think they are much more worthy on the offensive end.  

All I’ll say is that the Sixers don’t have many “great” on ball defenders…but their starting five and several bench players are pretty much in the “solid” to “good” range.  If that’s the case…it is a coach’s job to turn that into incredible team defense.  Why do I say incredible?  Because a coach SHOULD have expectations that high.  

If Doc Rivers can get freaking Ray Allen and others that have not given a crap to play defense…and Popovich, or others, then my expectation is the same level to aspire to for a lesser team.  I understand Mo is not the above coaches, but as fans, shouldn’t we be demanding that level of expectation from anyone dressing as coach walking our sidelines?

The numbers say the Sixers are a top 5 defensive team now. 

Opponents are committing 15.9 turnovers per game this season (15.7 last year – 1 behind the league leader) they are 1.6 behind the number one team.  I think you are asking too much honestly.

I actually think the perception right  now is that they aren’t creating enough turnovers (numbers say otherwise) because offensively they aren’t converting them in to points effectively.

Also, I think you are overvaluing guys individual defense a bit.  We don’t have any defensive players of the year on this team.  In fact only Theo has ever been on an all-defensive team (‘99 and ‘04). 

Thad is still developing defensively, shows signs of being very good as well as reasons why we need to remember he is still a second year player.  I don’t expect his potential to be realized this season.

Brand has been strong and steady defensively.  Sammy has been Sammy.  Good a large portion of the time but still has his “we are playing basketball?” games.

Andre Miller is not good defensively in my opinion and for a team to be weak at the head of the defense is a great liability the rest of the players on the floor have to make up for.

Andre Iguodala showed great potential in his first few years, but as soon as AI left and his energy turned more to scoring the ball his defense has fell off in my opinion. 

When we go to the bench I think it doesn’t get much better.  Rush is weak, Lou is weak, Willie has been pretty good this season, Reggie is usually pretty good.  I don’t even know if Donyell Marshall can play basketball because he doesn’t sniff the floor.  And Ivey is suppose to be good but again he never gets on the court.

Because we don’t have elite defenders (IMO) the system must make them great. I think they play pretty good defense now but if we had a defensive specialist as a head coach or assistant coach they would be even better.