Sometimes, I'll go for a few days without any good idea for a post. But then I'll read something that irks me. This morning, it's this piece from Rusty Simmons:
With Wright struggling to find comfort in the offense, the Warriors (2-5) went into the game ranked 25th of 30 teams in scoring and 17th in field-goal shooting. They're clearly a more defensive team this season, but that hasn't consistently translated into fastbreak chances, and they've labored in halfcourt sets.
Clearly a more defensive team? Hmm...This season the Warriors' DRTG is 106.2. Last season it was 110.7. Lower is better, so the Warriors are a better defensive team. Right? Not exactly. Let's look at this in terms of their ranking with respect to the rest of the league. Last season, the Warriors ranked 26th in DRTG. You're probably thinking they're now around average. Nope. This season the Warriors are ranked...wait for it...24th. We've moved up two spots! Now, I don't know about you, but I'm not sure that qualifies us as a defensive powerhouse.
So, why the discrepancy between what Mr. Simmons "clearly" sees (and I'm guessing what many fans are seeing — Hey, Kwame Brown plays defense!) and what the rankings see? It's pretty simple. There are two things going on. First, the Warriors are playing at a slower pace, 91.6 vs. 94.8. That change in pace, although seemingly small, is actually noticeable. And obviously, fewer possessions and fewer points (both offensively and defensively) can lead people to believe the team has improved (on defense). Second, and this one is arguably the more important factor, the league average DRTG is way down from last season (at least, in the early going). Last season the league average DRTG was 107.3. This season it's down to 102.6. That's almost 5 points down, which is a huge drop. Relative to this mark, the Warriors decrease in DRTG of 4 points is actually less than the overall drop in the league average. Go figure.
It's not only the perception of the Warriors that is being skewed. There's weird things afoot in Denver, too. Since Carmelo left, the conventional wisdom is that Denver's offense appears to have improved, because it is more balanced. Has it? The answer is apparently not. The Nuggets rank 12th in ORTG this season. Last season they ranked 1st (and most of that was with Carmelo in the lineup). But Denver *is* playing really well. Why? Because *their* defense actually has improved. Dramatically. Last season Denver was 16th in DRTG (107.3). This season, the Nuggets are leading the league at 94.6 (right ahead of the Bulls' 95.0). That's a pretty incredible change, but I haven't heard anybody talk about it (yet). They surely will. My guess is that *this* is the mile high effect in a condensed season.
So the take-home message here is:
Ok, that's not the message, but I just wanted to get that in here somewhere. The real message is, as always, don't let PPG fool you. And look at those league averages.
0 recs | 50 comments
Yess
I’m the only one who is starting to fear a “Terry Porter with the Suns” case of situation?
atmtc - January 7, 2012
well the one big cog in that was Shaq
shaq could not do anything in SSOL as evidenced by D’antoni’s below-average record those 20-30 games he tried to coach shaq and eventual playoff flameout before leaving for the Knicks
the warriors are playing too much halfcourt though i agree. the lack of post presence should be stirring them to play much faster, does it make a difference if they settle for a 20 foot jumper in delayed transition or after draining 15-20 seconds of shot clock?
starbury_to_s-jaxci2000 - January 7, 2012
Ooooohhhh! They scored points!!!
LOL! That’s awesome!
warriantinerks - January 7, 2012
Thanks as always Evanz
Interesting write up…but I’m confused.
You don’t really speculate on the cause here.
I mean, it does look to me like our defense has improved, and we supposedly have better defensive players (kwame instead of gadzuric, Rush instead of Reggie) – so what’s the problem? How come we aren’t significantly better?
I know someone (maybe Nate) mentioned that the synergy numbers were showing our awesome close out on jump shooters was kinda ineffective – do you have any guesses or insight on this? Because it DOES look to me like our D is in fact better
Duby Dub Dubs - January 7, 2012 via mobile
Interesting write up…but I’m confused.
I think the numbers don’t reflect the way we are playing to get these numbers. Previously we played a gambling defense with more emphasis on individual hustle and luck while now it appears we are trying to play a more structured defense with emphasis on fundamentals and positioning? Different strokes for different folks thing but I got as feeling the new way will end up better defensively but will also effect the scoring as players usually don’t like to concentrate on both aspects as there is then no time to relax and conserve energy.Hopefully we’ll figure out the balance that works best as the season progresses. Interesting to see that coach Smart had sac run a lot more in his first game and they won so he must have felt they were over defensed and under offensed before?
Skeptic con Urquell - January 7, 2012
The point is we're not "clearly" better...
…not yet anyway. You may be right that the changes will pay dividends down the line. But the commentators saying these changes have “clearly” made us better already aren’t paying attention to the bottom line.
Bigmouth - January 7, 2012
The cause for what? The cause for still not having a good defense? I think it’s obvious and the same cause as last season. Not enough talent.
Evanz - January 7, 2012
it’s very likely that the main causes for it looking like our defense is improved include a slower pace of play, and the fact that nobody can shoot coming out of the lockout. shots are off, players are out of shape, and league average efficiency is way down, causing lower scoring games.
bigkino217 - January 7, 2012
I think the reason for why our defense isn't significantly better is simple
Our players have played significantly better defense for decent periods of games so far this season, but those moments have tended to come at the start.
As the game has carried on they stop trying quite as hard and lose focus.
You should never base an argument around one piece of evidence, but I don’t have time for a decent post so for example consider last night against the lakers.
It’s easy to forget that the Lakers only scored 35 points in the first half. However in the second with a mixture of poor offence and turnovers they scored 60.
In fact one could argue that the reason for our poor defense in spells is how atrocious our offence is sometimes. There seem to be too many turnovers and missed shots as we’re not creating good looks, leading to better chances for the other team on attack
UKwarrior - January 7, 2012
"Never mistake activity for achievement"
I think this is a case where defensive numbers don’t necessarily tell the full story.
First, the Warriors were playing outstanding defense in the first three games – if I recall, their DRtg was in the top third in the league. So it’s not entirely fiction that they’re playing better D – for almost half their games (and the first half last night) they really were playing good defense. The last four games have just been disastrous.
But second, yes the Warriors D-Rtg (and as it happens, their opp EFG% & tov rate) is about the same as last season. But the effort and attention on defense is there like it really hasn’t been in years – rotations are better, their ability to deny to the post was good for the first half of last night, and the turnovers are coming not just as a result of their offensive pace, but from good defensive awareness.
Of course, that hasn’t changed the bottom line in the last four games. And I did say early on that people would figure out what they were doing in those first three games (trapping aggressively, leaving players like DLee to rotate) and make them pay for it. I also don’t think this team has strong defensive personnel. But might they be moving in the right direction in terms of a developing a defensive mindset? Watching this team compared to the last couple of decades…I’m going to go out on a limb – against the numbers – and say maybe…
Nate Parham - January 7, 2012
I agree with Nate here
The Warriors have much more awareness on defense this year. Mike Malone has gotten through to the team. The problem, once again, is that we do not have good individual defenders, meaning that this aggressive trapping type of defense is the only type of defense we can do. I feel as if the “bad” defensive numbers are due to lack of talent, not lack of effort. They are a more defensive team this season, even if the stats don’t exactly back it up.
I like how you used that quote by John Wooden, Nate. :D
doubleteapot - January 7, 2012
thank you nate
I never understood the dictomy of the poster who so readily points too small sample size on an explanatin of anything positive yet is ready to highlight anything negative in the same game span.
Truthfully, I don’t think its highlighted enough how much of a disadvantage we are specifically in this condensed season. A regular season has 8 preseason games. We just played our 9th overall game since the 26th day when camp broke usually that 9th game would come 10-12 days later and with a summer league and constant player/coach communication. All this while we play with only 4 players from last years roster last night and multiple players on less than 3 weeks as a warrior.
I just see no reason for pessimism. I think its a growth period. I’m inspired by monta’s play. How many assists would he have if kwame had andris’ hands?
(Which brings me to another point. That’s the number 1 reason I hate andris. So soft. Will not bring it hard in the paint like kwame. Even now he’s only finishing on unprotected rims. Such a waste of talent)
tafkasam - January 7, 2012 via mobile
WE ARE A NO EXCUSES BASKETBALL TEAM
Evanz - January 7, 2012
And this folks is why the Warriors will never get better. The front office has the same attitude. Everything is great. Just give it time. Yeah, like a couple more decades.
Evanz - January 7, 2012
i dont disagree
But you’re talking about something else.
We LACK talent. That doesn’t mean we don’t have some good players over used. Some underused.
I have no problem trading anyone. As a fan certain will make me sadder on an emotional level but whatever. I agree its frustrating seeing no changes yet. But I do think your point on coaching and numbers is flawed simply by the whole lock out and poor plan. Maybe I just interpreted your anger in the wrong direction. It shouldn’t be at jackson or the players. It should be at management
tafkasam - January 7, 2012 via mobile
What “anger”?
Evanz - January 7, 2012
maybe im the one with anger
Obviously I expected this roster of misfits and rejects to transform into a title contender under a first time coach no one gives a chance.
Sounds like the plot of a disney movie.
Actually sounds like mighty ducks…
tafkasam - January 7, 2012 via mobile
Maybe we could get Emilio Esteves’ brother to coach?
Obviously, that would translate to #Winning
Brownie13 - January 7, 2012
You mean that Adonal Foyle’s propensity to bounce about all over the place without any sense of where one should be wasn’t the same thing as good defense?
jae - January 7, 2012
You mean that Adonal Foyle’s propensity to bounce about all over the place without any sense of where one should be
with his contract i’d a been dancing to my own music too.
Skeptic con Urquell - January 7, 2012
effort is overrated, talent is what matters
until we get better talent, I don’t see things changing significantly
Evanz - January 7, 2012
effort is overrated, talent is what matters
that’s true but you gotta play with what you brung so effort and fundamentals can make a difference, not a last to first place difference but maybe a last to middle of the pack difference.
Skeptic con Urquell - January 7, 2012
Agree - hence the Wooden quote
But we’re talking about the Warriors. A mindset that defense matters enough to put in effort is a step forward.
Nate Parham - January 7, 2012
what I take issue with is that the "mindset" appears to be all they think is needed
when it’s clearly not sufficient
Evanz - January 7, 2012
It’s a step.
A step i’d appreciate more with better talent.
tafkasam - January 7, 2012 via mobile
players
like Iverson Anthony Beasley Amare totttttallllly agree with this
Lat We N Trash - January 7, 2012
A team that really appears to have improved defensively is Toronto
They were rated 30th last season in DRTG, and 20th this season. That’s “clearly better”. We are not. Sorry, but that’s just how it is.
Evanz - January 7, 2012
Casey, anyone?
Evanz - January 7, 2012
who have they played?
Who have we played?
On a sidenote- my biggest fears about lee have been confirmed. He’s as much a small ball gimmick as morrow or cj
tafkasam - January 7, 2012 via mobile
we have had a tougher schedule (toughest in the league according to basketball-reference)
so maybe there’s something to that.
Evanz - January 7, 2012
also they have bargnani who is AMAZING
But seriously I would have traded lee for him last year. This year i’d throw in guber with lee
tafkasam - January 7, 2012 via mobile
Wait U serious?
Bargs is not a good player. He is a shooting center who doesn’t rebound well or post up. Dwane Casey has done a marvelous job with him. I wanted Dwane Casey as coach BTW. That or Adelman.
doubleteapot - January 7, 2012
he's not being serious
if he was serious, he’d be talking about Channing Frye
Evanz - January 7, 2012
"Defense" and Warriors are never compatible
I hate that BS that the front office spat out when we hired MJ, because I believed it. The draft comes and there’s the best two wing defenders in Singleton and Leonard and a great rebounding effort guy in Faried on the board, but who do we pick? A shooting 3, who has average or below-average defense.
Monta is so much improved on D this year and I’ve been critical of him the past 2 years, I’m impressed with his progress. The same can’t be said about Lee or Curry. Lee pisses me off so bad, he never leaves his feet to contest a shot, he never tries to draw a charge, he can no longer guard the pick and roll well, he watches his defender take easy mid-range shots, he leaves his defender to try to get the rebound and pad his stats, and he doesn’t position himself well. For Lee, it only takes effort and dedication to D, he can be an average defender if he puts in work or effort during practice or in game, he doesn’t and he’s a big reason why our team defense still sucks.
/End Rant
ejdacanay - January 7, 2012
"Clearly a more defensive team? Hmm...This season the Warriors' DRTG is 106.2. Last season it was 110.7. Lower is better, so the Warriors are a better defensive team. "
Small Sample size.
So far we’ve played the Clippers, Knicks, Bulls, Sixers, Lakers, Suns, and the Spurs.
Save the Suns, those are all teams that should easily make the playoffs and feature elite scorers. Griffen, Paul, Melo, Amare, Rose, Kobe… playing these teams thus far and having improved at all is huge.
supermarc589 - January 7, 2012
This goes both ways. If it’s a SSS, then how can someone say “clearly better”?
Evanz - January 7, 2012
Been thinking about this. I think you’re right about pointing out Rusty Simmons is shallow.
I think your wrong in direction you’re pointing. He’s a poor writer.
They’re not clearly better. They are CLEARLY putting more emphasis and effort. The results have been mixed, as we’d expect with the lock out, the lack of camp, and the roster overhaul
tafkasam - January 7, 2012
A lot of excuses. Every team had the lockout and lacked camp. Our bench was overhauled but our starting unit is the same as opening day 2010. We’ve had injuries but so have other teams. Harbaugh came in and actually made a difference with mostly the same roster. But this is basketball. The coach has even less effect on the outcome. At the end of the day, it’s about talent. Who’s got it (other teams) and who doesn’t (our team). Until that changes, I don’t expect the results to change, no matter how much it would make me happier to see. I don’t give a free pass to management, coaches, or players. It is what it is. Or isn’t in this case.
Evanz - January 7, 2012
Fair enough
And you’re right. Our biggest issue is when I look at our starting 5 I see, 2 guards who might thrive as #2 options (1 who definitely would, the other is less clear, but i believe he would), we got a PF who gets touches/shots like he’s a front end option, but in actuality he’s at best a 4th option or a 6th man type of player, energy scorer, who you don’t run plays for basically. Dorell is a role player or bench player, Kwame/Andris are 3rd big material at best. Rush, Klay, Nate are deep bench players.
So your point is fine.
But who do you blame for this? Coach Jackson for not making Steph’s ankle titanium steel and not turning Monta into DWade? The players for not magically becoming better?
My blame is on management. They balked at CP3 when Woj is on record saying they preferred Curry + fillers to CLippers deal.
They better go all in on Dwight.
At this point if he stays or goes, it’s still better. If he stays, great, we have our first ‘star’ since Webber. If he goes, well we can legitimately BLOW it up. It forces a move out of complacency
tafkasam - January 7, 2012
Evan is right
End of story. Go Warriors and their great losses.
Doctor Kajita - January 7, 2012 via mobile
It is really annoying that pace isn't considered at all by the media and fans.
GovernorStephCurry - January 7, 2012
It's possibly 'more defensive team'
Just meant ‘style of play’ like we’re playing a more defensive game. Slower etc.
Not trying to apologize for Rusty, cause I think he’s too simplistic with nothing original.
tafkasam - January 7, 2012
what it is...
our offense got worse, so our defense looks better in comparison somehow
that’s about all I can figure he’s thinking (and what fans are thinking)
Evanz - January 7, 2012
Also known as the Acie Law Effect.
Spider Jerusalem - January 7, 2012
the defense can improve if the offense does
the team still has terrible transition d. Do the stats support the notion that the opponents’ points per possession go up after a missed perimeter shot ? Isn’t that part of Ellis’ negative effect on team d, his gunning from the perimeter ? Suppose two aspects of offense improved — offensive boards and getting to the foul line (another chronic team weakness of course ; LA’s winning margin last night was pretty much the same as its free throw advantage). Would we not expect to see the defense also do better in conjunction with those improvements ?
the.monk - January 7, 2012
If the Warriors want to play at a slower pace with an emphasis on defense
that is good, many teams are very successful doing that, however right now we don’t have a team constructed in a way to do that. We have a small back-court that is built to run, both guards are below average at defense. We have David Lee who is a liability at center defensively, but an offensive threat because he is quicker than most centers. At power forward Lee is still a defensive liability although not as much and not as good at offense(although still adequate) we are platooning two mediocre(at best) centers and our SF is just about average. It has been clear that this team needs to run to be successful or we need to trade half our team and rebuild.
The Warriors need to commit to one philosophy and get players that have play styles that work in that system. Getting a coach to try and turn all of our players into players that do not play to their strengths is terrible. If we are going to play at a slower pace we need different starters. If Jackson wanted to play at a slower pace why do we still have the back-court we have? Why does Biedrins start? What is David Lee’s role on the team? All of those aspects of the team are built around a running club.
If this is the direction we are going to go as a team then we need to put a lot of players on the trading block.
brutusbrutus - January 7, 2012
You shouldn't play a slow, grind it out style of play unless you have elite, big talent.
Otherwise you have to try and win despite your talent deficiencies, something the TK’s and Lauridsen’s really don’t understand. + why watch a boring mediocre team?
GovernorStephCurry - January 7, 2012
Love the article and the point you make..... if it was being made further into the season
There’s a good chance that the league skews gradually back towards where it was last season as a whole, and it remains to be seen whether the warriors then stay as they are and look to have improved or if they skew back with the pack.
However what this all really shows is the futility of thinking that events that happen early in the season are likely to be excellent predictors of what is going to come!
But the point you make is excellent and should clearly be applied as a way of looking at more things.
This is just a really basic example to highlight how comparing players effectiveness using field goal percentages can show very little.
So last year statistically Kobe Bryant and Monta Ellis had quite similar seasons offensively.
They both had the same FG%, Ellis had a slightly higher eFG% and Kobe a similarly higher TS%. On an efficiency bases this would lead many to conclude that they were roughly as efficient as each other.
However this says nothing for how efficient/effective their offence was relative to their own team
So last year the Lakers had the sixth best offensive rating in the league whereas the Warriors had the twelfth. Thus the Lakers overall were getting better shots and scoring more efficiently than the Warriors and thus you could just as well praise Monta for scoring as efficiently as Kobe whilst playing in an offence that in general creates worse shots.
This way of viewing players effectiveness is further shown as useful by looking at the effectiveness of the next three best players on the roster after Kobe.
Kobe Bryant FG%: 45.1 eFG%:48.7 TS%: 54.8
Andrew Bynum FG%: 57.4 eFG%: 57.4 TS%: 60.6
Pau Gasol FG%: 52.9 eFG%: 53 TS%: 58.9
Lamar Odom FG%: 45.1 eFG%: 56.8 TS%: 58.9
Essentially Kobe was dominating the ball and shooting a lot of shots within an offence with players that could score much more efficiently than him.
On the Warriors no-one is really above Monta Ellis efficiency-wise who also contributes significantly except Curry (an issue I have written extensively on). Thus he could be said to be performing offensively better than Kobe because he scores at an almost identical efficiency within an offence that is significantly worse with a lot less players that perform better than him
This is not meant to be saying that Monta is better than Kobe or anything like that. Just to highlight that when comparing the offence of different players for example, production should be viewed relative to the team that it is achieved within. Most arguments about offensive efficiency shouldn’t carry much weight because they either punish or praise people for playing in bad or good offences without acknowledging it’s effect.
UKwarrior - January 7, 2012
That’s a nice hypothesis. But where’s the evidence? And how much should I discount a player playing on a good team? And what if that player is the one making that team better? Should he be penalized for that?
Evanz - January 7, 2012
I shouldn't have used the word 'should' in that situation
I meant that it should be acknowledged.
I like to think that debates should be based on many factors, that is simply one of them. At the moment people blindly follow a couple of things they see as important.
All your questions are still valid and apply as a factors that should also be taken into account.
UKwarrior - January 7, 2012
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Golden State Of Mind to post a comment.