Steve Blake's defense
Posted: Tue Oct 20, 2009 5:17 pm
Random question, how is steve blakes defense? I know that you guys are a great defensive team, but individually, how is blake?
RealGM
Sports is our Business
https://forums.realgm.com/boards/
Steve Blake's defense
https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=28&t=951238
Page 1 of 2
Re: Steve Blake's defense
Posted: Tue Oct 20, 2009 5:20 pm
lol... awful?
Re: Steve Blake's defense
Posted: Tue Oct 20, 2009 5:30 pm
He tries hard, but he lacks the mental and physical abilities to actually keep his guy in front of him.
And the Blazers are hardly a "great defensive team."
And the Blazers are hardly a "great defensive team."
Re: Steve Blake's defense
Posted: Tue Oct 20, 2009 5:46 pm
It sucks!!
/thread
/thread
Re: Steve Blake's
Posted: Tue Oct 20, 2009 5:50 pm
deNIEd wrote:Random question, how is steve blakes ? I know that you guys are a great defensive team, but individually, how is blake?
Huh, how is what now? Steve Blake's what? Defense? What defense?
Re: Steve Blake's defense
Posted: Tue Oct 20, 2009 5:50 pm
As of others have said the Blazers are hardly a "great defensive team." They play at a slow pace and are coached by a guy who was a great defensive player, but overall team defense needs to improve. Blake will give effort on the defensive end. He is surprising adept at manning up against bigger guards... there was a game during his first stint with the Blazers where he famously did a nice job against Kobe. Unfortunately Steve is not quick and get torched by speedier point guards, and has a difficult time with pick and role defense causing a lot of switches and Oden and Aldridge to end up on the perimeter against guards where they pick up fouls.
Re: Steve Blake's defense
Posted: Tue Oct 20, 2009 5:59 pm
Blake doesn't like the "mental" aspect of defense but he is very limited athletically. Unfortunate for him he is in that middle ground where he isn't fast enough to stay with quick guard nor is he strong enough to handle the bruisers at that position.
There have been plenty of situation where he has played very good defense which is why I go back to the silly statement he lacks the "mental" part, because thats the only part he has going for him.
From a scale 1-10 I'd say he about 6-7 as a perimeter defender. He is pretty mobile, a relatively smart defender. He would do a solid job when playing zone defense on the outside. He isn't the greatest at getting around pick.
Post and defending penetration is where is pretty horrible and why so many posters here are hating on him. Is is probably in the 1-3 range on a scale of 10 in that regard. That goes back to my first point where quick guy (Parker, Paul) can blow by him while big guys (Billups, Williams and just bruise him wherever)
There have been plenty of situation where he has played very good defense which is why I go back to the silly statement he lacks the "mental" part, because thats the only part he has going for him.
From a scale 1-10 I'd say he about 6-7 as a perimeter defender. He is pretty mobile, a relatively smart defender. He would do a solid job when playing zone defense on the outside. He isn't the greatest at getting around pick.
Post and defending penetration is where is pretty horrible and why so many posters here are hating on him. Is is probably in the 1-3 range on a scale of 10 in that regard. That goes back to my first point where quick guy (Parker, Paul) can blow by him while big guys (Billups, Williams and just bruise him wherever)
Re: Steve Blake's defense
Posted: Tue Oct 20, 2009 11:55 pm
a_sensei wrote:As of others have said the Blazers are hardly a "great defensive team." They play at a slow pace and are coached by a guy who was a great defensive player, but overall team defense needs to improve. Blake will give effort on the defensive end. He is surprising adept at manning up against bigger guards... there was a game during his first stint with the Blazers where he famously did a nice job against Kobe. Unfortunately Steve is not quick and get torched by speedier point guards, and has a difficult time with pick and role defense causing a lot of switches and Oden and Aldridge to end up on the perimeter against guards where they pick up fouls.
the switches have a lot more to do with coaching philosophy then with personnel. It doesn't matter who is on the floor, the Blazers switch most of the time. It's a passive defense, and it's not Blake's doing it is like that
Re: Steve Blake's defense
Posted: Wed Oct 21, 2009 12:08 am
Steve Blake plays defense?
Re: Steve Blake's defense
Posted: Wed Oct 21, 2009 12:16 am
Blake is probably a below average defender, but he's not nearly as bad as some here are making out.
Blake had a defensive rating of 110 and allowed an opponent PER of 15.0
Andre Miller had a defensive rating of 110 and allowed an opponent PER of 17.9 (2.9 worse)
Steve Nash: 115 (5 worse then Blake)...opponent PER of 18.2 (3.2 worse)
Chris Paul: 103 (7 better)...opponent PER of 17.2 (2.2 worse)
Deron Williams: 111 (1 worse)...opponent PER of 17.3 (2.3 worse)
Tony Parker: 107 (3 better)...opponent PER of 16.7 (1.7 worse)
Jameer Nelson: 103 (7 better)...opponent PER of 15.7 (0.7 worse)
Chauncey Billups: 110...opponent PER of 18.3 - estimated (3.3 worse)
Mike Conley: 111 (1 worse)...opponent PER of 17.4 (2.4 worse)
what's probably true is that while Blake is not great at defending NBA PG's, neither is any other NBA PG. There simply aren't any Don Buse's or Gary Payton's in the league right now. For some Blazer fans, the other PG's must be better at defense and the reason for that is that they aren't named Steve Blake. Grass is greener...only it really isn't by that much.
Blake had a defensive rating of 110 and allowed an opponent PER of 15.0
Andre Miller had a defensive rating of 110 and allowed an opponent PER of 17.9 (2.9 worse)
Steve Nash: 115 (5 worse then Blake)...opponent PER of 18.2 (3.2 worse)
Chris Paul: 103 (7 better)...opponent PER of 17.2 (2.2 worse)
Deron Williams: 111 (1 worse)...opponent PER of 17.3 (2.3 worse)
Tony Parker: 107 (3 better)...opponent PER of 16.7 (1.7 worse)
Jameer Nelson: 103 (7 better)...opponent PER of 15.7 (0.7 worse)
Chauncey Billups: 110...opponent PER of 18.3 - estimated (3.3 worse)
Mike Conley: 111 (1 worse)...opponent PER of 17.4 (2.4 worse)
what's probably true is that while Blake is not great at defending NBA PG's, neither is any other NBA PG. There simply aren't any Don Buse's or Gary Payton's in the league right now. For some Blazer fans, the other PG's must be better at defense and the reason for that is that they aren't named Steve Blake. Grass is greener...only it really isn't by that much.
Re: Steve Blake's defense
Posted: Wed Oct 21, 2009 12:45 am
Blake's defense is nowhere near as bad as some people in here like to think. True, he couldn't stay in front of Aaron Brooks, but seriously, there are few players who could. The NBA has developed rules with the purpose of allowing perimeter players to penetrate.
I'd say the biggest problem with Blake's defense is his offense (or the offensive scheme's he's in). Since he defers so much ball-handling to Roy, and then becomes a spot-up shooter (as opposed to a penetrator), he puts very little pressure on opposing defenses and therefore doesn't wear down opponents or create foul trouble.
I'd say the biggest problem with Blake's defense is his offense (or the offensive scheme's he's in). Since he defers so much ball-handling to Roy, and then becomes a spot-up shooter (as opposed to a penetrator), he puts very little pressure on opposing defenses and therefore doesn't wear down opponents or create foul trouble.
Re: Steve Blake's defense
Posted: Wed Oct 21, 2009 12:53 am
There's no defense for his defense
Re: Steve Blake's defense
Posted: Wed Oct 21, 2009 12:56 am
Wizenheimer wrote:Blake is probably a below average defender, but he's not nearly as bad as some here are making out.
Blake had a defensive rating of 110 and allowed an opponent PER of 15.0
Andre Miller had a defensive rating of 110 and allowed an opponent PER of 17.9 (2.9 worse)
Steve Nash: 115 (5 worse then Blake)...opponent PER of 18.2 (3.2 worse)
Chris Paul: 103 (7 better)...opponent PER of 17.2 (2.2 worse)
Deron Williams: 111 (1 worse)...opponent PER of 17.3 (2.3 worse)
Tony Parker: 107 (3 better)...opponent PER of 16.7 (1.7 worse)
Jameer Nelson: 103 (7 better)...opponent PER of 15.7 (0.7 worse)
Chauncey Billups: 110...opponent PER of 18.3 - estimated (3.3 worse)
Mike Conley: 111 (1 worse)...opponent PER of 17.4 (2.4 worse)
what's probably true is that while Blake is not great at defending NBA PG's, neither is any other NBA PG. There simply aren't any Don Buse's or Gary Payton's in the league right now. For some Blazer fans, the other PG's must be better at defense and the reason for that is that they aren't named Steve Blake. Grass is greener...only it really isn't by that much.
Stats seem like such a great way to evaluate players. However, they are not. You can compare certain stats (like true FG%, PER, or oppenent PER) that would make people think you are crazy for calling Jordan the best of all time. I would love for someone to come up with a legitimate argument that he is not.....
Go look at John Hollingers PER and the order of the players. Then come back and try and tell me that it accurlately asseses players. It doesn't by any stretch of the imagination. Sorry to burst your bubble Wiz and Fitz (the two most stat loving people in here) but stats are over evaluated. If you above average basketball IQ, you can watch games and get a much better evaluation of the players.
With that said..... STEVE BLAKE PLAYS DEFENSE?
p.s. this is not a personal attack on you Wiz, or Fitz..... I just disagree with you guys posting stats as "proof" all the time.
Re: Steve Blake's defense
Posted: Wed Oct 21, 2009 1:05 am
HiHaters wrote:Stats seem like such a great way to evaluate players. However, they are not. You can compare certain stats (like true FG%, PER, or oppenent PER) that would make people think you are crazy for calling Jordan the best of all time. I would love for someone to come up with a legitimate argument that he is not.....
Go look at John Hollingers PER and the order of the players. Then come back and try and tell me that it accurlately asseses players. It doesn't by any stretch of the imagination. Sorry to burst your bubble Wiz and Fitz (the two most stat loving people in here) but stats are over evaluated. If you above average basketball IQ, you can watch games and get a much better evaluation of the players..
There really aren't any good PG defenders in the league. All the PGs besides Rondo and the all-stars are pretty terrible on defense.
Re: Steve Blake's defense
Posted: Wed Oct 21, 2009 1:25 am
Blake is a reasonably smart defender who can't stay in front of anyone and doesn't have the physical tools needed to make a big impact. On a scale of 1-10, with an average PG being a 5, I would rate Blake at about a 4. I am tempted to rate him lower than that, but if you look around the league you will see that even a lot of average and above average PGs still struggle stay in front of anyone.
Re: Steve Blake's defense
Posted: Wed Oct 21, 2009 1:26 am
He is a better defender then Andre Miller.
Re: Steve Blake's defense
Posted: Wed Oct 21, 2009 2:56 am
Odonism wrote:He is a better defender then Andre Miller.
Miller seems to be even slower than Blake as well as less focused on defense. On the other hand, he is pretty strong for a PG which helps when other players try to post up on him. If Blake is a 4, then Miller is probably around a 3.5.
I might as well give some estimated ratings for the defense of the rest of the Blazers:
Przybilla- 7
Oden- 7 (improving rapidly, was about a 4 at the start of last year)
Batum- 7
Aldridge- 6
Rudy- 5
Webster- 5 (It has been a while since we have seen him play games, could move up or down depending on how he does early in the season)
Roy- 4 (improves to a 6 or 7 at the end of close games)
Blake- 4
Outlaw- 4 at SF, 2.5 at PF (he isn't strong enough to stop PFs in the post)
Miller- 3.5
Bayless- 3 (based on making lots of mistakes and stupid fouls last year, could easily be a 6 or 7 if he improves his decision making)
Re: Steve Blake's defense
Posted: Wed Oct 21, 2009 3:56 am
trk wrote:Blake is a reasonably smart defender who can't stay in front of anyone and doesn't have the physical tools needed to make a big impact. On a scale of 1-10, with an average PG being a 5, I would rate Blake at about a 4. I am tempted to rate him lower than that, but if you look around the league you will see that even a lot of average and above average PGs still struggle stay in front of anyone.
I tend to agree with that.
Just by watching him play, I'd judge that he might be a little below average. He's got pretty good straight speed, but his lateral reactions don't match. I also don't believe for a minute that he's really 6'3
With that said, the two stats that can measure defensive effectiveness, at least to a remedial level, are bb reference's defensive rating and the player/opponent PER at 82games.
Blake is about average in defensive rating, but he does hold opponents to an impressively low PER. I have no illusions that those stats have flaws, like all stats do, but at least Blake performs well in a couple of metrics.
And like many have said including yourself, almost all NBA PG's are lousy at defense, at least when it comes to guarding each other
Re: Steve Blake's defense
Posted: Wed Oct 21, 2009 4:15 am
HiHaters wrote:
Stats seem like such a great way to evaluate players. However, they are not. You can compare certain stats (like true FG%, PER, or oppenent PER) that would make people think you are crazy for calling Jordan the best of all time. I would love for someone to come up with a legitimate argument that he is not.....
you insist on setting up a straw man.
Maybe it would be ok to leave Michael Jordan out of a discussion on Steve Blake's defense.
And I damn well know that I have never used just 2 or 3 stats to advance an argument for one player being better then the other.
Go look at John Hollingers PER and the order of the players. Then come back and try and tell me that it accurlately asseses players.
last year:
1 LeBron James, CLE 31.76
2 Dwyane Wade, MIA 30.46
3 Chris Paul, NOR 30.04
4 Dwight Howard, ORL 29.5
5 Tim Duncan, SAS 27.9
6 Kobe Bryant, LAL 24.46
7 Brandon Roy, POR 24.08
8 Tony Parker, SAS 23.47
9 Dirk Nowitzki, DAL 23.20
10 Al Jefferson, MIN 23.16
yeah, you're right...non of those players were in the top 10 in the league, and even if they were, it would have never been in that order
It doesn't by any stretch of the imagination. Sorry to burst your bubble Wiz and Fitz (the two most stat loving people in here) but stats are over evaluated. If you above average basketball IQ, you can watch games and get a much better evaluation of the players.
p.s. this is not a personal attack on you Wiz, or Fitz..... I just disagree with you guys posting stats as "proof" all the time.
this is about the 3rd time I've seen you do this. You basically say your opinion is more valid then somebody else because of of your "above average" bb IQ, obviously, with the inverse being that the other person just doesn't have your brain power
Where are the stats showing you're smarter?....
Re: Steve Blake's defense
Posted: Wed Oct 21, 2009 7:59 am
Your point about PER fails hard by the way, using PER to show Michael Jordan is the GOAT would be an amazing success, he has the highest PER of all time.