ImageImageImageImageImage

Trouble with big frontcourts.

Moderators: 7 Footer, Duffman100, HiJiNX, niQ, Morris_Shatford, DG88, Reeko, lebron stopper

godkingleonidas
Banned User
Posts: 3,116
And1: 2,215
Joined: Feb 07, 2014
Location: 29.5000

Re: Trouble with big frontcourts. 

Post#161 » by godkingleonidas » Fri Nov 21, 2014 11:29 am

Choker wrote:Seems silly to downplay an offense that's 2nd best in the league, but looking at it long term I just can't see us making it far in the playoffs when it feels like we have to fight our hardest every single possession.


It's even more sickening when we allow an easy basket afterward.
timdunkit
RealGM
Posts: 16,355
And1: 585
Joined: Aug 05, 2008
     

Re: Trouble with big frontcourts. 

Post#162 » by timdunkit » Fri Nov 21, 2014 2:06 pm

Choker wrote:
Anatomize wrote:Yeah, despite our ortg/drtg in the top 10 rankings, we barely get easy scoring chances.


I've been trying to figure a way out how to describe my feelings about our offense, and you finally summed it up for me. If I wasn't looking at the stats I would have never figured out we were a top offensive team in the league because all of our points always seem to be hard fought. I mean I guess it's working, we are 2nd in the league on offense, but resiliency just isn't something I'm comfortable with relying on all the time. It worked splendidly well for the 2011 Mavericks but we don't have a player capable of playing like Dirk did, or the collection of high IQ veterans that made that team click.

Seems silly to downplay an offense that's 2nd best in the league, but looking at it long term I just can't see us making it far in the playoffs when it feels like we have to fight our hardest every single possession.


We probably don't run to keep our defensive principles in place which I actually think longterm is a good thing.

Casey has always shown a lack of creativity on the offensive end but I actually think with the guys we have, our offense is fine even in the playoffs.

It's interesting that nobody talks about defense being an issue with Casey because I believe last years "good defensive numbers" were propped up by playing offensive teams & partially by playing at a slower pace. The Raptors consistently scored efficienctly against better defenses but had much more trouble stopping good offenses.
User avatar
vini_vidi_vici
RealGM
Posts: 18,447
And1: 20,796
Joined: Jun 29, 2006
 

Re: Trouble with big frontcourts. 

Post#163 » by vini_vidi_vici » Fri Nov 21, 2014 5:04 pm

Hendrix wrote:
vini_vidi_vici wrote:
First you cant give up more shots than possessions.

Second the differential this year in REB% is 9.6% (top to bottom) not 50%, that is a big distinction.

Third that is merely anecdotal, again there isnt any proof that I know of. K guys I really need to go, take care all, drive safe out there. Interesting discussion nonetheless even if I disagree.


Of course you can give up more shots than possessions. A possession doesn't end until you get the defensive board. If a team come down the court, shoots and misses, gets the ORB, takes a 2nd shot that misses, and then the defensive team gets the board, that is a possession where there was 2 shots.

The fact that the differential from top to bottom is not based in reality, and that it is an anecdotal example is irrelevant. It is an illustration so you can see that a team can get multiple shots in a possession that boosts their ORTG. Your contention is not the fact that it is anecdotal nor the reality of the drb%. Your contention here is that you don't think you can have multiple shots in a possession. So, I point you to Dean Oliver.

Dean Oliver defined ORTG as...

Dean Oliver wrote:points scored per 100 possessions".
ref. http://books.google.ca/books?id=jltvUlb ... ed&f=false



He defined a possession as....

Dean Oliver wrote:Possession: The period of time between when one team gains control of the ball, and when the opposing team gains control of the ball



As you can see, you can have multiple shots in a single possession by getting an ORB and taking a 2nd shot before the "opposing team gains control of the ball". And, what follows that is that you can increase your ORTG with ORB'ing. Conversely, you can decrease your DRTG, with better defensive rebounding.

Not a tonne of point in talking about who we should get without being on the same page in regards to this.


Sorry I misconstrued your initial post as I was leaving, and was confused by the math. I was looking at DREBs (because we were talking DREB%) not considering OREBs. I never said OREBs didnt have a corollary on ORTG (they do). I said DREBs on good team DRTGs. Or REB% on Ws.

Thats assuming the OREBs result in points.

http://www.hickory-high.com/making-connections-d-reb-to-drtg/

Interestingly, most of the best defensive teams had a relatively weak, or even negative, correlation between their DREB% and DRTG. Of the top five teams in Defensive Effective Field Goal Percentage (DeFG%), (San Antonio, Chicago, Indiana and Memphis) were in the bottom ten in the league for the strength of this connection between defensive rebounding and overall efficiency. This is a strange clustering and runs counter to what I would expect to see. Each of those teams rely so heavily on forcing their opponents to take contested shots. Collecting the inevitable misses is the endgame of that defensive focus and it’s surprising to see that those things weren’t necessarily tied together strongly. One possible explanation is that net negative of giving up an offensive rebound is much smaller for those teams since they will, theoretically, be able to defend the continuation of that possession with much of the same rigor that forced the initial miss.


http://hangtime.blogs.nba.com/2013/03/22/these-spurs-arent-the-same/

The Spurs were an excellent defensive rebounding team and did a great job of keeping their opponents off the free-throw line. But there’s a much stronger correlation between DefRtg and OppeFG% than there is between DefRtg and any of the other three factors. The most important thing you can do defensively is make your opponent miss shots from the field. And the Spurs just didn’t do that well enough.


As it goes, the Spurs DRTG got better as the DREB% got worse, because they defended more shots and got more TOVs.
Image
iDRTG is terrible. ** Paid for by Pfizer Inc.
User avatar
Indeed
RealGM
Posts: 19,843
And1: 3,048
Joined: Aug 21, 2009

Re: Trouble with big frontcourts. 

Post#164 » by Indeed » Fri Nov 21, 2014 5:50 pm

Choker wrote:
Anatomize wrote:Yeah, despite our ortg/drtg in the top 10 rankings, we barely get easy scoring chances.


I've been trying to figure a way out how to describe my feelings about our offense, and you finally summed it up for me. If I wasn't looking at the stats I would have never figured out we were a top offensive team in the league because all of our points always seem to be hard fought. I mean I guess it's working, we are 2nd in the league on offense, but resiliency just isn't something I'm comfortable with relying on all the time. It worked splendidly well for the 2011 Mavericks but we don't have a player capable of playing like Dirk did, or the collection of high IQ veterans that made that team click.

Seems silly to downplay an offense that's 2nd best in the league, but looking at it long term I just can't see us making it far in the playoffs when it feels like we have to fight our hardest every single possession.


I feel the same, particularly from our starting unit, where many of those shots are well contested. The bench unit is alright, but I don't see they are as dominate as last year with Vasquez (and his length) at PG for easy layups. Second unit seems better because of James Johnson.
User avatar
IMAN5
General Manager
Posts: 9,997
And1: 5,666
Joined: Jan 08, 2012
 

Re: Trouble with big frontcourts. 

Post#165 » by IMAN5 » Fri Nov 21, 2014 5:52 pm

I want casey to finally play Bebe meaningful minutes so all of you bebe die hards can see he isn't ready and is going to get eaten by real nba competition. He still needs time, and there are better guys ahead of him.
Image
instagram.com/510movement
User avatar
Hendrix
RealGM
Posts: 17,030
And1: 3,662
Joined: May 30, 2007
Location: London, Ontario

Re: Trouble with big frontcourts. 

Post#166 » by Hendrix » Fri Nov 21, 2014 11:11 pm

vini_vidi_vici wrote:Sorry I misconstrued your initial post as I was leaving, and was confused by the math. I was looking at DREBs (because we were talking DREB%) not considering OREBs. I never said OREBs didnt have a corollary on ORTG (they do). I said DREBs on good team DRTGs. Or REB% on Ws.

Thats assuming the OREBs result in points.


But, If you acknowledge that ORB% can improve ORTG, doesn't that also mean REB% improves Ws? Since ORB% increases ORTG, then ORB% also increases net ORTG-DRTG differential. Therefore, a bigger net ORTG-DRTG, means more wins.

Also, you acknowledge that ORB's have a corollary to ORTG, so doesn't that mean ipso facto, that DRB's have an impact on DRTG?

Little thought experiment to explain what I mean.


Imagine a league with only 2 teams in it. Team 'a' has a 25% orb%. Team 'b' has a 75% drb%. Lets say team 'a' makes a move that increases their orb % to 30% with all other things held constant. You acknowledge that this increase in ORB% will increase their ORTG. But, this ipso facto means that team 'b' now has a 70% drb%, and conversely has their DRTG negatively impacted.


http://www.hickory-high.com/making-connections-d-reb-to-drtg/

Interestingly, most of the best defensive teams had a relatively weak, or even negative, correlation between their DREB% and DRTG. Of the top five teams in Defensive Effective Field Goal Percentage (DeFG%), (San Antonio, Chicago, Indiana and Memphis) were in the bottom ten in the league for the strength of this connection between defensive rebounding and overall efficiency. This is a strange clustering and runs counter to what I would expect to see. Each of those teams rely so heavily on forcing their opponents to take contested shots. Collecting the inevitable misses is the endgame of that defensive focus and it’s surprising to see that those things weren’t necessarily tied together strongly. One possible explanation is that net negative of giving up an offensive rebound is much smaller for those teams since they will, theoretically, be able to defend the continuation of that possession with much of the same rigor that forced the initial miss.


http://hangtime.blogs.nba.com/2013/03/22/these-spurs-arent-the-same/

The Spurs were an excellent defensive rebounding team and did a great job of keeping their opponents off the free-throw line. But there’s a much stronger correlation between DefRtg and OppeFG% than there is between DefRtg and any of the other three factors. The most important thing you can do defensively is make your opponent miss shots from the field. And the Spurs just didn’t do that well enough.


As it goes, the Spurs DRTG got better as the DREB% got worse, because they defended more shots and got more TOVs.


Hmmm.... Could you please explain this...

were in the bottom ten in the league for the strength of this connection between defensive rebounding and overall efficiency.


a little further? I'm drawing a little bit of a blank for some reason, lol. The top 5 teams in defense last year were Pacers, Bulls, Spurs, Warriors, Bobcats. Respectively they ranked in drb%, 2nd, 11th, 4th, 5th, and 1st. Which seems like a strong connection to me, but I'm obviously missing something here.
oak2455 wrote:Do understand English???

Return to Toronto Raptors