The Defense thread 2024 (Final DPOY vote)

[bisme37]

Read on Twitter

[kcktiny]

It's pretty easy to make a data backed case that Jokic is somehow a positive on defense while clearly being a weak rim protector.

Go for it.

This should be good.

If you feel that it's impossible to be a good defensive center without being a good rim protector

Not sure what you mean by "rim protector" - I tend to think of that as shots close to the basket, like in the restricted area. The data at stats.nba.com I referenced shows that within 10' of the basket (including but well past the restricted area) he is a poor shot defender for a starting C. And that constitutes (through sunday's game) well over half of his total FGAs defended against (661/1170), and of those 661 FGAs he's faced within 10' he's allowed one of the highest/worst FG%s at 59.5% among the league's starting Cs.

I did use the words "petulant and childish" lol

Yes you did.

I don't get your line about me attacking you.

Words can hurt. Yours brought me to tears.

so I do apologize for that

Apology accepted.

You accused me of not watching basketball.

I inferred it.

I said I don't like when people do that... when I feel like most of the time I'm hearing it from people who might be watching less than me

I watch a lot of NBA basketball. Have for years. I have no idea if it is more or less than what others watch.

But when people make statements that are clearly contrary to the publicly available statistical evidence, you have to ask if they actually watch games, no? Because you then ask yourself wouldn't they know this if they watched games, many games?

Yet no matter how much you do watch - and that certainly helps in evaluation - you can't watch everything. And that is why data like the data at stats.nba.com is so helpful.

Fyi that shot defense data at stats.nba.com goes back for a full decade. I'm sure their methodology for capturing the data and assigning statistics to individual players has improved over that time, but you can in fact go back and look at the data for Jokic for the span of his entire career.

I suggest you do so. Compare it to the annual data of someone like Rudy Gobert, or Draymond Green, or some of the other really good shot defenders. It may open your eyes.

[Que Rico]

If Herb isn't 1st team I'll riot . The Pels are 8th in defensive rating and he starts with 4 negative defensive players (Jonas is the best of the 4 but CJ, BI and especially Zion are bad on D). Dude covers up so much **** defense by himself.

It doesn't get talked about enough. There should honestly be a DPOY campaign for him. Not saying it would be THE campaign that wins, but I'd at least like to hear some noise!

I think people lean on the on/off for defense a lot, because it's easy to look up and an easy concept to understand. If the team is good at defense with you on the floor, and bad when you're off, then I can give you all the credit! So, Herb's on/off is pretty pedestrian (112.5 Drtg on, 114.5 off) so what gives? I call this the "Shawn Marion Paradox" (lol no I don't, I just made that up right now and it sounds dumb). Good defenders who prop up weak defensive lineups historically get less credit that good defenders that are part of good defensive lineups, and it's because of the on/off and every defensive metric that uses on/off.

The Pelicans play most of their good defenders off the bench, and ask Herb to keep the defense afloat in a starting lineup where every other player is out there for offense first. Whenever Herb plays in lineups with Trey Murphy, Dyson Daniels or Jose Alvarado, those lineups are elite defensive. For every starter except Herb, the Pelicans play better defense when they're off the floor. Every bench piece (Trey, Nance, Alvarado, Naji, Dyson when healthy) out defend the starter in front of them.

Some metrics try to account for this and Herb still looks the part of an elite defender. But he'd be popping even more if he weren't asked to absorb all the bad defense of so many guys.

Perfectly stated my friend

[CD_41]

Wonder how Jokic fanboys will try to spin this.

It clearly didn't take long.

You've specifically picked a metric that measures rim protectors and shot blockers to try and discredit Jokic

On the contrary I simply posted publicly available shot defense data. If Mr. Jokic does not want to be discredited maybe he should just play better shot defense.

As to picking a specific metric - what's more important on defense for a C that their shot defense? I like how some Jokic fanboys point to Jokic's high FG% on offense and compare that to the great Cs of the past, saying he is a much better shooter than they, but when you point out his poor FG% allowed defensive shot data it's only to discredit him? That's the definition of a fanboy.

That doesn't make him a poor overall defender.

Well it certainly doesn't make him a tremendous/intelligent defender either.

It's don't love when people start their arguments with the assumption that the other person doesn't watch games. It's petulant and childish.

There is a tendency for some here when shown to be wrong to attack immediately, rather than fess up to it.

If your goal is to make me look stupid

Dude you did that all by yourself:

Jokic has been tremendous on defense this year

Then:

Why not just discuss basketball respectfully and for fun?

I mentioned your statement was incorrect, and backed that up with publicly available data. It is you who is going off the deep end.

and they keep saying stupid things and not listening

Jokic is a poor shot defender for a C, especially within 10' of the basket. Now who is not listening?

but to do this after 1 post? I don't deserve this, lol.

If you do not want to be shown to be wrong, do not make posts that are easily refutable.

In a thread about the best defenders in the league, you called one of the worst shot defending Cs in the league a tremendous defender.

I was responding to a user that made a joke about it.

Ah, I get it. All in jest.

He does some interesting things out there though, if you care to watch.

Then when you do watch watch in particular what he does on defense, and not just what he does on offense (where he is great). On defense count the number of blow-bys he is responsible for, plays where he just give ups and lets an opponent get by him and score.

Then watch a Gobert or Kessler or Wembenyama and notice how they track players on defense and time their defensive efforts. You'll notice a huge difference.

You're arguing in circles. And on top of that not very nuanced.
A players defense consists of different components and these components are weighed differently.
Even though shot defense near the rim is important, it can't make up for a 100% of a player's defensive level/reputation.

He is a solid (not great) defender because of his great hands and early positioning (which forces the defense to make more decisions. Jimmy Butler said this during the finals. Jokic is so smart that he regularly knows what plays the opponent will run and communicates them to teammates in real time and disrupts the flow of the offense. Seems like you have NOT watched last year's playoffs.

An untrained eye just focuses on a defense blow-by at the rim and concludes that Jokic must be a bad defender. Half the game on defense is played BEFORE a player can get a shot up.

Maybe you do watch games, but you're definitely not judging his defense accurately if your focus is only on shot defense.
Please be more nuanced next time, buddy.

[kcktiny]

You're arguing in circles.

Just to keep you guessing.

And on top of that not very nuanced.

How very perceptive of you.

A players defense consists of different components and these components are weighed differently.

This statement, which may sound as if it professes expertise, actually says nothing unless you are going to tell us how these different components are weighed differently. Which you haven't.

I contend that an individual players' shot defense, which is what we are discussing here, is - by far - the largest component of a C's overall defense (less so for say guards who tend to force more turnovers via steals and offensive fouls drawn).

Cs that play major minutes will face some 1100-1700 FGAs on defense a season. The difference between allowing a low FG% on these versus a high FG% is huge - a difference of 100-150 FGM is some 200-300 points a season saved (not including 3s too).

Defensive rebounds are after the fact. Not unimportant, but after the fact.

Steals and offensive fouls drawn each save a team possession worth 1-1.2 points per possession.

He is a solid (not great) defender because of his great hands and early positioning

If that's the case then why is his FG% allowed so high within 10' of the basket with those great hands and early positioning?

Jimmy Butler said this during the finals.

Well if Jimmy said so.

Jokic is so smart that he regularly knows what plays the opponent will run and communicates them to teammates in real time and disrupts the flow of the offense.

Well if he is so smart then why doesn't he stop more shots from going in, or from preventing them in the first place?

Seems like you have NOT watched last year's playoffs.

Not only did I, but I also looked at the stats.nba.com playoff data. And lo and behold in last year's playoffs who allowed the highest FG% of the 21 players that faced 200+ FGAs on defense? None other than Jokic.

An untrained eye just focuses on a defense blow-by at the rim and concludes that Jokic must be a bad defender.

Is that a fact. What does your trained eye conclude when a player blows by Jokic and scores? You gonna blame that on his teammates?

Half the game on defense is played BEFORE a player can get a shot up.

Once again - this statement, which may sound as if it professes expertise - actually says nothing unless you are going to tell us how.

Team's this season are averaging between 84.6 and 93.4 FGAs per game. Why don't you explain to us just what defense is being played such that it constitutes half of a team's defense prior to a shot being taken.

This should be interesting.

Maybe you do watch games

Just maybe.

but you're definitely not judging his defense accurately if your focus is only on shot defense

Oh? But you are? Fine, please explain to us how you are accurately judging his defense.

This should be interesting.

Please be more nuanced next time, buddy.

Like I said, this should be interesting. You like to speak in generalizations. How about something more concrete, more substance, and not so nuanced?

[CD_41]

You're arguing in circles.

Just to keep you guessing.

And on top of that not very nuanced.

How very perceptive of you.

A players defense consists of different components and these components are weighed differently.

This statement, which may sound as if it professes expertise, actually says nothing unless you are going to tell us how these different components are weighed differently. Which you haven't.

I contend that an individual players' shot defense, which is what we are discussing here, is - by far - the largest component of a C's overall defense (less so for say guards who tend to force more turnovers via steals and offensive fouls drawn).

Cs that play major minutes will face some 1100-1700 FGAs on defense a season. The difference between allowing a low FG% on these versus a high FG% is huge - a difference of 100-150 FGM is some 200-300 points a season saved (not including 3s too).

Defensive rebounds are after the fact. Not unimportant, but after the fact.

Steals and offensive fouls drawn each save a team possession worth 1-1.2 points per possession.

He is a solid (not great) defender because of his great hands and early positioning

If that's the case then why is his FG% allowed so high within 10' of the basket with those great hands and early positioning?

Jimmy Butler said this during the finals.

Well if Jimmy said so.

Jokic is so smart that he regularly knows what plays the opponent will run and communicates them to teammates in real time and disrupts the flow of the offense.

Well if he is so smart then why doesn't he stop more shots from going in, or from preventing them in the first place?

Seems like you have NOT watched last year's playoffs.

Not only did I, but I also looked at the stats.nba.com playoff data. And lo and behold in last year's playoffs who allowed the highest FG% of the 21 players that faced 200+ FGAs on defense? None other than Jokic.

An untrained eye just focuses on a defense blow-by at the rim and concludes that Jokic must be a bad defender.

Is that a fact. What does your trained eye conclude when a player blows by Jokic and scores? You gonna blame that on his teammates?

Half the game on defense is played BEFORE a player can get a shot up.

Once again - this statement, which may sound as if it professes expertise - actually says nothing unless you are going to tell us how.

Team's this season are averaging between 84.6 and 93.4 FGAs per game. Why don't you explain to us just what defense is being played such that it constitutes half of a team's defense prior to a shot being taken.

This should be interesting.

Maybe you do watch games

Just maybe.

but you're definitely not judging his defense accurately if your focus is only on shot defense

Oh? But you are? Fine, please explain to us how you are accurately judging his defense.

This should be interesting.

Please be more nuanced next time, buddy.

Like I said, this should be interesting. You like to speak in generalizations. How about something more concrete, more substance, and not so nuanced?

Your sarcasm takes the fun out of the discussion.
Don`t know why this is necessary, buddy.

Maybe you seem to be afraid that arguments alone won't win you any discussions.
Also the inability to consider any arugment of another person as valid just shows how you're arguing, lol.

I pointed out that Jimmy Butler, a great defender complimented Jokic on his defense.
Your answer: "Well if Jimmy said so." Damn, if that is not intellectual capitulation then I don't know what it is.

You're not arguing in good faith, so I'm not gonna continue the debate on how good Jokic is as a defender.
Most of the people in here at least try to engange in some honest conversation.

Be better.

[kcktiny]

Your sarcasm takes the fun out of the discussion.

Well I was having fun.

Don`t know why this is necessary, buddy.

Present some facts to back up your generalizations. That would make this more interesting.

Maybe you seem to be afraid that arguments alone won't win you any discussions.

Be afraid. Be very afraid.

Also the inability to consider any arugment of another person as valid just shows how you're arguing, lol.

Some like to argue without presenting any evidence. They can't back up their statements. When pressed on this rather than admitting they can't, they resort to:

You're not arguing in good faith, so I'm not gonna continue the debate

They turn and go home.

I pointed out that Jimmy Butler, a great defender

Yes he is. Needs a new hairdo though.

complimented Jokic on his defense. Your answer: "Well if Jimmy said so." Damn, if that is not intellectual capitulation then I don't know what it is.

That's you. The intellectual.

Most of the people in here at least try to engange in some honest conversation.

Honest people back up their statements professing expertise with facts. Those that do not and when called upon to back up their statements tend to retreat and go home rather than engage.

Don't make statements as if knowledgeable if you can't defend them, especially if you are simply going retreat when called upon to do so.

[CD_41]

It is really fun that YOU are the one who wants more facts, haha.
Your logic (as pointed out by MULITPLE people) is so flawed that you seem incapable of recognizing good arguments.
I won't call you dumb, but instead give you the benefit of the doubt and guess that you're doing this trolling on purpose.

I just looked up your first posts cause I was curious. And yes, I was not disappointed.
You really were advocating for Jarvis Varnado as the Heat`s starting center in 2012. Your argument: "Same size as Theo Ratliff, but better college stats."

LOL. This tells me enough about your evaluation skills when it comes to defense.
You seem like an old man who is not keeping up with how the league is evaluating players.
Be better, haha.

[kcktiny]

It is really fun that YOU are the one who wants more facts, haha.

It is you who likes to make statements that you cannot substantiate, then runs for cover.

you seem incapable of recognizing good arguments

As do you the difference between opinion and fact.

I won't call you dumb

I won't call you knowledgeable.

but instead give you the benefit of the doubt and guess that you're doing this trolling on purpose

Pointing out Nikola Jokic is a poor shot defender based on publicly available statistics to those who consider him a tremendous/intelligent defender is now considered trolling? And yes it was on purpose.

Sometimes finding out the truth really hurts. But that's the reality. And Jokic fanboys evidently don't want to face reality.

You really were advocating for Jarvis Varnado as the Heat`s starting center in 2012. Your argument: "Same size as Theo Ratliff, but better college stats."

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/348871

https://walterfootball.com/nbascoutingreport2010jvarnado.php

https://www.nbadraft.net/players/jarvis-varnado/

https://www.postingandtoasting.com/2010/5/15/1469851/know-the-prospect-jarvis-varnado

Like many in this world who think they are really smart, you apparently are only so after the fact.

Gloat while you can. But as you grow up and become an adult at some point in your life you may just have to make an evaluation in real time.

Fyi - Varnado was drafted in 2010. In the 2nd round. Did you know that of the 29 players drafted in the 1st round that year that attended college here is the US over half played less than 10,000 minutes in the NBA. And they all got guaranteed money.

Guess you are smarter than all of those talent evaluators too - after the fact.

LOL. This tells me enough about your evaluation skills when it comes to defense.

Really? What does it tell you?

You seem like an old man

Well my kids would agree. As would my grandkids.

who is not keeping up with how the league is evaluating players.

Is that a fact.

Why don't you explain to all of us just how the league now evaluates players, especially on defense. How does the league evaluate Jokic on defense?

Or is this simply another one of your many statements on which you have no clue, which with you seems to be most of the time you make a statement. Statements based on purported knowledge that does not exist.

Other - of course - than the shot defense data at stats.nba.com.

[cupcakesnake]

Jokic's weak rim protection is a legitimate detractor. The point of defense is to stop your opponent from scoring efficiently. So on one hand, it's a bad thing that Jokic yield high-efficiency rim attempts. There is however, plenty of evidence that Denver's team defense stops the other team's offense better when Jokic is on the floor. This isn't a lineup quirk where Jokic plays with the better defenders on the team. You can isolate him with or without Aaron Gordon, KCP, Peyton Watson, or whoever you could be propping up Jokic's numbers. It's very consistent that the Nuggets play stronger defense with Joker than without. However, there's no lineup with Jokic that produces consistently elite defense. He marginally improves the defense, but he can't be compared with any elite defensive center who's main value is making it easy to play elite defense.

Despite his lack of rim protection, there's no big picture evidence that Jokic is a damaging defender. Everything points to him being pretty neutral. He's like a +2 drtg guy in terms of defensive effect, where elite defensive centers can be like a +7 or more in the right context. I think it's fair to point out that playing Jokic is a defensive negative relative to the massive value add a good defensive center can add to the lineup (obviously Jokic more than makes up for this with his offense, but if we're talking purely defense, I think it's a fair argument to make).

On a related, moderator note:
This discussion is getting a little derailed by the lack of respect for each other being over emphasized in the posts. Keep the basketball debate, but please stop making disagreeing about basketball a referendum on each other's personal character. Not only is it no fun, it's specifically against forum policy. Let's talk basketball and limit the unecessary animosity. If you can't continue the discussion without suppressing the need to insult the other poster... don't continue the discussion!

[Dirk]

What is defense? What is this topic about?

- Mavs fan.

[cupcakesnake]

What is defense? What is this topic about?

- Mavs fan.

It's that thing that would happen Dorian Finney-Smith and Maxi Kleber were on the floor at the same time a couple years ago.

[Dirk]

What is defense? What is this topic about?

- Mavs fan.

It's that thing that would happen Dorian Finney-Smith and Maxi Kleber were on the floor at the same time a couple years ago.

Sadly the latter has missed a lot of time with two bad injuries the last two years and he has struggled to resemble what he looked before so far.

[CD_41]

Jokic's weak rim protection is a legitimate detractor. The point of defense is to stop your opponent from scoring efficiently. So on one hand, it's a bad thing that Jokic yield high-efficiency rim attempts. There is however, plenty of evidence that Denver's team defense stops the other team's offense better when Jokic is on the floor. This isn't a lineup quirk where Jokic plays with the better defenders on the team. You can isolate him with or without Aaron Gordon, KCP, Peyton Watson, or whoever you could be propping up Jokic's numbers. It's very consistent that the Nuggets play stronger defense with Joker than without. However, there's no lineup with Jokic that produces consistently elite defense. He marginally improves the defense, but he can't be compared with any elite defensive center who's main value is making it easy to play elite defense.

Despite his lack of rim protection, there's no big picture evidence that Jokic is a damaging defender. Everything points to him being pretty neutral. He's like a +2 drtg guy in terms of defensive effect, where elite defensive centers can be like a +7 or more in the right context. I think it's fair to point out that playing Jokic is a defensive negative relative to the massive value add a good defensive center can add to the lineup (obviously Jokic more than makes up for this with his offense, but if we're talking purely defense, I think it's a fair argument to make).

On a related, moderator note:
This discussion is getting a little derailed by the lack of respect for each other being over emphasized in the posts. Keep the basketball debate, but please stop making disagreeing about basketball a referendum on each other's personal character. Not only is it no fun, it's specifically against forum policy. Let's talk basketball and limit the unecessary animosity. If you can't continue the discussion without suppressing the need to insult the other poster... don't continue the discussion!

I think it is basically this. He is a solid, but not great defender.
The problem is that is flaws (rim protection, slow...) are so obvious that they create the impression that he must be a bad overall defender. A lot of the things he is great at (positioning, anchoring the defense, reading plays in advance) are not always eye-popping and usually happen BEOFRE someone takes a shot. To appreciate his defense it is almost necessary to not watch the games live but instead watch them later and analyze the plays in slow-mo.

Also: He just got better over the years. Was at best a 3/10 in his rookie year and improved a lot.

[CD_41]

What is defense? What is this topic about?

- Mavs fan.

It's that thing that would happen Dorian Finney-Smith and Maxi Kleber were on the floor at the same time a couple years ago.

Sadly the latter has missed a lot of time with two bad injuries the last two years and he has struggled to resemble what he looked before so far.

I'm German, so I always like when Maxi is playing, but this year they should give Gafford some of his minutes.

[Lockdown504090]

Quietly this is kawhis best season on defense since he left the spurs

[ILOVEIT]

When right, there is only one player I've seen lock up Luka, Kawahi, Tatum in the same season - Andrew Wiggins.

[tmorgan]

I sure hope Ausar can develop a decent offensive game outside of transition buckets, because his defense is every bit as obnoxious as Herb’s or anyone else’s. He was in Mikal Bridges’ shirt tonight, played basically all of Bridges’ 43 minutes, and held him to 13 points.

[NO-KG-AI]

The arguments against Herb are going to be rough. People have dug in on the idea that every starter on the Pels is such an unsalvageable defender that it’s going to be super hard to explain why our defense is good.

Herb is honestly one of those guys that just passes the eye test on such a ridiculous level. He pops off the screen all night on the defensive end. I can’t believe the deal we got him signed to.

[Homerclease]

Read on Twitter

?s=46&t=2r3K1qCL2UmIu9zb8OVdDw

Between this and Ant almost decapitating himself, two blocks for the ages in a matter of days