These have to be troll posts.
I don't think kctiny is trolling
In a discussion of Jokic vs. Antetokounmpo I point out that publicly available data shows Jokic is a poor shot defender. How is that trolling?
Because Jokic fans don't want to acknowledge it? Simply by pointing out what is factual?
the NBA has no stats on good rotations and thus is hard to track or evaluate good defense without the eye test
There is a decade's worth of individual player defensive FGM/FGA allowed data at stats.nba.com. How is that not helping to evaluate players on defense? The largest aspect of player defense is shot defense, and there is data available for that.
If defended shot FG% is all you're fixated on, then Jokic is pretty average despite being second in total field goal attempts defended (according to Synergy). His defended FG% differential versus actual FG% of the players he's defended is 0.
If it makes you feel better to call that "average" call it average.
But the fact is if you limit the Defense Dashboard for shots Overall to those who have faced the most shots - say 900+ FGAs - it lists 61 players. Of those 61 players Jokic's now 51.0% DFG% is the 3rd highest/worst with a +0.3 differential (ranks 43rd). So among those players who have faced the most FGAs on defense this season Jokic is clearly one of the worst, with 20 other starting Cs ranked above him. Look at 600+ FGAs faced (189 players) and his 51.0% DFG% ranks 29th among Cs and his +0.3% differential ranks 31st among Cs.
Do the same thing for FGAs <10' of the basket - say 500+ FGAs faced - Jokic allows 59.6% the 6th highest/worst, with 19 starting Cs allowing a lower FG%. His -1.0% differential ranks only 17th among starting Cs. Look at 300+ FGAs faced and that -1.0% differential ranks just 29th among Cs (starting and reserve Cs).
So - again - among Cs his shot defense this season has been poor.
Importantly, Nuggets are top 5 in total DFG% allowed and 6th in DFG% allowed inside 6 feet
That may be, but this is a thread of Jokic compared to Antetokounmpo, not Denver vs. Milwaukee.
why you ask "whose eyes?" and then you go by the stats?
Because last I checked no one can watch all games. But the camera data does. The cameras are eyes for all games.
Jokic impacts defense differently compared to other big men (not fouling, quick hands, securing the defensive rebound, reading the play) something that is not necessarily captured by the numbers you are showing
Oh I get it. Jokic is a good defender because he defends differently than all other Cs. He does what no one else can do. He's better than most on defense despite the fact that he can't stop shots from going in.
Jokic, as are the Nuggets, is absolutely coasting in the RS hence I am not expecting to strong of a defensive signal.
Oh I get it. His shot defense is poor because he's coasting? Just out of curiosity are other poor shot defending Cs like Nick Richards, Nikola Vucevic, and Jonas Valanciunas also coasting on defense?
Twisting my words again? Check.
Not comprehending that your boy Jokic is a poor shot defender? Check.
Placing sole defensive value on shot defense at the expense of everything else (a metric that actually paints him average instead of bad)? Check.
Not understanding that shot defense is the key component of a team's overall defense? Check.
Not understanding a metric such that you believe he is average? Check.
Thanks for proving my last post to be correct.
Whatever makes you sleep better at night.
Feel free to check out WOWY, RAPM, Net rating, or past examples like LEBRON/RAPTOR, RPM, etc
Which of these include individual player shot defense in their calculations? None? Never would have guessed it.
Until then there isn't a point in arguing with someone whose mind is incorrectly made up that Jokic is a weak defender
No - correctly made up that Jokic is a poor shot defender.
Any impact metric is going to be based on what happens when a player is on the court versus off the court.
So let me get this straight. You are going to tell us how good a player is based on what happens when he doesn't play?
And you are going to do this without including publicly available individual player shot defense data?
Which means that it inherently takes shot defense into account, because that affects what happens on the court
Inherently? That's a joke.
One of the key arguments against any plus/minus on/off calculations is that they can't tell you why a player is good or bad. You simply have to trust the black box calculation. And then when you actually ask the calculators of these metrics, or question their player ratings as to why a player has a certain rating, they then cannot say why in basketball terms and simply say you don't understand exactly what the metric means.
Jokic is not great at shot defense, but yet he ends up pretty consistently looking genuinely good defensively in impact metrics.
Which is exactly why you cannot trust the results of these metrics. If one of the worst shot defending Cs in your calculation ends up ranking as good defender, ask the calculator why. See what happens.
Which very clearly suggests that the impact of his non-shot-defense strengths outweigh his shot-defense weakness.
Delusional.
And that makes a lot of sense, because he has a bunch of very significant defensive strengths.
Like?
It’s really not hard to imagine them outweighing his lack of rim protection ability.
Perhaps in your world.
deflections that do not result in turnovers are actually quite often impactful
You have some data to back up this statement, rather than a lengthy rambling soliloquy where every deflection has a positive outcome?
How about all those deflections that go right to an opponent under his basket such that he scores?
The bottom line is that the available evidence tells us that Jokic is not a good rim protector but is still a good overall defender
Again, what ever it takes to make you sleep better at night.
I simply pointed out his shot defense is poor, using publicly available data.
And if you don't want to believe that shot defense is the major component of a team's overall defense, go for it.
