Quality defense at PG is harder to come by

[El Duderino]

I'm not a fan of people just taking the numbers players at a certain position put up and then simply assuming the other guy at the same position played either poor or good defense.

There are often times during games where the two players aren't both on the court, a PG can break down a defense without a stat showing it, sometimes points scored aren't even the fault of the guy on the other team at the same position, sometimes a guy is playing good or bad defense without stats showing that because his man is cold or on fire.

Defense counts on good individual defense, but it's also a team game. There are many players in this league who have their defense either look better than it really is or get exposed even more because the team defense around them is good or terrible.

The Bucks have the double whammy. Poor individual defenders and bad team defense.

[Wade-A-Holic]

I'm not a fan of people just taking the numbers players at a certain position put up and then simply assuming the other guy at the same position played either poor or good defense.

There are often times during games where the two players aren't both on the court, a PG can break down a defense without a stat showing it, sometimes points scored aren't even the fault of the guy on the other team at the same position, sometimes a guy is playing good or bad defense without stats showing that because his man is cold or on fire.

Defense counts on good individual defense, but it's also a team game. There are many players in this league who have their defense either look better than it really is or get exposed even more because the team defense around them is good or terrible.

The Bucks have the double whammy. Poor individual defenders and bad team defense.

Good post. Defense is really something you have to observe because stats can be very deceiving. Offensively, you can much more accurately gauge how effective a player was simply by looking at the box score.

[paul]

I'm not a fan of people just taking the numbers players at a certain position put up and then simply assuming the other guy at the same position played either poor or good defense.

There are often times during games where the two players aren't both on the court, a PG can break down a defense without a stat showing it, sometimes points scored aren't even the fault of the guy on the other team at the same position, sometimes a guy is playing good or bad defense without stats showing that because his man is cold or on fire.

Defense counts on good individual defense, but it's also a team game. There are many players in this league who have their defense either look better than it really is or get exposed even more because the team defense around them is good or terrible.

The Bucks have the double whammy. Poor individual defenders and bad team defense.

I agree entirely, and it's one of the one million reasons stats are so highly overrated, and should only ever be used as a secondary to what one sees with the naked eye.

[LISTEN2JAZZ]

How is adding in what Miller did to Mo in those same games 100% off topic? You brought up Mo not me, essentially saying he'd burnt Miller, when in fact Miller's offensive games were far more effective and efficient than Mo's in the matchups, meaning Miller's defense was far superior to Mo's.

Because this is a thread about defense. It's like you got desperate because you had nothing to say about his defense, so you started talking about his offensive abilities instead. Leave Miller's offense for another thread.

As for the fg%'s of the 4 best PG's in the game (not TJ obviously) vs Miller there was nothing startling there except for CP shooting 60%

That's not true. I looked up the stats for the first six or seven PGs I thought of, and they all shot their season fg% or higher against Miller. Since this isn't an academic paper I didn't look up every pg in the league, but you can feel free to add in some examples of guys who Miller has held to low percentages.

Good post. Defense is really something you have to observe because stats can be very deceiving. Offensively, you can much more accurately gauge how effective a player was simply by looking at the box score.

But when I watch Miller, he doesn't look like a great defender then either. He doesn't lock guys down, and the stats confirm this - guys do against Miller what they do against everyone else (but with higher fg%'s). Telling me I can't use stats is stupid.

You guys aren't putting forth any falsifiable claims - trying to construct an argument that cannot be debated. "Miller is a good defender because I say so - can't use stats because they're overrated." So far, no specific claims as to what he does on defense that makes him so good. Obviously it isn't limiting fg%. So what is it? Does he force more turnovers than the league average? Block a lot of shots? Fool his opponent into shooting a high fg% because he wants to raise their confidence before going in for the kill?

[BucksRuleAll22]

Jason Kidd is not a great defender anymore, and he has been one of the most overrated players in the NBA the last few years.

[paulpressey25]

The troubling part about this discussion is that our team had a reasonable chance to acquire either Paul, Billups or Miller at differing points over the last 34-months.....

And we declined each and every time.

Miller isn't a lock-down defender.....but what he does do that you don't see in the boxscore is:

a) He's physical and grinds on guys

b) He likes to post up his opposition which tends to stop the other team's PG from then being in a position to run the break quickly since he's occupied on the blocks.

[Wise1]

It's not just defense that's hard to come by with point guards. I got into a debate on a different forum with a guy who said if he was starting a team from scratch that he'd take Bogut over both Chris Paul and Deron Williams because high quality big men were much harder to come by.

Then i pointed out just how few high quality point guards are in the NBA right now.

Nash
Paul
Williams
Billups
Davis

Those are the clear top five IMO and then there is

Parker
Miller
Kidd He's also old and won't be around much longer

There are other point guards in the NBA who are solid/decent, but aren't anything special players.

A high quality PG is IMO the rarest commodity in the game.

Now there are guys like Wade/Kobe/TMac who handle the ball alot and are part PG/part small forward or shooting guard. I guess Brandon Roy kinda fits in that type also.

Some may want to include Iverson and Arenas as point guards, but i don't see them as anything more than shooting guards who handle the ball alot and can pass decently.

That's a great debate and something that I've pondered while watching Bogut's game improve this season. I'd have to agree with the guy that puts the premium on the big men though. Winning in the NBA has too much to do with what your big men can do inside and on the glass.

Both positions (center/pg) are clearly 1 and 1a in terms of importance. Chris Paul is the best point guard in the game and probably will be for the next 5-10 years lest someone better enters the league that can duplicate Paul's production with better measurables. I would trade Bogut for Chris Paul no problem. I probably wouldn't trade him for Williams though, even though I think Williams is the better overall player.

I think its much harder to find dominant big men (pure centers) than it is to find dominant point guards. How many dominant pure centers are there in the NBA?

Howard
Yao
Duncan (even though AI/Arenas aren't on pg list)

That's it. Those type guys are harder to come by than top notch point guards.

A good topic of debate on that issue would be would you start your team with Chris Paul or Dwight Howard.

[paulpressey25]

-= A good topic of debate on that issue would be would you start your team with Chris Paul or Dwight Howard.

I'd take Dwight over Paul because in the playoffs the big men grind you down......but that said, there are very few big guys outside of Dwight you take over Paul.....he might be the one exception in the league right now.

[LISTEN2JAZZ]

Miller isn't a lock-down defender.....but what he does do that you don't see in the boxscore is:

a) He's physical and grinds on guys

b) He likes to post up his opposition which tends to stop the other team's PG from then being in a position to run the break quickly since he's occupied on the blocks.

I guess I feel that if these two things don't lead to something that can be measured with statistics, then they aren't things that lead to winning. When he grinds on guys, does it cause them to miss shots? To see fewer passing lanes and thus assists? To slow down the tempo? What does all that grinding accomplish?

I'm a big believer in statistics. It is extremely easy to misuse them, but I think it's even worse to throw them out the window. The big picture outcome of a game is measured in numbers, so if you aren't impacting those numbers, you aren't helping your team. Sometimes you need to find new ways to look at the numbers to capture how a player is helping his team (such as +/- for a good glue guy who isn't doing the actual scoring or assist making).

I'd be curious to see the results of point B, that his posting up prevents fast breaks going the other way. Is there a site that has data on fast break points? If so, we should be able to see if teams get fewer fast break points against the Sixers (adjusted for pace of game).

[paulpressey25]

When I was touting Miller a year ago, a number of posters here said that Mo averages the same or better statistics and he's only 24.....so the choice is clear. Keep Mo.

You can't argue Miller statistically. You just have to watch a bunch of sixers games. He's not Paul. He's not Deron Williams. He's not Billups because Miller can't hit and doesn't really take 3's. He takes plays off as well......

But he just has a feel for the game and knows how to play the PG position. And most commentators feel like he is the MVP of the sixers this season.

[LISTEN2JAZZ]

You can't argue Miller statistically.

How can that be??? If his game doesn't have an impact on the points his team scores or the points his team prevents, then he doesn't help his team.

To be clear though, I think Miller is a good PG, and I'm not arguing against that. This thread is about good defensive point guards though, and I've never thought he was anything special on that end. The numbers (at least the ones brought into this thread so far) don't indicate that he's anything special either.

I think it's a total cop-out to say that "he's good, but there are no numbers that would prove it." How can that be possible, to help your team's defense without limiting baskets?

[REDDzone]

Miller is average defensively.

Nothing great, but that puts him better than any current Bucks perimeter defender IMO.

[paulpressey25]

-= I think it's a total cop-out to say that "he's good, but there are no numbers that would prove it."

The numbers that prove it are in the W-L column......

My first few years on this board I got into always comparing guys "stats" during these debates by looking them up on espn.com......and then later the PER's and 82.games stuff......

I've gone back the other way.....just watch the last 10 Philly games versus our last 10 games. Watch the PG on every play. You'll find your difference there on offense and defense.

[europa]

-= original quote snipped =-



The numbers that prove it are in the W-L column......

Ultimately, this is the only stat that matters. I want the Bucks to start adding more players who do the things that help teams win. If you watch Miller, it's obvious he does things that help the Sixers win.

[LISTEN2JAZZ]

I've gone back the other way.....just watch the last 10 Philly games versus our last 10 games. Watch the PG on every play. You'll find your difference there on offense and defense.

Well if he doesn't create turnovers, lower his opponent's fg%, steal rebounds, etc, then no I will not find a difference. If his efforts don't impact any of these categories, then he's just Royal Ivey, looking like he's trying hard while not having an impact.

The numbers that prove it are in the W-L column...

How do I know that Andre Miller's defense impacted the W-L column. If that's all I'm looking at, it could be entirely because of Thad Young's defense, or Sam Dalembert's offense, or anything else.

[Nowak008]

A lot of people talk about needing better defense "at the point of attack". I would agree. However, very few teams have it and have the same person run a good offense. It is a rare commodity.

It would be great to improve it, don't get me wrong. I just think it is going to be hard to do. Our only realistic trade piece we have to get this PG is our lottery pick. Yi is untouchable. Redd makes a boat load and I can't see us dealing him for a PG even if someone wanted Redd. Everyone else isn't worth much.

The problem with our PG situation the last 2 years is that we have not had an adequate back up. Mo Williams for better or worse has been the only ball handler on the team. Now that we have Sessions, hopefully he can develop and be a solid back up next year.