WCQF | (4) Oklahoma City Thunder vs Utah Jazz (5) | UTA 4-2

[Pillendreher]

Melo had that rating because of who he's on court with.

Oh. So when the defense was good with him on the floor, that must have meant the defense with him on the floor was a problem? Is this like the Roberson argument, only in reverse?

Wouldn't you need to make the same argument with Westbrook if he had the third best d-rtg?

Yes. If the team had a < 100 DRtG with Westbrook on the floor, I would argue that the defense wasn't a problem with him on the floor. The 'It's Melo's fault' stance loses some of its merit if the team was actually good defensively with him on the floor.

Melo ON, Gobert ON: 88 DRtG (30 min)
Melo ON, Gobert OFF: 105 DRtG (8 min)
Melo ON, Favors ON: 105 DRtG (30 min)
Melo ON, Favors OFF: 46 DRtG (8 min)
Melo ON, Favors ON, Gobert ON: 106 DRtG (22 min)
Melo ON, Favors OFF, Gobert OFF: N/A

If Melo's defense had been this problematic, it would have to show up somewhere. Even those Favors ON numbers are still ~3-4 pp100p below their ORtG with Favors on the floor over their recent run.

[hardenASG13]

No, he wasn't fine. Far from it. He was either too far away leaving him completely uncovered or much too close giving him the opportunity to drive by him, forcing Adams to help. The way Russ defended him this game was the main reason for our defensive struggles. Going over screens when he should be going under them. Giving him room to drive when he should have forced him to shoot. Giving him too much room to shoot. This was all evident in the 2nd quarter when he was trying to get back at Ricky Martin on both ends of the floor.



Melo literally had the best On/Off DRtG in this game by far.

Melo had that rating because of who he's on court with.

Oh. So when the defense was good with him on the floor, that must have meant the defense with him on the floor was a problem? Is this like the Roberson argument, only in reverse?

And yes, that was the plan. The literal plan was to let Rubio shoot. He did in game 1 and they won because of it. He did in 2 and they lost because of it. 1 game on/off stats are meaningless. Russ had the 3rd best D on/off. So where does that put it?

The plan was to make Rubio score, not to let him do whatever he wanted. The difference was plain as day between game 1 and game 2. In game 1, Rubio was shooting left leaning floaters. In game 2, he had all the time in the world to take shots he's comfortable with.

Did you actually watch the game? Or were you too emotionally disconnected to do so?

The scouting report may have said to leave rubio open (for some reason.....like Roberson level open). I dont agree with it, but wouldn't put it past Donovan. Here is where the actually having played basketball part comes in though. In a basketball game, you have your initial scouting report. If your guy is described as a non shooter, you can give him space initially, sure. But after he makes 2 3s, or 4 of them, you need to adjust. The game isn't played on paper. If a guy hits a few wide open 3s, you need to get tighter to him and then move your feet if he drives. That's what wasn't done. You can blame Donovan for that, as it wouldn't surprise me if he was too nervous to say it to Russ, but Russ also has to know better.

[alessandrux]

In a basketball game, you have your initial scouting report. If your guy is described as a non shooter, you can give him space initially, sure. But after he makes 2 3s, or 4 of them, you need to adjust. The game isn't played on paper. If a guy hits a few wide open 3s, you need to get tighter to him and then move your feet if he drives. That's what wasn't done. You can blame Donovan for that, as it wouldn't surprise me if he was too nervous to say it to Russ, but Russ also has to know better.

Genuinely asking, is this the consensus?

If so, can someone explain it to me? I don't get this.
Sure, you have to react to things happening on the court, if there are some holes in your game-plan but do you have to alter your plan completely if it is in itself structurally sound(e.g. if you have discovered a weakness in your opponents game, but he suddenly (maybe by pure chance) does not show this weakness right now, does this render your discovery useless) ?



Regarding our next game, what changes do you expect?

I would like:
- Adams sits back on switches/does not overswitch, if he does he is useless defensively. In my opinion the only players on whom he should switch on are Gobert, Favors and maybe Ingles or Crowder.
- better/more cohesive defensive boxing-out
- some (semi-)open looks/plays run for Abrines
- if Gobert is still able to completetely prevent our pick-and-roll, some low post opportunities for Adams

If we ran no plays for Adams and he switches on everyone I wouldn't mind if he sees (a bit) less time on the court (in favor of Grant or Patterson).

[Pillendreher]

In a basketball game, you have your initial scouting report. If your guy is described as a non shooter, you can give him space initially, sure. But after he makes 2 3s, or 4 of them, you need to adjust. The game isn't played on paper. If a guy hits a few wide open 3s, you need to get tighter to him and then move your feet if he drives. That's what wasn't done. You can blame Donovan for that, as it wouldn't surprise me if he was too nervous to say it to Russ, but Russ also has to know better.

Genuinely asking, is this the consensus?

If so, can someone explain it to me? I don't get this.
Sure, you have to react to things happening on the court, if there are some holes in your game-plan but do you have to alter your plan completely if it is in itself structurally sound(e.g. if you have discovered a weakness in your opponents game, but he suddenly (maybe by pure chance) does not show this weakness right now, does this render your discovery useless) ?



Regarding our next game, what changes do you expect?

I would like:
- Adams sits back on switches/does not overswitch, if he does he is useless defensively. In my opinion the only players on whom he should switch on are Gobert, Favors and maybe Ingles or Crowder.
- better/more cohesive defensive boxing-out
- some (semi-)open looks/plays run for Abrines
- if Gobert is still able to completetely prevent our pick-and-roll, some low post opportunities for Adams

If we ran no plays for Adams and he switches on everyone I wouldn't mind if he sees (a bit) less time on the court (in favor of Grant or Patterson).

I would say it depends on the player that's making the shot. Rubio is a non-shooter, but this season he's shown the capability of making open spot up 3s. So you want him to shoot it, but you don't want to gift him points either. And even if you continue to leave him wide open, the guy ignoring him has to do something worthwile on defense. Giving him wide open spot up jumpers while Russ does nothing is not a good defensive strategy. Playing off of a non-shooter needs to actually accomplish something besides his opponent not guarding him.

[bondom34]

No, he wasn't fine. Far from it. He was either too far away leaving him completely uncovered or much too close giving him the opportunity to drive by him, forcing Adams to help. The way Russ defended him this game was the main reason for our defensive struggles. Going over screens when he should be going under them. Giving him room to drive when he should have forced him to shoot. Giving him too much room to shoot. This was all evident in the 2nd quarter when he was trying to get back at Ricky Martin on both ends of the floor.



Melo literally had the best On/Off DRtG in this game by far.

Melo had that rating because of who he's on court with.

Oh. So when the defense was good with him on the floor, that must have meant the defense with him on the floor was a problem? Is this like the Roberson argument, only in reverse?

And yes, that was the plan. The literal plan was to let Rubio shoot. He did in game 1 and they won because of it. He did in 2 and they lost because of it. 1 game on/off stats are meaningless. Russ had the 3rd best D on/off. So where does that put it?

The plan was to make Rubio score, not to let him do whatever he wanted. The difference was plain as day between game 1 and game 2. In game 1, Rubio was shooting left leaning floaters. In game 2, he had all the time in the world to take shots he's comfortable with.

Did you actually watch the game? Or were you too emotionally disconnected to do so?

I w enough and listened to enough afterward to make a pretty good idea. And why doesn't the Melo argument hold for Russ? Because he was 3rd on the team and Steven one of the worst. And yet I don't agree with that.

The issues tonight defensively were Russell not being sound defensively (see leaving Rubio all night, do we read the scouting report more than him?) He just simply wanted to play passing lanes and leave him open.

This Favors issue is plain and simple. If I got paid to, I could show a number of gifs where George/Brewer/Russ or other perimeter players got beaten plain and simple. Melo (or other bigs) rotates correctly to help and force a miss by altering shots. Nobody rotates to box out Favors or attack the board and Favors cleans it up (I remember the 2nd to last play of the 1st quarter, I was already tired of it where Grant or George who got beat should've hit the glass). Or in other instances, they switch and they left a mouse in the house. Again this is taken advantage of by taking a rebounder out of the paint and either driving it in allowing their big to grab a board or take a dump off pass. At least twice Rudy drove, was cut off by Melo and dropped it right off to Favors. Then Favors hit a few jumpers he had no business hitting, and had a great game.

Well this is supposed to be the strategy for OKC. Their entire starting lineup consists of slashers or guys that can get points in the paint (including Brewer and Grant off the bench). They need to get into the paint, and draw out Rudy and get some offensive boards from it and get some fouls. I get that 3s have changed the game and Russ driving off the pick and roll with Melo and George at the 3pt line is ideal, but transition buckets and getting into the paint is the key for a team that shoots too many 3s and is too inconsistent with it. If they're not falling, take less. Get quality looks and share the ball (at least 3 people touch it each possession, except with obvious advantages), get movement off ball even within iso sets, get Westbrook PnR opportunities, attack the offensive glass, get to the line, and defend hard to get into transition. When the 3s are falling like in game 1, take advantage.

The scouting report is literally to let Rubio shoot. This was one of the games Westbrook was fine defensively. If Rubio shoots 5-8 for 3, you live with it. You don't live with Melo being too immobile to defend basic actions.

Grant has to come in for him.

Rubio is an efficient spot up shooter. Forcing him to be a scorer is the report.

Even when Rubio took forever to shoot it, Russ never even attempted a close out. For what? A rebound? Get up the court and they'll push ahead to him for better transition opportunities

And Rubio was at times getting open because of Melo being run though pnr and switches. Hence the issue. Favors killed him

[bondom34]

Oh. So when the defense was good with him on the floor, that must have meant the defense with him on the floor was a problem? Is this like the Roberson argument, only in reverse?

Wouldn't you need to make the same argument with Westbrook if he had the third best d-rtg?

Yes. If the team had a < 100 DRtG with Westbrook on the floor, I would argue that the defense wasn't a problem with him on the floor. The 'It's Melo's fault' stance loses some of its merit if the team was actually good defensively with him on the floor.

Melo ON, Gobert ON: 88 DRtG (30 min)
Melo ON, Gobert OFF: 105 DRtG (8 min)
Melo ON, Favors ON: 105 DRtG (30 min)
Melo ON, Favors OFF: 46 DRtG (8 min)
Melo ON, Favors ON, Gobert ON: 106 DRtG (22 min)
Melo ON, Favors OFF, Gobert OFF: N/A

If Melo's defense had been this problematic, it would have to show up somewhere. Even those Favors ON numbers are still ~3-4 pp100p below their ORtG with Favors on the floor over their recent run.

You're literally using single game on off as a.measure. its like using the plus minus from the box score. Near useless.

Edit.


And if you're doing it:
Favors on Melo on 98.6 Drtg
'Favors on Melo off 81.2

[Pillendreher]

Wouldn't you need to make the same argument with Westbrook if he had the third best d-rtg?

Yes. If the team had a < 100 DRtG with Westbrook on the floor, I would argue that the defense wasn't a problem with him on the floor. The 'It's Melo's fault' stance loses some of its merit if the team was actually good defensively with him on the floor.

Melo ON, Gobert ON: 88 DRtG (30 min)
Melo ON, Gobert OFF: 105 DRtG (8 min)
Melo ON, Favors ON: 105 DRtG (30 min)
Melo ON, Favors OFF: 46 DRtG (8 min)
Melo ON, Favors ON, Gobert ON: 106 DRtG (22 min)
Melo ON, Favors OFF, Gobert OFF: N/A

If Melo's defense had been this problematic, it would have to show up somewhere. Even those Favors ON numbers are still ~3-4 pp100p below their ORtG with Favors on the floor over their recent run.

You're literally using single game on off as a.measure. its like using the plus minus from the box score. Near useless.

It's useless if you're trying to draw anything from it for the future just based on 30 minutes of play. I'm merely using it to demonstrate that - in this specific game - the team held its own defensively when Anthony was on the floor. And that goes directly against the 'Carmelo Anthony lost the Thunder this game' narrative.

And if you're doing it:
Favors on Melo on 98.6 Drtg
'Favors on Melo off 81.2

That's not pertinent to this discussion. We're not talking about the Jazz's defense. But while we're at it:

Favors ON, Melo ON: 105.6 Jazz ORtG
Favors ON, Melo OFF: 162 Jazz ORtG

But sure, they killed us offensively with that 106 ORtG.

[bondom34]

Yes. If the team had a < 100 DRtG with Westbrook on the floor, I would argue that the defense wasn't a problem with him on the floor. The 'It's Melo's fault' stance loses some of its merit if the team was actually good defensively with him on the floor.

Melo ON, Gobert ON: 88 DRtG (30 min)
Melo ON, Gobert OFF: 105 DRtG (8 min)
Melo ON, Favors ON: 105 DRtG (30 min)
Melo ON, Favors OFF: 46 DRtG (8 min)
Melo ON, Favors ON, Gobert ON: 106 DRtG (22 min)
Melo ON, Favors OFF, Gobert OFF: N/A

If Melo's defense had been this problematic, it would have to show up somewhere. Even those Favors ON numbers are still ~3-4 pp100p below their ORtG with Favors on the floor over their recent run.

You're literally using single game on off as a.measure. its like using the plus minus from the box score. Near useless.

It's useless if you're trying to draw anything from it for the future just based on 30 minutes of play. I'm merely using it to demonstrate that - in this specific game - the team held its own defensively when Anthony was on the floor. And that goes directly against the 'Carmelo Anthony lost the Thunder this game' narrative.

And if you're doing it:
Favors on Melo on 98.6 Drtg
'Favors on Melo off 81.2

That's not pertinent to this discussion. We're not talking about the Jazz's defense. But while we're at it:

Favors ON, Melo ON: 105.6 Jazz ORtG
Favors ON, Melo OFF: 162 Jazz ORtG

But sure, they killed us offensively with that 106 ORtG.

So just to be clear, Melo didntnlose the game despite getting killed on pick and rolls every time. Russ did even though he was 3rd nest on the team in drtg and defensive on off.

By this measure the issue defensively was Steven. And to be blunt I don't buy that at all.

Sometimes parsing through on off data isn't showing the story.

[Pillendreher]

But sure, they killed us offensively with that 106 ORtG.

So just to be clear, Melo didntnlose the game despite getting killed on pick and rolls every time.[/QUOTE]

Our PnR defense with Melo defending it was better than when Adams was defending it.

Russ did even though he was 3rd nest on the team in drtg and defensive on off.

If you had actually watched the game, you'd have seen Russ being horrible both offensively and defensively for extended stretches. The 2nd quarter was payback time for him, when he was trying to get back at Rubio by either playing him too close in order to poke the ball away or posting him up and taking trash shots on offense.

By this measure the issue defensively was Steven. And to be blunt I don't buy that at all.

Yes, he was a big issue defensively.

Sometimes parsing through on off data isn't showing the story.

We're approaching sleestak territory.

[bondom34]

But sure, they killed us offensively with that 106 ORtG.

So just to be clear, Melo didntnlose the game despite getting killed on pick and rolls every time.

Our PnR defense with Melo defending it was better than when Adams was defending it.

Russ did even though he was 3rd nest on the team in drtg and defensive on off.

If you had actually watched the game, you'd have seen Russ being horrible both offensively and defensively for extended stretches. The 2nd quarter was payback time for him, when he was trying to get back at Rubio by either playing him too close in order to poke the ball away or posting him up and taking trash shots on offense.

By this measure the issue defensively was Steven. And to be blunt I don't buy that at all.

Yes, he was a big issue defensively.

Sometimes parsing through on off data isn't showing the story.

We're approaching sleestak territory.[/quote]
I literally just went through Rubio box score shot tracking and watched his shots. It was always the same thing. Pick and roll, switch, Russ drops onto Gobert or Favors or Crowder, Rubio open.

Now if you want to say that's not watching or call me sleestak please explain how using a measure of defense to claim Melo was good, when by the same measure so.was Russ, but claiming Russ was bad, is in any reasonable way consistent. Because by watching.the replay of his shots I can see that a.handful were on Russ. But a lot were the same pick and roll switch with Melo most times.

And even just now to be totally sure I researched thw final 3 he hit.

Mitchell beats PG off a screen. Russ shows to stop the easy layup and helps off. Rubio open. Now if you want to blame him fine. But if Mitchell goes for an uncontested layup I guess he gets blame too.

[Pillendreher]

I literally just went through Rubio box score shot tracking and watched his shots. It was always the same thing. Pick and roll, switch, Russ drops onto Gobert or Favors or Crowder, Rubio open.

This is every 2PA by Rubio in the game:











There is no switching. They didn't start switching until late in the game, end of the 3rd/beginning of the 4th quarter iirc.

What I'm seeing is Westbrook just stopping on defense and basically conceding the possession a couple of times. Then they also gave Rubio a couple of bad shots, which is good.
But in the end, this doesn't tell the 'whole picture' because he didn't shoot in in the PnR every time down the floor. We'd have to look at every PnR possession with him as the ball handler. stats.nba.com doesn't give me that video filter though. And I don't have the time to go through every possession Rubio was on the floor.

Now if you want to say that's not watching or call me sleestak please explain how using a measure of defense to claim Melo was good, when by the same measure so.was Russ, but claiming Russ was bad, is in any reasonable way consistent. Because by watching.the replay of his shots I can see that a.handful were on Russ. But a lot were the same pick and roll switch with Melo most times.

I'm saying this 'BUT MELO KILLED US DEFENSIVELY' doesn't have a lot of merit because our team defense with Anthony on the floor was more than fine. If the team defense isn't hurting, what's the point?
You can't blame a game on one guy because of his defense and then go 'So what if the team didn't give up that many points with him on the floor?'. That's the point after all, isn't it?

Btw: Russ-Adams 117 DRtG in 22 minutes. That's what I was referecing: That pairing was horrible at defending against the PnR. I have no idea why the tried that 'scheme'. Idiotic. They played them like they did the Rockets in the one game they got spanked. Makes no sense.

[bondom34]

I literally just went through Rubio box score shot tracking and watched his shots. It was always the same thing. Pick and roll, switch, Russ drops onto Gobert or Favors or Crowder, Rubio open.

This is every 2PA by Rubio in the game:











There is no switching. They didn't start switching until late in the game, end of the 3rd/beginning of the 4th quarter iirc.

What I'm seeing is Westbrook just stopping on defense and basically conceding the possession a couple of times. Then they also gave Rubio a couple of bad shots, which is good.
But in the end, this doesn't tell the 'whole picture' because he didn't shoot in in the PnR every time down the floor. We'd have to look at every PnR possession with him as the ball handler. stats.nba.com doesn't give me that video filter though. And I don't have the time to go through every possession Rubio was on the floor.

Now if you want to say that's not watching or call me sleestak please explain how using a measure of defense to claim Melo was good, when by the same measure so.was Russ, but claiming Russ was bad, is in any reasonable way consistent. Because by watching.the replay of his shots I can see that a.handful were on Russ. But a lot were the same pick and roll switch with Melo most times.

I'm saying this 'BUT MELO KILLED US DEFENSIVELY' doesn't have a lot of merit because our team defense with Anthony on the floor was more than fine. If the team defense isn't hurting, what's the point?
You can't blame a game on one guy because of his defense and then go 'So what if the team didn't give up that many points with him on the floor?'. That's the point after all, isn't it?

Btw: Russ-Adams 117 DRtG in 22 minutes. That's what I was referecing: That pairing was horrible at defending against the PnR. I have no idea why the tried that 'scheme'. Idiotic. They played them like they did the Rockets in the one game they got spanked. Makes no sense.

1. There was, and there was more on 3s with the switching and or helping off when someone got beat


Edit. And Russ wasn't even on Rubio on a few of those...

2. If you're going to say Melo was fine defensively and Westbrook wasn't then using on off isn't a good measure. Be consistent.

Also using that weird new shot tracking thing sucks. According to it Rubio was best when guarded by PG.

[slick_watts]

Watch on YouTube

[slick_watts]

you won't find an argument from me that westbrook was bad defending the pnr especially in 4q. you won't find an argument from me that melo was put into tough situations by utah using favors in screens more, either. both contributed to the fourth quarter defensive collapse.

i'm probably most at issue with the thunder playing the grant-starters for most of the 4q. that lineup was never effective defensively, and it forces melo into being a wing way too much. there was one play with westbrook helping into the paint on a pnr to deny the lane to mitchell (ostensibly) and ricky is wide open for a three. if you have grant and adams both behind, why is westbrook helping even necessary?

[Kizz Fastfists]

And yes, that was the plan. The literal plan was to let Rubio shoot. He did in game 1 and they won because of it. He did in 2 and they lost because of it.

They won game 1 because they shot 48% from 3! When a 35% 3pt shooting team shoots 48% they are going to win most of the time. OKC might be able to pull that off one more time during the series, but losing in the first round in 6 games is nothing to get excited about.

[bondom34]

And yes, that was the plan. The literal plan was to let Rubio shoot. He did in game 1 and they won because of it. He did in 2 and they lost because of it.

They won game 1 because they shot 48% from 3! When a 35% 3pt shooting team shoots 48% they are going to win most of the time. OKC might be able to pull that off one more time during the series, but losing in the first round in 6 games is nothing to get excited about.

And Utah won game 2 because Rubio shot 60 percent for 3! If you're going to sell bad logic do it consistently. I know winning hurts you but its gonna be ok.

[spearsy23]

Schematically Russ is going over screens and the roll man is taking a deep drop specifically to force Rubio into mid-range shots. If he repeatedly hits them that's not on Russ or Adams, that's when you either concede it's not working or you live and die on the percentages. I can't watch Slick's link right now, but anecdotally there are definitely times when a mediocre or even bad shooter starts making shots at a high percentage and seems to make more difficult ones in addition. To me that means you need to adjust your defense, but that's a Donovan issue. I also hate the deep drop and Chase over picks look because it allows penetration which almost always results in scrambling defense at the very least.

[Kizz Fastfists]

And Utah won game 2 because Rubio shot 60 percent for 3! If you're going to sell bad logic do it consistently. I know winning hurts you but its gonna be ok.

Utah, as a team, still shot below their regular season average from 3. Would you have felt better if Rubio had been 2-8, Mitchell had been 2-7 and Crowder had been 1-3?

[bondom34]

And Utah won game 2 because Rubio shot 60 percent for 3! If you're going to sell bad logic do it consistently. I know winning hurts you but its gonna be ok.

Utah, as a team, still shot below their regular season average from 3. Would you have felt better if Rubio had been 2-8, Mitchell had been 2-7 and Crowder had been 1-3?

So did okc game 2. Adams was also a non factor in a matchup he usually wins and Russ hasn't had a good game yet. Would you feel better if either of them played to their average once?

[slick_watts]

And Utah won game 2 because Rubio shot 60 percent for 3! If you're going to sell bad logic do it consistently. I know winning hurts you but its gonna be ok.

Utah, as a team, still shot below their regular season average from 3. Would you have felt better if Rubio had been 2-8, Mitchell had been 2-7 and Crowder had been 1-3?

So did okc game 2. Adams was also a non factor in a matchup he usually wins and Russ hasn't had a good game yet. Would you feel better if either of them played to their average once?

russ is going to have problems with ricky and gobert no matter what. it seems hopeless, the way he is playing.