Should the NBA add a Defensive attention stat to box scores?

Jazzfan12 · Post #1 » by **Jazzfan12** » Tue Mar 6, 2012 4:45 pm

For example, if LaMarcus Aldridge gets double-teamed and Raymond Felton is left open, Aldridge passes out and Felton misses the three, the scorekeepers could give a +1 defensive attention to Aldridge and -1 to Felton. This would be hard to count and fully notice, but it sometimes seems like shot creators are sometimes praised less than they should be and players who can't shoot are praised too much. Another example would be when teams send three guys to defend the PnR because Nash is running it or because Dirk is popping out for a jumper, Nash and Dirk could get positive defensive attention stats. I think offball scorers and big men are regarded not as highly as they should be because "they don't make their teammates better" because of lack of assist numbers, but their presence and potential scoring is what allows other teammates to get open and therefore many do make their teammates better. It could also show what players truly need help instead of fans simply being able to say that their star is constantly double-teamed when he might not be.

Post #2 » by **Doctor MJ** » Wed Mar 7, 2012 2:21 am

The key issue is exactly what you pointed out: "This would be hard to count and fully notice".

NBA scorekeepers can't even get assists consistent, and those are orders of magnitude easier to recognize and judge than what you mean.

With that said, I absolutely want much more depth to game tracking than what classic box scores provide, and I'd enjoy seeing it in box score form in addition to the other ways we're starting to see it (Synergy, etc).

-Kees- · Post #3 » by **-Kees-** » Wed Mar 7, 2012 11:19 am

I like the idea, but as Doc MJ said, it will be very hard for stat keepers to add another stat they have to worry about, and this one can be a bit tricky (some times on P&Rs, for instance, a perimeter, off-ball defender might step in, but not fully commit, does the ball handler of the P&R get a +1 then?)

Trying it on a small sample using Synergy might be a good idea (and I'm thinking about getting it, maybe I'll try something like that).