Making sense of Nicolas Batum's defensive impact
Posted: Wed Feb 6, 2013 5:43 pm
Nicolas Batum is generally known as a good defender. Often a very good defender. Occasionally even called an elite defender. He certainly fits the profile, physically. But there's one problem, and it's been bugging me: the +/- numbers disagree. Now normally this doesn't bother me. It's not odd for impact stats to be imprecise. There may be noise effecting things, or the perception of a player may be off. But what confuses me is how strongly the +/- numbers disagree, and how consistently they do so, and how I've completely escaped any explanation to account for this.
Now, pretty much every +/- statistic doesn't merely think Batum is an overrated defender, or an average defender. They think he's a HORRIBLE defender. 4 year RAPM has him at -2.1 xRAPM has him a bit better at -1.7. He's been putrid in raw on/off for a few years now. Now even over a few years, a player can have bad raw on/off numbers if he's consistently playing with another player who is bringing him down. But Batum isn't. The rest of the Blazers' starting lineup, for example, posts much stronger +/- numbers on defense than he does. Last year, for example, he played 2/3 of his minutes with Lamarcus Aldridge. Batum was +4.8 on defense (where positive is bad), while Aldridge was -7.8!
In fact, the only other Blazer who played significant minutes and rivaled Batum's on/off numbers on defense was Jamal Crawford. But he only played about half of his minutes with Crawford, and this year Crawford is gone and Batum's +/- numbers remain the same. I've failed to come up with any explanation for this. I'd assumed it was just noise for a while, but after 3 or 4 years of this being the case, I've failed to come up with any adequate explanation. The only reasonable explanation would be that the Blazers play small ball with Batum in a disproportionate amount of time, but they don't. All the evidence seems to point to one thing: that Batum is just a bad defender.
But this is extremely counter-intuitive. No human seems to think Batum is a bad defender. Even with someone like Serge Ibaka that +/- thinks is generally overrated, there's a not insignificant group of people that see his weaknesses defensively. But in this case, the human element almost unanimously agrees that Batum is a good to very good defender, and the impact statistics basically definitively think he's a bad one. I'm completely unable to make heads or tails of this. Pretty much every other major counter-intuitive +/- phenomena I've been able to explain in one way or another (schematic reasons, noise, whatever). But I have no explanation for this. Is Batum just really overrated defensively for some reason most people simply don't see? The large sample size of data saying that the team is better defensively with him on the bench despite it being better defensively with everyone he plays with on the floor is just hard to ignore.
Sorry for the walls of text.
Now, pretty much every +/- statistic doesn't merely think Batum is an overrated defender, or an average defender. They think he's a HORRIBLE defender. 4 year RAPM has him at -2.1 xRAPM has him a bit better at -1.7. He's been putrid in raw on/off for a few years now. Now even over a few years, a player can have bad raw on/off numbers if he's consistently playing with another player who is bringing him down. But Batum isn't. The rest of the Blazers' starting lineup, for example, posts much stronger +/- numbers on defense than he does. Last year, for example, he played 2/3 of his minutes with Lamarcus Aldridge. Batum was +4.8 on defense (where positive is bad), while Aldridge was -7.8!
In fact, the only other Blazer who played significant minutes and rivaled Batum's on/off numbers on defense was Jamal Crawford. But he only played about half of his minutes with Crawford, and this year Crawford is gone and Batum's +/- numbers remain the same. I've failed to come up with any explanation for this. I'd assumed it was just noise for a while, but after 3 or 4 years of this being the case, I've failed to come up with any adequate explanation. The only reasonable explanation would be that the Blazers play small ball with Batum in a disproportionate amount of time, but they don't. All the evidence seems to point to one thing: that Batum is just a bad defender.
But this is extremely counter-intuitive. No human seems to think Batum is a bad defender. Even with someone like Serge Ibaka that +/- thinks is generally overrated, there's a not insignificant group of people that see his weaknesses defensively. But in this case, the human element almost unanimously agrees that Batum is a good to very good defender, and the impact statistics basically definitively think he's a bad one. I'm completely unable to make heads or tails of this. Pretty much every other major counter-intuitive +/- phenomena I've been able to explain in one way or another (schematic reasons, noise, whatever). But I have no explanation for this. Is Batum just really overrated defensively for some reason most people simply don't see? The large sample size of data saying that the team is better defensively with him on the bench despite it being better defensively with everyone he plays with on the floor is just hard to ignore.
Sorry for the walls of text.