RealGM

Posted: **Fri Jan 8, 2010 5:25 pm**

lets discuss...

OK, i know chandler has had a rotten start statistically, especially on offense. now we've had 7 games to watch us without him. what have we learned? ive read a lot of talk about how we should trade chandler for peanuts (mostly on other boards) and honestly i think thats nuts. chandler is not a savior. he has been largely disappointing, but i think is defensive value was greatly underrated. larry brown also made a comment after the ny game about how badly our defense misses chandler.

my feel-o-meter suggests that our rebounding and defense has been rather poor in his absence. just watching the past two games against the bulls and knicks it was obvious that teams were driving into the paint at will. for the bulls that meant rose getting to the rim time after time and for the knicks it meant wide open 3s for their shooters.

im sure the stat nerds will chime in and give us all sorts of good data. i just did some basic stuff.

record: 4-3
ppg allowed: 97
rebounds: outrebounded in 5 of last 7, including the last 4 in a row.
fg% allowed: 5 of last 7 have shot over 45% including the last 2 shooting over 50%

we all loved nazr when he was coming off the bench. man he was fantastic in that role. but quite frankly, he has been rather pathetic as our starter, which leaves us playing small ball for long stretches, which leaves us getting beat on the boards and exposed defensively. nazr has only averaged 3 rpg in the past 7 games including 4 games with 1 rebound or less.

i for one am looking forward to getting our defensive anchor back. hopefully we can find a way to mesh our recent offensive production with our earlier defensive production. i think the two can co-exist. and if and when that happens we will be NASTY.

and, lets not turn this into an okafor vs chander debate please. been there, done that.

Posted: **Fri Jan 8, 2010 5:34 pm**

The weakened defense has been a theme since Tyson Chandler went down with his current injury. Since 12/22, the Bobcats have surrendered 105.6 points per 100 possessions - a mark that would be good for just 17th in the league. So far this season, with Tyson on the court, the Bobcats have surrendered just an efficiency of just 99.5. While Nazr Mohammed does provide an offensive spark in the post, it is becoming more evident that works better for him (and the team) when it comes from the bench. Nazr's numbers have suffered since being thrust into a starting role: 21.4 points per 40 minutes on 59% shooting plus 12.6 rebounds per 40 prior to the move, 18.3 points/40 on 54% and just 7 rebounds per 40 since. Oh, and the team defense with him on the court has taken a similar hit: 103.2 before, 106.9 since.

Bobcats vs Knicks Recap - QCH

Posted: **Fri Jan 8, 2010 5:41 pm**

haha... creepy. qch is one step ahead of me. thanks for the link spectre.

Posted: **Fri Jan 8, 2010 6:12 pm**

Not sure why LB didn't play Gana in the 3rd against the Bulls when Rose was going nuts or at all last night against the Knicks.

Isn't he meant to be a shot blocking/defensive anchor type? Isn't that why we went out and got him? To me, no TC means start Gana and still play Nazzy off the bench. If Gana gets into foul trouble, make adjustments but LB better not keep p*ssing and moaning in the papers about our lack of an inside defensive player with TC being out if he isn't going to play Gana - an inside defensive player - a lick of playing time.

Posted: **Fri Jan 8, 2010 6:44 pm**

I am questioning some decisions. Like we had size disadvantage all game long against Knicks and we didn't play our center enough.

What if Chandler misses more, gets another injury (now he really seems injury prone to me).

We would have used greatly Diop on offensive boards when we jacked up all those jumpshots. Talking about Chanlder, I remember 6 block game, it was enormous. Whoever came inside, got blocked. That's a presence you will miss.

Posted: **Fri Jan 8, 2010 7:44 pm**

i assume we stayed small cause lee was eating nazrs lunch.

slam i agree about gana. he has played well enough lately to deserve some minutes on a consistent basis. i dont like it when we go super small with diaw at center.

Posted: **Fri Jan 8, 2010 8:22 pm**

Feel-o-meter says our defense has sucked (relatively speaking) since Jackson came here. Since we have been able to score, we haven't been relying on our defense to win as much anymore. Of course, reality shows that when our defense was "really good," we were a really bad team, starting out 2-7.

A quick check shows that the games Chandler played in December, we were 4-7, allowing over 98ppg.

As an interesting side note, in that stretch when Chandler played 26 minutes or less, we were 4-1 and allowed 93ppg.

We have a 40% winning percentage with Chandler, and a 56% winning percentage without him.

Posted: **Fri Jan 8, 2010 8:36 pm**

W_HAMILTON wrote:A quick check shows that the games Chandler played in December, we were 4-7, allowing over 98ppg.

As an interesting side note, in that stretch when Chandler played 26 minutes or less, we were 4-1 and allowed 93ppg.

We have a 40% winning percentage with Chandler, and a 56% winning percentage without him.

How much of this is due to Chandler playing like crap most times? He was just starting to play with some modicum of consistency (on defense) when he went out. That's not to say he will ever be a huge asset.

Ham, without question we miss Okafor's average performance in the middle. His stats with the Hornets are not mind-blowing...he hasn't gotten any better as a player, but he still provides that steady chug-a-lug low double-double with shot blocking. That performance, with the addition of Jackson and Wallace's consistently high output, would have us at the 5 spot in the East.

Posted: **Fri Jan 8, 2010 8:42 pm**

Teams/matchups play a role. Vs. Toronto, Chicago & NY I think TC would have made a big difference. Against teams like the Cavs maybe not so much.

Either way...TC's presence allows Nazr to come off the bench. From QCH's numbers it appears that's his best role.

Posted: **Fri Jan 8, 2010 8:46 pm**

Bassman wrote:How much of this is due to Chandler playing like crap most times? He was just starting to play with some modicum of consistency (on defense) when he went out.

I'm not sure I understand the question. It's like saying, "how much of my kid being stupid is due to the fact that he can't read?" It probably accounts for a lot of it. Chandler playing like crap most of the time is probably the reason why he doesn't have a bigger impact on our team, either on the court or on the box score.

And when it comes to stats, Chandler benefits by including stats from earlier in the year, when you say he wasn't as consistent. This is because we are debating his affect on our defense, and our "defense" was at its "best" early in the year, when we couldn't score 75ppg but "held" teams to like 90ppg. But of course, if you use those stats to bolster the argument that Chandler helps our defense, you must also include the fact that we were a horrible team back then, and our awful record undercuts any positives on defense.

Posted: **Fri Jan 8, 2010 9:00 pm**

spectre_ wrote:Teams/matchups play a role. Vs. Toronto, Chicago & NY I think TC would have made a big difference. Against teams like the Cavs maybe not so much.

The last time we had Chandler and played against NY and CHI, we lost.

Instead, all of those games, and the games against those teams we played without Chandler, can be chalked up to whether we played at home or on the road.

Against NY, we are 2-0 in Charlotte, 0-2 in New York.
Against Chicago, we are 1-0 in Charlotte, 0-1 in Chicago.
Against Toronto, we are we are 1-0 in Charlotte, 0-1 in Toronto.

I admire the lengths some are going to try and make it seem -- dare I say, feel -- that Chandler is more useful than he lets on, but the stats don't really show it. At best, the stats are conflicting, which means that he most likely doesn't really have an effect one way or the other. I wouldn't say that we are a demonstrably worse team with Chandler (even though some stats would suggest that), it's just that he doesn't really have much of an impact one way or the other. We would probably be better off having him, but at the same time, I don't think any of the results lately would have changed with him in the lineup. He just hasn't had that sort of effect on the games to say otherwise.

Posted: **Fri Jan 8, 2010 9:04 pm**

I know Diaw has been dissapointing lately, but if..

We somehow trade Chandler for starting PF and bring Boris off the bench? That way we would having really impressive frontcourt. I mean, our C's probably can handle some burn and our new aquired PF could play C in some streches, when Diaw plays on PF and so on.

Is there any teams who would be interested in Chandler and giving up starting PF in return. Only Brand comes into my mind, but they would be not interested in Chandler, as they got Dalembert. Anyone else? Overpaid BIG PF?

Posted: **Fri Jan 8, 2010 9:10 pm**

I was actually wondering about playing Diaw more at center. He wouldn't be much of a defensive stopper, but I thought Phoenix played him in place of Stoudemire one year and he did pretty well. I'd probably rather start Diaw at center and move one of our smaller guys into the starting lineup.

Posted: **Fri Jan 8, 2010 9:13 pm**

We can only do that against teams, who lack outside shooters.
For example, when we played against Knicks, it was awful. We needed help in low-post and when we left some space behind the arc, we got torched.

If Diaw can somehow defend his man in the middle, we can try it. But he is so slow, it's horrible.

Posted: **Fri Jan 8, 2010 9:15 pm**

W_HAMILTON wrote:
spectre_ wrote:Teams/matchups play a role. Vs. Toronto, Chicago & NY I think TC would have made a big difference. Against teams like the Cavs maybe not so much.

The last time we had Chandler and played against NY and CHI, we lost.

Instead, all of those games, and the games against those teams we played without Chandler, can be chalked up to whether we played at home or on the road.

Against NY, we are 2-0 in Charlotte, 0-2 in New York.
Against Chicago, we are 1-0 in Charlotte, 0-1 in Chicago.
Against Toronto, we are we are 1-0 in Charlotte, 0-1 in Toronto.

You do realize the last time we played NY with TC Gerald Wallace sat out right?

Vs Toronto in our big win Bosh only scored like 4 points in the first half...and TC had something like 6 blocks. He intimidated the Raps where they were hesitant to bring it into the paint.

Maybe you didn't catch that game, but it was very obvious TC was a huge reason we blew them out.

Vs Chicago in the loss we didn't have Jax and Crash/Felton/Bell were a combined 11/33 and the team overall shot 39.5% TC went 5 for 8 and had 7 boards.

TC can only do so much. If the rest of the team isn't producing he's not going to get the win on his own...obviously. He's also not going to make a big impact in every game that he should because of matchups (who does?).

And none of this takes into account that Boris has been MIA most of the season.

Posted: **Fri Jan 8, 2010 9:18 pm**

W_HAMILTON wrote:I was actually wondering about playing Diaw more at center. He wouldn't be much of a defensive stopper, but I thought Phoenix played him in place of Stoudemire one year and he did pretty well. I'd probably rather start Diaw at center and move one of our smaller guys into the starting lineup.

That was what we were doing last night vs. David Lee and he was destroying him...forcing the wings/guards to "help" and thus leave their shooters open beyond the arc.

I definitely think Boris at C will work in a lot of situations...and LB has been trying it fairly often, esp. with TC out.

Posted: **Fri Jan 8, 2010 9:22 pm**

our 4th quarter lineup recently has been

felton
flip (or dj)
jax
wallace
diaw

we've won 3 of the last 4 so hard to complain about that lineup. i do think that tc would have helped in some of the games to at least reduce some of that penetration. but then again, who do you take out? flip or diaw? flip gives us another scorer/iso guy and diaw, while he does play hot potato, he generally is smart and unselfish and doesnt do anything too ridiculous.

Posted: **Sat Jan 9, 2010 3:08 am**

And he allowed Noah to put up Dwight Howard numbers, except Dwight Howard doesn't score 20 points anymore.

"TC" can only do so much, and he's not even come close to doing that. He's been horrible, and essentially a non-factor in most of our games.

The fact that you can make excuses for those other players when they are out, whereas we actually have a better record without Chandler than with him, just continue to emphasize this point.

If Chandler were playing in these recent games, the outcomes most likely would not have changed. He just hasn't had that sort of impact on our team this season.

Posted: **Sat Jan 9, 2010 9:37 am**

Well Fats we aren't necessarily talking about the last 4 games, only 2 of them; a loss and a close win.

Using what Noah put up vs. TC isn't really relevavant as he's been putting up "Dwight Howard" numbers against a lot of teams this season. In fact...just 2 weeks vs. NOLA and Okafor he put up 17 points and 18 boards along with 4 blocks while Okafor went 0-5!

The fact that you can make excuses for those other players when they are out, whereas we actually have a better record without Chandler than with him, just continue to emphasize this point.

Right...Crash being out should have no impact. Not having Jax means absolutely no difference. :roll:

If you saw the first game vs Toronto we wouldn't be having this discussion...unless of course you're just trying to work an agenda here...and from your history I know you'd NEVER do that!

Posted: **Sat Jan 9, 2010 11:43 am**

You're the one with the agenda, loon. I don't know what has happened to you over the past couple of seasons.

This was a discussion about Chandler and his effect on this team, so I don't know what Okafor has to do with anything. I didn't bring him up, since fatlever asked us not to.

As for Wallace and Jackson, they do have an impact. That is why you are making excuses for the team losing when they weren't around. No one is making excuses for our team losing when Chandler is not around, because we've actually been a better team without him. He doesn't have that sort of impact, which is the point I was making. The way he has been playing this season, he doesn't make us much better or worse.

As for the Toronto game, I've typed up about three different responses, but decided to delete them because it makes my point look petty by even arguing otherwise. I'm happy that Chandler had an effect in one of the 25 games he's played in.

He's been an injury-prone non-factor this season.

RealGM

in chandler's absence

in chandler's absence

Re: in chandler's absence

Re: in chandler's absence

Re: in chandler's absence

Re: in chandler's absence

Re: in chandler's absence

Re: in chandler's absence

Re: in chandler's absence

Re: in chandler's absence

Re: in chandler's absence

Re: in chandler's absence

Re: in chandler's absence

Re: in chandler's absence

Re: in chandler's absence

Re: in chandler's absence

Re: in chandler's absence

Re: in chandler's absence

Re: in chandler's absence

Re: in chandler's absence

Re: in chandler's absence