Why do people think Stephenson should've been an All-Star?

[Nuntius]

I couldn't care less about individual defensive stats. Some of those are highly misleading. Especially the counterpart ones, those are just silly. As if a player production - which often isn't even the counterpart player, the one actually being guarded by the defender, as 82games.com doesn't actually chart the games (so, if Stephenson is defending the wing they classify as SF, he'll still get the counterpart production of player he isn't guarding)- is solely dependent on the action of his defender. I've never used that stat, never will and I have little respect for those who do. Lame crutches for those who can't even realize if they're seeing good defense from a player or not.

I know good defense by seeing it.

So, what exactly are you saying? That you don't take into account any defensive stats and only base your opinions on the eye test?

I'm fully aware of the flaws that 82games.com's counterpart production has and I'm also fully aware of the flaws that DRTG and Defensive Win Shares have but all of them are still helpful in measuring something.

Do you know what else has a lot of flaws? The eye test. A human's mind is not able to record and replay every single play. We're not machines. Basing your opinion solely on the eye test seems extremely naive to me. I have little respect for those who only use the eye test.

Now, if you use a combination of the two then we can have a discussion.

Lowry is one of the best ball-hawks in the league. Probably the guy offering the best defense at the point of attack. Second to Bradley, possibly. He's quick on pick'n'rolls, he's physical with the screener if needed, he contests shots well, closes out very well and under control, always raises his hands.

Lowry's defensive problem has always been that he tends to play happy-go-lucky defense. Too much of a gambler. Lacking discipline. He's like the Josh Smith of the guards. However, this season he's been quite under control. Playing very good defense.

Stephenson is a very strong isolation defender. Contests almost every shot. But he still struggles with the pick'n'roll, he approaches them too lackdaisically, and still has a tendency to overhelp - he was terrible with this early on in his career and has improved quite a bit.

That's a decent breakdown. You clearly know more about Lowry than I do so I will not argue with what you said about him.

I can say some things about Stephenson, though. His main problem is his off ball defense. He can lose his man when he is run through multiple screens. I really don't think that he struggles in the PnR. Indiana's defense wants the ball-handler to be funneled into Hibbert and Stephenson does a good job at funneling them into him. He also does an excellent job on the post defensively.

[Pacerlive]

I couldn't care less about individual defensive stats. Some of those are highly misleading. Especially the counterpart ones, those are just silly. As if a player production - which often isn't even the counterpart player, the one actually being guarded by the defender, as 82games.com doesn't actually chart the games (so, if Stephenson is defending the wing they classify as SF, he'll still get the counterpart production of player he isn't guarding)- is solely dependent on the action of his defender. I've never used that stat, never will and I have little respect for those who do. Lame crutches for those who can't even realize if they're seeing good defense from a player or not.

I know good defense by seeing it.

So, what exactly are you saying? That you don't take into account any defensive stats and only base your opinions on the eye test?

I'm fully aware of the flaws that 82games.com's counterpart production has and I'm also fully aware of the flaws that DRTG and Defensive Win Shares have but all of them are still helpful in measuring something.

Do you know what else has a lot of flaws? The eye test. A human's mind is not able to record and replay every single play. We're not machines. Basing your opinion solely on the eye test seems extremely naive to me. I have little respect for those who only use the eye test.

Now, if you use a combination of the two then we can have a discussion.

Lowry is one of the best ball-hawks in the league. Probably the guy offering the best defense at the point of attack. Second to Bradley, possibly. He's quick on pick'n'rolls, he's physical with the screener if needed, he contests shots well, closes out very well and under control, always raises his hands.

Lowry's defensive problem has always been that he tends to play happy-go-lucky defense. Too much of a gambler. Lacking discipline. He's like the Josh Smith of the guards. However, this season he's been quite under control. Playing very good defense.

Stephenson is a very strong isolation defender. Contests almost every shot. But he still struggles with the pick'n'roll, he approaches them too lackdaisically, and still has a tendency to overhelp - he was terrible with this early on in his career and has improved quite a bit.

That's a decent breakdown. You clearly know more about Lowry than I do so I will not argue with what you said about him.

I can say some things about Stephenson, though. His main problem is his off ball defense. He can lose his man when he is run through multiple screens. I really don't think that he struggles in the PnR. Indiana's defense wants the ball-handler to be funneled into Hibbert and Stephenson does a good job at funneling them into him. He also does an excellent job on the post defensively.

Nuntius don't fall for the all knowing eye test bull crap. Nearly everything he just said about Lowery defense vs Lance was crap.

Per synergy shows Lowery giving up 43% to his opponents which is basically what he shoots while Lance gives up 37% to his opponents.

Lance pnr ball handler defense is also better giving up .75 PPP while Lowery gives up .84 PPP. I can look up isolation defense tomorrow but their post up defense is basically the same.

I love it when posters say I watch the games but all you need to do is watch all the cut up film on a players defense this season to call the ridiculous crap out and for a typical play like pnr defense it takes about 15 minutes.

[MinneOOPalis]

It would be hard to vote him in over Lowry.

DD vs Stephenson is debatable but Lowry really should of been a clear cut vote in over both.

Demar has really cool dunks though.

[Harmoo]

If a lot of the energy was spent on the offensive end then the numbers would be greater but the Pacers basically play the defensive end much harder than most teams. If they didn't then their offensive numbers would be better. This is why their efficiency differential smokes all the teams you mentioned.

LOL

Unlike all the other teams, who apparently don't suffer from the same trade-off? It's just the Pacers! Brilliant. What kind of argument is that? And I only mentioned the Raptors.

What a minute.. You think other teams play nearly the same defensive intensity as the Pacers which is close to historic?

Yes I see your point now.

Using your "logic" teams like the Rockets, Suns and Trailblazers are all capable of being the best defensive teams in the league if they only would stop playing so intensely on the offensive side of the ball.

The Pacers are pedestrian offensively and elite defensively.

Hibbert is ineffective against most defensive big men.

This is Paul George's first time scoring more than 20ppg.

West is clearly deteriorating and is having one of the worst offensive seasons of his career.

To be elite on both sides of the floor, you need legitimate 2-way players, something the Pacers only have 1 or 2 of.

[Pacerlive]

LOL

Unlike all the other teams, who apparently don't suffer from the same trade-off? It's just the Pacers! Brilliant. What kind of argument is that? And I only mentioned the Raptors.

What a minute.. You think other teams play nearly the same defensive intensity as the Pacers which is close to historic?

Yes I see your point now.

Using your "logic" teams like the Rockets, Suns and Trailblazers are all capable of being the best defensive teams in the league if they only would stop playing so intensely on the offensive side of the ball.

The Pacers are pedestrian offensively and elite defensively.

Hibbert is ineffective against most defensive big men.

This is Paul George's first time scoring more than 20ppg.

West is clearly deteriorating and is having one of the worst offensive seasons of his career.

To be elite on both sides of the floor, you need legitimate 2-way players, something the Pacers only have 1 or 2 of.

Well I personally think a lot of defense does come down to effort and communication. Does any really think Harden is incapable of playing good d? I don't but like most star players they reserve their energy for the gaudy numbers on the offensive end.

[aol4532]

Two things to keep in mind when using opponent PER: the average PER is lower at shooting guard, since the talent is so weak. As a guideline, it should be 12 or 13 for SGs, 14 for SFs, and 15 for PGs. Who you play with has a big deal on the PER, one has Hibbert and the other has Jonas. Take these things into account and I would say Stephenson is slightly better defensively. But this doesn't take into account off ball steals.

[Nuntius]

Nuntius don't fall for the all knowing eye test bull crap. Nearly everything he just said about Lowery defense vs Lance was crap.

Per synergy shows Lowery giving up 43% to his opponents which is basically what he shoots while Lance gives up 37% to his opponents.

Lance pnr ball handler defense is also better giving up .75 PPP while Lowery gives up .84 PPP. I can look up isolation defense tomorrow but their post up defense is basically the same.

I love it when posters say I watch the games but all you need to do is watch all the cut up film on a players defense this season to call the ridiculous crap out and for a typical play like pnr defense it takes about 15 minutes.

Thank you for providing some Synergy stats, mate

[Nuntius]

To be elite on both sides of the floor, you need legitimate 2-way players, something the Pacers only have 1 or 2 of.

That's not really true, though. The entire starting 5 of the Pacers consists of 2-way players. Everyone can go for 20 points in any given day and none of them is a defensive liability.

[Nuntius]

Two things to keep in mind when using opponent PER: the average PER is lower at shooting guard, since the talent is so weak. As a guideline, it should be 12 or 13 for SGs, 14 for SFs, and 15 for PGs. Who you play with has a big deal on the PER, one has Hibbert and the other has Jonas. Take these things into account and I would say Stephenson is slightly better defensively. But this doesn't take into account off ball steals.

Yeah, that's a good point. The PG position is very strong at the moment while the SG position is weak.

Still, even with that adjusted PER Stephenson is still doing a great job.

[og15]

I couldn't care less about individual defensive stats. Some of those are highly misleading. Especially the counterpart ones, those are just silly. As if a player production - which often isn't even the counterpart player, the one actually being guarded by the defender, as 82games.com doesn't actually chart the games (so, if Stephenson is defending the wing they classify as SF, he'll still get the counterpart production of player he isn't guarding)- is solely dependent on the action of his defender. I've never used that stat, never will and I have little respect for those who do. Lame crutches for those who can't even realize if they're seeing good defense from a player or not.

I know good defense by seeing it.

So, what exactly are you saying? That you don't take into account any defensive stats and only base your opinions on the eye test?

I'm fully aware of the flaws that 82games.com's counterpart production has and I'm also fully aware of the flaws that DRTG and Defensive Win Shares have but all of them are still helpful in measuring something.

Do you know what else has a lot of flaws? The eye test. A human's mind is not able to record and replay every single play. We're not machines. Basing your opinion solely on the eye test seems extremely naive to me. I have little respect for those who only use the eye test.

Now, if you use a combination of the two then we can have a discussion.

Lowry is one of the best ball-hawks in the league. Probably the guy offering the best defense at the point of attack. Second to Bradley, possibly. He's quick on pick'n'rolls, he's physical with the screener if needed, he contests shots well, closes out very well and under control, always raises his hands.

Lowry's defensive problem has always been that he tends to play happy-go-lucky defense. Too much of a gambler. Lacking discipline. He's like the Josh Smith of the guards. However, this season he's been quite under control. Playing very good defense.

Stephenson is a very strong isolation defender. Contests almost every shot. But he still struggles with the pick'n'roll, he approaches them too lackdaisically, and still has a tendency to overhelp - he was terrible with this early on in his career and has improved quite a bit.

That's a decent breakdown. You clearly know more about Lowry than I do so I will not argue with what you said about him.

I can say some things about Stephenson, though. His main problem is his off ball defense. He can lose his man when he is run through multiple screens. I really don't think that he struggles in the PnR. Indiana's defense wants the ball-handler to be funneled into Hibbert and Stephenson does a good job at funneling them into him. He also does an excellent job on the post defensively.

Nuntius don't fall for the all knowing eye test bull crap. Nearly everything he just said about Lowery defense vs Lance was crap.

Per synergy shows Lowery giving up 43% to his opponents which is basically what he shoots while Lance gives up 37% to his opponents.

Lance pnr ball handler defense is also better giving up .75 PPP while Lowery gives up .84 PPP. I can look up isolation defense tomorrow but their post up defense is basically the same.

I love it when posters say I watch the games but all you need to do is watch all the cut up film on a players defense this season to call the ridiculous crap out and for a typical play like pnr defense it takes about 15 minutes.

We do also have to take into account that how well your team defends plays into how good your numbers will be in these areas too.


Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using RealGM Forums mobile app

[SuperflyKnick]

Put Stevenson on the bobcats does he still look this good ? He is the perfect fit for his current team but take him out his comfort zone ur looking at what ? I'm not sure

[aol4532]

He'd do even better. As a general rule, your PER will drop with more talented teammates., especially the 2nd and 3rd options.

[Pacerlive]

Nuntius don't fall for the all knowing eye test bull crap. Nearly everything he just said about Lowery defense vs Lance was crap.

Per synergy shows Lowery giving up 43% to his opponents which is basically what he shoots while Lance gives up 37% to his opponents.

Lance pnr ball handler defense is also better giving up .75 PPP while Lowery gives up .84 PPP. I can look up isolation defense tomorrow but their post up defense is basically the same.

I love it when posters say I watch the games but all you need to do is watch all the cut up film on a players defense this season to call the ridiculous crap out and for a typical play like pnr defense it takes about 15 minutes.

Thank you for providing some Synergy stats, mate

No problem.

So I looked up the isoaltion numbers and Lance holds his guys to 36.4% while Lowry holds his guys to 43.2%.

We do also have to take into account that how well your team defends plays into how good your numbers will be in these areas too.


Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using RealGM Forums mobile app

Is Toronto a poor defense? They rank 6th in the league in defensive efficiency.

[BK nets BK]

Can't believe that scrub Johnson made it lol and also to the guy who said Stephenson is the the most exciting player to watch must be loco

Sent from my g2 using RealGM Forums mobile app

[aol4532]

Nuntius don't fall for the all knowing eye test bull crap. Nearly everything he just said about Lowery defense vs Lance was crap.

Per synergy shows Lowery giving up 43% to his opponents which is basically what he shoots while Lance gives up 37% to his opponents.

Lance pnr ball handler defense is also better giving up .75 PPP while Lowery gives up .84 PPP. I can look up isolation defense tomorrow but their post up defense is basically the same.

I love it when posters say I watch the games but all you need to do is watch all the cut up film on a players defense this season to call the ridiculous crap out and for a typical play like pnr defense it takes about 15 minutes.

Thank you for providing some Synergy stats, mate

No problem.

So I looked up the isoaltion numbers and Lance holds his guys to 36.4% while Lowry holds his guys to 43.2%.

We do also have to take into account that how well your team defends plays into how good your numbers will be in these areas too.


Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using RealGM Forums mobile app

Is Toronto a poor defense? They rank 6th in the league in defensive efficiency.

That means that Lowry's defensive impact must be pretty high since they don't have Hibbert and George. I think 15 PER for point guards may be too low. 16 is probably more accurate.

[Pacerlive]

Thank you for providing some Synergy stats, mate

No problem.

So I looked up the isoaltion numbers and Lance holds his guys to 36.4% while Lowry holds his guys to 43.2%.

We do also have to take into account that how well your team defends plays into how good your numbers will be in these areas too.


Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using RealGM Forums mobile app

Is Toronto a poor defense? They rank 6th in the league in defensive efficiency.

That means that Lowry's defensive impact must be pretty high since they don't have Hibbert and George. I think 15 PER for point guards may be too low. 16 is probably more accurate.

Welp according to synergy he is the second worse defender on the starting 5 although him and Ross are close.

[Stop It]

Haven't watched Chicago nearly at all this year and haven't looked at his number but I'd take Stephenson, Al Jefferson or Lowry in before Noah.

Stopped reading after that.

[og15]

Nuntius don't fall for the all knowing eye test bull crap. Nearly everything he just said about Lowery defense vs Lance was crap.

Per synergy shows Lowery giving up 43% to his opponents which is basically what he shoots while Lance gives up 37% to his opponents.

Lance pnr ball handler defense is also better giving up .75 PPP while Lowery gives up .84 PPP. I can look up isolation defense tomorrow but their post up defense is basically the same.

I love it when posters say I watch the games but all you need to do is watch all the cut up film on a players defense this season to call the ridiculous crap out and for a typical play like pnr defense it takes about 15 minutes.

Thank you for providing some Synergy stats, mate

No problem.

So I looked up the isoaltion numbers and Lance holds his guys to 36.4% while Lowry holds his guys to 43.2%.

We do also have to take into account that how well your team defends plays into how good your numbers will be in these areas too.


Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using RealGM Forums mobile app

Is Toronto a poor defense? They rank 6th in the league in defensive efficiency.

That's a good starting point. But what is their defensive strength? Is is limiting opponent eFG%, or are they a high ranked defense for other reasons. How do we approximately account for the better team defense in Indiana vs Toronto. I mean if Lance's man is getting to the basket, statistically he's on average shooting a pretty low percentage, what about Lowry's man in a similar situation?

It still isn't fully laid out just looking at the numbers when're we can say "the end", we still need some analysis, adjustment and context to those numbers. They are a good guide and part of the analysis though. Now, the conclusions could still end up saying Stephenson is better, but the numbers alone don't necessarily play that out if they are fairly close.

[Harmoo]

Well I personally think a lot of defense does come down to effort and communication. Does any really think Harden is incapable of playing good d? I don't but like most star players they reserve their energy for the gaudy numbers on the offensive end.

Of course, he's capable.

Are you insinuating that Harden doesn't have the foot speed, the communication abilities or the length to appropriately defend other SGs?

Like you said, defense is mostly about effort and intelligence.

Offense is about talent, thus, it is always easier to teach/force an offensive minded player to play D than to fix a broken jumper.

Therefore, to claim that the Pacers are a good offensive team and would be excellent if not for all their energy expended on the other side of the floor is very questionable, as I could say the same about any team that's elite on any side of the floor.

[DTP]

Haven't watched Chicago nearly at all this year and haven't looked at his number but I'd take Stephenson, Al Jefferson or Lowry in before Noah.

Stopped reading after that.

Cool.