I know you may be feeling picked upon, but there are a few things I wanted to respond to, a few points of clarification to provide [because I think the gist of certain opinions has been missed], and I’ll provide some data/info that hopefully may be of use for all….
Dutchball97 wrote:Seems like I opened the saltmines. I'm not even the guy who started about offense. I'm talking about overall impact. When looking at the regular season then D-Rob's overall impact has an argument for the back end of the top 10 or at least top 15.
I would say top 10 for rs only rather easily (particularly if longevity isn’t a big consideration for you).
Dutchball97 wrote: In the play-offs I'm looking at what they actually did and I'm sorry if you don't see KD as a more impressive play-off performer than D-Rob. Talking about KD like he has no defense is ridiculous as well. He definitely wasn't known for his defense in his early days, which is why I don't agree with 2014 being KD's peak. I prefer 2017 comfortably due to his much better play-offs that year. In terms of overall impact, which is offense and defense and everything inbetween.
Team defense might be equally valuable to team offense but we're looking at individuals here....
Team defense is the collective impact of five individual impacts (which, as you just stated, when added up can equal the value of team offense [which is also, when fully distilled, the sum of five individual impacts]).
Relating to this, I think you’re misinterpreting why so many people have been “piling on” the critiques in this thread. You’ve continually alluded to longevity as something that’s creating disagreement, and even more so you’ve repeatedly brought up the importance of playoffs vs regular season as the other major contributing factor to disagreement.
And certainly these philosophical differences contribute to the disconnect. But I think the larger issue that has created this blow-back you’ve been enduring is your view on offense v defense, and how this relates [directly] to comparisons like Durant vs Robinson, etc.
You’d implied that if Robinson was very close to Durant or Barkley offensively during the rs, then sure he can be considered better overall [in the rs] on account of his defense…...basically implying that defense is appropriate to use as a sort of tie-breaker, or to overcome a very small
offensive gap; nothing more.
Ergo, because Durant is clearly more impactful offensively
in the playoffs, he MUST be more impactful overall
You’ve blithely dismissed any possible case for someone like Robinson, going so far as to take a sort of I’d-like-to-see-you-try [to make the case]
attitude toward it (post #12), and also lumping Robinson together with Karl Malone (presumably because you view them as similar OFFENSIVELY in the playoffs [even though they’re worlds apart defensively]).
Durant is clearly better offensively, so that alone closes the book on the comparison as far as you’re concerned.
But THAT is where people are [primarily] disagreeing with you--->It’s not
so much a fundamental disagreement on the importance of the playoffs that is creating the discord: it’s that you’re casually brushing aside the case for a player like Robinson because it’s built more around defense than on offense (and defense just doesn’t matter that much [to you]).
You further reinforced this philosophy with the statement [direct quote]: “defense isn’t half as important as offense
I [as well as everyone else who is piling on the critique] find this to be a pretty dubious statement. It’s a statement that---if taken literally---justifiably should
be met with skepticism and frankly…..perhaps a pinch of doubt regarding the credibility/knowledgeability of the speaker.
You stated that looking at basketball as though it’s offense on one hand and defense on the other is a very flawed way of looking at it. That may
be true to a degree…...but I guarantee that looking at it in this way [“defense isn’t half as important”] is a flawed way of looking at the game (and yes I’ll provide my homework below).
One poster called you out on this already, though said so with very little tact [almost framed it more as a personal jab, though that does NOT excuse you telling him to “**** right off”, btw. That’s in clear violation of forum rules; I didn’t issue a warning only because he was less than tactful and subsequently seemed to take your response in stride. But so I’m clear: that kind of response is never OK].
But it is indeed a highly questionable statement to make (and yes I’ll show my homework that demonstrates this below).
Btw, at one point itt you’d said “I’m not even the guy who started about offense”, but as far as I can tell you ARE the one who sort of kicked things off with that statement (in response to 70sFan alluding to the importance of defense). And it was stated without providing any proof or evidence (more on this below).
I mean, people often argue that an offensive superstar can influence or impact nearly every possession on offense in a way that a defensive superstar cannot. I’m not 100% sure that’s true, or at any rate am pretty certain it’s not true to NEAR the extent that those people typically think
I’ll give an example related to the Rudy Gobert and the Utah Jazz that I’ve been a big fan of for the last few years…..
This past season the Jazz were 3rd in the league in terms of fewest 3PAs allowed [while also being 13th in 3P% allowed]; consequently they were 3rd in the league in made 3pters allowed per game.
In ‘19 they were 1st
in 3PAs allowed while still being respectable [15th] in 3P% allowed; as result they were 2nd in the league in terms of fewest made 3pters allowed per game (and the one team who bested them played a slower pace--->the Jazz were actually tied for 1st in 3PM/100 possessions allowed).
One might try to say this has nothing to do with Gobert, since he’s guarding the interior; but in actuality it has A LOT to do with Gobert: the Jazz perimeter defenders are encouraged to close out hard at all times, to even chase opponents off the line--->basically deployed to take away the 3pt shot at the expense of having the opponent blow by them off the dribble. Why? Because they can do so with near-impunity because Rudy Gobert has got their backs.
Does a casual fan realize the cumulative play-over-play defensive impact this provides over the course of a whole game [or even realize this is happening at all]? I sincerely doubt it.
And does Gobert get any individual credit by way of a standard boxscore? No, he does not. But this is just one of numerous examples we could come up with of how a defensive INDIVIDUAL can be influencing nearly every possession defensively.
Kevin Garnett would provide numerous examples, too. I vaguely recalled on play [which I think was broken down in this project] against the Spurs: Duncan is deep in the post [on a semi-transition, iirc], trying to get the ball on the right block (the ball on the wing). Garnett does a fantastic job denying an entry pass, so Duncan aborts action and fades back toward the weak-side block as the wing passes back to the top of the key [Parker?] just as I believe a screen was coming to Parker’s left; a shooter is camped in the weak-side [left] corner. The shooter’s man is hedging to help on the roll-man as Tim Duncan see’s what is developing and subtly tries to position himself to screen Garnett away from helping on the corner shooter…..problem is Garnett seems to have sensed the play even before Duncan did and quickly gets around Duncan to be in help position. And he’s so long and athletic he basically positions himself in a way that he still has contact with Duncan while also being in a position he can easily close on the shooter if the pass goes there. Thus the pass never happens; Garnett blew up the play before it could happen. Parker ends up driving into the paint, Garnett steps up and forces an extremely difficult shot which misses, though he did leave Duncan only partially boxed out, so Duncan gets the offensive rebound; but then Garnett contests that put-back too, which again misses, and Garnett gets the rebound.
Most casual fans only notice that the Spurs missed two shots before Garnett got a rebound; that’s it.
But Garnett first denied a deep post score before eliminating a potential corner trey attempt, before drastically altering TWO shots before securing the rebound.
Against a defender like Amare Stoudemire you probably either see the Spurs get a DEEP post isolation attempt by Duncan OR a wide-open corner trey for a teammate.
And a player like Garnett is influencing plays in a similar way all the time.
Dutchball97 wrote: An individual's offense, especially an individual who is the first option for a team like KD or D-Rob, has a higher impact than individual defense.
Again, you state this as though it’s a given; but I don’t see where you’ve offered anything beyond conjecture as evidence.
I actually took the time to look at 23 seasons [‘97-’19] of RAPM data, comparing the league-best ORAPM and the league-best DRAPM in each year. I also tabulated the top 10 ORAPMs/DRAPMs in each season, and compared the average of those top 10’s.
If individual defense “isn’t half as important” as individual offense, this should be reflected by way of the elite DRAPMs being only about half [or even less] of the elite ORAPMs.
But as it turns out, the league-best DRAPM was actually HIGHER than the best ORAPM every year except two between ‘97-’05. So that’s 7 years out of 23 where the best DRAPM was not only above half the best ORAPM, it was above the ORAPM period
The average of the top 10’s was higher for DRAPM than for ORAPM for 5 seasons (‘01-’05).
And it’s perhaps not surprising that all of those years were circa-2000, given that was a slowed down defensive grudge-match era. That’s why they made the rule-changes [such as the hand-checking rule] to open the game up and make it more high-scoring.
Overall, for all 23 years, the league-best DRAPM averaged out to being 86.8% as high as the league-best ORAPM (range of 54.4% to 157.5%).
The avg of top 10 DRAPMs averaged out to being an almost identical 86.9% of the ORAPM top 10 avg (range of 52.5% to 121.8%).
So whereas you’ve suggested it “isn’t half as important”, the best evidence we have on the topic suggests it actually carries 80-90% the same value (and that’s even with recent years trending things toward offense-favourable rules and officiating [which is reflected in the ORAPM/DRAPM splits]).
I suspect if we had this data going back to the NBA’s origins, it might skew things slightly back in defense’s favour [especially with Bill Russell influencing the numbers].
Dutchball97 wrote: How else do you explain Trae Young being an All-Star when no amazing defender with bad offense even comes close to getting any accolades? Is it just casuals who are biased?
Yes! Or rather, just oblivious to much of what is going on during a game.
"Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience." -George Carlin