RealGM

These guys are two of the main names that come to my mind when thinking about the topic of greatest defenders that were never selected for an NBA All-Defensive Team. At their peaks, who do you think was more impactful on that end of the floor?

This isn’t a very close comparison even though both are noted for not being selected for all defense (another reason to not take all-defense voting very seriously). There are several tiers between peak Wallace and peak O’Neal, or even prime Wallace and peak O’Neal.

What’s more, Wallace was one of those rare players in NBA history who could also provide good offense while being a defensive standout. He’s one of the most underrated impact monsters in NBA history. We saw this in 2004 as he was a perfect addition to those Pistons. Pistons lost the first two games Sheed played with them and then went on to win 20 out of the next 24 with Sheed sitting out a few. These games from 2/23/2004 to 4/12/2004, the Pistons had:

—A MOV of +13.58
—DRtg of 89-90, rDRtg of about -12

We then saw what they did in the playoffs on defense.

Peak: Wallace by a lot
Prime: Wallace by a lot

If Wallace was motivated every night and not off getting technicals instead of getting back on defense, I'd agree with you. Super talented but mentally very much a Jeckyl and Hyde type on the court. JO had that stupid low percentage turnaround that he was in love with but on the defensive end, he was a very good rim protector and covered out on the floor quite well for a big as well. Dominant games or consistent performance, it's a tough call but I'd go with JO.

penbeast0 wrote:If Wallace was motivated every night and not off getting technicals instead of getting back on defense, I'd agree with you. Super talented but mentally very much a Jeckyl and Hyde type on the court. JO had that stupid low percentage turnaround that he was in love with but on the defensive end, he was a very good rim protector and covered out on the floor quite well for a big as well. Dominant games or consistent performance, it's a tough call but I'd go with JO.

O'Neal gets my vote as well. Mainly because he had the advantage for both rebounding and rim protection. I also feel that he was slightly more athletic and able to adequately switch onto perimeter players. And like you said, he was a much steadier influence when it came to defensive leadership. O'Neal was a huge part in why Artest was able to play as aggressively as he did out on the perimeter because he knew if he overreached and blew past his man, he still had JO's elite rim protection behind him.

AStark1991 wrote:

penbeast0 wrote:If Wallace was motivated every night and not off getting technicals instead of getting back on defense, I'd agree with you. Super talented but mentally very much a Jeckyl and Hyde type on the court. JO had that stupid low percentage turnaround that he was in love with but on the defensive end, he was a very good rim protector and covered out on the floor quite well for a big as well. Dominant games or consistent performance, it's a tough call but I'd go with JO.

O'Neal gets my vote as well. Mainly because he had the advantage for both rebounding and rim protection. I also feel that he was slightly more athletic and able to adequately switch onto perimeter players. And like you said, he was a much steadier influence when it came to defensive leadership. O'Neal was a huge part in why Artest was able to play as aggressively as he did out on the perimeter because he knew if he overreached and blew past his man, he still had JO's elite rim protection behind him.

Even if what you are saying is true, these strengths don't show up in the overall impact he made on defenses, while Rasheed's do. There's basically no empirical case that peak JO or prime JO is on the same level as peak or prime Sheed.

homecourtloss wrote:

AStark1991 wrote:

penbeast0 wrote:If Wallace was motivated every night and not off getting technicals instead of getting back on defense, I'd agree with you. Super talented but mentally very much a Jeckyl and Hyde type on the court. JO had that stupid low percentage turnaround that he was in love with but on the defensive end, he was a very good rim protector and covered out on the floor quite well for a big as well. Dominant games or consistent performance, it's a tough call but I'd go with JO.

O'Neal gets my vote as well. Mainly because he had the advantage for both rebounding and rim protection. I also feel that he was slightly more athletic and able to adequately switch onto perimeter players. And like you said, he was a much steadier influence when it came to defensive leadership. O'Neal was a huge part in why Artest was able to play as aggressively as he did out on the perimeter because he knew if he overreached and blew past his man, he still had JO's elite rim protection behind him.

Even if what you are saying is true, these strengths don't show up in the overall impact he made on defenses, while Rasheed's do. There's basically no empirical case that peak JO or prime JO is on the same level as peak or prime Sheed.

Just to be clear, I'm not saying that you're wrong, but to flat out claim that O'Neal has absolutely no case over Rasheed is HIGHLY debatable. First off, JO was clearly the better rebounder and shot blocker. Also, his career best for defensive win shares was 6.3 while Rasheed's was only 5.1, and JO's career best defensive rating was 93.1 and Rasheed's was a lesser 96.8. Whether or not you put any stock into advanced defensive metrics is entirely up to you, but I think they are relevant in cases like this where it's a very close comparison and basically a judgement call. All things considered, on court stats and advanced defensive metrics both lead to the conclusion that O'Neal was more active on that end of the floor. Take that as you will.

homecourtloss wrote:This isn’t a very close comparison even though both are noted for not being selected for all defense (another reason to not take all-defense voting very seriously). There are several tiers between peak Wallace and peak O’Neal, or even prime Wallace and peak O’Neal.

What’s more, Wallace was one of those rare players in NBA history who could also provide good offense while being a defensive standout. He’s one of the most underrated impact monsters in NBA history. We saw this in 2004 as he was a perfect addition to those Pistons. Pistons lost the first two games Sheed played with them and then went on to win 20 out of the next 24 with Sheed sitting out a few. These games from 2/23/2004 to 4/12/2004, the Pistons had:

—A MOV of +13.58
—DRtg of 89-90, rDRtg of about -12

We then saw what they did in the playoffs on defense.

Peak: Wallace by a lot
Prime: Wallace by a lot

Agreed. This is Sheed by a landslide. Superior in almost every way, from physical tools like his insanely long arms, through to his fundamentals on D.

As stated in the JO vs. Amare thread, JO didn’t quite reach the “Dominant” level defensively—he was likely one or two tiers below. By comparison, defensively, Sheed probably ranks one or two tiers below O’Neal.

SHAQ32 wrote:As stated in the JO vs. Amare thread, JO didn’t quite reach the “Dominant” level defensively—he was likely one or two tiers below. By comparison, defensively, Sheed probably ranks one or two tiers below O’Neal.

I am baffled by how anyone could say this. Their primes overlapped, and it was clear that Sheed was better. Sheed was a tough defensive match up even for guys like KG and Duncan.

If we want to talk about underrated players, we should be discussing his team mates like Artest and Brad Miller. The Pacers dropped off a cliff when JO had to anchor them (overall and on D). That's why once Artest was traded the Pacers were finished.

One_and_Done wrote:

SHAQ32 wrote:As stated in the JO vs. Amare thread, JO didn’t quite reach the “Dominant” level defensively—he was likely one or two tiers below. By comparison, defensively, Sheed probably ranks one or two tiers below O’Neal.

I am baffled by how anyone could say this. Their primes overlapped, and it was clear that Sheed was better. Sheed was a tough defensive match up even for guys like KG and Duncan.

If we want to talk about underrated players, we should be discussing his team mates like Artest and Brad Miller. The Pacers dropped off a cliff when JO had to anchor them (overall and on D). That's why once Artest was traded the Pacers were finished.

there's literally zero evidence for Jermaine O being a tier above Rasheed Wallace on defense let alone multiple tiers. It's completely laughable.

One_and_Done wrote:

SHAQ32 wrote:As stated in the JO vs. Amare thread, JO didn’t quite reach the “Dominant” level defensively—he was likely one or two tiers below. By comparison, defensively, Sheed probably ranks one or two tiers below O’Neal.

I am baffled by how anyone could say this. Their primes overlapped, and it was clear that Sheed was better. Sheed was a tough defensive match up even for guys like KG and Duncan.

If we want to talk about underrated players, we should be discussing his team mates like Artest and Brad Miller. The Pacers dropped off a cliff when JO had to anchor them (overall and on D). That's why once Artest was traded the Pacers were finished.

Why is it such a cardinal sin to imply that O'Neal was at the very least a comparable defender? For starters, Duncan and KG's respective career stats against Jermaine and Rasheed were almost identical, so to claim that Sheed was a much more formidable defender against those guys is not factually accurate...

- Tim Duncan vs Jermaine O’Neal: 19.1 PPG, 10.2 RPG, 2.9 APG, 0.9 SPG, 2.1 BPG, 48.4 FG%
- Tim Duncan vs Rasheed Wallace: 19.0 PPG, 12.2 RPG, 2.9 APG, 0.7 SPG, 2.1 BPG, 45.7 FG%
- Kevin Garnett vs Jermaine O’Neal: 19.7 PPG, 9.6 RPG, 3.2 APG, 1.5 SPG, 2.1 BPG, 48.2 FG%
- Kevin Garnett vs Rasheed Wallace: 19.0 PPG, 10.4 RPG, 4.1 APG, 1.6 SPG, 1.8 BPG, 47.1 FG%

And in regard to this quote... "The Pacers dropped off a cliff when JO had to anchor them (overall and on D). That's why once Artest was traded the Pacers were finished." That is also not really accurate. O'Neal was always the anchor of those defenses. Like already mentioned, JO's presence in the paint is what allowed Artest to be as aggressive as he was on the perimeter. Very similar to how Bruce Bowen greatly benefitted from having Duncan's paint presence behind him. All in all, I would say that Sheed was better at off-ball help defense and 1v1 post defense, whereas JO was better at rebounding and protecting the rim. I have absolutely no issue with people picking Rasheed, he was clearly a great defender, but to continually imply that it's not even a competition is pretty puzzling. At the very least, you have to admit that O'Neal was an imposing figure on that end of the court. The fact that he was once the league co-leader in total blocks with 228 is frequently forgotten. And just like Bill Russell, he was very good at keeping his blocked shots in the field of play so that his team had a chance to regain possession of the ball and start a fast break. In fact, Russell saw a lot of himself in O'Neal when he was a younger player and even reached out and invited JO to train with him during the 2001 offseason. Here's what Russell had to say about him at the time, "He's a young player who has plenty of potential. I think I know a few things that can help him reach it."

AStark1991 wrote:O'Neal was always the anchor of those defenses.

2002-06 Indiana Defense
With Artest, With O'Neal: 98.76 DRtg
With Artest, Without O'Neal: 95.63 DRtg
Without Artest, With O'Neal: 103.10 DRtg
Without Artest, Without O'Neal: 102.32 DRtg

The Pacers were 7.5 points better defensively with Artest alone than O'Neal alone during their seasons together. Two player on/offs strongly point to Artest (-4.3, -6.7), not JO (+3.1, +0.8) being the better defender. So does impact data when we look at their overall careers, or the defensive heat map for that specific season:

LA Bird wrote:

Quotatious wrote:Yeah, I would say JO was actually the Pacers MVP that year, he was more impactful defensively than Artest (Ron was an amazing perimeter defender, but there's no way he deserved DPOY over elite defensive bigs like Ben Wallace, Duncan, Garnett and JO).

But the Pacers were led by Artest's perimeter defense (#1 in forcing turnovers), not their rim protection.


Left to right: 04 Pacers, 14 Pacers, 09 Magic

Either the opponent offense is funneled into the rim protector and he does a great job of challenging the shot (Hibbert) or the opponent is intimidated into not entering the paint at all (Howard). 2004 Pacers' interior defense not only allowed opponents more shots near the basket but also at a relatively high percentage. JO shouldn't get more credit for the defense simply because he is a big. Artest wasn't the DPOY but he was the best defensive player on the Pacers.

LA Bird wrote:2002-06 Indiana Defense
With Artest, With O'Neal: 98.76 DRtg
With Artest, Without O'Neal: 95.63 DRtg
Without Artest, With O'Neal: 103.10 DRtg
Without Artest, Without O'Neal: 102.32 DRtg

The Pacers were 7.5 points better defensively with Artest alone than O'Neal alone during their seasons together. Two player on/offs strongly point to Artest (-4.3, -6.7), not JO (+3.1, +0.8) being the better defender. So does impact data when we look at their overall careers, or the defensive heat map for that specific season:

Thanks for posting. What's the sample size on that?

SHAQ32 wrote:

LA Bird wrote:2002-06 Indiana Defense
With Artest, With O'Neal: 98.76 DRtg
With Artest, Without O'Neal: 95.63 DRtg
Without Artest, With O'Neal: 103.10 DRtg
Without Artest, Without O'Neal: 102.32 DRtg

The Pacers were 7.5 points better defensively with Artest alone than O'Neal alone during their seasons together. Two player on/offs strongly point to Artest (-4.3, -6.7), not JO (+3.1, +0.8) being the better defender. So does impact data when we look at their overall careers, or the defensive heat map for that specific season:

Thanks for posting. What's the sample size on that?

Minutes in order:
5926
1825
7536
6791

Artest without JO had much lower minutes than the other combinations because of the suspension and trade.

LA Bird wrote:

SHAQ32 wrote:

LA Bird wrote:2002-06 Indiana Defense
With Artest, With O'Neal: 98.76 DRtg
With Artest, Without O'Neal: 95.63 DRtg
Without Artest, With O'Neal: 103.10 DRtg
Without Artest, Without O'Neal: 102.32 DRtg

The Pacers were 7.5 points better defensively with Artest alone than O'Neal alone during their seasons together. Two player on/offs strongly point to Artest (-4.3, -6.7), not JO (+3.1, +0.8) being the better defender. So does impact data when we look at their overall careers, or the defensive heat map for that specific season:

Thanks for posting. What's the sample size on that?

Minutes in order:
5926
1825
7536
6791

Artest without JO had much lower minutes than the other combinations because of the suspension and trade.

Interesting.

Not to take anything away from Metta, he was a force defensively those years, but those were also the final years of hand-checking. You notice, he never had the same impact after '05. And even in '06, the Pacers still finished with the 3rd ranked defense with him only playing 16 games (JO played 51 games).

SHAQ32 wrote:Not to take anything away from Metta, he was a force defensively those years, but those were also the final years of hand-checking. You notice, he never had the same impact after '05. And even in '06, the Pacers still finished with the 3rd ranked defense with him only playing 16 games (JO played 51 games).

Artest was still top 10 in multi-year DRAPM as late as 2011. He lost some quickness as he got older but I wouldn't say his impact fell off after 05 because of league changes. The 06 Kings had one of the largest mid-season trade improvements ever (5.3 point jump from below league average to top 5 net) and they had a better defense than the Pacers post-trade.

LA Bird wrote:

SHAQ32 wrote:Not to take anything away from Metta, he was a force defensively those years, but those were also the final years of hand-checking. You notice, he never had the same impact after '05. And even in '06, the Pacers still finished with the 3rd ranked defense with him only playing 16 games (JO played 51 games).

Artest was still top 10 in multi-year DRAPM as late as 2011. He lost some quickness as he got older but I wouldn't say his impact fell off after 05 because of league changes. The 06 Kings had one of the largest mid-season trade improvements ever (5.3 point jump from below league average to top 5 net) and they had a better defense than the Pacers post-trade.

When people talk about non-center/non-big ATG defenders, they often forget about how good defensively Artest/World Peace was. When looking at rDRtg, no team he ever played on through 17 years was ever ever better defensively with him off court including these last few years when he barely played. The 2002-2010 defensive stretches is one of the better ones ever for a non-big, with the added bonus that a high level, i.e., 95th+ percentile defender was also providing plus offense.

SHAQ32 wrote:Not to take anything away from Metta, he was a force defensively those years, but those were also the final years of hand-checking. You notice, he never had the same impact after '05. And even in '06, the Pacers still finished with the 3rd ranked defense with him only playing 16 games (JO played 51 games).

Absolutely not true. From 2006 through 2011, Metta was a 95th to 99th percentile defender every single season.

LA Bird wrote:

SHAQ32 wrote:Not to take anything away from Metta, he was a force defensively those years, but those were also the final years of hand-checking. You notice, he never had the same impact after '05. And even in '06, the Pacers still finished with the 3rd ranked defense with him only playing 16 games (JO played 51 games).

Artest was still top 10 in multi-year DRAPM as late as 2011. He lost some quickness as he got older but I wouldn't say his impact fell off after 05 because of league changes. The 06 Kings had one of the largest mid-season trade improvements ever (5.3 point jump from below league average to top 5 net) and they had a better defense than the Pacers post-trade.

Why wasn't it showing up in the team drtgs? He was playing big enough minutes. 07 and 08 Kings were 22nd and 25th defensively. The 09 Rockets got worse defensively with Metta, despite Yao playing 77 games compared to 55 in 08.

SHAQ32 wrote:Why wasn't it showing up in the team drtgs? He was playing big enough minutes. 07 and 08 Kings were 22nd and 25th defensively. The 09 Rockets got worse defensively with Metta, despite Yao playing 77 games compared to 55 in 08.

DRAPM and defensive on/off is from team DRtg. But the overall number can sometimes be dragged down by poor support - that's how even prime Mutombo had a bottom 5 defense.

Also I notice you switching from using minutes for Artest's availability to games played for Yao. Seems convenient to hide Artest missing 50 games during these seasons. And Yao's total minute increase in 2009 was more than offset by decreases for Battier, Hayes, and Mutombo, with Battier in particular coming back from ankle injury at half of his peak level defensive impact. Despite that, the Rockets had the #1 defense when they finally had both Artest and Battier as starters post All Star break. And in the playoffs, they held the #1 offense to 10 points below their RS level to finally break their first round curse. Using that team performance against Artest is a pretty bad argument.

Anyways, this has now strayed far from the thread topic of JO vs Sheed so I'll end it here.