Nikola Vucevic ranked in the Top 10 in Defensive Rating Last Year

[Stratmaster]

The only C to give up more points in the paint and restricted area than Vuc, in the entire NBA, was Sabonis. Who, just like Vuc, also happened to get targeted on D because both were also bottom third or quarter (by memory) in FG% against and contests. It's not a conspiracy trying to make Vuc look bad--teams made it a point to drive against the Bulls, which was why the Bulls' G's being able to stay in front of people, fight through screens and rotate on point was immensely important to how the team looked on D.

As has been discussed--it's not a unique drawback of Vuc, per say, but his inability to protect the rim really limits what kind of players he can have around him and how you have to play D as a team to mitigate his impact.

That's a bit of a leaky individual stat. In 22-23, the Bulls were 4th best in opponent points per game in the paint, behind NYC, MIA, Cleveland.

Especially if the stat he is looking at is truly total points given up. Since Vuc likely played significantly more minutes than anyone else.

[dougthonus]

On off is off value looking at 5 man units. It's a meaningless as DRTG for addressing individual play.

You might want to go look at how defensive rating is calculated.

[GoBlue72391]

2000 minutes is a ridiculous minimum but 125 is sensible? And you're using Tony Bradley as a comparison?

If we want to make poor comparisons we should mention Vuc ranked better than Jimmy Butler :l

I think a reasonable number would be 1500, which would include 192 players. IDK how that would affect Vuc's rank.

Who cares how it affects Vuc's rank? I could make a stat called Doug's Defensive Rating, where I just roll a 100 sided dice and it comes up with a number, and that is your rating and it'd be about as meaningful as DRTG, then we could argue how many minutes people need to play to have a valid number.

All you have to do is watch the game and you quickly get a feel for how bad Vuc is on defense, all the numbers being thrown out just go to show you how god awful the NBA is at public defensive metrics.

The NBA has very good public defensive metrics. It's just that nobody uses them because they're newish and because they won't confirm people's talking points.

The NBA lists 33 "starter" centers who played at least 40 games.
Vuc was 32nd in defensive field goal percentage. He allowed 52.8% on 17 attempts at him per game.
32nd in defensive field goal percentage on shots within 6 feet of the basket (protecting the rim). He allowed 66.9% on a relatively high number of attempts: 7.7 per game. If I had time to convert that to per36, it would still be high.

You can dig a little deeper, but it doesn't change the bottom line that he's really bad.

If one is going to use stats for defense then these are the ones that matter for a center. This is a lot more telling of Vuc's true defensive worth than defensive rating or his effectiveness against isolation.

[dougthonus]

How many centers do you see who are with more than the MLE? Because there really isn't much argument anywhere but on here that he isn't one of the top 15 centers in the league.

I have consistently said I do not believe he is a top 15 center and has a negative impact on the team and that people only believe he is a top 15 center due to a high level of counting stat production which has not helped push the team forward.

Is that value based on you thinking he's not even starter quality? Or that starter quality centers aren't important?

I do not think he is starter quality or at least, I think he is replacement starter quality.

And please done encourage others by mentioning Bradley and DJJ at center in the same breath as Vuc.

I think the only reason people don't do this is due to it taking a long time for people to realize how bad someone is. The only reason people aren't talking about Drummond this way is his contract. We performed better when Drummond played, Drummond's per minute stats are better than Vuc's per minute stats. The only reason people don't view Drummond as "all star caliber" is the number of minutes and the contract.

I like you owing me so I'm stringing the pizza thing along. Seriously, been really busy on the music front, and at my age it wears me out. In Memphis right now and then have shows every weekend in August...but we will make it happen! Maybe right before the season starts so I can tell you why the Bulls will win the East and you can tell me why they will get knocked out in the first round and forever be in basketball hell.

[ChiTownNation]

Read on Twitter

[Stratmaster]

On off is off value looking at 5 man units. It's a meaningless as DRTG for addressing individual play.

You might want to go look at how defensive rating is calculated.

Why?

[dougthonus]

On off is off value looking at 5 man units. It's a meaningless as DRTG for addressing individual play.

You might want to go look at how defensive rating is calculated.

Why?

Because the vast majority of it is based on team contribution, not individual contribution.

[Stratmaster]

You might want to go look at how defensive rating is calculated.

Why?

Because the vast majority of it is based on team contribution, not individual contribution.

Like I said. Pretty worthless.

[dougthonus]

Why?

Because the vast majority of it is based on team contribution, not individual contribution.

Like I said. Pretty worthless.

Misinterpreted what you said. The regressed on/off number stats like EPM are a lot better than DRTG, they're effectively DRTG with the junk thrown out and then regressed to balance out teammate quality, opponent quality, and luck, but I think most corollary stats should always be viewed with some healthy suspicion.

[Stratmaster]

Because the vast majority of it is based on team contribution, not individual contribution.

Like I said. Pretty worthless.

Misinterpreted what you said. The regressed on/off number stats like EPM are a lot better than DRTG, they're effectively DRTG with the junk thrown out and then regressed to balance out teammate quality, opponent quality, and luck, but I think most corollary stats should always be viewed with some healthy suspicion.

Especially because teammate quality is still reliant on team performance. Opponent quality is situational, and there is no way to balance out luck, garbage time etc.

I agree with something you said earlier.

<pause to see if you are still standing and whether your jaw is off the floor>

The convoluted let's try to fix bad stats by multiplying them by other bad stats from all the other players will usually give you an accurate picture of the top and bottom 1 or 2 or possibly even 4 percent, although there are still often anomalies there. (OK, you didn't word it quite like that but...) Because those players numbers are all good or all bad; you can add, multiply and adjust all you want you aren't going to be able to ruin them.

They do nothing to differentiate the players in-between, who are highly influenced by that top and bottom 5 percent who are the actual difference makers (for better or worse)

[dougthonus]

Especially because teammate quality is still reliant on team performance. Opponent quality is situational, and there is no way to balance out luck, garbage time etc.

I mean, there are statistical techniques that do this, and given enough data, they could do so effectively. The problem with the NBA is things are changing too fast and sample sizes are difficult. So I wouldn't throw away the very good version of these stats as nothing, they're definitely better than nothing, but I agree that I wouldn't rely on them so much except looking at extreme outliers.

The convoluted let's try to fix bad stats by multiplying them by other bad stats from all the other players will usually give you an accurate picture of the top and bottom 1 or 2 or possibly even 4 percent, although there are still often anomalies there. (OK, you didn't word it quite like that but...) Because those players numbers are all good or all bad; you can add, multiply and adjust all you want you aren't going to be able to ruin them.

They do nothing to differentiate the players in-between, who are highly influenced by that top and bottom 5 percent who are the actual difference makers (for better or worse)

Agree, but Vuc is in the very bottom of these things. He rates out as a 4th big. This is a pretty shocking disparity with what people view his quality as. You can look at that and then start asking why, and the reason why is because these stats would say his defensive ability is among the worst in the league. I also believe that's true at his position because:
1: He can't defend the rim
2: He can't defend the perimeter
3: He removes any sense of defensive optionality your team has

I don't think anyone disagrees with the above either. Some people have convinced himself he can be an adequate defender despite those things because he can stay in front of his man, plays fundamental defense, or has good DEFG% or some other bs, but it ignores that the primary job of a center is not to defend centers. It's to help defend all the guards who are scoring, and he doesn't do that.

And those are things which are obvious watching him. It's obvious watching him for a few minutes that he absolutely destroys you on that end of the court, and people try to come up with all kinds of convoluted reasons why this isn't true, but if you think about the skills you need in a modern NBA defense he provides basically none of them. He's Carlos Boozer out there.

And so you can ignore this stat which kind of points this out and say the stat is hot garbage if you want. My subjective eye-test argument says he kills you when he's on the floor and I've expressed those reasons subjectively as well. I don't recall a single game where I was watching and said "you got to bring Vuc back in here". Any time literally any other center on the roster plays, I feel fine with it, be it Tony Bradley, Andre Drummond, or DJJ going small at center.

[Stratmaster]

Especially because teammate quality is still reliant on team performance. Opponent quality is situational, and there is no way to balance out luck, garbage time etc.

I mean, there are statistical techniques that do this, and given enough data, they could do so effectively. The problem with the NBA is things are changing too fast and sample sizes are difficult. So I wouldn't throw away the very good version of these stats as nothing, they're definitely better than nothing, but I agree that I wouldn't rely on them so much except looking at extreme outliers.

The convoluted let's try to fix bad stats by multiplying them by other bad stats from all the other players will usually give you an accurate picture of the top and bottom 1 or 2 or possibly even 4 percent, although there are still often anomalies there. (OK, you didn't word it quite like that but...) Because those players numbers are all good or all bad; you can add, multiply and adjust all you want you aren't going to be able to ruin them.

They do nothing to differentiate the players in-between, who are highly influenced by that top and bottom 5 percent who are the actual difference makers (for better or worse)

Agree, but Vuc is in the very bottom of these things. He rates out as a 4th big. This is a pretty shocking disparity with what people view his quality as. You can look at that and then start asking why, and the reason why is because these stats would say his defensive ability is among the worst in the league. I also believe that's true at his position because:
1: He can't defend the rim
2: He can't defend the perimeter
3: He removes any sense of defensive optionality your team has

I don't think anyone disagrees with the above either. Some people have convinced himself he can be an adequate defender despite those things because he can stay in front of his man, plays fundamental defense, or has good DEFG% or some other bs, but it ignores that the primary job of a center is not to defend centers. It's to help defend all the guards who are scoring, and he doesn't do that.

And those are things which are obvious watching him. It's obvious watching him for a few minutes that he absolutely destroys you on that end of the court, and people try to come up with all kinds of convoluted reasons why this isn't true, but if you think about the skills you need in a modern NBA defense he provides basically none of them. He's Carlos Boozer out there.

And so you can ignore this stat which kind of points this out and say the stat is hot garbage if you want. My subjective eye-test argument says he kills you when he's on the floor and I've expressed those reasons subjectively as well. I don't recall a single game where I was watching and said "you got to bring Vuc back in here". Any time literally any other center on the roster plays, I feel fine with it, be it Tony Bradley, Andre Drummond, or DJJ going small at center.

Nah. I'm not going to try to make a case he is good defensively. He isn't. He isn't as bad as you characterize it, but he isn't good.

There are a ton of NBA "star" players who aren't good defensively. He can score, rebound and passes pretty well. As meatloaf said (paraphrasing) "3 out of 4 ain't bad"

[bad knees]

Vuc better in the post than AD and Giannis.

Read on Twitter

?s=46&t=8Svv_-MwN33dX52-Z2fvEw

[prolific passer]

Vuc better in the post than AD and Giannis.

Read on Twitter

?s=46&t=8Svv_-MwN33dX52-Z2fvEw

Retire that mans jersey asap.

[bad knees]

Vuc better in the post than AD and Giannis.

Read on Twitter

?s=46&t=8Svv_-MwN33dX52-Z2fvEw

Retire that mans jersey asap.

He’s still playing so you’ll have to wait.

[prolific passer]

Vuc better in the post than AD and Giannis.

Read on Twitter

?s=46&t=8Svv_-MwN33dX52-Z2fvEw

Retire that mans jersey asap.

He’s still playing so you’ll have to wait.

[dice]

Vuc better in the post than AD and Giannis.

Read on Twitter

?s=46&t=8Svv_-MwN33dX52-Z2fvEw

Retire that mans jersey asap.

and hang it at the, wait for it...post office

seriously though, that's jokic, embiid and everybody else

[prolific passer]

Vuc better in the post than AD and Giannis.

Read on Twitter

?s=46&t=8Svv_-MwN33dX52-Z2fvEw

Retire that mans jersey asap.

and hang it at the, wait for it...post office

seriously though, that's jokic, embiid and everybody else

But Vuc is the best of the everybody else.

[kodo]

Vuc better in the post than AD and Giannis.

Read on Twitter

?s=46&t=8Svv_-MwN33dX52-Z2fvEw

I don't know what qualifies as a "post shot" but they aren't in the same league in terms of scoring efficiency, because AD attacks the paint and finishes on lobs, dunks, and FTs. Vuc has one of the lower FT drawing rates in the league. AD scores at 62.7% TS, Vuc is 59.4%.

This has been an outlier bad year for Giannis, 60.5% TS. Last 2 year she was 63%, and 64% in 2019. I'd assume he'd return to normal unless this is the knee issue.

Embiid is better than everyone other than Joker at 65.5%.

Listing FG% to try and evaluate post scorers is almost meaningless. Like looking at FG% without checking if it was a 2 or 3.

[chitownsports4ever]

Vuc better in the post than AD and Giannis.

Read on Twitter

?s=46&t=8Svv_-MwN33dX52-Z2fvEw

I don't know what qualifies as a "post shot" but they aren't in the same league in terms of scoring efficiency, because AD attacks the paint and finishes on lobs, dunks, and FTs. Vuc has one of the lower FT drawing rates in the league. AD scores at 62.7% TS, Vuc is 59.4%.

This has been an outlier bad year for Giannis, 60.5% TS. Last 2 year she was 63%, and 64% in 2019. I'd assume he'd return to normal unless this is the knee issue.

Embiid is better than everyone other than Joker at 65.5%.

Listing FG% to try and evaluate post scorers is almost meaningless. Like looking at FG% without checking if it was a 2 or 3.

So you dont know what a post up is ? or better yet you refuse to acknowledge what a post up is because it shows Vooch is good at it ?

LOL you guys go to great lengths to trash Vooch