I_Like_Dirt wrote:That isn't my 'theory' at all. My 'theory' is that nobody in the NBA can stop their man regularly in a one-on-one setting unless their man is horrible defensively (Ben Wallace, etc.). Guys in the NBA are just too good offensively that to be able to stop anybody consistently without handchecking requires a system of teamwork where everybody is doing more than just paying attention to their own man. This means that perimeter players are always on the lookout for angles that might cause bigs trouble and cutting them off before they present themselves, or paying attention to double-team opportunities and reacting quickly on kickouts. It also means bigs need to do more than just defend their man after they've already established post position and received the ball, which is pretty much the only thing Bargnani does even remotely close to well defensively.
Watch some of the best defensive teams out there - the Celtics and Spurs are my favourite examples. All 5 players on the floor for those teams are required to be constantly reacting to how the play unfolds and changing their responsibilities on the floor accordingly. Simple man defense doens't work in the NBA. Even with man defense, you need a contingency plan when a person's man beats him - which happens quite often without handchecking, as already mentioned- and to operate without one is just stupid, because every other team does.
I think you need to read Boris's posts in this thread and pay attention to what he is implying, as I am completely on board.
The pillar of any good defensive team is their ability to put effective pressure on the opposing team from the point of attack. The best teams that you point out, Celtics and Spurs, are known for their effective man defense. The Celtics during their title run were manning up teams so effectively that they could lock into each and every offensive player on the floor without having to counter react to a breakdown in man defense with a planned team defensive strategy. The Spurs are also one of the most effective teams at man defense. Any analyst will tell you that if you want to go far in the playoffs you have to be able to man up on D and allow minimal defensive coverage from a team perspective. T
Team defense is a semi effective means when a break down occurs on your man defense. The less you have to rely on it the better your chances are of making and effective stop. When the Lakers locked down the Celts in game 5, their man defense was so effective that they had to rely on help defense a hand full of times during that entire game. That primarily came from the point of attack, limited Rondo from doing his thing.
Simple Man Defense doesn't work at the NBA level? Seriously? When you have 5 players on the court that can effectively contain their man, you win championships. Not sure how you can make a statement such as that. You seem to think that all a good wing player should do defensively is force their player to an angle then wait for the center to provide help. With that mindset its easy to see why Andrea is failing miserably with his help D.
It's like stating a pitcher in baseball is throwing hanging curve balls all night long but the balls being smacked are mostly hard grounders. Instead of saying your pitcher is pitching poorly, you state that the fielders should be hit with errors for not getting to the grounders in time. Hey, they are ground balls.
I_Like_Dirt wrote:Disagree all you want, but the bottom line is that those perimeter players that get beat don't get beat or blown-by nearly so regularly when Bargnani is on the bench. Why? Because they've suddenly got more space in the paint to operate when Bargnani is on the floor because he isn't paying attention to the paint as much NBA bigs are required to.
Please back such a statement up with facts. Not sure what you are basing this on other than your own opinion. You make some pretty adamant statements that hardly resonate with me.
I_Like_Dirt wrote:My point also wasn't that Andrea relies on help defense less than his teammates. The point is that Andrea is allowed to succeed because his teammates play better help defense behind/around him than he plays behind/around them. His man is much more limited in how he can attack the basket because the other players are all positioned properly and preventing certain ways Bargnani can be attacked offensively. Bargnani doesn't provide that same level of support he receives, which is sade for two reasons, first because bigs are generally supposed to provide more help, not less, that's the biggest advantage of being big in basketball, and secondly because the Raptors aren't exactly a great team when it comes to help defense, so being massively worse than what is generally a sub-par team at help defense is downright embarassing.
So with our horrid defensive record you are implying that it all falls on Andrea. Once again, read Boris's posts and enlighten yourself.
You deny that wasn't your point then state exactly that it was. You aren't making sense.
There is a big difference to offering the type of help defense that you imply AB gets on every possession his man has the ball to that of the help defense that AB has to, or as you imply doesn't ever offer, when wings of opposing teams have the ball. Tell me, what is easier to assist with:
A big down low, back to the basket, trying dribble into a position for a basket. His back is to the basket, his dribbling skills are limited and he can be surround much easier with his back against a Centers chest.
Or
A wing that uses a simple screen to knock his defender off, facing the basket with a live dribble, speed to attack and room to maneuver.
Anyone with basketball savvy will state that the center down low is much easier to double or assist your center with support. The wing will most often draw a foul while attacking, pull up for an open jumper or kick out to a teammate for an open jumper.
Furthermore, how can you be state that our wings provide this amazing help defense for Andrea on his assignment? Did you watch any of the games last season? When an opposing team beat our center or PF, it was usually a basket and one.
If you think for one second that Howard, Perkins or Duncan are forced to clean up bad man defense on a regular bases I think you really need to watch more of their games. Are they better at it than AB, of course, are they put into situations were they are continually being expected to come to the aid of blown assignments? Not even close.
Not saying AB is a good or even average defender, but to totally dismiss the situations that are caused by our poor wing and guard defense and how it exploits his below average defense is very ignorant. As Boris has pointed out so eloquently, the picture is much much bigger than some on here like to paint it. Many are so quick to take whatever stat supports their cause and run with it, while dismissing other factual stats that counter oppose it.
