Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

A new way judge a team's defense

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • A new way judge a team's defense

    Not much to comment on but I found this interesting


    http://proxy.espn.go.com/nba/columns...ohn&id=1997975






    Orlando's D deserves some credit
    By John Hollinger, ESPN Insider
    John Hollinger Archive

    Quick, who has a better defense, Orlando or Indiana?

    Probably 99 percent of you will say Indiana. Ask a group of NBA beat writers and columnists the same question, and they'd all stump for the Pacers too.

    Even the two teams would agree. The Magic consider themselves to be a terrible defensive team, as general manager Jon Weisbrod recently vented.

    "Our personnel doesn't warrant us being the worst defensive team in the league," he said after a recent loss to Golden State. "I think we need to look elsewhere for where the issues are."

    Meanwhile, Indiana believes its defense is what's keeping it in the playoff chase. On Monday, a newspaper column opined "Indiana is once again one of the league's premier defensive teams, but have underachieved because of an offense stuck in neutral."

    At first glance, the stats seem to support this idea. Orlando ranks a measly 27th in the league in points allowed per game, giving up 100.5, while Indiana is a lofty fifth at 93.4. So that settles it, right? All the conventional wisdom says Indiana is the superior defense.

    But there's one catch: Orlando is just as good.

    The entire argument for Indiana relies on the premise that points allowed per game is a good indicator of a team's defense. In truth, it's about as reliable as your uncle's '83 El Camino.

    Ranking teams by points allowed per game is flawed because of one massive omission that many observers overlook: pace. Some teams play much faster than others, leading to more possessions for each side. For instance, if one team is running and pressing and using a 100 possessions a game, while the other is milking the shot clock and only using 50, it's going to be awfully hard for the second team to outscore the first one.

    Yet the NBA rankings pretend this distinction doesn't exist. It would be like major league baseball ranking pitchers by "runs allowed" with no regard for how many innings they'd pitched.

    Thus, factoring in pace is a critical part of evaluating team defense. I measure pace with a statistic I call Pace Factor, which is the number of possessions a team uses in an average 48-minute game. The tricky part to calculating Pace Factor is dealing with free-throw attempts. If every free-throw attempt came on a two-shot foul, each would be worth half a possession. However, we have to account for those occasions when a player draws a foul and makes the basket, as well as oddities like technical fouls, clear-path fouls, flagrant fouls and lane violations. Based on these factors, the average free throw uses approximately 0.44 possessions.

    With that knowledge in hand, determining Pace Factor is easy. For those of you playing at home, here's the math: Take a team's free-throw attempts and multiply by 0.44, add its field-goal attempts and turnovers, and subtract its offensive rebounds. That's the number of possessions the team used on offense. Do the same for its defensive stats and you have the opponents' possessions. Average the two, divide by minutes played, and multiply by 48. Voila – you have the team's Pace Factor.

    Pace Factor: 2004-05 League Leaders
    Team Possessions per Game
    Orlando 97.7
    Phoenix 97.6
    Philadelphia 96.3
    Boston 95.8
    Dallas 95.5
    League Average 93.2


    When it comes to pace, the league has two jackrabbits: Orlando and Phoenix. The Suns' run-and-gun style is well known, but Orlando actually is the fastest-paced team in the league. Orlando's opponents get 97.7 possessions per game, compared to the league average of 93.2, meaning Orlando's opponents get nearly five extra trips per game. Once we consider the pace, it's hardly a revelation that Orlando allows more points than do most teams.

    For a counter-example, look at Indiana. The Pacers are the tortoise to Orlando's hare. Indiana uses just 90.0 possessions per game – only Detroit and New Orleans play slower. As a result, the Pacers' opponents have eight possessions a game fewer than Orlando's, making it fairly easy for Indiana to allow fewer points.

    So who's really better, Indiana or Orlando? Due to the differences in pace, it's impossible to make a relevant comparison using points allowed per game. Fortunately, there's an easy way to compare apples to apples. It's a measure that I call Defensive Efficiency, which is the number of points a team gives up for every 100 opponent possessions. Better yet, it's easily calculated once we know a team's Pace Factor. To do so, start with the number of points a team allows per 48 minutes and divide by its Pace Factor. Then multiply the result by 100.

    Using Defensive Efficiency, we can see that Orlando gives up 102.3 points per 100 possessions, while Indiana gives up 102.2. In other words, the Magic actually play defense just as well as the Pacers, despite allowing nearly seven more points per game (and yes, these numbers include Monday night's beatdown at the O-Rena).

    Lies and Statistics
    Team PPG Allowed Rank Def. Efficiency Rank
    Orlando 100.5 27 102.3 13
    Indiana 93.4 5 102.2 12
    League Average 96.7 103.2


    The Magic and the Pacers aren't the only teams whose pros and cons are masked by per-game averages. Take Utah, for instance. The Jazz's 99.1 points allowed per game looks somewhat respectable, ranking 18th in the league. But that ranking is pure fiction. Utah is, in fact, the worst defensive team in captivity, giving up 108.0 points for every 100 opponent possessions. The only thing making them look good is one of the league's slowest Pace Factors at 91.6 possessions a game.

    On the other hand, of the six teams allowing more than 100 points per game, only Toronto has a truly bad defense. Phoenix gives up the most points in the league at 102.3 per game, but it ranks 17th in Defensive Efficiency. Golden State allows 100.4 points per game, just like Orlando, but ranks 18th. Sacramento and Washington are a bit more deficient, ranking 20th and 22nd, respectively, but aren't nearly as bad as their per-game averages suggest.

    But let's get back to the Magic, the most intriguing case of the bunch. What I find so fascinating is they really think their defense is a problem, when in fact it's a slight strength – Orlando's Defensive Efficiency is nearly a point better than the league average. It's not an esoteric point, either – the Magic made a key in-season trade based on this perceived need when they swapped Cuttino Mobley for Doug Christie.

    Unfortunately, the gaping difference between perception and reality is having a real impact on the team and its front office. Orlando's offense is no great shakes (the other side of the same coin – its fast pace also means we need to let some air out of that gaudy scoring average), but the Magic are spending much of their time fretting about defense. They've made deals to shore up that perceived weakness and devoted huge chunks of practice time to it, instead of focusing on an offensive attack that requires at least as much attention.

    Orlando's only crime is thinking that a team's ranking in points allowed per game is an honest appraisal of its defense. Using tools like Pace Factor and Defensive Efficiency, however, we can see that points allowed per game's relevance to team defense is kind of like Chris Andersen in the dunk contest. Sometimes it's in the general area, but it's rarely on target, and more often than not it isn't even close. As a result, the notion that Indiana has a better defense than Orlando isn't such a slam dunk after all.

    John Hollinger is the author of "Pro Basketball Forecast 2004-05." He has joined ESPN Insider as a regular contributor.

  • #2
    Re: A new way judge a team's defense

    Some of us have tried to make the arguement on here that the pace of the game (and over-controlling coaches) has more to do with decreases in scoring than actual defense.

    Opponents FG% is a much better indicator of defensive quality than Opponents PPG.

    More important than any of those stats is whether or not a team can make stops/ get defensive rebounds at crunch time.

    Some of us just know a good (bad) defense when we see it, and it doesn't matter what the stats say. And in this case, it seems to me Orlando gives up more possessions because their opponents can quickly find a good shot. Especially over the past couple of weeks, we've seen Pacers' opponents scrambling to beat the shotclock with any shot, good or not.
    Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
    Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
    Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
    Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
    And life itself, rushing over me
    Life itself, the wind in black elms,
    Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: A new way judge a team's defense

      Did he just watch the last Pacer/Magic game, or not?
      "It's just unfortunate that we've been penalized so much this year and nothing has happened to the Pistons, the Palace or the city of Detroit," he said. "It's almost like it's always our fault. The league knows it. They should be ashamed of themselves to let the security be as lax as it is around here."

      ----------------- Reggie Miller

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: A new way judge a team's defense

        Originally posted by The Article
        Using Defensive Efficiency, we can see that Orlando gives up 102.3 points per 100 possessions, while Indiana gives up 102.2. In other words, the Magic actually play defense just as well as the Pacers, despite allowing nearly seven more points per game (and yes, these numbers include Monday night's beatdown at the O-Rena).
        yes.
        Play Mafia!
        Twitter

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: A new way judge a team's defense

          Why make an entire article to explain such a simple concept? I felt like a child being taught how to add and subtract.

          The premise of the entire thing is flawed however. If you slow the pace, doesn't that indicate that the team probably has good transition and half-court defense? Simply milking the clock does not make you the third slowest team in the league. It means other teams are struggling to get easy buckets against you.

          He also really should have picked another team. As the Pacers have been this season, there have been about five different units playing. The pre-brawl unit, the directly post-brawl unit, the post-brawl unit with Reg, Jeff, and others, the Jermaine unit, and then the unit were are fielding now. Some of those lineups played horrible defense, and if on average the Pacers have played equal intensity defense to Orlando this season, that means our standard lineup is significantly better.

          If one is to judge a defense with only stats, FG% allowed, and how often the defense sends someone to the line is probably the way to go.
          You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: A new way judge a team's defense

            I gotta go with Soup on this one, but I loved the insight to a stat angle I had never thought of....I just hope the trend of good defense continues.

            We have some more big tests ahead that could easily let us get some of our swagger back....There are several teams that are good that we owe for a beatdown the last time...I can't wait for the Sonics game.....The soon-post-brawl shot pretty lights out to keep us close but we couldn't hang at the end. I think JJ had his career high of 33 that night?

            We owe them and Golden State too.....



            RESIDENT COUNTING THREAD PHILOSOPHIZER

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: A new way judge a team's defense

              Well, I'm with Jay about FG%. This stat, though, is nutty.

              82games has us at .445 vs. Orlando at .440 for the season, which seems about right. For the season, our stats are similar. With our players coming back, though, we're putting our defense back together. I expect our defensive fg% to be among the league leaders for the remainder of the season.
              This space for rent.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: A new way judge a team's defense

                Originally posted by Jay@Section204

                Opponents FG% is a much better indicator of defensive quality than Opponents PPG.

                More important than any of those stats is whether or not a team can make stops/ get defensive rebounds at crunch time.

                Some of us just know a good (bad) defense when we see it, and it doesn't matter what the stats say. And in this case, it seems to me Orlando gives up more possessions because their opponents can quickly find a good shot. Especially over the past couple of weeks, we've seen Pacers' opponents scrambling to beat the shotclock with any shot, good or not.


                Jay, you and I often disagree, but in this case I agree with you 100%. great ponts.

                I think the most important team stat is defensive FG%, followed by defensive rebounding %. Of course what a team can do in the last 5 minutes of a close game in these two areas is huge.


                As I watch a game if the defense appears to be "suffocating the offense" That is the barometer I use. The Magic allowed the Pacers to do whatever they wanted get any shot they wanted and allowed the Pacers to move the ball at will. The Heat were much more suffocating.

                Another baromerter I use is if it seems like there are 6 defenders on the court. The Pitons last yar and the Bulls in the 90's seems like they had 6 defenders

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: A new way judge a team's defense

                  This is roughly similar to what Dean Smith had always done at North Carolina. He called it points per possession. He used it on offense and defense. If I remember correctly his goal was 1 point per possesion offensively and .75 ppp defensively. His formula for this took in offensive rebounds, 1-1 FT's , everything. As a matter of fact most basketball stats software has this as one of the things that is kept. I believe there are a few pro teams using a software called Cybersports. It is a gametime software. Easy to use if you have a spotter to help you.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: A new way judge a team's defense

                    I agree with just about everyone.

                    In essence, the Pacers defense so far this season hasn't been up to what it was last year in a game-in game-out basis. Part of that's you've turned into a horrible rebounding team, part of it's not having Artest and part of it's the team D just hasn't been up to snuff.

                    If I was going to put together a fairly simple formula to calculate team defense I'd be looking at these factors:

                    Defensive FG %
                    Defensive Rebounding %
                    Turnover Margin
                    Opponents FTA per FGA

                    Between those factors you'd get how many more/fewer possessions your team gets and how well you do defending those possessions.

                    Hollinger's formula is OK - it uses most of the above factors. But nothing is a substitute for watching a team's games. And I'd say that if you'd REALLY want to figure it out with stats you'd have to take whatever number you come up with and do a full statistical analysis using standard deviations, validity, etc. If two teams give up an average of 90 ppg, but for one team 68% of their games give up between 87 and 93 while for the other it's between 80 and 100, I'd prefer the first team.

                    Unless of course the second team is very young, or has injury problems and everyone will be in for the playoffs, or any of a dozen other factors that numbers alone can't explain.
                    The poster formerly known as Rimfire

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: A new way judge a team's defense

                      Man I swear I've seen this before......Wasn't there something very similar to this last season?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: A new way judge a team's defense

                        Originally posted by Unclebuck
                        Jay, you and I often disagree, but in this case I agree with you 100%. great ponts.

                        I think the most important team stat is defensive FG%, followed by defensive rebounding %. Of course what a team can do in the last 5 minutes of a close game in these two areas is huge.


                        As I watch a game if the defense appears to be "suffocating the offense" That is the barometer I use. The Magic allowed the Pacers to do whatever they wanted get any shot they wanted and allowed the Pacers to move the ball at will. The Heat were much more suffocating.

                        Another baromerter I use is if it seems like there are 6 defenders on the court. The Pitons last yar and the Bulls in the 90's seems like they had 6 defenders
                        I was going to add that I thought the late-1990s era Pacers were a great example of a team that, while not excellent at either defense nor rebounding, could always be relied on to get a defensive stop (McKey) and rebound (DD) when it needed one. Even Jalen Rose, Mark Jackson, and Reggie Miller could contribute "clutch" defense on those teams. When we lost a close game, it was either an opponents' offensive player hitting a great, contested shot (and great offensive players can score, no matter how good the defense), or we couldn't convert at our end of the court.
                        Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                        Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                        Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                        Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                        And life itself, rushing over me
                        Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                        Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: A new way judge a team's defense

                          I mostly agree with the opps FG% as a good barometer of D. And I do like the points scored/possession concept.

                          While there is some truth to the posted article, let's not use the pacers, but the colts as the comparison. The colts being a run and gun team must have good D because that D is on the field so much longer. I'd be willing to bet that points allowed per time of possession was pretty low for the colts D, therefore they must be one of the top defenses in the nfl. gaaaaaa

                          Ever notice how many more 24 second violations there are during the playoffs? And fewer possessions? And lower scores? Basketball is one of the few, maybe only, sports where allowing your opponent to have more time of possession works in your favor.

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X