48MoH: The Root of All Defensive Evil

[Blackjack]

The Root of All Defensive Evil
by Andrew A. McNeill

http://www.48minutesofhell.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/jefferson_thomas.jpg

Saying that the Spurs aren’t playing as good of defense this year as they have in the past would be like saying it doesn’t snow much in Austin. By the way, it’s snowing here in Austin today.

But why exactly are the Spurs not playing good defense? It starts in the middle, quite literally.

Keep reading → (http://www.48minutesofhell.com/2010/02/23/the-root-of-all-defensive-evil/)

[Libri]

So that's the reason Pop refuses to play Ian.

[nkdlunch]

why in the hell does he play Matt bonner then????

[DAF86]

It's all about size, look how Dallas' D improved with Haywood's acquisition.

[Trimble87]

why in the hell does he play Matt bonner then????

I hear you, but the article is pointing out players getting into the lane, not our ability to stop them at the rim. The problem is teams are getting past our perimiter defenders and into the middle of the lane much easier then in years past.

Of course when we force them baseline our "big-men" cant do much then either... but thats another story.

[Blackjack]

http://www.48minutesofhell.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/jefferson_thomas.jpg

This picture is depressing . . .

The wrong player is wearing the Spurs' 24.:depressed

[ElNono]

The reason we suck defensively is 2 more fouls per game? Really? That translates to 4 points.
I seriously doubt that the differential of points allowed between 2006-2007 and this season is 4 points.

:td

[HarlemHeat37]

-There's no shot blocking in the middle other than Duncan..while Timmy is still good for around 2 blocks a game when he's playing actual starter minutes, nobody else on the team blocks or alters shot..literally, nobody..this would be alright if we had a mobile big to make up for what Duncan can no longer do due to age, but we don't have that either..

-The perimeter defenders are even worse than the bigs, constantly allowing penetration..Hill is a good man defender, but he's inconsistent and small in size compared to a lot of the players he has to guard..Manu is no longer a good 1 on 1 defender, but he makes up for it with his help D and his ability to play the passing lanes..

Everybody else is a poor defender on the wing..Jefferson will occasionally play good D vs. bigger SFs and SGs, but he doesn't have the lateral quickness to defend any players with athleticism..he also misses a ton of rotations due to low IQ..

Mason and Finley obviously aren't worth mentioning for obvious reasons..

Bogans is supposed to be a "stopper", but he doesn't have any athleticism or lateral quickness..he's not a leaper either..what exactly does he have? I don't know..he commits a bunch of stupid fouls, so it can't be his basketball IQ..

-Too many new players that still don't know how to rotate defensively..

-The coach doesn't help with his rotations..

[Destro]

The reason we suck defensively is 2 more fouls per game? Really? That translates to 4 points.
I seriously doubt that the differential of points allowed between 2006-2007 and this season is 4 points.

:td

the extra fouls put us in the penalty earlier

[Bender]

the extra fouls put us in the penalty earlier
also, the author was stating how players start backing off defensively when they have more fouls...

[ElNono]

the extra fouls put us in the penalty earlier

And? still 2 fouls... 4 points...

[HarlemHeat37]

What are they supposed to do about the fouling?..players generally foul when they can't keep up with their opposition or if they have low basketball IQ..there's nothing the current Spurs rotation can really do about that..

[ElNono]

The only other significant side-effect I could think of is foul trouble, or fouling out. But we really haven't been fouling out much at all, that I recall.

[Seventyniner]

The reason we suck defensively is 2 more fouls per game? Really? That translates to 4 points.
I seriously doubt that the differential of points allowed between 2006-2007 and this season is 4 points.

:td

The Spurs' point differential this season so far is +4.11. The current league leader is the Lakers at +6.70. Adding 4 points per game is a lot.

The 2006-2007 Spurs' point differential (regular season) was +8.43, an elite mark. Once again, adding 4 points per game is huge.

[ElNono]

The Spurs' point differential this season so far is +4.11. The current league leader is the Lakers at +6.70. Adding 4 points per game is a lot.

The 2006-2007 Spurs' point differential (regular season) was +8.43, an elite mark. Once again, adding 4 points per game is huge.

If you do not foul, it doesn't automatically mean the other team doesn't score in that possession. Furthermore, 4 points is worst case scenario. Because they get foul it doesn't mean they're going to make the free throws.

Again, and I think I'm going to have to look this up myself, I seriously doubt that the difference in points allowed between the 2006-2007 season and this season is a mere 4 points.

[igruex]

The reason we suck defensively is 2 more fouls per game? Really? That translates to 4 points.
I seriously doubt that the differential of points allowed between 2006-2007 and this season is 4 points.

:td


That's not what the article says. The point is, we are allowing to many penetrations, which causes us to give up many points; fouls committed are just a stat supporting the author's main point.

[GhosTown]

The Spurs are weaker defensively because they don't have an shot blocker guarding the rim.

It doesn't matter that they can't keep their man in front of them. No team can.

The difference is if you have a shot blocker, offenses don't try to challenge the rim too often because it will get block or alter. If their is no shot blocking threat, you see it all the time, guards get brave and drive the ball at the rim. Just like TP does for the Spurs. A shot blocker can erase a lot of defensive mistakes.

This also explains why the foul count is up. When there is no shot blocker you have to foul because of the no layup rule.

So it is very important to stay big around the rim, if you are a defensive minded team. You need the size for shot blocking and rebound.

Pop, Bonner, Small Ball = Losing

[#2!]

also, the author was stating how players start backing off defensively when they have more fouls...

Timmy is very guilty of this the last few seasons.

[ElNono]

That's not what the article says. The point is, we are allowing to many penetrations, which causes us to give up many points; fouls committed are just a stat supporting the author's main point.

I think we all agree with that.

But the author conclusion is:
But the ability of opposing players to get in the lane and draw fouls is becoming the Achilles’ heel for the Spurs this season.

The reality is that wether we foul or not they're still getting the points, because as Harlem correctly pointed out, we really have nobody to protect the paint outside of Duncan. The actual problem is not how many fouls we give up. It's the lacking perimeter and interior defense.

[ElNono]

Timmy is very guilty of this the last few seasons.

Tim just doesn't have that much of a lift anymore. On top of that, nobody on the perimeter is really helping him. They all come full force at him.

[Obstructed_View]

Teams don't kill the Spurs in the paint with Timmy there to defend, they kill the Spurs in the paint by running a pick on Timmy and then going to the rim where there's nobody taller than 6'8" to stop them.

[RuffnReadyOzStyle]

I agree with the thesis of the article. The extra fouling is a symptom of our aging, slowing players, and our lack of a second tough defensive big. It's not the reason we are losing, but it's a contributing factor.

[Obstructed_View]

I agree with the thesis of the article. The extra fouling is a symptom of our aging, slowing players, and our lack of a second tough defensive big. It's not the reason we are losing, but it's a contributing factor.

Yeah there are dozens of little reasons why the Spurs are stinking it up. Many of those little reasons have caught up with them at this point in the year. That's why it's so maddening when someone suggests a small fix and the response is that it's not big enough to make a difference.

[ElNono]

Yeah there are dozens of little reasons why the Spurs are stinking it up. Many of those little reasons have caught up with them at this point in the year. That's why it's so maddening when someone suggests a small fix and the response is that it's not big enough to make a difference.

Exactly. There's no one single Spurs Achilles' heel. The defensive problems this season have been a plethora of different things, some small issues, some bigger issues. It's actually been a progression from the woes we had last season already, exacerbated with the addition of new guys that made matters worse.

[dbestpro]

Penetration to the basket is not the root problem, nor is open shooters. Both of these problems are caused by small lineups or poor rotations by the bigs. We use to crowd the shooters and dared them to drive on our bigs. Our bigs would rotate in a way where one would cut off the driver and the other would position for the block out. The off wing player would play center field waiting to cut off any pass.

The problem now is when we go small and crowd the shooter the driver goes to the basket and the big that is their to defend the basket is left in no mans land as he tries to defend the basket from the defender and protect the backside at the same time. If he comes out on the driver, the driver simply throws it up because he knows his man will get the ball on the back side for the easy put back. We see this as part of the high number of offensive rebounds that we give up.

When Blair is the primary big on the floor most drivers can simply go over the top of him anyway. The perimeter defenders know this so they are more worried about the drive than the shot, thus we leave more shooters wide open. Add this equation into a simple pick and roll and the defense can easily be picked apart by any NBA team.

The interior defense must be fixed first before we can start pin pointing problems on the perimeter defense.

[all_heart]

It all translate to athleticism, or the lack there of on the roster. It's about knowing where to be and having the ability to get there. Spurs got 2 problems, lacking a legit athletic big and a athletic wing. And of course playing small ball doesn't help.

[dbestpro]

It all translate to athleticism, or the lack there of on the roster.

I feel we don't really know that. Athleticism is an issue for transition D, and we for the most part have done okay on transition D. We really do not know what our perimeter D is capable of until we fix the interior D. When we play conventional ball, most of the time we look pretty good and the players are in rhythm. When we go small the D falls apart and we never seem to recover.

There are times for small ball but it has to be done judiciously and intelligently, not just because its at a particular time of the quarter and when it is apparent the opposing team is winning the small ball battle we need to go quickly back to conventional. Small ball is left in tact for way too long of portions of the game.

[Old School 44]

We do not have the personnel (or are not playing them) to funnel players to the baseline for defensive help. We are wearing Tim out on the defensive end as he tries to cover the paint by himself. We need some length and athletism inside to pair with Tim. I don't know how many times I've seen our perimeter defenders chase guys off the three point line only to be blown by with little or no help underneath.

My starting front line would be Tim, Ian and McDyess. The way things are going, I'd even try Tim, Ian and Blair. Active bodies to alter shots and hit the boards. If they (Ian and Blair) foul out, so be it. Ian just standing in the paint with arms raised, will improve our interior D.

[Agloco]

If you do not foul, it doesn't automatically mean the other team doesn't score in that possession. Furthermore, 4 points is worst case scenario. Because they get foul it doesn't mean they're going to make the free throws.

Again, and I think I'm going to have to look this up myself, I seriously doubt that the difference in points allowed between the 2006-2007 season and this season is a mere 4 points.

You're not considering the other side of the equation either. The Spurs are slightly faster on the offensive end this year. You need to add that on top of whatever differentials you're analyzing.

2007 Points Allowed 90.2
2010 Points allowed 96.2

The difference is 6. Pace might account for the other 2 points.

[Ibanezsr]

Comparing the defense of the past compared to now is pointless. Rules were different in the past and perimeter players could get away with a lot more. Now... not so much... Which stresses the fact that now more than ever you need bigs to protect the rim...

[ElNono]

You're not considering the other side of the equation either. The Spurs are slightly faster on the offensive end this year. You need to add that on top of whatever differentials you're analyzing.

2007 Points Allowed 90.2
2010 Points allowed 96.2

The difference is 6. Pace might account for the other 2 points.

I thought we were giving up close to a 100 this season... But thanks for looking it up!

[hommeaetage]

Teams don't kill the Spurs in the paint with Timmy there to defend, they kill the Spurs in the paint by running a pick on Timmy and then going to the rim where there's nobody taller than 6'8" to stop them.

This

[SpurNation]

Keep fouling then. At least you can hope the other team misses their FT's instead of just giving them uncontested shots. This team has an assortment of DNP's it can use.

At least that's the strategy I would use if ahead and close to the end of the game with about 5 minutes left. It would also give our aged veterans a chance to catch their breath.

Meh!

[dbestpro]

There is some merit to comitting more fouls. Detroit took a bunch of average players and fouled on every play. The officials were not going to call every foul so it allowed Detroit to get away with being physical and creating an identity as a defensive team.

[SpurNation]

Spurs defense. I'm sure that age (and to some extent talent) has some to do with this team's lack of defensive effectiveness.

But looking at some of the games this year...I've also noticed teams taking advantage by exploiting some of the holes this system has even if the team had a Bowen in his prime.

Back door cuts and weak side screens have always been an achilies heel. Granted others in the past were able to push (direct) their opponent to a certain spot where weak side help could reak havoc. But teams are starting to be able (and not by sure will or one on one) pass the ball to effective spots against this defense.

It's almost as if once a team can pass to the blind side of this defense...there isn't any body (due to positioning) that is close enough to defend an easy shot. They've either over committed or too far away to effectively close out.

Again...not knowing the nuances of the entire system and who's to blame in those situations...I've also seen some decent defense by this team only to be exploited by the nature of the defense itself.

[ElNono]

Defense is A LOT easier if you can stay in front of your guy.
To stay in front of you guys you need one of:
A) Lateral quickness
B) Great footwork

Bowen had both, and towards the end of his career he was losing A, which is normal as players age and lose mobility.
But the fact he had outstanding footwork and stayed in shape is what kept him in the game for so long doing what he did so well.
In fact, he was so good, that he would always be moved to guard whoever player was hot at the time.

These days, Hill is probably the only player that has A, but he's still lacking on B. Manu is probably the best we have on B, but due to his age, he's lacking on A.
And neither is really as good or effective as Bruce.

Now, as far as holes in the system, we always had them. They're just a lot easier to exploit if you have holes everywhere. When Bruce was around, we reduced the game basically to a 4 on 4, with Bowen and whoever was the hot/best player of the other team being the men out. At that point, it's a lot easier to help when you already know that their best player is taken care of.

Obviously, there are other factors. Like Tim's decline and overall suckitude of whoever plays next to him.

[portnoy1]

In 2005/07 we had the big3 and 6 role players that could do at least 2 or more things very well. We also had more shotblockers then instead of now. Look at the difference!!

2004-05
Bowen - Perimeter D / 3 pt shooting
Mohammed - Rebounding / shot blocking / Post and help D
Horry - Post and Help D / Shotblocking / 3pt shooting / Passing
Barry - 3pt shooting / Passing
Udrih - 3pt shooting / Passing
Nesterovic - Rebounding / Shot blocking / Post and help D
2006-07
Bowen - Perimeter D / 3pt shooting
Oberto - Rebounding / Post and help D / Passing
Horry - Post and help D / Shotblocking / 3pt shooting / Passing
Barry - 3pt shooting / Passing
Elson - Rebounding / shot blocking
Finley - Shooting
2009-10
Hill - Perimeter D / Scoring
Bogans - Perimeter D
Bonner - 3pt shooting
RJ - Scoring
Dice - Shooting / Rebounding
Blair - Rebounding / Low post Scoring
The 6 role players we have surrounding the big3 now are inconsistent and one-dimensional in there strengths. We also have no shotblockers next to Tim (05 - Nazr , Rasho , Horry 07 - Elson, Horry ).

[SpurNation]

Good point El Nono using the A and B analogy. But I've also seen teams exploit this defense more and more with passing and placement of their offensive personel against this defense.

What about the games where the opponent's 4th/5th option and/or even bench player racks up easy shots? From what I've seen when that happens...It's mainly been due to the oposing coach breaking down our defensive scheme more so than the lack of our player's ability to defend.

Again...our players may be out of position due to a bad decision they made on the court. But many times it's as if they are a half court away when trying to close out or defend against that extra pass. And many times that extra pass is made to a point where the team is at it's weakest to defend due to the players going to where they are supposed to go in their defensive rotations.

Surely one can't expect even youth and athleticism to defend against that when it's happening so fast?

[Obstructed_View]

In 2005/07 we had the big3 and 6 role players that could do at least 2 or more things very well. We also had more shotblockers then instead of now. Look at the difference!!

2004-05
Bowen - Perimeter D / 3 pt shooting
Mohammed - Rebounding / shot blocking / Post and help D
Horry - Post and Help D / Shotblocking / 3pt shooting / Passing
Barry - 3pt shooting / Passing
Udrih - 3pt shooting / Passing
Nesterovic - Rebounding / Shot blocking / Post and help D
2006-07
Bowen - Perimeter D / 3pt shooting
Oberto - Rebounding / Post and help D / Passing
Horry - Post and help D / Shotblocking / 3pt shooting / Passing
Barry - 3pt shooting / Passing
Elson - Rebounding / shot blocking
Finley - Shooting
2009-10
Hill - Perimeter D / Scoring
Bogans - Perimeter D
Bonner - 3pt shooting
RJ - Scoring
Dice - Shooting / Rebounding
Blair - Rebounding / Low post Scoring
The 6 role players we have surrounding the big3 now are inconsistent and one-dimensional in there strengths. We also have no shotblockers next to Tim (05 - Nazr , Rasho , Horry 07 - Elson, Horry ).

Don't forget, in the 2006 regular season, Neterovic and Mohammed were your starting centers and helped the Spurs win 63 games with relative ease. When those two were pulled in the playoffs, the Spurs began to give up points in the paint at an alarming rate and were bounced from the playoffs pretty quick.

[wildbill2u]

There was a time when you could visibly see the Spurs rachet up their defensive focus and intensity in the fourth quarter that stimulated extra effort. There was more physicality and more/faster lateral movement by individual defenders and the team worked together to cover each other.

I've only seen that focus and intensity--with all the physical results of extra effort that entails a few times this year.

[phxspurfan]

So you're saying the problem is small ball.