Grades: Spurs vs. Bulls - Dec. 8, 2023

[timvp]

https://www.spurstalk.com/2023-spurs-bulls-grades-21/

:music

[Fireball]

Thanks for the grades! This was the game I wanted the Spurs to win before they can go on another losing streak ...

[DrSteffo]

Thank you timvp. I still wish for a starting lineup of Jones, Vassell, Johnson, Sochan, and Wemby. Draft a PG and move Jones to the bench next season. It's not rocket science tbh.

[RC_Drunkford]

I think it's safe to say the Spurs can only win if everybody has an A performance

[Leetonidas]

Poop should get an F every game he decides to not start a fucking PG tbh

[Mugen]

Starting Tre is so fucking obvious. But it's going to take the old man 25 different SLs before he lands on it. Like I legit think Blake Wesley will start at point before Tre does :lol

[John B]

Starting Tre is so fucking obvious. But it's going to take the old man 25 different SLs before he lands on it. Like I legit think Blake Wesley will start at point before Tre does :lol

That shouldn’t be so bad IF Wesley can hit open shots. Tre often times gets overpowered defensively. While Wesley is the better point-of-attack defender, and should help when they start losing the game defensively. He has PG qualities, just not consistent. BUT if he could limit the mistakes, Wesley could see minutes with the SL. Tre should stay as backup PG because the Bench needs his leadership and offense. Tre is a very good backup PG, but that’s about it. He is a defensively against starting PG’s.

But yes, Wesley’s development is crucial imo. He could solve a lot of the PG problems

[MultiTroll]

Good to see your sniffing on KJ tone down while you recognized his abysmal transition D.

His made treys are often negated by the oppenents hitting a trey or driving past him for a layup.

I don't know where this guys trade value sits. Assuming other NBA teams are not stupid.

[Chinook]

That shouldn’t be so bad IF Wesley can hit open shots. Tre often times gets overpowered defensively. While Wesley is the better point-of-attack defender, and should help when they start losing the game defensively. He has PG qualities, just not consistent. BUT if he could limit the mistakes, Wesley could see minutes with the SL. Tre should stay as backup PG because the Bench needs his leadership and offense. Tre is a very good backup PG, but that’s about it. He is a defensively against starting PG’s.

But yes, Wesley’s development is crucial imo. He could solve a lot of the PG problems

There's no evidence that Tre isn't anything but a good defender, even as a starter. Defense is pretty hard to measure objectively. but it's also extremely easy to misread it subjectively. Wesley has shown some aesthetically pleasing possessions, but he hasn't had a ton of success actually stopping players. Jones has been beat before, but he also forces a lot of turnovers, understands how to rotate and help and overall improves the defense every time he's on the court.

The Spurs' defense is literally only a half-point per 100 better this year than last, and that's with getting one of the best defensive prospects ever and getting another year to "learn the system" for the other players. It feels like Pop misidentified what needed to happen to improve the defense and has made it worse all things considered.

As far as backup PG goes, Graham has looked good in his minutes and should be in the running for either PG spot. Both he and Jones are miles ahead of Wesley

[onechance87]

branham deserves a f,Just terrible on d.....Give granham his mins or bring back wesley ffs

[JeffDuncan]

There's no evidence that Tre isn't anything but a good defender, …


Unless you watch the games, in which case you’ll see plenty of objective evidence of how bad Tre is on defense. He’s terrible. It isn’t only that he’s short. He’s a moron.

Look at the Bulls game replay.

3:10 in the first quarter. Tre totally abandons his man on the arc, and runs all the way to the middle of the lane to try to help McDermott guard Vuc when both Collins and Keldon are already there. Tre leaves his man wide wide open only one pass away. When Vuc passes back out to Tre’s unguarded man, Keldon scrambles to cover, the pass then goes to a man open in the corner, where Tre then sprints out to try to cover, too late of course. Fortunately, the Bulls missed.

Sir, totally abandoning your man at the 3pt line, to try to help when three of your teammates are already there, is objectively bad defense, with no honest question about it.

All you’ve proven with your remarks about Tre’s defense is that you don’t know what to look for.

Want more? Still the Bulls game.

First quarter 1:50 on the clock. Tre abandons his man at the 3pt line with the apparent intent of helping Osman and Collins defend a ball screen, which is going on one pass away. This time, when the pass goes to the man Tre left open, he doesn’t miss.

That’s twice, in less than a minute and a half, that Tre just ran away from his assignment, leaving his man wide open at the 3pt line.

Simply abandoning your man at the 3pt line (or anywhere else for that matter) is objectively bad defense.

Want more? Still the Bulls game.

Second quarter 11:20. Tre abandoned his man to try to help Osman guard DDR in the right corner. (It did no good at all, they didn’t trap DDR of course.) While Tre was stupidly engaged in that pointless activity, his man ran all the way across the court to the left corner. Tre then went sprinting all the way across the court to try to get back to his man. In the meantime Collins saw the man go by unguarded to the corner, and rotated that direction. When you see something like that, you think a rotation is happening. But it left Drummond unguarded under the basket, where he received a pass and scored.

In the space of about 3:30 on the game clock, Tre Jones committed three major defensive blunders, two of which led to scores, for 5 points. All that saved him the other time was that the shooter missed an open corner 3.

There you have some evidence of objectively bad defense, by Mr. Tre Jones.

[onechance87]

Unless you watch the games, in which case you’ll see plenty of objective evidence of how bad Tre is on defense. He’s terrible. It isn’t only that he’s short. He’s a moron.

Look at the Bulls game replay.

3:10 in the first quarter. Tre totally abandons his man on the arc, and runs all the way to the middle of the lane to try to help McDermott guard Vuc when both Collins and Keldon are already there. Tre leaves his man wide wide open only one pass away. When Vuc passes back out to Tre’s unguarded man, Keldon scrambles to cover, the pass then goes to a man open in the corner, where Tre then sprints out to try to cover, too late of course. Fortunately, the Bulls missed.

Sir, totally abandoning your man at the 3pt line, to try to help when three of your teammates are already there, is objectively bad defense, with no honest question about it.

All you’ve proven with your remarks about Tre’s defense is that you don’t know what to look for.

Want more? Still the Bulls game.

First quarter 1:50 on the clock. Tre abandons his man at the 3pt line with the apparent intent of helping Osman and Collins defend a ball screen, which is going on one pass away. This time, when the pass goes to the man Tre left open, he doesn’t miss.

That’s twice, in less than a minute and a half, that Tre just ran away from his assignment, leaving his man wide open at the 3pt line.

Simply abandoning your man at the 3pt line (or anywhere else for that matter) is objectively bad defense.

Want more? Still the Bulls game.

Second quarter 11:20. Tre abandoned his man to try to help Osman guard DDR in the right corner. (It did no good at all, they didn’t trap DDR of course.) While Tre was stupidly engaged in that pointless activity, his man ran all the way across the court to the left corner. Tre then went sprinting all the way across the court to try to get back to his man. In the meantime Collins saw the man go by unguarded to the corner, and rotated that direction. When you see something like that, you think a rotation is happening. But it left Drummond unguarded under the basket, where he received a pass and scored.

In the space of about 3:30 on the game clock, Tre Jones committed three major defensive blunders, two of which led to scores, for 5 points. All that saved him the other time was that the shooter missed an open corner 3.

There you have some evidence of objectively bad defense, by Mr. Tre Jones.

yup his defence has been to inconsistent this year of course along with his offence...Dude has
been useless at times alot

[DAF86]

Eventually, Wembanyama will be a center. If Pop thinks that time is now, I don’t have a problem with that.

I guess folks like Obstructed_View and exstatic can stop pretending like Wemby is the next Durant now.

[Chinook]

.

Basically none of that is bad defense. I don't have a game recorded, so I'm just looking at what I can see in the NBA's recap vid:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JvFbCkOr3W8&ab_channel=NBA


3:10 in the first quarter. Tre totally abandons his man on the arc, and runs all the way to the middle of the lane to try to help McDermott guard Vuc when both Collins and Keldon are already there. Tre leaves his man wide wide open only one pass away. When Vuc passes back out to Tre’s unguarded man, Keldon scrambles to cover, the pass then goes to a man open in the corner, where Tre then sprints out to try to cover, too late of course. Fortunately, the Bulls missed.

(2:02 in the above video) So this isn't a real interpretation of what happened. The Spurs purposefully ran a double on that play. Jones didn't "abandon his man" and Keldon didn't "scramble to cover". That's not really how NBA defense works. Jones doubled, Keldon rotated and Jones rotated to force the miss. That was actually a very good defensive sequence until the Spurs forgot to box out and allowed a put-back dunk. It was just a regular strong-side rotation after a dig.

Also "one pass away" doesn't mean that it only takes one pass to get to the next player. Basically every pass would meet that definition. It's about where a players are on the court. A pass from the post to the wing is two passes away. One pass away in this case would be to the corner. Which is where Keldon was covering. That's why he couldn't double on that play. He would've been doubling from one pass away.


First quarter 1:50 on the clock.

Not in the video, did find it in this video:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZn65QS3RgA&ab_channel=ChicagoBulls

(:50) What Jones is doing there is called "getting in the gaps", and it's necessary because the Spurs are running drop coverage and expecting Osman to fight over a screen rather than switching. He's stunting at the ball-handler and recovering to his man. He probably waits about a half-second too long there. The Bulls shooter very smartly drifted to create more space. The result of that play without Jones was going to be an easy two. If you've watched any of those "Spurs defensive mistakes" videos, you'll know that drop coverage Collins is playing is the single thing the guy gets most pissed about in terms of how the Spurs play. It wouldn't surprise me if the Spurs adjusted their PnR coverage specifically to emphasize that stunt as a way to trying to limit the two-on-ones their previous scheme kept giving up.


Second quarter 11:20. Tre abandoned his man to try to help Osman guard DDR in the right corner. (It did no good at all, they didn’t trap DDR of course.) While Tre was stupidly engaged in that pointless activity, his man ran all the way across the court to the left corner. Tre then went sprinting all the way across the court to try to get back to his man. In the meantime Collins saw the man go by unguarded to the corner, and rotated that direction. When you see something like that, you think a rotation is happening. But it left Drummond unguarded under the basket, where he received a pass and scored.

(2:30 of the first vid) The Spurs weren't trying to trap DeRozan. They wanted him to pick up his dribble. As soon as he did, Jones sprinted to cover his rotation (opposite corner). The Spurs rotated extremely well for most of this play. The mistake happened when Collins and Jones both rotated. It's possible Pop wants that rotation, but that would leave Jones on a center under the basket. So I don't know for sure which way Pop would coach that, but I would rate Jones as basically perfect, Victor perfect, Vassell late (which allowed the penetration) and Collins having a mental lapse. If you watch Tre's actions on the play, he immediately sprints to the opposite corner as soon as the ball leaves DeRozan's hands. That is somebody who is following a procedure and not panicking. But is Collins is supposed to make that rotation, then Jones made a mistake by not rushing to front Drummond. What isn't the mistake is "leaving his man open" to double DeRozan. That part is textbook.

So yeah, I think you should look up what rotations are and how NBA defensive schemes work. Check out this video:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D2hvfHzJjJ4&ab_channel=CoachDaniel

Go to about the 1:00 mark. Basically the exact rotation you think Jones did by mistake is diagramed here.

Stuff like this just pisses me off. I'm not even close to an expert in basketball analysis. I've never played outside of pickup when I was a kid. But I do bother to look into shit like defense and metrics before I talk about who is or isn't playing well. Can I be wrong? Yes. I'm wrong often. But it would be nice if folks did basic research if they're going to claim that Jones is a bad defender despite him grading out as a good defender for years.

[Tyronn Lue]

There's no evidence that Tre isn't anything but a good defender, even as a starter. Defense is pretty hard to measure objectively. but it's also extremely easy to misread it subjectively. Wesley has shown some aesthetically pleasing possessions, but he hasn't had a ton of success actually stopping players. Jones has been beat before, but he also forces a lot of turnovers, understands how to rotate and help and overall improves the defense every time he's on the court.

The Spurs' defense is literally only a half-point per 100 better this year than last, and that's with getting one of the best defensive prospects ever and getting another year to "learn the system" for the other players. It feels like Pop misidentified what needed to happen to improve the defense and has made it worse all things considered.

As far as backup PG goes, Graham has looked good in his minutes and should be in the running for either PG spot. Both he and Jones are miles ahead of Wesley
If this was true teams wouldn't A) switch on defense and B) put their "best defenders" on the other teams best offensive players. We'd not see people like Kawhi and Draymond get so much recognition on defense. If you cannot objectively measure Kawhi's defense in comparison to Keldon Johson, you should never discuss basketball.

[LongtimeSpursFan]

Poop should get an F every game he decides to not start a fucking PG tbh

LOL. Tre ain’t gonna get us any more wins.

[boutons_deux]

Pop should order VW

If you get more than 15 ft away from the basket, on either end, you will be benched

[JeffDuncan]

Basically none of that is bad defense. …


Oh please. I know you just like to argue, but really now. Give sanity a break.

What I wrote was all perfectly true, and no amount of lying about it, or trying to rationalize, is going to make it any better. Tre is a horribly bad defender, which is why, I suppose, Pop put him on the bench in favor of Sochan.

[MannyIsGod]

If this was true teams wouldn't A) switch on defense and B) put their "best defenders" on the other teams best offensive players. We'd not see people like Kawhi and Draymond get so much recognition on defense. If you cannot objectively measure Kawhi's defense in comparison to Keldon Johson, you should never discuss basketball.

I dont think you know what the word measure means. I can look at Wemby and Tre by sight and know that Wemby is much taller than Tre, but that doesn't mean I can tell you what either height is just by looking at them. Knowing that someone is a worse defender is not the same as quantifying that in a measurement.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

Pop deserves an F every game we lose to continue the streak.

This defense is clown world.

[Ed Helicopter Jones]

This team needs a point guard. Even with this shitty roster they'd scrape out a few wins if anyone could run the offense.

[Ed Helicopter Jones]

The 20-20 game by Wemby was cool, though. Imagine how much he'd score with a PG who actually knew how to pass him the ball?

[mudd]

Pop's use of his players is embarrassing for his so called knowledge of the game. If we don't have the talent, play all your roster.. sochan is a miss imho. Use dom, mamu, blake ( at least he can push the ball with his speed to create ). etc. bwdik

[Russ]

To belabor the obvious -- Wembanyama's scoring efficiency is a major problem.

His three-point shooting of 25.5% is bad.

But his two-point shooting of 50.9% isn't very good either for a 7'5" player.

To put it in context, the cutoff is 55% for the top 50 two-point % shooters in the NBA. Wemby isn't even close.

Even on the Spurs roster, Wemby's two-point % of 50.9% is middle of the pack behind Charles Bassey 74.4%, Devonte' Graham 66.7%, Zach Collins 61.2%, Devin Vassell 57.9%, Cedi Osman 55.7% and even chucker Keldon Johnson 55.3%.

The Bulls game was typical -- Wemby went 0-4 from three (0%) and 8-16 from two (50%).

Wemby's efficiency must (and will) improve but until then the Spurs will continue to struggle.

[Leetonidas]

LOL. Tre ain’t gonna get us any more wins.

The stats say otherwise. They wouldn't be world beaters but they'd have 3-4 more wins

[onechance87]

To belabor the obvious -- Wembanyama's scoring efficiency is a major problem.

His three-point shooting of 25.5% is bad.

But his two-point shooting of 50.9% isn't very good either for a 7'5" player.

To put it in context, the cutoff is 55% for the top 50 two-point % shooters in the NBA. Wemby isn't even close.

Even on the Spurs roster, Wemby's two-point % of 50.9% is middle of the pack behind Charles Bassey 74.4%, Devonte' Graham 66.7%, Zach Collins 61.2%, Devin Vassell 57.9%, Cedi Osman 55.7% and even chucker Keldon Johnson 55.3%.

The Bulls game was typical -- Wemby went 0-4 from three (0%) and 8-16 from two (50%).

Wemby's efficiency must (and will) improve but until then the Spurs will continue to struggle.

yea cause this coaching staff aint setting plays for him....Like they aint got no game plan

[Tyronn Lue]

I dont think you know what the word measure means. I can look at Wemby and Tre by sight and know that Wemby is much taller than Tre, but that doesn't mean I can tell you what either height is just by looking at them. Knowing that someone is a worse defender is not the same as quantifying that in a measurement. How it's used in the phrase I responded to though, is as if a players defensive ability isn't easily assessable. If quantify was meant, it should have been used. No one here is trying to quantify defense. They are simply assessing that one person has terrible defense and another less terrible. This is what Pop does. It's what all coaches do. That assessment is how they measure defense, and it's pretty objective. By the time someone gets to the NBA, their defensive ability is measured.

[spurraider21]

my issue with tre's defense certainly isn't his smarts. he's one of the few guys i trust to generally be positioned well, rotate properly, etc. and his technique on individual defensive assignments is fine, and he can be pest that causes guys to pick up their dribble. the problem is that he's just... small. he's short. no special wingspan to make up for it. and its not just his height. he's weak and gets pushed around. he lacks any kind of vertical explosiveness. the end result is that he often is just overwhelmed on individual assignments when people just go right at him and he's basically helpless to do anything about it even if he's doing many of the right things

[Chinook]

my issue with tre's defense certainly isn't his smarts. he's one of the few guys i trust to generally be positioned well, rotate properly, etc. and his technique on individual defensive assignments is fine, and he can be pest that causes guys to pick up their dribble. the problem is that he's just... small. he's short. no special wingspan to make up for it. and its not just his height. he's weak and gets pushed around. he lacks any kind of vertical explosiveness. the end result is that he often is just overwhelmed on individual assignments when people just go right at him and he's basically helpless to do anything about it even if he's doing many of the right things

Modern defense is not supposed to involve a lot of one-on-one stops. Players are supposed to help each other, and the ways to do that are pretty well established (like "getting in the gaps"). Point guards have always been able to play on elite defenses, and they historically haven't been bigger than Jones is. I don't buy the idea that it's what's holding the defense back, and the improvement in the defenses' performance when Jones is on the court backs that up. The Spurs defense is 8.1 points better when Jones is on the court. To put that in perspective, the Spurs are only 6.7 points better when Victor is on the court. They're 2.3 points worse when Sochan is on the court. So no, it doesn't track that Jones playing his hurting the defense's integrity just because he's not going to stop a mismatch one-on-one all the time.

I'm not a Jones stan. I wanted the Spurs to trade up to draft their PG. But I think a lot of people are relying on a superficial standard "Can I point of him getting beat ever" or in the case of JD literally not knowing what NBA defense even looks like on a surface level. There's nothing stopping the other guys on the roster playing like Jones. If they did, and you wanted to make a change to take out a weak link, I wouldn't be bothered. But right now, even if Jones is the link made from the weakest material, he's the strongest link because none of the other ones are even welded shut. Taking him out to improve the D would be like taking Vassell out to improve the offense. Can Devin change some things to fit better in the offense? Yes. Does starting fucking Branham in his place improve that at all? No.

[spurraider21]

Modern defense is not supposed to involve a lot of one-on-one stops. Players are supposed to help each other, and the ways to do that are pretty well established (like "getting in the gaps"). Point guards have always been able to play on elite defenses, and they historically haven't been bigger than Jones is. I don't buy the idea that it's what's holding the defense back, and the improvement in the defenses' performance when Jones is on the court backs that up. The Spurs defense is 8.1 points better when Jones is on the court. To put that in perspective, the Spurs are only 6.7 points better when Victor is on the court. They're 2.3 points worse when Sochan is on the court. So no, it doesn't track that Jones playing his hurting the defense's integrity just because he's not going to stop a mismatch one-on-one all the time.

I'm not a Jones stan. I wanted the Spurs to trade up to draft their PG. But I think a lot of people are relying on a superficial standard "Can I point of him getting beat ever" or in the case of JD literally not knowing what NBA defense even looks like on a surface level. There's nothing stopping the other guys on the roster playing like Jones. If they did, and you wanted to make a change to take out a weak link, I wouldn't be bothered. But right now, even if Jones is the link made from the weakest material, he's the strongest link because none of the other ones are even welded shut. Taking him out to improve the D would be like taking Vassell out to improve the offense. Can Devin change some things to fit better in the offense? Yes. Does starting fucking Branham in his place improve that at all? No.
i agree with just about all of this tbh. i mentioned that he can get overwhelmed 1v1 at times, but as i've been criticizing the spurs D all year, ive basically exclusively commented on team defense tactics. where doubles are coming from, failing to help the helper, rotating late, wrong guys rotating, unnecessary help, etc. those are all areas where Tre is more trustworthy that any other perimeter player on the team. with that said, his short stature also hurts his ability to effective when closing out

and just as an aside on branham, theres no reason he should be starting. imo he's not playing at an NBA level right now and should be fighting for rotation minutes, not fighting for starts. fortunatley for him, there isnt a tremendous amount of competition right now at his position.

[Chinook]

How it's used in the phrase I responded to though, is as if a players defensive ability isn't easily assessable. If quantify was meant, it should have been used. No one here is trying to quantify defense. They are simply assessing that one person has terrible defense and another less terrible. This is what Pop does. It's what all coaches do. That assessment is how they measure defense, and it's pretty objective. By the time someone gets to the NBA, their defensive ability is measured.

No. Defense isn't like height. What does it mean to be a good defender? For the most part, you're going to come up with a suite of factors, some quantitative, some qualitative. Other people will come up with a different suite. That's true for All-Defense voters putting Kobe up there because of steals numbers and of statisticians creating RAPTOR, RPM, TPA, DBPM and all of the other stats. Even if the factors in the suite you select can be measured objectively "DFG, on/off, deflections" how much emphasis you place on each factor is up in the air. And more importantly, it's possible to get that weighing wrong. Hell, I'd say it's easy to get it wrong (and thus, "hard" to get it right). So yeah, taking trivial examples like a HoF defender compared to a guy who struggles doesn't actually prove anything. Just like the question in 2023 is "Who's better defensively, Tre or Sochan?" the question back in 2013 was "Who is the second-best Lebron defender, Diaw or Green?" Pop had to make the decision in the Finals that year. He went with Diaw, and it didn't really work out. Danny ended up grading out as a stiff challenge to James when he got tertiary duty. Diaw held up with help until James had his awakening, after which Boris never successfully guarded Lebron again.

Even that statement about Green grading out better is subjective. I am referencing the PPP allowed stats I charted during that series. Green was pretty successful stopping Lebron from scoring on him in that series. But is that good defense? It might seem obvious that it's a yes, but was stopping James from scoring efficiently even the goal? Maybe the goal was to tire him out, or get under his skin, or prevent him from passing or whatever. Coaches employed all of those tactics to stop James back then. The next year, Lance Stephenson did all that weird shit like blowing into James' ear. In that same vein, Sochan seems to want to annoy opposing scorers, constantly toeing the line of what is an acceptable basketball play. A lot of good defenders over the years have done that. Kawhi and Green never did anything like that.

This post could go on and on about with examples for how "good defense" has meant a number of factors, some of which are contradictory, and how some coaches misunderstood the effect some of those factors had. Most aspects to offense are quantified, even if they aren't all box score stats. Defense is nowhere near as easy to figure out. Just because someone makes an evaluation, it doesn't mean that they have successfully captured the nature of the situation. At best, it would be a similar line of reasoning to saying that teachers are able to measure intelligence through their curricula. Even ignoring shit like how standardized tests suck or whether the current state of the education system is viable, you're going to struggle to come up with criteria that will fully and consistently capture the breadth of intellectual expression and aptitude.

[Chinook]

i agree with just about all of this tbh. i mentioned that he can get overwhelmed 1v1 at times, but as i've been criticizing the spurs D all year, ive basically exclusively commented on team defense tactics. where doubles are coming from, failing to help the helper, rotating late, wrong guys rotating, unnecessary help, etc. those are all areas where Tre is more trustworthy that any other perimeter player on the team. with that said, his short stature also hurts his ability to effective when closing out

and just as an aside on branham, theres no reason he should be starting. imo he's not playing at an NBA level right now and should be fighting for rotation minutes, not fighting for starts. fortunatley for him, there isnt a tremendous amount of competition right now at his position.

I don't think a team with five Joneses would be a good defense. Two might be too many. Size is important. Like on that rotation that he can Collins misread, if Jones had Sochan's size, it would've been a no-brainer for Zach to go out of the shooter and Tre to take the center. In my opinion, Collins should've had a much higher threshold for when he pulled the trigger on joining the rotation wheel. He needed to understand the mismatch he was creating by making the rotation. I fully think Tre assumed Collins would stay home, since Zach joining the wheel was basically a guaranteed bucket no matter what Tre did. The question is how Pop is telling them to play that situation. It's possible that he has been coaching Collins to join the wheel because Sochan has been the starting PG for so long. That's why I can't fully assume it was Zach's fault. Collins for all his faults has a negative (which is good) defensive on/off as well despite his seeming inability to stop anyone from scoring on him. He doesn't seem to be protecting the rim, but he's probably not stupid when it comes to making his rotations. They should have communicated that better, since I could see reasoning for both decisions.

[Tyronn Lue]

No. Defense isn't like height. What does it mean to be a good defender? For the most part, you're going to come up with a suite of factors, some quantitative, some qualitative. Other people will come up with a different suite. That's true for All-Defense voters putting Kobe up there because of steals numbers and of statisticians creating RAPTOR, RPM, TPA, DBPM and all of the other stats. Even if the factors in the suite you select can be measured objectively "DFG, on/off, deflections" how much emphasis you place on each factor is up in the air. And more importantly, it's possible to get that weighing wrong. Hell, I'd say it's easy to get it wrong (and thus, "hard" to get it right). So yeah, taking trivial examples like a HoF defender compared to a guy who struggles doesn't actually prove anything. Just like the question in 2023 is "Who's better defensively, Tre or Sochan?" the question back in 2013 was "Who is the second-best Lebron defender, Diaw or Green?" Pop had to make the decision in the Finals that year. He went with Diaw, and it didn't really work out. Danny ended up grading out as a stiff challenge to James when he got tertiary duty. Diaw held up with help until James had his awakening, after which Boris never successfully guarded Lebron again.

Even that statement about Green grading out better is subjective. I am referencing the PPP allowed stats I charted during that series. Green was pretty successful stopping Lebron from scoring on him in that series. But is that good defense? It might seem obvious that it's a yes, but was stopping James from scoring efficiently even the goal? Maybe the goal was to tire him out, or get under his skin, or prevent him from passing or whatever. Coaches employed all of those tactics to stop James back then. The next year, Lance Stephenson did all that weird shit like blowing into James' ear. In that same vein, Sochan seems to want to annoy opposing scorers, constantly toeing the line of what is an acceptable basketball play. A lot of good defenders over the years have done that. Kawhi and Green never did anything like that.

This post could go on and on about with examples for how "good defense" has meant a number of factors, some of which are contradictory, and how some coaches misunderstood the effect some of those factors had. Most aspects to offense are quantified, even if they aren't all box score stats. Defense is nowhere near as easy to figure out. Just because someone makes an evaluation, it doesn't mean that they have successfully captured the nature of the situation. At best, it would be a similar line of reasoning to saying that teachers are able to measure intelligence through their curricula. Even ignoring shit like how standardized tests suck or whether the current state of the education system is viable, you're going to struggle to come up with criteria that will fully and consistently capture the breadth of intellectual expression and aptitude.
First, :lol of course stopping the other team from scoring is good defense and of course that was the plan, else why have your best defender on him?

Second, the fact you yourself said people were "good defenders" shows it's not as subjective as you claim. You cannot have it both ways.

[taps]

There's no evidence that Tre isn't anything but a good defender

I agree. 2nite against HOU he was getting tons of deflections, seemed to be bothering guys at every position. I noticed when he roamed or helped he was super fleet of foot recovering to his man. I think His recovery to good position defense after badgering a big has improved.

[taps]

Obviously the way to beat tre jones 1v1 on defense is to post him up.

[Chinook]

First, :lol of course stopping the other team from scoring is good defense and of course that was the plan, else why have your best defender on him?

... did not not read any of that? In case you're wondering, no, stopping a player from scoring is not always the plan. I'd argue it usually wasn't in the iso days. "Making them work for their points" was the goal. Bowen didn't guard Nash to stop him from scoring (thankfully too, because Nash didnt' see a drop in scoring efficiency in Bowen's minutes). It was to prevent him from passing the ball. Before you try to go like ":lol That's the same thing", it's literally not. We are talking about how one objectively measures if a player is doing a good job, and the suite of factors to show a drop in scoring aren't the same as the suite for passing. At the same time, you can't just assume that passing is ALWAYS an important part of a player's assignment. Do you care about limiting Shaq's passing?


Second, the fact you yourself said people were "good defenders" shows it's not as subjective as you claim. You cannot have it both ways.

Do you not know what objective means? It doesn't mean that an individual believing it. It means being true outside of interpretation. That I can talk about good defenders and bad defenders means I have opinions and can talk about the opinions of others. While most folks think Kawhi was a good defender, a number of Spurs fans thought Danny Green was a bad defender. I was on the side that LDN was very good defensively and had multiple series where he was pretty close to Leonard on that end. But objectively speaking, was he? ... Well it turns out the answer to that is difficult and contentious. You know, because defense is something that's difficult to measure objectively.

If you think you objectively know the answer to that question, it would be a sign you might think too many of your opinions are facts. In reality, people on both sides will try to bring evidence to bear, but there won't be agreement on the strength of that evidence. It's not like, "Was Kobe a good scorer?" where you can talk about his PPG, EFG, TS, PPP, whatever. Those stats are transparent and focused. In contrast, RPM, BPM, RAPTOR (RIP) and the others are opaque and esoteric. It's not clear what each stat means on its own, let alone how to measure that against the other stats and evidence. The math guys keep trying to come up with new stats to measure defense, and none really stick. Even if one did get enough prestige ala the OG RAPM, folks like Sean would completely dismiss it while confidently lauding Keldon's defense.

[Tyronn Lue]

... did not not read any of that? In case you're wondering, no, stopping a player from scoring is not always the plan. I'd argue it usually wasn't in the iso days. "Making them work for their points" was the goal. Bowen didn't guard Nash to stop him from scoring (thankfully too, because Nash didnt' see a drop in scoring efficiency in Bowen's minutes). It was to prevent him from passing the ball. Before you try to go like ":lol That's the same thing", it's literally not. We are talking about how one objectively measures if a player is doing a good job, and the suite of factors to show a drop in scoring aren't the same as the suite for passing. At the same time, you can't just assume that passing is ALWAYS an important part of a player's assignment. Do you care about limiting Shaq's passing?

You're playing a semantics game. If you know who the good defenders are well enough to use them as an example, it's not subjective, and yes I read your response. There were too many opportunities where you went both ways on a point so I chose to only address the most glaring ones. Basically a good defender stops the opponent from doing what the opponent wants to do, and in the NBA (and in most sports) that's scoring even if a pass comes first.


Do you not know what objective means? It doesn't mean that an individual believing it. It means being true outside of interpretation. That I can talk about good defenders and bad defenders means I have opinions and can talk about the opinions of others. While most folks think Kawhi was a good defender, a number of Spurs fans thought Danny Green was a bad defender. I was on the side that LDN was very good defensively and had multiple series where he was pretty close to Leonard on that end. But objectively speaking, was he? ... Well it turns out the answer to that is difficult and contentious. You know, because defense is something that's difficult to measure objectively.

You're playing a semantics game again. If we can agree that Kawhi and Draymond are good defenders without comparing notes, then for conversational purposes, the term "good defender" already has a measuring stick.


If you think you objectively know the answer to that question, it would be a sign you might think too many of your opinions are facts. In reality, people on both sides will try to bring evidence to bear, but there won't be agreement on the strength of that evidence. It's not like, "Was Kobe a good scorer?" where you can talk about his PPG, EFG, TS, PPP, whatever. Those stats are transparent and focused. In contrast, RPM, BPM, RAPTOR (RIP) and the others are opaque and esoteric. It's not clear what each stat means on its own, let alone how to measure that against the other stats and evidence. The math guys keep trying to come up with new stats to measure defense, and none really stick. Even if one did get enough prestige ala the OG RAPM, folks like Sean would completely dismiss it while confidently lauding Keldon's defense.
This is going into sophist nonsense. Clearly you know what comprises a good defender.

[Chinook]

You're playing a semantics game. If you know who the good defenders are well enough to use them as an example, it's not subjective, and yes I read your response.

Bro, you're here trying to make a special definition for "measure" and you're accusing me of playing the semantic game? That's ridiculous. I'm not going to keep having this conversation when you don't even bother to look up what "subjective" means. If could list good restaurants, cools bands and a ton of other subjective things too. I would 100 percent have Danny Green as one of the best defenders of his era. That's irrefutably a subjective claim. I have plenty of empirical evidence for it, but others (like seemingly you) wouldn't accept that evidence over subjective, qualitative evaluations like, "Does he prevent his man from doing what he wants to do?"


Basically a good defender stops the opponent from doing what the opponent wants to do, and in the NBA (and in most sports) that's scoring even if a pass comes first.

That's your definition, and it's basically useless. Like it's fine as a definition with no extensions, but it doesn't address the actual question, which is "How do you measure it?" Do you interview the player to see if his defender correctly guessed his mind? What if a player wants to pass and is forced instead of score an efficient 50 points in a blowout win. Is that good defense? More importantly, your definition is only talking about one-on-one defenders, as rim-protectors aren't measured by how well they're guarding a single guy. Wemby isn't judged by how much the opposing C scores, but how much efficiency he can knock of the opposing offense. And no, that's not just a position thing, because Splitter was an excellent man-defender and PnR helper but wasn't a great rim-protector, whereas Old Tim wasn't great if he had to leave the paint but was still probably the best phone-booth defender in the NBA right up until his good knee went out. I would say all three of those bigs were some degree of good defender, but how I would go about figuring that out would be difficult, especially if I were trying to evaluate them without already knowing them.


You're playing a semantics game again. If we can agree that Kawhi and Draymond are good defenders without comparing notes, then for conversational purposes, the term "good defender" already has a measuring stick.

Again, that's not a semantics game. You can't say, "We know how a good defender is because we have Kawhi and Draymond." A big part why is because they aren't the same kind of defender at all, and there are players who are similar to either of them who aren't good defenders. Players can be good defenders while not being anything like those guys, both in terms of nature and degree. Tre isn't like either of them. Nevertheless, he's a good defender. He's not a HoFer like those guys, but because we don't have to use a dumb (in this case meaning simple and agnostic to the situation, not unintelligent) method of examination, we can form opinions with strong support. Those opinions are still subjective of course, and there's a ton of room for disagreement in some cases. More importantly, saying "like Kawhi or Draymond" doesn't answer the effing question, because we still don't have any guidance to determining how to make that determination.


This is going into sophist nonsense. Clearly you know what comprises a good defender.

Rather than pulling out the best of FuzzieLumpkins, why not actually try to apply your objective reasoning? If the test you've developed is sufficient, you should be able to use it to objectively differentiate any players in the league. You inserted yourself into a conversation about whether Jones is a good defender. As far as I know, you've yet to give your answer to that question. Is Jones a good defender? If your answer is "no" then we can pack this whole thing up right here. The argument for Jones has way too much evidence for your claim to be an objectively true statement. You might believe it to be true but again, that's just not being able to tell opinion from fact. There's no "You know Jones is a bad defender, and you're just being a sophist" or whatever. I legit think Jones has been a good defender, and I have been discussing supporting evidence for that assertion for like a year now.

If you answer, "Yes". then the question becomes what elements are you using to liken him to Kawhi or Draymond. I know I don't think of him in the context of those two or any of the iconic defenders. I can't even really think of a comparison to Jones, not because he's unique (he isn't), but because I see no value in that thought process. It really helps some people, and I'm cool with that. I understand that it's hard to objectively measure defense, so using short-hand to try to grapple with the evaluation can be helpful, even if woefully insufficient.

[Tyronn Lue]

https://www.giantbomb.com/a/uploads/square_small/16/164924/2830526-8095568536-Vizzi.jpg

Clearly you cannot say a player is a good defender because you clearly don't have objective proof.
Ah but then you cannot say a player isn't a good defender because you lack the same objective proof.
So clearly there is no such thing as a good defender. Or is there?

[Obstructed_View]

I guess folks like Obstructed_View and exstatic can stop pretending like Wemby is the next Durant now.
:lol let's wait and see how he does at center first.

[DAF86]

:lol let's wait and see how he does at center first.

He already made history on his first game there.

Everybody and their mother knows Wemby will end up being a center in the NBA, I thought Pop would keep Wemby at PF for the entire rookie season, but it only took 20 games to end that experiment. Just give it a rest, from here on out Wemby will be a center, I don't understand how you still don't realize this fact, tbh.

[Obstructed_View]

He already made history on his first game there.

Everybody and their mother knows Wemby will end up being a center in the NBA, I thought Pop would keep Wemby at PF for the entire rookie season, but it only took 20 games to end that experiment. Just give it a rest, from here on out Wemby will be a center, I don't understand how you still don't realize this fact, tbh.
Came in here to give you some credit, but you're such a little fucking twat about. It. I changed my mind. :lol

[DAF86]

Came in here to give you some credit, but you're such a little fucking twat about. It. I changed my mind. :lol

If it's any consolation, that's just my internet persona. On real life I try to be humble. :lol

[Obstructed_View]

If it's any consolation, that's just my internet persona. On real life I try to be humble. :lol
:lol. Fair enough.
I did like that he seemed to be more involved. I thought he might get chewed up, but he does better against big guys than small guys. He really struggled against fronting, but he held his own with AD. And fuuuuuck he's so good in the clutch. I want more touches, more shots and see how the chips fall.

[rascal]

He already made history on his first game there.

Everybody and their mother knows Wemby will end up being a center in the NBA, I thought Pop would keep Wemby at PF for the entire rookie season, but it only took 20 games to end that experiment. Just give it a rest, from here on out Wemby will be a center, I don't understand how you still don't realize this fact, tbh.

Of course Wemby will be more effective closer to the basket to utilize his size. Only problem he'll be in more games with foul trouble defending closer to the basket.