Analysis of Spurs Perimeter Defense against OKC

[Chinook]

Finally! This is the moment some undisclosed but probably really small number of you have been waiting for. Here are the Game Five numbers:

Durant
	Game 5	Possesions	Makes	Misses	Fouls	Turnover	Points	PPP		Series	Possessions	Makes	Misses	Fouls	Turnover	Points	PPP
	Leonard	4	0	3	0	1	0	0		Leonard	40	18	16	3	4	42	1.05
	Green	6	3	3	1	0	7	1.166667		Green	22	8	11	4	1	21	0.954545
	Duncan	2	0	1	1	0	1	0.5		Belinelli	4	1	2	1	0	4	1
	Splitter	1	0	1	0	0	0	0		Duncan	8	2	2	4	1	9	1.125
	Diaw	2	1	1	0	0	2	1		Splitter	8	2	4	1	1	6	0.75
	Ginobili	9	7	1	2	0	15	1.666667		Ginobili	19	11	5	3	2	26	1.368421
										Baynes	4	0	1	1	2	1	0.25
	Total	24	11	10	4	1	25	1.041667		Parker	3	0	1	1	1	2	0.666667
										Diaw	9	4	3	1	1	9	1
										Bonner	3	0	3	1	0	0	0
										Ayres	3	0	3	0	0	0	0
										Joseph	1	0	0	1	0	2	2
										Pop	1	0	0	1	0	1	1
										Total	125	46	51	22	13	123	0.984

Westbrook
	Game 5	Possessions	Makes	Misses	Fouls	Turnover	Points	PPP		Series	Possessions	Makes	Misses	Fouls	Turnover	Points	PPP
	Leonard	13	5	5	3	1	14	1.076923		Leonard	18	6	7	4	3	16	0.888889
	Green	1	1	0	0	0	3	3		Green	28	10	13	2	3	24	0.857143
	Parker	1	0	0	1	0	2	2		Parker	23	6	13	3	1	19	0.826087
	Ginobili	1	0	0	0	1	0	0		Duncan	9	2	3	4	0	9	1
	Mills	1	0	0	1	0	2	2		Splitter	6	2	3	0	1	3	0.5
	Duncan	1	0	1	1	0	0	0		Diaw	7	2	3	1	1	7	1
										Ginobili	19	6	4	5	6	19	1
	Total	18	6	6	6	2	21	1.166667		Baynes	3	0	1	2	0	4	1.333333
										Mills	5	2	2	1	0	7	1.4
										Belinelli	4	1	2	1	0	4	1
										Bonner	2	1	1	0	0	2	1
										Joseph	9	4	3	3	2	9	1
										Ayres	3	1	1	1	0	4	1.333333
										Total	136	43	56	27	17	127	0.933824

Jackson
	Game 5	Possessions	Makes	Misses	Fouls	Turnover	Points	PPP		Series	Possessions	Makes	Misses	Fouls	Turnover	Points	PPP
	Duncan	1	1	0	0	0	2	2		Green	12	3	6	0	3	6	0.5
	Green	2	1	1	0	0	2	1		Parker	14	7	5	0	2	17	1.214286
	Parker	7	3	2	0	2	7	1		Belinelli	6	4	1	0	1	9	1.5
	Diaw	1	0	1	0	0	0	0		Mills	4	1	1	1	2	2	0.5
	Joseph	1	0	1	0	0	0	0		Duncan	6	3	1	0	1	5	0.833333
										Diaw	3	1	2	0	0	2	0.666667
	Total	12	5	5	0	2	11	0.916667		Ginobili	5	3	1	1	1	6	1.2
										Splitter	1	1	3	0	0	0	0
										Leonard	2	0	1	1	0	2	1
										Joseph	1	0	1	0	0	0	0
										Total	54	23	22	3	10	49	0.907407

Ibaka
	Game 5	Possessions	Makes	Misses	Fouls	Turnover	Points	PPP		Series	Possessions	Makes	Misses	Fouls	Turnover	Points	PPP
	Duncan	2	0	2	0	0	0	0		Parker	1	1	0	0	0	2	2
	Splitter	1	0	1	0	0	0	0		Bonner	4	0	3	1	0	1	0.25
	Diaw	4	3	1	0	0	6	1.5		Splitter	11	6	4	1	0	14	1.272727
	Bonner	3	0	3	0	0	0	0		Diaw	8	4	2	1	1	9	1.125
										Belinelli	2	1	1	0	0	2	1
	Total	10	3	7	0	0	6	0.6		Green	2	1	0	0	1	2	1
										Joseph	1	0	0	1	0	0	0
										Duncan	2	0	2	0	0	0	0
										Total	31	13	12	4	2	30	0.967742

General Takeways:

The thing that jumps out to me the post is that I think Pop and Brooks had two completely different impressions about what happened in Game Four. Pop seemed to overact to Westbrook’s explosion, putting Leonard on him and committing the bigs to help on penetration. Brooks seemed to think Russell shot too much and needed to get others involved. Both impressions were a little wrong-headed, in my opinion, but what they led to is Westbrook having a constant driving lane into Duncan, whom Russ refused to consistently challenge. Instead, Westbrook looked to pass a lot more when he could have drawn fouls, which led to some nice assist, but overall an easier offense for San Antonio to defend. It’s amazing to me that Brooks would be complaining about a lack of calls when the Thunder really didn’t attack the basket.

Strangely enough, the Thunder really didn’t run the 1/3 PnR very much. They instead seemed content to let Russ beat Kawhi off the dribble (which he did constantly, as I said in the last paragraph). However, that allowed Duncan to stay at home and contest drives, which is pretty much the exact opposite of what you want to make Tim do. Eventually the Thunder had some mild success running the 3/4 PnR, but that was only for a stretch in which Diaw was caught overhedging. By that same token, it’s also strange that Green was only involved in nine ended possessions against OKC’s Big Four. It’s possible that Brooks is starting to go away from Danny’s man.

Ginobili. Well, Durant made Manu his in Game Five. There’s really not much more to say about that. I think Manu is a fine tertiary Durant defender, but Pop probably shouldn’t keep him on KD too long. After an exception Game Three defensively, Ginobili’s D has started to trend downwards. The good news is that if Jackson is unable to be effective going forward, then Manu will be able to draw Butler or Fisher more often.

Have we seen the last of Reggie Jackson and Serge Ibaka as scoring threats? Perhaps. Jackson really fell off after the first quarter Thursday, and Ibaka really fell off after Game Three. I wouldn’t be surprised to see them both start off hot tonight, but they may well cool off and even be ice cold by the second half. Lower leg injuries are no joke. It’s nice to see Splitter having some pride and shutting down Ibaka for two straight games, regardless, and Parker battled back in the second half after letting Jackson torch him to start the game.

The team went back to defending the three-point line aggressively, closing hard on 9/13 attempts. OKC scored on 2/4 soft-closes (the fouls from Bonner and Parker) and 2/9 hard-closes (and Durant three after Green helped on Ibaka and a Fisher three at the beginning of the second). A poster suggested that the time on the shot clock may affect which type of close the defender gives, and there may be some truth to that. Every soft close was before the 12-second mark on the shot clock, while 7/9 hard-closes occurred after. I’ll crunch those numbers later, along with other potential variables.

All right! All caught up. Now it’s time to sit back and not think about basketball for a few hours. I’ve seen too many games in the past day or so. Feedback and discussion always welcomed, though.

[will_spurs]

As far as the differences between the way Parker and Green are viewed defensively. I'd say off the bat that Danny is underrated as a defender. More than that, though, Green's considered superior to Parker due to his consistency, team impact and versatility. When Tony is motivated, he's a very strong defender against point-guards. But Green's been doing work against elite perimeter scorers for a few years now. The fact that Danny has played huge (and successful) minutes on Westbrook and Durant, shut down Reggie Jackson and taken Fisher and Butler out of the series is why he's been defensive MVP so far. That doesn't discount that job that Parker and even Leonard have done, though. The Spurs' perimeter defense has been strong all series, even when it didn't look like it.

First of all thanks for explaining what you meant about Parker vs Westbrook and the decision to have Kawhi get this defensive assignment.

Second it's clear that Green is much more versatile than Parker when it comes to D. But I think Parker's D is way underrated when it comes to shutting down the opposing PG. He might not do well against other players, but he shines against PG, especially stars (Westbrook, CP3, Deron Williams back when he was a star, etc.) Parker seems to be playing with a chip on his shoulder when facing other elite PGs and he usually comes out on top.

I'm quite impressed to see that Parker is as good as Kawhi or Green when it comes to defending Westbrook in this series. And it could be good news if Pop decided to let him do so and use Kawhi/Green on other threats. On the other hand I'll have to check in which games Parker defended Westbrook a lot, and if it affected his production on offense.

[Chinook]

First of all thanks for explaining what you meant about Parker vs Westbrook and the decision to have Kawhi get this defensive assignment.

Second it's clear that Green is much more versatile than Parker when it comes to D. But I think Parker's D is way underrated when it comes to shutting down the opposing PG. He might not do well against other players, but he shines against PG, especially stars (Westbrook, CP3, Deron Williams back when he was a star, etc.) Parker seems to be playing with a chip on his shoulder when facing other elite PGs and he usually comes out on top.

Completely agree. Parker knows how to be a very good defender. He just isn't always motivated to do so. When the movement strikes him, the Spurs' D becomes elite. However, it's also worth considering that he's getting older and probably can't sustain max effort at both sides for long stretches. That's why Jackson being hobbled may end up being so huge.

[UZER]

Great work man. Appreciate the information. My opinion is, there are certain things that numbers don't do justice.

For example:

An offensive player can score on a defensive player numerous times which will make it look like he's getting torched. However, the D player can be playing physical pesky defence and making the O player work extremely hard even though he's still scoring. As the game wears on the O player may be guarded by other players, but the work put in by the D player earlier has taken its toll whether he had "stopped" him or not, and the O player struggles with other players.

Or, a player can be 1-5 but hit a timely 3 that helps prevent a game from getting away.

To say Joseph's game 4 was overrated and his D wasn't that good is doing a disservice to him. Joseph's game for was huge as far as hussle and effort. Regardless of what his numbers said, his hard nosed play had an effect on the Spurs players, especially the throw down on Ibaka.

I'm not dismissing what numbers can show, but they can also be misleading if you strictly go by them.

[ElNono]

thanks for the writeup

[Chinook]

You know what's an awesome feeling? Deleting the Game Seven template in my Excel file. Just wanted to say that. Game Six numbers will be up some time tomorrow.

[Chinook]

Last, but not least, here are the numbers for Game Six:

Durant
	Game 6	Possessions	Makes	Misses	Fouls	Turnover	Points	PPP		Series	Possessions	Makes	Misses	Fouls	Turnover	Points	PPP
	Leonard	5	2	2	0	1	4	0.8		Leonard	45	20	18	3	5	46	1.022222
	Green	14	6	4	1	4	12	0.857143		Green	36	14	15	5	5	33	0.916667
	Diaw	5	1	1	4	0	7	1.4		Belinelli	4	1	2	1	0	4	1
	Ginobili	6	3	2	2	1	8	1.333333		Duncan	11	2	4	4	2	9	0.818182
	Bonner	2	0	2	0	0	0	0		Splitter	8	2	4	1	1	6	0.75
	Duncan	3	0	2	0	1	0	0		Ginobili	25	14	7	5	3	34	1.36
										Baynes	4	0	1	1	2	1	0.25
	Total	35	12	13	7	7	31	0.885714		Parker	3	0	1	1	1	2	0.666667
										Diaw	14	5	4	5	1	16	1.142857
										Bonner	5	0	5	1	0	0	0
										Ayres	3	0	3	0	0	0	0
										Joseph	1	0	0	1	0	2	2
										Pop	0.5	0	0	1	0	1	2
										Total	159.5	58	64	29	20	154	0.965517

Note: I changed Durant’s FT of Pop’s tech to count as .5 poss. instead of a 1.

Westbrook
	Game 6	Possessions	Makes	Misses	Fouls	Turnover	Points	PPP		Series	Possessions	Makes	Misses	Fouls	Turnover	Points	PPP
	Leonard	12	3	3	4	2	14	1.166667		Leonard	30	9	10	8	5	30	1
	Green	11	3	6	1	1	8	0.727273		Green	39	13	19	3	4	32	0.820513
	Belinelli	1	0	1	0	0	0	0		Parker	23	6	13	3	1	19	0.826087
	Mills	4	0	2	0	2	0	0		Duncan	13	3	4	5	1	13	1
	Duncan	4	1	1	1	1	4	1		Splitter	8	2	3	1	2	5	0.625
	Splitter	2	0	0	1	1	2	1		Diaw	9	3	4	1	1	9	1
	Diaw	2	1	1	0	0	2	1		Ginobili	22	6	5	7	6	23	1.045455
	Ginobili	3	0	1	2	0	4	1.333333		Baynes	3	0	1	2	0	4	1.333333
	Bonner	0	0	0	1	0	0	N/A		Mills	9	2	4	1	2	7	0.777778
										Belinelli	5	1	3	1	0	4	0.8
	Total	39	8	15	10	7	34	0.871795		Bonner	2	1	1	1	0	2	1
										Joseph	9	4	3	3	2	9	1
										Ayres	3	1	1	1	0	4	1.333333
										Total	175	51	71	37	24	161	0.92

Jackson
	Game 6	Possessions	Makes	Misses	Fouls	Turnover	Points	PPP		Series	Possessions	Makes	Misses	Fouls	Turnover	Points	PPP
	Leonard	1	1	0	0	0	2	2		Green	15	4	6	0	5	9	0.6
	Green	3	1	0	0	2	3	1		Parker	18	9	7	0	2	22	1.222222
	Parker	4	2	2	0	0	5	1.25		Belinelli	6	4	1	0	1	9	1.5
	Mills	2	0	1	0	1	0	0		Mills	6	1	2	1	3	2	0.333333
	Duncan	3	0	3	0	0	0	0		Duncan	9	3	4	0	1	6	0.666667
	Diaw	4	2	2	0	0	4	1		Diaw	7	3	4	0	0	6	0.857143
	Ginobili	1	1	0	0	0	2	2		Ginobili	6	4	1	1	1	8	1.333333
	Bonner	1	0	0	0	0	2	2		Splitter	1	1	3	0	0	0	0
	Joseph	1	1	0	0	0	3	3		Leonard	3	1	1	1	0	4	1.333333
										Joseph	2	1	1	0	0	3	1.5
	Total	20	8	8	0	3	21	1.05		Bonner	1	0	0	0	0	2	2
										Total	74	31	30	3	13	71	0.959459

Note: I had missed a point on Jackson’s total tally. This is because I had accidently put down that Duncan had given up five points when really gave up six.

Ibaka
	Game 6	Possessions	Makes	Misses	Fouls	Turnover	Points	PPP		Series	Possessions	Makes	Misses	Fouls	Turnover	Points	PPP
	Green	2	0	1	1	1	0	0		Parker	1	1	0	0	0	2	2
	Mills	2	0	0	2	0	3	1.5		Bonner	9	2	6	1	0	5	0.555556
	Duncan	1	0	0	1	0	2	2		Splitter	11	6	4	1	0	14	1.272727
	Diaw	3	2	1	0	0	5	1.666667		Diaw	11	6	3	1	1	14	1.272727
	Bonner	5	2	3	0	0	4	0.8		Belinelli	2	1	1	0	0	2	1
	Joseph	1	1	0	0	0	2	2		Green	4	1	1	1	2	2	0.5
										Joseph	2	1	0	1	0	2	1
	Total	14	5	5	4	1	16	1.142857		Duncan	3	0	2	1	0	2	0.666667
										Mills	2	0	0	2	0	3	1.5
										Total	45	18	17	8	3	46	1.022222

General Takeaways:

I was incorrect in assuming OKC had become reluctant to go at Green after Game Five. The Thunder thought they had a huge mismatch with Westbrook or Durant being checked by Danny, and they went after him constantly. They weren’t alone in this feeling, as Kerr, Miller and others like Coach Nick at B-Ball Breakdown seemed to agree. But damn, did that NOT work out for them. Really, the Thunder couldn’t find any weaknesses in the Spurs defense they could exploit with match-ups. Even well-known sieves like Beli and Mills held up strong with the aid of rotating help-defenders. For a team like OKC that relies so much on individual scoring, they simply weren’t able to win enough battles. These numbers are truly abysmal for star players, especially considering that the Spurs rarely committed their whole defense to stopping them individually. Lock n Lock (my tentative nickname for the Green/Leonard defensive duo) gives the Spurs such an immense defensive advantage over the rest of the NBA that it’s not even fair.

It can’t really be overstated how much the fatigue affected Durant and Westbrook. They faded down the stretch offensively in each of the final three games of the series. The Spurs did a great job in making them work for their points, forcing them to run around multiple screens and constantly try to push the pace. The Spurs have the horses to run with anyone, and unlike most teams, they have quite a few in the stable. I said before the series that the Spurs matched up extremely well with OKC and that the Thunder would have to have a talent explosion to win. They got that explosion for their first six-and-a-half quarters in OKC, but after that, they suc bed to Xs and O’s.


There’s really not much more to say about the game. OKC’s Big Four couldn’t hold on to the ball giving the ball up 16 TIMES among themselves. (Green forced eight turnovers, Leonard five and Mills three.) The Spurs closed out hard on six attempts, soft on three, and didn’t close at all on one. I intend to get into all that in a later thread. On that topic, I will be making at least one more post about these numbers. I intend to do a little series round-up that will hopefully add a little more depth to these game-by-game analyses. Be sure to check back in this thread in a couple of days if that interests any of you.

[Malik Hairston]

Just as I suspected, tbh, Danny Green really had one of the best defensive performances in franchise history..it's a shame that it won't be discussed by anybody outside of this forum..

[spurraider21]

thanks for this series Chinook. you the man

[ElNono]

thanks for the hard work Chinook

[Robz4000]

Good work Chinook

[gilmor]

Very interesting read.. Thanks for the effort!

I thought that strip by Kawhi on Westbrook drive already deserve the nick Lock..

[Chinook]

Just as I suspected, tbh, Danny Green really had one of the best defensive performances in franchise history..it's a shame that it won't be discussed by anybody outside of this forum..

, even on this forum. Green threads sink on the front page like Boris Diaw in a hot air balloon.

[apalisoc_9]

Leonard did a better job on westbrook than durant..Kinda surprising imo since his main weakness has always been fast guards.

I made a danny green thread a couple days ago that lasted 5 minutes in the front page..

[Spursfanfromafar]

I waited for the whole series to get over before complimenting Chinook. I suspected that much of his analysis would suffer from the small sample size problem and thats why I didnt' see it necessary to take home the analysis. But over 6 games, these numbers hang well and point to a pattern -

a) Green & Leonard are indeed, as Chinook rightly points out, a perimeter terror for the opposing team.
b) Leonard makes the spectacular plays - the strip here, the block there, the reach there and the quick show of feet. But Green does the needful more. It is corroborated by advanced stats, where Green has the greater defensive RAPM numbers than Leonard, whose numbers are quite good too. It is also the case that Leonard is the designated defender and has to *always* take on the best offensive player of the opposing team. That way, one could call it a tie for Leonard and Green. Having said that, Green is such an unacknowledged and great defender, coming out of nowhere on his own.
c) Diaw is clearly the best Swiss army knife in the NBA. He will have his hands full when he takes on Lebron for limited minutes in the Finals.

[Chinook]

All right. I thought it was time to close my discussion of this series with a wrap-up post.

Here are the final numbers for Spurs defenders against OKC's Big Four (feel free to point out any calculation errors, though I don't think any will be too egregious):

Series	Possessions	Makes	Misses	Fouls	Turnover	Points	PPP
Leonard	78	30	29	12	10	80	1.025641
Green	94	32	41	9	16	76	0.808511
Parker	45	16	21	4	4	45	1
Duncan	36	8	14	10	4	30	0.833333
Splitter	31	11	14	3	3	25	0.806452
Diaw	41	17	15	7	7	45	1.097561
Ginobili	53	24	13	13	10	65	1.226415
Baynes	7	0	2	3	2	5	0.714286
Mills	17	3	6	4	5	12	0.705882
Belinelli	17	7	7	2	1	19	1.117647
Bonner	17	4	12	3	0	9	0.529412
Joseph	14	6	4	6	2	14	1
Ayres	6	1	4	1	0	4	0.666667
Pop	0.5	0	0	1	0	1	2
Total	456.5	159	182	78	64	430	0.94195

Thoughts:


It makes sense that Kawhi, Danny and Manu would lead the team in defensive possessions used, as they were the primary defenders for Durant and Westbrook. Obviously, Green was awesome in his assignments. Leonard was good as well, and he should get some extra credit for his ball-denial. However, I should note that both Green and Leonard checked the Durant/Westbrook duo the same number of times (75), so it’s not like Kawhi prevented significantly more possessions relative to his wingman.

I’m not sure that the sample sizes for the other guards (except Parker) are large enough to get make claims about with any confidence. It is also worth noting that the other guards defended OKC’s “others” more than they defended the Big Four. I didn’t keep tabs on OKC’s bench, but I do remember Fisher causing Mills problems in Game One and Butler scoring efficiently on Diaw in Game Two. Still, nice enough jobs on their parts.

Each big gave strong help when put in that assignment. Most of the negative numbers come from situations in which they had to switch onto OKC’s smalls. Diaw in particular suffered from that. Bonner was actually great, defensively, even though his sample size was too small to prove that. I said this before, but I feel Ibaka’s inability to score on Bonner played as big of a role in getting Serge off his game than Bonner pulling Ibaka out on the paint.

Finally, Pop was clearly the worst Spurs on the court defensively. How do you give up a point in a half possession? I mean, most teams haven’t even gotten through their play by that time. I hope we don’t see Pop come off the bench during the Finals.


Three-Point Defense


This was a subplot I paid attention to for the WCF. I stopped posting the chart after Game One, but I kept track of the numbers.

Series
	Result	Three	Two	Foul	Miss	Pass	Total
	Hard	10	3	0	26	4	43
	Soft	4	4	6	7	1	22
	Stunt	1	0	0	0	0	1
	None	4	0	0	2	0	6

(In case anyone is wonder, the Spurs jumped on all but two hard-closes while jumping on three soft-closes.)

As you can see, the Spurs are a hard-closing team, and they do so because it is a very successful strategy. There are a lot more intricacies to this than I am listing, obviously, and during the summer, I intend to get more into various strategies. We’ll see how that goes. For now, this was a fun little exercise.


Thanks for reading guys. I am happy that I was able to finish out this series. Now it’s time to create the template for the next series.

[ElNono]

Thanks again Chinook... I read the whole thing...

[SpurPadre]

Great read, Chinook. Should've read this earlier but pretty insightful stuff.

[Brazil]

great stuff tbh

nice btw to show by the number the Parker effect. Globally Parker don't play defense during RS except some marquee games against elite PGs but he had always stepped on the D end during the POs. He is surely not a one on one defender but he is one the best at funeling opponent PGs inside where Spurs bigs are waiting.

Also we can notice that second string PGs are having some success against him once in a while, it is just the result of Parker letting them a bit of space and make them take jumpers. I prefer globally a guy like Jackson taking JS rather than Durant.

[DesignatedT]

Decision to play Bonner that series looks pretty damn good all things considered. Changed the series tbh.

[heyheymymy]

great analysis thanks!

[timtonymanu]

Great work, Chinook.

Looking forward to your analysis on the Finals.

[Splits]

Damn, those hard vs. soft closeout numbers are devastating. Amazing that out of 43 hard closes not ONCE was there a foul called. 60% misses vs 32% misses with a large enough sample size to prove that those hard closes are indeed intended/coached and not "instinct" from the player.

I would like to see in your hard/soft table the point per attempt. My rough calculation, assuming all FTs were made and the passes don't count, is .84 pts/hard vs 1.2-1.7/soft depending on if those fouls resulted in 3 shots or an and-1.

Great work, Chinook. Look forward to more in the Finals.

[ABC]

Durant 0 for 5 and Ibaka 2 for 8 against Bonner

Thanks Chinook!