This section is take from the "Hollinger Spurs in 6" article Rummpd posted ( http://spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=15313 ). I wanted to pick this part out, because I often hear people talk about how poor the Spurs 3 point defense is.
http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/playo...=2055486&num=1
How did Seattle beat San Antonio in the regular season? In both victories, Seattle shot well from 3-point range. The Sonics made 9 of 22 in a 102-96 win on Dec. 9, and 6-of-13 in a 113-94 win on Nov. 7. Over those two games, they hit 42.9 percent, well above their season mark of 36.5 percent.
Seattle's 3-point shooting will be a focal point, because it was crucial to the team's success. The Sonics were a great offensive team this year, finishing third in the league in Offensive Efficiency (my measure of how many points a team scores per 100 possessions). They pulled this off in spite of a poor field-goal percentage. Seattle's 44.4 percent shooting mark ranked a mere 18th in the NBA.
Seattle offset the low percentage by earning an extra point on its shots. The Sonics were second only to Phoenix in 3-point attempts, taking more than 22 a game. With the help of all the long-range bombs, Seattle was fourth in the league in True Shooting Percentage at 54.6 percent.
However, Seattle's 3-point frequency goes head-to-head with San Antonio's strongest defensive trend: The Spurs put the kibosh on the 3-point shot. San Antonio allowed only 11 made 3-pointers in its five game series against Denver, underscoring its season-long trend. The Spurs permitted fewer than four 3-pointers a game during the regular season, nearly one per game less than any other team.
Oddly, the Spurs allow teams to shoot a decent percentage: San Antonio's opponents hit 36.7%. The problem for opponents was getting an attempt in the first place. In a league where the average team takes 15.8 3-pointers a game, Spurs' opponents shot just 10.7. The Spurs' defense essentially vaporized a third of their opponents' 3-point tries, which is one of many reasons that San Antonio ranked No. 1 in Defensive Efficiency for the fourth time in five years.
"allowed only 11 made 3-pointers in its five game series against Denver"
I don't think Denver's absence of 3G had everything to do with the Spurs. I think Karl told them not to shoot 3G's, esp Carmelo, who used to hoist 3Gs very frequently.
Could somebody lookup how many 3Gs the Nuggets shot per game after Karl, vs how many before Karl, vs the league avg?
I understand that, but the averages given were for all teams, not just Denver.
It's an old story, for anyone who checks "NBA.com sortable team stats", that the Spurs opp 3G% was one of the worst in the NBA (an anomaly in the Spurs' top defensive stat line), but I didn't realize the number of 3Gs attempted against Spurs was so low, which reduces the anomaly of the 3G%.
or does it? You would think if the opp was shooting a good 3G%age against the Spurs, the opp would shoot more, not less, 3Gs.
I think it might be in the way the Spurs defend the three. They allow fewer looks overall, but sacrifice a higher percentage of "good looks" in return.
The quan y of the Nuggets 3 point attempts per game didn't change drastically after Karl took over, it was the quality of the shots that improved the team. Since the Nuggs don't take a lot of threes, I don't know that the Spurs limited them per se. The Nuggets didn't shoot a great percentage, so the Spurs didn't really have to work to limit their attempts.
The Spurs double less often in the post, so there are fewer looks for the perimeter players without someone in their face...
The higher percentage is probably just a fluke...I mean the percentage is not that mich more, maybe 1 or 2 in a hundred...so it is insignificant.
I think there is something in the way the Spurs funnel baseline and how that affects rotations to shooters at the arc.
The Spur's 3 point defense is awsome! People see only the % BUT in attempts per game for opposing teams is the lowest in the league!Its about 10 apg. Highest is Phoenix @ 18 apg! Talk about being a KY jelly defense!!!
The Spur's defense also had lowest % in field goals made per game in the league.
Basically I see the Spurs are content in letting the 3 go but they still force alot of those possible 3 attempts to go interior,so teams attemps less of them.
-+=
Spurs also focus in particular on not allowing good looks from the corners where the highest three point percantage is made from and where many teams like to shoot the threes from since a better percentage is made and if missed it limit long rebounds upcourt to feed transitions play. Pop generally goes nuts when Spurs defenders allow open looks from behind the corner arc.
Isn't that partially a result of forcing drives baseline?
My understanding it is in part but forcing baseline I think is primarily to take away the middle, seal the player along the baseline where there are less options.Then on the baseline what I see is Pop wants the defender to close out and allow penetration rather than lay back and allow the three. Let the bigs clean up any mess coming from baseline penetration. Just my understanding of the workings. Happy to be corrected if wrong. One thing I know though is Pop will regualrly ream guys who don't get to the baseline three point shooter.
Yeah, I think Hollinger's point is that the Spurs 3pt FG defense is best viewed in light of the number of attempts they allow and not the percentages that opponents shoot.
The low attempt number suggests that the Spurs generally stick with shooters, don't get caught in slow rotations out of double teams, tend to play screen and roll pretty well, and close out well on open guys.
I think there's another reason, too. Teams playing the Spurs know that every possession will likely matter in deciding their fate -- giving away offensive possessions against the Spurs with turnovers and bad shots tends to be fatal to the chance of beating the Spurs. I suspect that teams are generally reluctant to attempt many threes, knowing that they're going to be defended tightly at the arc and that the percentage of 3 point hits is fairly small anyway.
So, teams shooting from distance against the Spurs tend to take only the very best looks that they can get -- that will be a limited number of shots in every game, and because the looks will be among the best, they'll shoot a decent percentage.
Well if you force the guy with the ball baseline, there is most likely not another offensive player standing behind him at the corner. Sending a penetrator through the middle allows for both corners to be camped by shooters. Also, it would seem harder to me to kick the ball from a baseline penetration all the way across the court to the opposite corner, than driving down the middle and dishing either left or right.
That's what I mean by limiting options by taking away the middle.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
