PDA

View Full Version : The Value of Defense When It Comes To Judging an NBA Player



Rivera
06-16-2011, 02:45 PM
i made this thread in part of the nash v rondo and whos better right now

nash is superior offensivley while rondo is superior defensivley

while there other skills sets match up similarly...

its hard to judge defense when it comes to stats...theres no real stats for individual defense only the way how someone gets after it and how much they hold there opponent to score

in a debate how much do you value defense when judging an NBA player??

Tony Allen is the best perimeter defender in the NBA today in my book but he wouldnt touch my top 10 NBA shooting guards

Bruce Bowen and Ron Artest was regarded as the best defenders about 5 to 8 years ago you could make an arguement 5 to 8 years ago ron ron was a top 10 SF but not bowen

just how much do you factor defense when it comes to judging an NBA player?

mRc08
06-16-2011, 02:57 PM
It is difficult to judge like you said, however i value it a lot. The thing is, many people do not appreciate good defense and think it is something that you can just turn on and off. THere are reasons some players are career long poor defenders (boozer). It takes a combination of scouting, hustle, and athleticisim. Fans often become angry with defense first players because when they get the ball and cannot score in a situation others can, it makes you feel they shouldn't be on the floor. However, solid defense is the key to all championship teams(beating dead horse). I don't look at blocks as the key indicator for how good someone is on D, but more so the ability to effect shots, shot selection, and the ability to make otherwise star players work harder, waste energy, and do things they ordinarily wouldn't do. Also, because defense requires hustle and heart, often defensive players are great in the lockeroom and help make players raise their defense and intensity as well. (lead by example)

Chronz
06-16-2011, 03:20 PM
Agreed on most of your post, despite popular belief I believe defense is not 50% of the game, you take a purely offensive talent like a young ray allen vs a purely dominant defender like bruce bowen and ray is thrice the player bowen is.

I think the% differ when it comes to bigmen but still not a 50/50 split.

That said there are ALOT of defensive stats out there so I disagree on that claim.

PatsSoxKnicks
06-16-2011, 03:32 PM
For PGs, I think defense is like 30-70 (30% being defense). It's the least important position defensively. And most teams can cover up bad PG defense with a great interior defense.

And I agree with Chronz, there are quite a few defensive stats out there. Synergy has some excellent stats that are for free. So I'd imagine the people who pay for their service have access to even better stats.

HouRealCoach
06-16-2011, 03:42 PM
Rondo isnt superior defensively... He just gets steals

Allen, Bowen, Artest, Battier were never known for steals... They could just contain and shut down others

Add that stealing is the most overrated stat because Rondo tends to hurt the team when he gambles alot also

HouRealCoach
06-16-2011, 03:54 PM
and its funny because people usually just call the best players the ones that are winning...

Zach Randolph has been a 20,10 player 90% of his career but until he starts winning this year he isnt considered a top PF

Kobe is now no longer the best player they say

In the Chicago series LeBron was the best closer in the game but now they have dollar/75cent jokes

Nash putting up the same numbers but he is no longer "the best"

They have been on and off about Dirk being better than Bird

When the Celtics lost people on here FINALLY decided to call Rondo "overrated" but during the season he was the best PG walking the face of this earth

Pau lost and now he is back to being soft... But during those championships he was called the next Tim Duncan

Its pretty sad if you ask me

HouRealCoach
06-16-2011, 03:56 PM
Not to mention during the season Durant and Rose were the new breed of superstars but now since they lost they are nothing more than all stars at this point

and most of the best defensive bigmen are usually the top big men in the league but most of what you said is true

SugeKnight
06-16-2011, 04:05 PM
Individual defense is not nearly as important as team defense, so I look at offensive capabilities when I compare players more so than defense.

tredigs
06-16-2011, 04:11 PM
Chronz and PatSox summed my thoughts up well here.

Unless the players defense is elite basket protection or transcendent to the point of being able to lock down the best player at 2+ positions (this almost never, ever happens - and a great team D supercedes personal D every time), then it's never as important as great offense.

Joshtd1
06-16-2011, 04:36 PM
Agreed on most of your post, despite popular belief I believe defense is not 50% of the game, you take a purely offensive talent like a young ray allen vs a purely dominant defender like bruce bowen and ray is thrice the player bowen is.

I think the% differ when it comes to bigmen but still not a 50/50 split.

That said there are ALOT of defensive stats out there so I disagree on that claim.

Curious but why do you think that?

Also curious why you think a offensive talent like Allen is "thrice the player" that Bowen is who was a dominant defender.

Im not questioning that it's not true, just would like to hear your reasoning.

Joshtd1
06-16-2011, 04:38 PM
It has to be pretty valuable though, seeing as someone like Bill Russell who was a dominant defender, the best defender ever to some people, is in contention for GOAT. Or is he only in contention because of his 11 rings more so then his defense.

Raph12
06-16-2011, 06:37 PM
If it was as important as offense, Dwight would easily be the #1 player in the league... Easily.

Chronz
06-17-2011, 04:14 AM
It has to be pretty valuable though, seeing as someone like Bill Russell who was a dominant defender, the best defender ever to some people, is in contention for GOAT. Or is he only in contention because of his 11 rings more so then his defense.
I do think its more important the higher up the positional chart you go, bigmen tend to have the most responsibility defensively so its more important for them but generally speaking a dominating offensive player is more valuable.

Its why you always see teams build around offensive centerpieces, its much easier to surround that dominant offensive player with defensive talent than it is to surround him with more offensive talent. Your seeing it now with the Bulls, and you saw Dirk finally win the title behind the addition of Tyson Chandler.

With regards to Russell, no one really believes hes one of the GOAT, he has one of the prettiest resumes for his era but that cant be all your basing it on.



If it was as important as offense, Dwight would easily be the #1 player in the league... Easily.
Pretty much

Chronz
06-17-2011, 04:17 AM
Curious but why do you think that?
Because if you take a player who only excels defensively vs a player who only excels offensively, the offensive player will leave a greater imprint on the game.


Also curious why you think a offensive talent like Allen is "thrice the player" that Bowen is who was a dominant defender.

Im not questioning that it's not true, just would like to hear your reasoning.
Twice? Its hyperbole bro, I dont know the exact figure but you know hes the far superior player

More-Than-Most
06-17-2011, 05:01 AM
When it comes to the point guard position it should not be as cut and dry as offense/defense. When using examples of both Rondo and Nash... Nash has proven to make everyone around him better no matter how good or bad they are. Defense is important but what Nash brings to the point guard position far exceeds what Rondo brings to it.

Steve Nash defense is bad but its not as bad as everyone makes it out to be. Also Rondo has much better team defense around him that also helps him out on the defensive side of things.

For the point guard position give me a point guard that excels on the offensive side over the defensive side. There is much more things for a point guard to do from an offensive perspective then a defensive one.

NBA-GMaster
06-17-2011, 06:30 AM
Not a fan of both teams, Nash is better offensively but Rondo is a good inside slasher type scorer too..

Rentzias
06-17-2011, 09:38 AM
I agree with Chronz that the offensive player will leave the bigger imprint on the game. Point total is what matters at the end of a game and a defensive stopper at a non-C, non-PF (inside) position can only handle a player at a time.
Russell was able to be so dominant defensively because Auerbach pretty much told him to focus on defense and let the rest of the team worry about scoring. That pretty much sums it up; defense, as an overall game value, should be measured in a team context, whereas you have a Kobe 81-point game where an individual effort kept the team in the game, and not the other way around.

Nicolas007
06-17-2011, 09:46 AM
When it comes to the point guard position it should not be as cut and dry as offense/defense. When using examples of both Rondo and Nash... Nash has proven to make everyone around him better no matter how good or bad they are. Defense is important but what Nash brings to the point guard position far exceeds what Rondo brings to it.

Steve Nash defense is bad but its not as bad as everyone makes it out to be. Also Rondo has much better team defense around him that also helps him out on the defensive side of things.

For the point guard position give me a point guard that excels on the offensive side over the defensive side. There is much more things for a point guard to do from an offensive perspective then a defensive one.

Totally agreed