PDA

View Full Version : Who wins DPOY?



numba1CHANGsta
02-27-2014, 02:08 AM
Who do you guys think wins it with a month and a half left? personally I think it will be DeAndre Jordan, 1st in FG% and Rebounds, 4th in Blocks

P&GRealist
02-27-2014, 02:11 AM
1. DeAndre Jordan
2. Anthony Davis
3. Roy Hibbert
4. Serge Ibaka

Bostonjorge
02-27-2014, 02:47 AM
I like hibbert then Davis.

Im_in_Mia_bish
02-27-2014, 02:52 AM
FG% should be considered for defensive player of the year? Jesus Christ do you ever say anything that maKes sense?

Def between Ibaka and Roy Hibbert.

Chronz
02-27-2014, 03:14 AM
Why bring up irrelevant stats like rebounds and fg% when it should be about defense?

Anyways, Hibbert is taking it home rather easily, have complete faith the voters are going damn near unanimous in this one

5ass
02-27-2014, 03:41 AM
Deandre jordan because he's 1st in fg%.

slashsnake
02-27-2014, 03:47 AM
The best defense is a good offense. Durant all the way lol

Going Hibbert. only thing that might hurt him is Paul George on the same team is a top 5 candidate from what I've seen this year.

poleandreel
02-27-2014, 03:48 AM
Hibbert. But lol @ no mention of Noah. I think it's Hibbert/Ibaka/Noah/Robin Lopez

Ibaka has this perception that he isn't a good defender and only blocks shots. That was true 2 years ago when he finished 2nd in DPOY. He used to jump out of his shoes all the time and get faked rather easily. That is no longer the case. His improvement has been obvious and he shuts down most pf's.

And Robin Lopez is vastly underrated. He plays on a piss poor defensive team so he gets no recognition but his rim protection is very good. Players shoot a very low % around the rim while he is in the game.

JLynn943
02-27-2014, 04:34 AM
Just for fun, here's a CBS article about the DPOY race as of the all star break:



Defensive Player of the Year

1. Roy Hibbert, Indiana Pacers
2. Serge Ibaka, Oklahoma City Thunder
3. Dwight Howard, Houston Rockets
4. DeMarcus Cousins, Sacramento Kings
5. Paul George, Indiana Pacers

This may honestly be the most fun race of the year. Hibbert and Ibaka are effectively neck and neck at this point. We'll get more into this in a few weeks, but the two have remarkably different tactics but similar rates of production. Hibbert's mobility is underrated as the assumption is that he's stuck in the paint. The reality is that he has good awareness of staying within range so it seems like he's always there. But he can guard in the pick and roll and stay fluid with his rotations.

Meanwhile, Ibaka's closed on the things that I had always criticized him for. He doesn't fall for pump faks nearly as often. He doesn't chase blocks at the expense of his rotation. He's still a monster rebounder. He's able to more effectively guard in space and can shut down players with multiple weapons from the triple-threat. KD is unbelievable, but OKC's defense is what makes them a title contender. And Ibaka's the biggest part of that.

That's right, DeMarcus Cousins. Cousins still does enough to drive you nuts, but it's reached "Serge Ibaka in 2012" levels. Just because he has a worse attitude doesn't take away from what he does well. For all players defending at least 10 possessions per game, Synergy Sports lists DMC as fourth best in the league,. He's the best with over 14 possessions defended per game.

Dwight Howard's getting more and more healthy. Just keep that in the back of your head.
http://www.cbssports.com/nba/eye-on-basketball/24439259/baseline-awards-nba-awards-update-at-the-all-star-break

numba1CHANGsta
02-27-2014, 05:14 AM
Why bring up irrelevant stats like rebounds and fg% when it should be about defense?

Anyways, Hibbert is taking it home rather easily, have complete faith the voters are going damn near unanimous in this one

I threw in the FG% just for the heck of it, and are you forgetting about defensive rebounds??

Chronz
02-27-2014, 05:27 AM
I threw in the FG% just for the heck of it, and are you forgetting about defensive rebounds??
Thats a pretty awful reason bro, and to answer your question, nope. That would be more relevant than plain ol rebounds, thats for sure.

JasonJohnHorn
02-27-2014, 08:16 AM
I haven't seen a lot of Pacers or Rockets games this year, so I can't say much to Hibbert and Howard this year. Based on what I've seen of them in the past, they are obviously deserving of consideration, as is Ibaka.

I'm going to throw out Noah and Drummond and Anthony Davis. Drummond needs to get more experience to be able to read defenses and develop his basketball IQ, but his natural instincts seem pretty amazing at this point. I see him winning this award eventually.

Noah has been a big reason the Bulls are winning on both ends of the floor to be honest. And Davis is going to be an elite defender as well. I'm not sure where I'd currently rank him. Anybody voting for DPOY should watch a TON of games, because defense is something you can't just look up on the stat sheet.

thought Horford was doing great to start the season as well. And the usual perimeter players are doing well: CP3 and Tony Allen and such.

ManningToTyree
02-27-2014, 09:32 AM
Anthony Davis if his team wasn't terrible. He is going to win so many of these.

Hibbert or maybe Lebron since he won't get MVP this year.

Goose17
02-27-2014, 09:39 AM
IMO

Favourites; Hibbert, Howard, Noah and George.

Dark Horse(s); Deandre Jordan, Lebron James (could he win both MVP and DPOY in the same year?), Andrew Bogut, Ricky Rubio and Patrick Beverley.


It would be nice to see a perimeter guy win it again...

JasonJohnHorn
02-27-2014, 10:50 AM
Why bring up irrelevant stats like rebounds and fg% when it should be about defense?

Anyways, Hibbert is taking it home rather easily, have complete faith the voters are going damn near unanimous in this one

I agree that one's own FG% is a useless stats for defense, but I buy the rebounding numbers.

Part of your job on the defensive end is to ensure that the opposing team doesn't get a second chance. I think it is fair to factor in rebounds, but you MUST judge guards and small forwards by different standards and account for the fact that power forwards and centers are in position to get more boards.

THE MTL
02-27-2014, 10:53 AM
Roy Hibbert for sure

D-Leethal
02-27-2014, 11:23 AM
Noah deserves this award every year. Its about time this guy got some props from the league.

lamzoka
02-27-2014, 11:43 AM
They gon give it to Lebron even tho he doesnt deserve it

Shammyguy3
02-27-2014, 11:51 AM
The only correct answer is Roy Hibbert

FYL_McVeezy
02-27-2014, 11:54 AM
Hibbert or the Brow.

Im_in_Mia_bish
02-27-2014, 12:11 PM
Thats a pretty awful reason bro, and to answer your question, nope. That would be more relevant than plain ol rebounds, thats for sure.

He's just backtracking cos he's been exposed.
He always types the dumbest ****
:facepalm:

Chronz
02-27-2014, 02:16 PM
I agree that one's own FG% is a useless stats for defense, but I buy the rebounding numbers.
You're not getting it. Raw Rebounds consist of OFFENSIVE AND DEFENSIVE REBOUNDS. Why dilute the importance of rebounding by counting rebounds that have NOTHING to do with defense.

bearadonisdna
02-27-2014, 02:24 PM
I like noah. No other defender is carrying his team like noah.

Shammyguy3
02-27-2014, 02:29 PM
You're not getting it. Raw Rebounds consist of OFFENSIVE AND DEFENSIVE REBOUNDS. Why dilute the importance of rebounding by counting rebounds that have NOTHING to do with defense.

One could say that an offensive rebound prevents the other team from acquiring possession of the ball, similar to how a defensive rebound prevents the other team from re-gaining possession of the ball. It's quirky, but I've seen people argue that on here before

Chronz
02-27-2014, 02:40 PM
One could say that an offensive rebound prevents the other team from acquiring possession of the ball, similar to how a defensive rebound prevents the other team from re-gaining possession of the ball. It's quirky, but I've seen people argue that on here before
But with Offensive rebounding, it doesn't suppress their offensive efficiency one iota, it might suppress the opposing teams defensive efficiency.

But yes, its similar to offense is the best defense argument. I've seen some guys argue Tony Parker for DPOY back in the days when he was a relentless attacker, that his style fatigued team defenses. Same with Kobe/Bron etc..



But the thing about offensive rebounding, is that some coaches prefer not to crash the glass, instead prioritizing transition defense, so in some cases, by pursuing the offensive rebound, you can actually hurt your teams defense. But I suppose something similar would be true for defensive rebounding vs defensive positioning.

I'd rather just stick to outright defensive contributions, in either event, I find rebounding overrated when compared to positioning.

Im_in_Mia_bish
02-27-2014, 02:41 PM
One could say that an offensive rebound prevents the other team from acquiring possession of the ball, similar to how a defensive rebound prevents the other team from re-gaining possession of the ball. It's quirky, but I've seen people argue that on here before

one could say throwing the ball out of bounds gives a chance to set your defense, therefore turnovers helps your defense too.

Walt
02-27-2014, 02:42 PM
Hibbert. Easily.

Stunner
02-27-2014, 02:49 PM
How is Noah not involved ?

Stunner
02-27-2014, 02:52 PM
Noah deserves this award every year. Its about time this guy got some props from the league.

Still don't know how he didn't win it last year over Gasol , makes the 1st team all NBA defense over Gasol who was 2nd team and doesn't win DPOTY .

Shammyguy3
02-27-2014, 03:04 PM
But with Offensive rebounding, it doesn't suppress their offensive efficiency one iota, it might suppress the opposing teams defensive efficiency.

But yes, its similar to offense is the best defense argument. I've seen some guys argue Tony Parker for DPOY back in the days when he was a relentless attacker, that his style fatigued team defenses. Same with Kobe/Bron etc..



But the thing about offensive rebounding, is that some coaches prefer not to crash the glass, instead prioritizing transition defense, so in some cases, by pursuing the offensive rebound, you can actually hurt your teams defense. But I suppose something similar would be true for defensive rebounding vs defensive positioning.

I'd rather just stick to outright defensive contributions, in either event, I find rebounding overrated when compared to positioning.

Completely agree


one could say throwing the ball out of bounds gives a chance to set your defense, therefore turnovers helps your defense too.

IT doesn't, because you're putting greater pressure on your defense to limit the other team from scoring since you yourself decrease the # of opportunities you yourself has to score. You know they're not remotely the same thing. The offensive rebounds has a slight point, but this comment serves no purpose

Hawkeye15
02-27-2014, 03:06 PM
Hibbert is the leader of one of the best defenses in the past decade. Easily him for this year. Though, it's no coincidence that the Grizz have made up tons of ground since Gasol returned..

bearadonisdna
02-27-2014, 03:06 PM
But with Offensive rebounding, it doesn't suppress their offensive efficiency one iota, it might suppress the opposing teams defensive efficiency.

But yes, its similar to offense is the best defense argument. I've seen some guys argue Tony Parker for DPOY back in the days when he was a relentless attacker, that his style fatigued team defenses. Same with Kobe/Bron etc..



But the thing about offensive rebounding, is that some coaches prefer not to crash the glass, instead prioritizing transition defense, so in some cases, by pursuing the offensive rebound, you can actually hurt your teams defense. But I suppose something similar would be true for defensive rebounding vs defensive positioning.

I'd rather just stick to outright defensive contributions, in either event, I find rebounding overrated when compared to positioning.

I know exactly what u mean and i agree. For example if a center for example has three guys boxed out but his teammate gets the rebound.

bearadonisdna
02-27-2014, 03:08 PM
Hibbert is the leader of one of the best defenses in the past decade. Easily him for this year.

hibbert is 3rd or 4th fiddle on a team whos defense is marginally better than the bulls based on ppg. Noah is carrying them.

JasonJohnHorn
02-27-2014, 03:15 PM
You're not getting it. Raw Rebounds consist of OFFENSIVE AND DEFENSIVE REBOUNDS. Why dilute the importance of rebounding by counting rebounds that have NOTHING to do with defense.

I'll agree that putting too much weight on the rebounding is flawed, but when you play, you have more than one job on the defensive end, as well as the offensive end. Getting defensive rebounds is important. It is part of preventing the other team from scoring. I think offensive rebounds work in the same way. It is hard to get position on those when you are on offense, but somebody who effectively stops the other team's play before it even starts is contributing to the defensive effort.


When voting for the DPOY award, I'd go with a lock down defender over a rebounder any day of the week. But a guy that can't box out? Chances are if the guy isn't boxing out, he's not defending very well. And even if guards aren't getting the boards, they still need to be effective about keeping the guy the are guard off of the offensive glass.

Now, it is hard to gauge rebounding because when boxing out, the board might go to a teammate, so stats might lie, but the bottom line is, when it comes to defense, the stats don't tell you everything. The box scores don't tell you if the guy who got 3 steals took 9 gambles and it only paid off 3 times and left a wide open lane which allowed the other team to draw a foul and get the +1. 3 steals looks like a good defensive effort, but it might not have been. Likewise, a guy who gets 3 blocks but swats them out of bounds isn't as good a player as a guy who go his guy to force three bad shots and got the defensive rebound. In each play the offensive player was stopped from scoring, but in one instance the defender got possession each time and not blocks, while the other got blocks but gave possession back to the offensive team.

which is better?


You have to watch the game to see who the best defensive player is. You can't rely on the box scores.


But boxing out is apart of the defensive game.

Shammyguy3
02-27-2014, 03:19 PM
hibbert is 3rd or 4th fiddle on a team whos defense is marginally better than the bulls based on ppg. Noah is carrying them.

The Pacers give up 96.5 points per 100 possessions (best in the league)
The Bulls give up 100.4 points per 100 possessions (2nd best)

Given the same amount of possessions, which doesn't fall into the trap of Pace (Indiana plays at a much higher pace than Chicago), IND is ~4 points better. That's a HUGE difference.

bearadonisdna
02-27-2014, 03:24 PM
The Pacers give up 96.5 points per 100 possessions (best in the league)
The Bulls give up 100.4 points per 100 possessions (2nd best)

Given the same amount of possessions, which doesn't fall into the trap of Pace (Indiana plays at a much higher pace than Chicago), IND is ~4 points better. That's a HUGE difference.

Its not that huge a difference, u know what is the huge difference the talent on both teams rosters.

Shammyguy3
02-27-2014, 03:29 PM
Are you kidding me? That's a HUMONGOUS difference dude.

If there were 100 possessions every game (there isn't, but let's just say that there is) then the Pacers over 82 games would give up 328 less points than the Bulls' defense. Chicago's defense is great, but it's not on the Pacers level this season. And that's mostly because of Roy Hibbert.

Hawkeye15
02-27-2014, 03:31 PM
hibbert is 3rd or 4th fiddle on a team whos defense is marginally better than the bulls based on ppg. Noah is carrying them.

why would we rank a defense on that?

bearadonisdna
02-27-2014, 03:32 PM
Are you kidding me? That's a HUMONGOUS difference dude.

its a 4 pt difference. In what world is 2 possessions a Humongous difference. Factor in the talent the bulls lost this season and it shows how elite their defense is despite pace.

Hawkeye15
02-27-2014, 03:34 PM
The Pacers give up 96.5 points per 100 possessions when Hibbert is on the floor, 99.5 points per 100 possessions when he sits. Opposing centers have a PER of 12.2 when Hibbert is on the floor.

The Bulls give up 102.7 points per 100 possessions with Noah on the floor, 99.3 points per 100 possessions with him sitting. The opposing center has a PER of 16.7 when Noah is on the floor.

HUGE gape between these two.

valade16
02-27-2014, 03:35 PM
The only thing I find curious about the DPOY big men shouldn't need huge rebounding numbers to win the award line of thinking is how come all the guys who did it before were able to maintain great defensive presence and still rebound at an elite level? When did this transition occur and/or what does it say about how good the defenders of today are compared to earlier eras?

Dwight Howard, Marcus Camby, Ben Wallace, Dikembe Mutombo, Alonzo Mourning, Hakeem Olajuwan and David Robinson were all able to be defensive anchors and gobble up rebounds.

Is this just an indictment about how much worse the current crop of Centers is?

Chronz
02-27-2014, 03:47 PM
I'll agree that putting too much weight on the rebounding is flawed
The quote you responded to said nothing about putting weight on rebounding. Im saying the rebounding the OP includes OFFENSIVE rebounding. If he had stuck to DEFENSIVE rebounding, it would have been more relevant.


I think offensive rebounds work in the same way. It is hard to get position on those when you are on offense, but somebody who effectively stops the other team's play before it even starts is contributing to the defensive effort.
Nope, they are contributing to their offensive effort, they are having absolutely no impact on the opposing teams offensive efficiency.



When voting for the DPOY award, I'd go with a lock down defender over a rebounder any day of the week. But a guy that can't box out? Chances are if the guy isn't boxing out, he's not defending very well. And even if guards aren't getting the boards, they still need to be effective about keeping the guy the are guard off of the offensive glass.
I dont know about that, in my opinion some of the best rebounders tend to be the worst defenders whereas guys who box out but dont get the rebound are the best defenders.


Now, it is hard to gauge rebounding because when boxing out, the board might go to a teammate, so stats might lie, but the bottom line is, when it comes to defense, the stats don't tell you everything. The box scores don't tell you if the guy who got 3 steals took 9 gambles and it only paid off 3 times and left a wide open lane which allowed the other team to draw a foul and get the +1. 3 steals looks like a good defensive effort, but it might not have been. Likewise, a guy who gets 3 blocks but swats them out of bounds isn't as good a player as a guy who go his guy to force three bad shots and got the defensive rebound. In each play the offensive player was stopped from scoring, but in one instance the defender got possession each time and not blocks, while the other got blocks but gave possession back to the offensive team.

which is better?


You have to watch the game to see who the best defensive player is. You can't rely on the box scores.


But boxing out is apart of the defensive game.
Stats aren't limited to the boxscore tho. We have more tools at our disposal than just raw tallies.

Shammyguy3
02-27-2014, 03:47 PM
Not an indictment - it's just the best defensive center in a single season was not a great rebounder based on his own characteristics.

Tyson Chandler, a great rebounder, won a few years ago. Joakim Noah, a great rebounder, has a case to be made for the award. Same for a number of other players that are great rebounders and equally great defenders.

Marc Gasol and Roy Hibbert are outliers.

Chronz
02-27-2014, 03:49 PM
The only thing I find curious about the DPOY big men shouldn't need huge rebounding numbers to win the award line of thinking is how come all the guys who did it before were able to maintain great defensive presence and still rebound at an elite level? When did this transition occur and/or what does it say about how good the defenders of today are compared to earlier eras?

Dwight Howard, Marcus Camby, Ben Wallace, Dikembe Mutombo, Alonzo Mourning, Hakeem Olajuwan and David Robinson were all able to be defensive anchors and gobble up rebounds.

Is this just an indictment about how much worse the current crop of Centers is?

Camby was an overrated defender, Ben Wallace could be exposed 1 on 1, Dwight used to be that guy that could do it all. But in short, yes, those guys were on another level athletically. And in some cases, players had their best defensive seasons in the years they didn't pursue rebounds. Dennis Rodman comes to mind.

Chronz
02-27-2014, 03:50 PM
its a 4 pt difference. In what world is 2 possessions a Humongous difference. Factor in the talent the bulls lost this season and it shows how elite their defense is despite pace.

The difference is much more than that when you look at the most important defensive statistic, DEF EFF.

Hawkeye15
02-27-2014, 03:53 PM
The only thing I find curious about the DPOY big men shouldn't need huge rebounding numbers to win the award line of thinking is how come all the guys who did it before were able to maintain great defensive presence and still rebound at an elite level? When did this transition occur and/or what does it say about how good the defenders of today are compared to earlier eras?

Dwight Howard, Marcus Camby, Ben Wallace, Dikembe Mutombo, Alonzo Mourning, Hakeem Olajuwan and David Robinson were all able to be defensive anchors and gobble up rebounds.

Is this just an indictment about how much worse the current crop of Centers is?

need to look at the teams though. Indy is a great defensive rebounding team. Hibbert is surrounded by guys who are excellent defensive rebounders. Watch my Wolves. When the shot goes up, most of our guys just know who is getting it. A team like Indy, has 7 players with well over a 10% defensive rebound rate, meaning Hibbert is being challenged by his own teammates as much or more than the opposition to grab those rebounds. Also keep in mind Indy forces a ton of jump shots, which provide long rebounds, and a center doesn't get to those.

Hawkeye15
02-27-2014, 03:54 PM
Camby was an overrated defender, Ben Wallace could be exposed 1 on 1, Dwight used to be that guy that could do it all. But in short, yes, those guys were on another level athletically. And in some cases, players had their best defensive seasons in the years they didn't pursue rebounds. Dennis Rodman comes to mind.

very true

Chronz
02-27-2014, 03:54 PM
Not an indictment - it's just the best defensive center in a single season was not a great rebounder based on his own characteristics.

Tyson Chandler, a great rebounder, won a few years ago. Joakim Noah, a great rebounder, has a case to be made for the award. Same for a number of other players that are great rebounders and equally great defenders.

Marc Gasol and Roy Hibbert are outliers.
You're prolly right but I wonder if todays style of play has had any sort of impact, maybe team defense has become increasingly important and the rebounds are spread around as a result. Doubt it but its just a thought. I have no doubt the guys he listed would be better defenders than what we have today. D-Rob was a freak athlete if I've ever seen one.

Shammyguy3
02-27-2014, 04:02 PM
You're prolly right but I wonder if todays style of play has had any sort of impact, maybe team defense has become increasingly important and the rebounds are spread around as a result. Doubt it but its just a thought. I have no doubt the guys he listed would be better defenders than what we have today. D-Rob was a freak athlete if I've ever seen one.

Today's style of play definitely has an impact, it's just near impossible to quantify it across the league for different players in different systems under different substitution patterns obviously. I'm not sure if all of those guys would be better defenders in today's league than when they themselves played, but I could see those guys being better in today's league than today's centers are. If that makes sense, it's sorta wordy.

However though some of those guys listed are all-time greats, whereas none of the centers we have today are in that same hemisphere. It would be more accurate to find more of a role-playing defensive center similar to a player like Noah from the 70s/80s/90s and compare then

Swashcuff
02-27-2014, 04:41 PM
The real question should be who is going to finishes in 2nd place after Roy Hibbert wins the award the DPOY.

Pacerlive
02-27-2014, 06:03 PM
How is Noah not involved ?
I think he is but its hard to evaluate Noahs defensive prowess.

Most people would say he is a great defender and I certainly think he is in the top 5 but lets look at the numbers.

Synergy has NOah giving up 0.86 ppp to his opponents and Hibbert gives up 0.73 ppp. I don't make a big deal of synergy rank because it doesn't factor in minutes but based on ppp thats a difference of being ranked 25th vs 164th.

I will also be the first to admit that synergy doesn't really factor in help defense but lets say you just look at post defense of each player which typically is a one on one scenario with not a whole lot of wing help. You see that Hibbert gives up 0.52 ppp and Noah gives up 0.88 ppp.

NOah to me has to run around a lot more and he often times gets caught just a little out of position which is why his numbers on his own man are down IMO. The Pacers on the other hand take a different philospohy with Hibbert and I think its the right call when you can protect the rim at a high rate and guard your own man without much help.

bearadonisdna
02-27-2014, 06:30 PM
The Pacers give up 96.5 points per 100 possessions when Hibbert is on the floor, 99.5 points per 100 possessions when he sits. Opposing centers have a PER of 12.2 when Hibbert is on the floor.

The Bulls give up 102.7 points per 100 possessions with Noah on the floor, 99.3 points per 100 possessions with him sitting. The opposing center has a PER of 16.7 when Noah is on the floor.

HUGE gape between these two.

Are u kidding me theses bush league on -the floor off the floor stats. Those are incredibly circumstantial based on talent and rotations.
ie. bulls scrubs incredibly outplay the opponents bench scrubs. Dude dont even.
WHat ur trying to show is that the bulls defens eis better with noah off the floor. Everyone with eyes knows thats clownery.

Swashcuff
02-27-2014, 06:56 PM
Are u kidding me theses bush league on -the floor off the floor stats. Those are incredibly circumstantial based on talent and rotations.
ie. bulls scrubs incredibly outplay the opponents bench scrubs. Dude dont even.
WHat ur trying to show is that the bulls defens eis better with noah off the floor. Everyone with eyes knows thats clownery.

What about the opp PER numbers? Those aren't one off numbers. What do you make of those? Lemme guess you don't think stats should be used when attempting to ascertain an individuals defensive worth. You trust your eyes right?

Hawkeye15
02-27-2014, 07:01 PM
Are u kidding me theses bush league on -the floor off the floor stats. Those are incredibly circumstantial based on talent and rotations.
ie. bulls scrubs incredibly outplay the opponents bench scrubs. Dude dont even.
WHat ur trying to show is that the bulls defens eis better with noah off the floor. Everyone with eyes knows thats clownery.

Just because you don't agree with the numbers doesn't mean they aren't real.

bearadonisdna
02-27-2014, 07:02 PM
What about the opp PER numbers? Those aren't one off numbers. What do you make of those? Lemme guess you don't think stats should be used when attempting to ascertain an individuals defensive worth. You trust your eyes right?

PER is fn meaningless. Guys can rack up a decent PER(LOL that this the stat u guys want to cling to) by just not turning the ball over and stupid stuff like that.
Am i supposed to beleive that nazr is a better defender than noah because opp centers have a worse PER when he is on the floor? He is the bulls backup. In any instance those stats are saying the bulls defense is better without noah? Eyes or not, does anyone believe that? They shouldnt.

bearadonisdna
02-27-2014, 07:06 PM
edit-delete

Swashcuff
02-27-2014, 07:18 PM
PER is fn meaningless. Guys can rack up a decent PER(LOL that this the stat u guys want to cling to) by just not turning the ball over and stupid stuff like that.
Am i supposed to beleive that nazr is a better defender than noah because opp centers have a worse PER when he is on the floor? He is the bulls backup. In any instance those stats are saying the bulls defense is better without noah? Eyes or not, does anyone believe that? They shouldnt.

Okay so lets here it what exactly does Noah do that makes him a better defensive player than Hibbert. What do your eyes tell you?

bearadonisdna
02-27-2014, 07:23 PM
Okay so lets here it what exactly does Noah do that makes him a better defensive player than Hibbert. What do your eyes tell you?

Carry his team more than any other defensive player in the league. Point blank. Read the thread bruh.

poleandreel
02-27-2014, 07:25 PM
Carry his team more than any other defensive player in the league. Point blank. Read the thread bruh.

this is clownery

Hawkeye15
02-27-2014, 07:32 PM
PER is fn meaningless. Guys can rack up a decent PER(LOL that this the stat u guys want to cling to) by just not turning the ball over and stupid stuff like that.
Am i supposed to beleive that nazr is a better defender than noah because opp centers have a worse PER when he is on the floor? He is the bulls backup. In any instance those stats are saying the bulls defense is better without noah? Eyes or not, does anyone believe that? They shouldnt.

You don't know the first thing about stats, do you?

Thibs system is created to run players into help, and take them out of their offensive game plan. Noah isn't even that great of an individual defender. Hibbert has an impact just being on the floor. Teams stay the hell out of the lane with him.

bearadonisdna
02-27-2014, 07:37 PM
this is clownery

no dude it s the truth. Every other defensive player is a third or 4th fiddle as far as carrying their team. So yeah unless u got some proof ur post is clownery. For starters.

JasonJohnHorn
02-27-2014, 07:38 PM
The quote you responded to said nothing about putting weight on rebounding. Im saying the rebounding the OP includes OFFENSIVE rebounding. If he had stuck to DEFENSIVE rebounding, it would have been more relevant.


Nope, they are contributing to their offensive effort, they are having absolutely no impact on the opposing teams offensive efficiency.


I dont know about that, in my opinion some of the best rebounders tend to be the worst defenders whereas guys who box out but dont get the rebound are the best defenders.


Stats aren't limited to the boxscore tho. We have more tools at our disposal than just raw tallies.

I don't want to argue here, primarily because I agree with you on most points.

That said offensive rebounds are part of the defensive effort. If you get an offensive rebound, the other team IS less efficient offensively. You just stole a possession away from them. It is as valuable as a steal. Just because it doesn't count as a turnover, or lower the opposing teams FG%, doesn't mean it is not impacting their offensive performance. Again, I wouldn't put too much emphasis into the offensive rebounding, but rebounding, in my eyes, IS apart of the defensive effort, regardless of which end of the floor you are on. You are keeping the opposing players away from the ball, and that is part of the defensive part of the game.

Would you suggest that a steal is only contributing to your own offense and not the defensive effort? Of course not. You are taking the ball out of somebody else's hands. So why would you suggest that getting yourself between the ball and your opponent and preventing them from a possession in the first place isn't a part of the defensive effort? If you admit that doing this on one end of the court IS a part of the defensive effort, but ISN'T a part of the defensive effort on the other end, how does that even make sense? As soon as a shot goes up, you are on defense because the ball is in nobody's hands.


As to the guys who can't box out can play defense, I stick to that. That does NOT mean that guys who CAN box out CAN play defense. That is NOT what I said. I said if you can't box out, you LIKELY can't play defense. The kind of guys who know how to position themselves in front of or behind an offensive player, and can move and respond to their movements, are the kind of guys who are excellent at boxing out and rebounding. Whatever their rebounding average is doesn't really matter. When Rodman was with the Pistons initially, he knew how to box out and he did it all the time. They had big bodies up from like Laimbeer and MaHorn and Salley and Edwards, so he got less rebounds and didn't need the crash the boards that much. That's how the old school teams used to work it. One guy would focus on rebounding (usually the C, like Russell and Wilt), and the other guys would just focus on boxing out and keeping the other guys off the glass.


Anytime you are stopping the other team from getting a possession, you are contributing to the defensive effort. Period.

bbcmillionaire
02-27-2014, 07:38 PM
I got Noah over hibbert simply because he rebounds better, and embraces and switch up on defense. Rather it's Tony Parker, lebron, or Kobe. And he does a pretty decent job. Noah is also great with his defensive rotations. Hibbert is the better down low post defender. But watchout for ibaka, he might get it over both of these guys.

bearadonisdna
02-27-2014, 07:39 PM
You don't know the first thing about stats, do you?

Thibs system is created to run players into help, and take them out of their offensive game plan. Noah isn't even that great of an individual defender. Hibbert has an impact just being on the floor. Teams stay the hell out of the lane with him.

Noah was 1st team all defense last season dude so i dont know how u can bash his individual defense. Yeah hibbert is blessed by nearly the same defensive coaching except he has more defensive talent around him.
And im not arguing noah over hibbert. What i posted and ur stats didnt refute is that NOT ONE DEFENDER IS CARRYING HIS TEAM as much as Noah.
Should that make a case for him, sure. Does it win it for him idk.

Swashcuff
02-27-2014, 07:42 PM
Carry his team more than any other defensive player in the league. Point blank. Read the thread bruh.

That doesn't make him a better defensive player than Hibbert however. Kevin Love has to carry his team's offense more than LeBron and KD does that doesn't make Love a better offensive player than them both. Bruh.

birdmann5
02-27-2014, 07:42 PM
Lebron James is the best defender in the league. I don't know why he's not at the top of this conversation. Is it because he's an MVP candidate?

Hawkeye15
02-27-2014, 07:43 PM
Noah was 1st team all defense last season dude so i dont know how u can bash his individual defense. Yeah hibbert is blessed by nearly the same defensive coaching except he has more defensive talent around him.

Well, I have never taken that award seriously. Hell, Kobe made 6 of them when he wasn't even a top 10 perimeter defender. Noah can still be scored on in the low block much easier than one would like to admit. I do like his ability to defend the PnR, and he rebounds well, but as impact goes, he isn't on Hibbert's level. Or Marc Gasol's. Or Dwight's.

The coaching style is different btw. And sure Hibbert has more talent around him, which is why Indy is 12.5 games ahead of them. So?

Hawkeye15
02-27-2014, 07:43 PM
Lebron James is the best defender in the league. I don't know why he's not at the top of this conversation. Is it because he's an MVP candidate?

eh, LeBron should no way in hell make the all defense team this year. But, as with Kobe, I figure he rides his name into another 6-7 of those teams.

Swashcuff
02-27-2014, 07:44 PM
Lebron James is the best defender in the league. I don't know why he's not at the top of this conversation. Is it because he's an MVP candidate?

Being the best and the most versatile are two different things.

bearadonisdna
02-27-2014, 07:56 PM
That doesn't make him a better defensive player than Hibbert however. Kevin Love has to carry his team's offense more than LeBron and KD does that doesn't make Love a better offensive player than them both. Bruh.

is there an offensive player of the year award? Are the twolves winning? Stop joking around dude.

Swashcuff
02-27-2014, 08:01 PM
is there an offensive player of the year award? Are the twolves winning? Stop joking around dude.

I am being 100% serious you still can't answer the question as to why Noah is better than Hibbert. If he indeed carries a greater role defensively than Hibbert does that alone does not make him better by that notion Dwight Howard should be the winner because he carries arguably a greater load than anyone else.

Chronz
02-27-2014, 08:03 PM
If you get an offensive rebound, the other team IS less efficient offensively.
No they are less efficient defensively because they failed to secure the stop. Their offense has not been stunted one iota. Offensive rebounding enhances your offensive efficiency, defensive rebounding enhances your defensive efficiency.


Would you suggest that a steal is only contributing to your own offense and not the defensive effort?
Im not sure, thats a thought provoking point sir. Sometimes defense fuels offense and vice versa, so I guess I see where you're coming from, transition play is that middle ground between O and D that fudges statistics.

To me its sorta like saying Ben Wallace was a better offensive player because all his rebounds take away possessions from a team, while ignoring his putrid offensive statistics. If rebounds are all the same, then there is no designation from offensive and defensive rebounding, they are simply both at the same time. Which makes no sense to me. Id rather believe Ben was an offensive liability with elite defense. His offensive rebounding didn't offset his lack of offensive efficiency, but I imagine it would if we were to treat all rebounds the same.



Of course not. You are taking the ball out of somebody else's hands. So why would you suggest that getting yourself between the ball and your opponent and preventing them from a possession in the first place isn't a part of the defensive effort? If you admit that doing this on one end of the court IS a part of the defensive effort, but ISN'T a part of the defensive effort on the other end, how does that even make sense? As soon as a shot goes up, you are on defense because the ball is in nobody's hands.
Offensive rebounding has diminished over the years because more teams value transition D. In essence, they are sending less players to crash the glass in an effort to get back defensively.

Just because the ball is in the air doesn't change anything, you're still playing defense until you secure the defensive rebound just like your still playing offense until the possession ends, make or miss.



As to the guys who can't box out can play defense, I stick to that. That does NOT mean that guys who CAN box out CAN play defense. That is NOT what I said. I said if you can't box out, you LIKELY can't play defense. The kind of guys who know how to position themselves in front of or behind an offensive player, and can move and respond to their movements, are the kind of guys who are excellent at boxing out and rebounding. Whatever their rebounding average is doesn't really matter. When Rodman was with the Pistons initially, he knew how to box out and he did it all the time. They had big bodies up from like Laimbeer and MaHorn and Salley and Edwards, so he got less rebounds and didn't need the crash the boards that much. That's how the old school teams used to work it. One guy would focus on rebounding (usually the C, like Russell and Wilt), and the other guys would just focus on boxing out and keeping the other guys off the glass.
Now you lost me. Rodman is an excellent example tho, his worst defensive days were the days in which he obsessed with rebounding.



Anytime you are stopping the other team from getting a possession, you are contributing to the defensive effort. Period.
But you are contributing to your own offensive effort, the other team is still going to get their possession and chance to score once your offensive possession has ended. I dont believe that offensive rebounding is a part of defense, Im pretty sure the NBA separated the 2 and distinguished them as offensive and defensive rebounding for a reason. Otherwise they would have just kept calling them rebounds.

bearadonisdna
02-27-2014, 08:03 PM
I am being 100% serious you still can't answer the question as to why Noah is better than Hibbert. If he indeed carries a greater role defensively than Hibbert does that alone does not make him better by that notion Dwight Howard should be the winner because he carries arguably a greater load than anyone else.

Greater load by howard? the rockets have one of the worst ds in the league. the bulls have the number 2 defense in the entire league! who do they have?! they lost rose and deng!

Swashcuff
02-27-2014, 08:08 PM
Greater load by howard? the rockets have one of the worst ds in the league. the bulls have the number 2 defense in the entire league! who do they have?! they lost rose and deng!

Coming into this year Bulls fans called Butler the best defensive wing in the league and a "LeBron Stopper", Taj is probably a top 5-10 defensive PF in the game today and let's not forget the maestro of it all Tom Thibodeau.

Shammyguy3
02-27-2014, 08:41 PM
Kirk Hinrich's been great defensively as well this year

bearadonisdna
02-27-2014, 08:49 PM
Kirk Hinrich's been great defensively as well this year

Hinrich defensive rating is a 102. Compared to hill who is a 99.
Taj is coming off the bench unfortunately. Butler yeah he is a good defender. You guys are traveling down a slippery slope of trying to say the bulls have more and or better defenders than the pacers?

Raps18-19 Champ
02-27-2014, 08:58 PM
Hibby.

Swashcuff
02-27-2014, 09:14 PM
Hinrich defensive rating is a 102. Compared to hill who is a 99.
Taj is coming off the bench unfortunately. Butler yeah he is a good defender. You guys are traveling down a slippery slope of trying to say the bulls have more and or better defenders than the pacers?

Boozer DRtg is 98 is he better than Taj, Garnett, Ibaka, Millsap, Davis, Bosh, Andy V etc?

Hill DRtg is 99 because Hibbert is a better player. If not for Hibbert's impact his entire team's defensive rating would be worse.

You thrashed Hawkeye15 for using on/off numbers earlier but individual's DRtg are essentially the very same. You don't understand stats but you're attempting to attack those who do understand them and how to use them. Interesting. Also Taj coming off the bench is almost irrelevant when you consider the fact that he plays just as much MPG as Boozer.

3RDASYSTEM
02-27-2014, 09:22 PM
HOWARD/DAVIS/NOAH are true d anchors ,and of course BRON has to be up there just for the fact he has to guard 1-4's throughout the seasons since joining HEAT, plus he could have done it in CLE but he had to do too much on offense to go thru that type of strain but playing with 2 number 1 type options put him in position to do a whole lot more on d side

GASOL won last yr but didn't make 1st all d, BRON should have won that or NOAH easily, and GASOL handled his business with T ALLEN anchoring that d, also PRINCE and the new coach seems to be sticking with the old coach d theory, tough hard nosed

Hawkeye15
02-28-2014, 12:30 AM
Hinrich defensive rating is a 102. Compared to hill who is a 99.
Taj is coming off the bench unfortunately. Butler yeah he is a good defender. You guys are traveling down a slippery slope of trying to say the bulls have more and or better defenders than the pacers?

Wait, you totally dismiss advanced stats such as on court/off court, and direct opponent PER, but then bring up literally the most useless metric to rank defensive players?

Hawkeye15
02-28-2014, 12:31 AM
Boozer DRtg is 98 is he better than Taj, Garnett, Ibaka, Millsap, Davis, Bosh, Andy V etc?

Hill DRtg is 99 because Hibbert is a better player. If not for Hibbert's impact his entire team's defensive rating would be worse.

You thrashed Hawkeye15 for using on/off numbers earlier but individual's DRtg are essentially the very same. You don't understand stats but you're attempting to attack those who do understand them and how to use them. Interesting. Also Taj coming off the bench is almost irrelevant when you consider the fact that he plays just as much MPG as Boozer.

They are even worse in reality, depending on the rotation structure of a team. Fact is, you can be a horrid defender, but if you play for a great defensive team, and they are able to cover you, your defensive rating will look great.

bearadonisdna
02-28-2014, 12:39 AM
They are even worse in reality, depending on the rotation structure of a team. Fact is, you can be a horrid defender, but if you play for a great defensive team, and they are able to cover you, your defensive rating will look great.

Ok well as far as trying to disregard dRtg bear in mind boozers ortg and drtg render to a net negative.

Sadds The Gr8
02-28-2014, 12:41 AM
If Jordan wins the voters would be complete morons

bearadonisdna
02-28-2014, 12:44 AM
If Jordan wins the voters would be complete morons

Yeah that dude has been retired for years. Space jam! lol that would be hilarious. yeah they would be complete morons.
but the award isnt being given out today or won already. The most important part of the regular season is ahead of us.

Hawkeye15
02-28-2014, 12:50 AM
Ok well as far as trying to disregard dRtg bear in mind boozers ortg and drtg render to a net negative.

I completely disregard Drtg, because its 100% about the rest of the team in most cases (obviously any team with Gasol, Hibbert, or Dwight for instance will be a good defensive team). Elite defensive teams have literally almost everyone on their roster with awesome Drtg. But we all know that isn't the case, that they are full of elite defenders.

todu82
02-28-2014, 12:59 AM
Deandre Jordan.

Sadds The Gr8
02-28-2014, 01:05 AM
looking through the thread shocked there's so much Jordan votes. He gets blocks but that's pretty much it...he isn't an intimidating force....Clippers defense isn't even that good.

bearadonisdna
02-28-2014, 01:08 AM
I completely disregard Drtg, because its 100% about the rest of the team in most cases (obviously any team with Gasol, Hibbert, or Dwight for instance will be a good defensive team). Elite defensive teams have literally almost everyone on their roster with awesome Drtg. But we all know that isn't the case, that they are full of elite defenders.

Yeah thats pretty much true in some cases. Boozer puts up a respectable drtg cuz pfs dont score on him, but hinrich the more renowned defender has a worse defensive rating.
Guys like Hibbert and Noah post the exact same dRTG. Both considered anchors of their respective D.

mrblisterdundee
02-28-2014, 01:24 AM
I'd go with DeAndre Jordan by a hair over Roy Hibbert. He averages nearly five more rebounds than Hibbert per 36 minutes, gets twice as many steels and is comparable to (albeit slightly lesser than) Hibbert when it comes to blocks. Anthony Davis is a beast, but his stats are stuffed by being on a bad team with no other decent front court presences.

Shammyguy3
02-28-2014, 01:26 AM
Individual DRtg is the most useless statistic available right now

mdm692
02-28-2014, 01:27 AM
Who do you guys think wins it with a month and a half left? personally I think it will be DeAndre Jordan, 1st in FG% and Rebounds, 4th in Blocks

What does that have to do with the DPOY award? Or are you talking about fg% against him?

Shammyguy3
02-28-2014, 01:27 AM
I'd go with DeAndre Jordan by a hair over Roy Hibbert. He averages nearly five more rebounds than Hibbert per 36 minutes, gets twice as many steels and is comparable to (albeit slightly lesser than) Hibbert when it comes to blocks. Anthony Davis is a beast, but his stats are stuffed by being on a bad team with no other decent front court presences.

but Blake Griffin is a front-court presence? You knock Davis because of his defensive front-court teammates, but then vote for DeAndre Jordan and skim over Griffin?

bbcmillionaire
02-28-2014, 02:03 AM
You guys know rebounds are a part of defensive player voting as well right. 7.6 rebounds won't cut it, Noah >hibbert. I got Davis, Noah and maybe Dwight as a dark horse

Chronz
02-28-2014, 02:25 AM
You guys know rebounds are a part of defensive player voting as well right. 7.6 rebounds won't cut it, Noah >hibbert. I got Davis, Noah and maybe Dwight as a dark horse

Maybe back in the dark ages when superficial stats were the extent of our defensive statistics, but as Marc Gasol proved last year, its not a rebounding crown, its about overall defense. Rebounding tends to be overrated when compared to elite defensive positioning.

Hawkeye15
02-28-2014, 02:39 AM
Yeah thats pretty much true in some cases. Boozer puts up a respectable drtg cuz pfs dont score on him, but hinrich the more renowned defender has a worse defensive rating.
Guys like Hibbert and Noah post the exact same dRTG. Both considered anchors of their respective D.

I suppose so, but Hibbert is literally an anchor, while Thibs system is a machine.

Chrisclover
02-28-2014, 02:46 AM
LBJ loses MVP to Durant and gets a DPOY as a consolation prize. Everybody wins. It is time to give credit to Durant and it is not time to stop the LBJ winning trend.

Chrisclover
02-28-2014, 02:52 AM
Deandre jordan because he's 1st in fg%.
You have no idea what DPOY means. It is all about defense so even a sky high FG% doesnt count. To be more specific, one important yardstick is his opponent 's FG%.The lower it is, the more convincing his defense is.
Of course there are more criteria like reb rate,blocks, steals.

Chrisclover
02-28-2014, 02:55 AM
Why bring up irrelevant stats like rebounds and fg% when it should be about defense?

Anyways, Hibbert is taking it home rather easily, have complete faith the voters are going damn near unanimous in this one
Reb is actually one defensive stats when it is defensive reb.
Admittedly Hibbert is a top candidate but I have no idea why his reb total is this low, like 7?if i am not mistaken.

Hawkeye15
02-28-2014, 03:18 AM
if defensive rebounding is so important, then shouldn't Love be considered a decent defender? He leads the league in defense rebounding percentage...

Chronz
02-28-2014, 05:39 AM
Reb is actually one defensive stats when it is defensive reb.

Well yeah, that was never in doubt.

bbcmillionaire
02-28-2014, 05:39 AM
if defensive rebounding is so important, then shouldn't Love be considered a decent defender? He leads the league in defense rebounding percentage...

lol if love actually defended. I never said it was all about rebounding, I'm just say 7.6 rebounds? People clowned brook Lopez for this, and he was getting a gang load of blocks. Hibbert benefits from having great wing defenders in lance and Paul. I'd be pretty satisfied if anyone but hibbert wins. Rather it'll be lebron, Davis, deandre, ibaka or Noah

Swashcuff
02-28-2014, 07:52 AM
Yeah thats pretty much true in some cases. Boozer puts up a respectable drtg cuz pfs dont score on him, but hinrich the more renowned defender has a worse defensive rating.
Guys like Hibbert and Noah post the exact same dRTG. Both considered anchors of their respective D.

Dude just admit you have no clue what you're talking about. Listen to what Hawkeye15 is telling you he is quite knowledgeable on the topic. Boozer doesn't put up a good DRtg because other PFs don't score on him that's crazy talk. DRtg has nothing to do with individual matchups. He puts up a good DRtg because he plays on one of the best defensive teams in the league and spends a great deal of time on the court with plus defensive players (Hinrich, Taj, Noah, Butler and for a portion of the season Deng).

Swashcuff
02-28-2014, 08:20 AM
You guys know rebounds are a part of defensive player voting as well right. 7.6 rebounds won't cut it, Noah >hibbert. I got Davis, Noah and maybe Dwight as a dark horse


lol if love actually defended. I never said it was all about rebounding, I'm just say 7.6 rebounds? People clowned brook Lopez for this, and he was getting a gang load of blocks. Hibbert benefits from having great wing defenders in lance and Paul. I'd be pretty satisfied if anyone but hibbert wins. Rather it'll be lebron, Davis, deandre, ibaka or Noah

IMO if defensive rebounding is your reasoning then you don't have much of a case.

Artest once won over Wallace who averaged 8.4 DRB, Payton also won one over Dike who also averaged 8.4 DRB, MJ also won one over Dream who averaged 8.3, the year KG won he beat out Camby who averaged 10.2 DRB (more than KGs ORB and DRB) and last year none if the top 3 vote getters even averaged 7 DRB a game.

Defensive rebounding is literally one of the last things you look at when judging a players D. Sure boxing out grabbing the board and ending the opposing team's possession right there and then is great and fundamental in basketball but when your impact in the paint is so good that opposing teams have to change their entire offensive philosophy and become purely a jump shooting team thus hurting their offensive efficiency you know you're a great defender.

Noah is really good but if your only case for him being a better defender than Hibbert is his defensive rebounding then your case is really bad.

Goose17
02-28-2014, 08:51 AM
Hibbert is clearly the favourite this year, why is it even being debated?

JasonJohnHorn
02-28-2014, 08:51 AM
No they are less efficient defensively because they failed to secure the stop. Their offense has not been stunted one iota. Offensive rebounding enhances your offensive efficiency, defensive rebounding enhances your defensive efficiency.


Im not sure, thats a thought provoking point sir. Sometimes defense fuels offense and vice versa, so I guess I see where you're coming from, transition play is that middle ground between O and D that fudges statistics.

To me its sorta like saying Ben Wallace was a better offensive player because all his rebounds take away possessions from a team, while ignoring his putrid offensive statistics. If rebounds are all the same, then there is no designation from offensive and defensive rebounding, they are simply both at the same time. Which makes no sense to me. Id rather believe Ben was an offensive liability with elite defense. His offensive rebounding didn't offset his lack of offensive efficiency, but I imagine it would if we were to treat all rebounds the same.



Offensive rebounding has diminished over the years because more teams value transition D. In essence, they are sending less players to crash the glass in an effort to get back defensively.

Just because the ball is in the air doesn't change anything, you're still playing defense until you secure the defensive rebound just like your still playing offense until the possession ends, make or miss.



Now you lost me. Rodman is an excellent example tho, his worst defensive days were the days in which he obsessed with rebounding.



But you are contributing to your own offensive effort, the other team is still going to get their possession and chance to score once your offensive possession has ended. I dont believe that offensive rebounding is a part of defense, Im pretty sure the NBA separated the 2 and distinguished them as offensive and defensive rebounding for a reason. Otherwise they would have just kept calling them rebounds.

I think where we are diverging here is that you see a rebound as either part of the defensive effort, or part of the offensive effort. I don't see the two as mutually exclusive.

If you take the ball away from the other team, or stop them from getting it, you are helping your offense by getting possession of the ball. You've earned your team an offensive possession. Now, does it matter which end of the floor that happens at? It is part of the offense either way.

Likewise, if you take away a possession from the opposing team, you are playing good defense.


Getting a rebound STOPS the other team from getting a possession, regardless of where you are on the court. Keeping track of offensive rebounds is important because they are harder to get. When you are on offense, the opposing team generally has better position to get rebounds, so guys who get those rebounds are performing a task that is inherently more difficult, so it is interesting to keep track of that. Usually these guys are guys who aren't terribly important to the offense and once' they'd set a pick or drawn their defender out, they can crash the boards.

Offense and defense are often interwoven. It is hard to find where they diverge sometimes. just because you are on your offensive end of the court, doesn't mean you don't play defense down there. And as I said, once that ball is in the air you are on defense. Nobody has possession of a ball that's in the air. Even if you are on your own end, once your team no longer has possession, you are in defense mode. You need to stop the other team from getting the ball to prevent them from getting an offensive possession.

Does getting an offensive rebound show up under the defensive stats in terms of how efficient the opposition is? No. It doesn't. But every time you get one, you've essentially given that team a missed FG that doesn't show up in the stat sheets, or a turnover. It is no different than a steal or a missed field goal. It is a possession they should have had, that they had the better position to obtain, and that you took from them. That is defense, regardless of which end of the court you are on, and just because it doesn't show up on the defensive stats or advance stats, doesn't mean it isn't defense.

It seems to me that your argument is twofold.

1. It doesn't show up in the defensive stats, so it's not defense.
2. It helps your offense.

My response is

1. All kinds of defensive efforts don't show up in the stats.
2. Every piece of good defense helps your offense.

If you stop thinking about things in binaries, then you will see that good defense ALWAYS helps your offense, and if that is your reason for not recognizing rebounding on both ends of the court as part of the defensive effort, then you need to stop thinking in binaries. Aristotle is not a genius he thought he was.

Think of it as a Yin Yang.

And yes, when Rodman was focused on rebounds, his one-on-one defense was better, but as I said, I didn't say that a good rebounder = a good defender. I said a good defender = a good rebounder. All lions are felines, but not all felines are lions.

Chrisclover
02-28-2014, 11:49 AM
if defensive rebounding is so important, then shouldn't Love be considered a decent defender? He leads the league in defense rebounding percentage...
Defensive rebounding is just one aspect but DPOY demands a holistic defense impact .I do not know how much defensive rebounding should be attributed to the overall D

Tony_Starks
02-28-2014, 12:02 PM
Reb is actually one defensive stats when it is defensive reb.
Admittedly Hibbert is a top candidate but I have no idea why his reb total is this low, like 7?if i am not mistaken.

It's low because he challenges and alters so many shots at the rim it takes him out of rebounding position. Also his wings gang rebound. All things considered 7 boards is pretty good.

Chrisclover
02-28-2014, 12:09 PM
It's low because he challenges and alters so many shots at the rim it takes him out of rebounding position. Also his wings gang rebound. All things considered 7 boards is pretty good.
Another reason that his rebounds are low may be his clumsiness caused by his height and weight .Hibbert is a gigantic monster with incredible muscles

Pacerlive
02-28-2014, 01:27 PM
Defensive rebounding is just one aspect but DPOY demands a holistic defense impact .I do not know how much defensive rebounding should be attributed to the overall D

Each team would put a different value on it. For the Pacers it would be less since they are one of the best defensive rebounding teams which has everything to do with going with a big lineup that sacrafices speed on defense to take advantage of Hibberts height.

For the Heat on the other hand it would be more valueable since they go with the overal speed of a double team and quick recovery. They sacrafice height for more possesions by stealing the ball.

All of it goes back to "how are you helping your team overall on defense". The guy who I find more valuebable as a defender is always the guy the requires less help from his teammates. Hibbert and Howard don't require a lot help and they dish out a lot of help defense. Noah to me requires help which is why I don't think he deserves it every year like some poster on here suggested.

Blitzbolt
02-28-2014, 02:35 PM
Marc Gasol grizz have the number 1 D since his return...his impact on the team is crucial.

D-Leethal
02-28-2014, 02:38 PM
The guy boxing out deserves every bit of credit for the DRB as the guy who grabbed it, if not more.

JasonJohnHorn
02-28-2014, 02:59 PM
The guy boxing out deserves every bit of credit for the DRB as the guy who grabbed it, if not more.


Agree 100%. The rebounds, over the course of the season, will fall one way as much as the other, so the averages should work out, but buy at SF and SG, who keep their guys off the glass perform an important role that doesn't show up in the stat sheet as often. Sometimes the opposing wing players crash the board, sometimes they don't. But when you are playing against good rebounding teams, it is important to keep all those guys off the glass. even the wing players, and the guys doing the box out on those guys seldom get a rebound but often play a huge role in that rebound getting picked up by the C or PF (who are also likely boxing out as well).

Clippersfan86
02-28-2014, 03:03 PM
Hibbert in a landslide. DJ isn't even top 5 this year. He's improved a lot and finally is worth his contract... but he's still WAY too inconsistent on defense. Some games he's the most dominant defender in the NBA... then other games he's getting career high's dropped on his head by scrub centers (it happens a lot).

NoahH
02-28-2014, 07:22 PM
Does the Unibrow have a shot

bearadonisdna
02-28-2014, 07:22 PM
Each team would put a different value on it. For the Pacers it would be less since they are one of the best defensive rebounding teams which has everything to do with going with a big lineup that sacrafices speed on defense to take advantage of Hibberts height.

For the Heat on the other hand it would be more valueable since they go with the overal speed of a double team and quick recovery. They sacrafice height for more possesions by stealing the ball.

All of it goes back to "how are you helping your team overall on defense". The guy who I find more valuebable as a defender is always the guy the requires less help from his teammates. Hibbert and Howard don't require a lot help and they dish out a lot of help defense. Noah to me requires help which is why I don't think he deserves it every year like some poster on here suggested.

No noah doesnt deserve it evry year. Im not sure u can say he needs more help than hibb or dwight when he has less help than both of those guys. Well at least hibbert. Dwight has more help overall not sure how that translates defensively tho.

NoahH
02-28-2014, 07:23 PM
TOP 10 IN DEFENSIVE RATING:

1. Roy Hibbert-IND 94.8
2. Paul George-IND 95.1
3. Andrew Bogut-GSW 95.4
4. David West-IND 95.8
5. Joakim Noah-CHI 96.1
6. Draymond Green-GSW 97.0
7. Tim Duncan-SAS 98.1
8. Carlos Boozer-CHI 98.3
9. Lance Stephenson-IND 98.5
10. DeAndre Jordan-LAC 98.6

ManRam
02-28-2014, 07:30 PM
Defensive rating is WAY too team dependent for me to care about individual numbers, especially compared to players on other teams.


Gasol
Hibbert
Iggy
Howard

That's my short list. Hibbert is my leader right now. Gasol missing time hurts his case, and he again has a great one. Individually I'm unconvinced Hibbs has been the most impacting, but I'm fine with factoring in the fact that he was totally disrespected last year and that he's the anchor of the league's absolute best defenses.

bearadonisdna
02-28-2014, 07:34 PM
Defensive rating is WAY too team dependent for me to care about individual numbers, especially compared to players on other teams.


Gasol
Hibbert
Iggy
Howard

That's my short list. Hibbert is my leader right now. Gasol missing time hurts his case, and he again has a great one. Individually I'm unconvinced Hibbs has been the most impacting, but I'm fine with factoring in the fact that he was totally disrespected last year and that he's the anchor of the league's absolute best defenses.

How do u not have noah on the list? The anchor of the number 2 defense in the nba?

ManRam
02-28-2014, 07:44 PM
How do u not have noah on the list? The anchor of the number 2 defense in the nba?

He was one of the 2 players I chopped off before I posted. He's right there. I love Noah. He was one of my 2-3 favorite college athletes ever. He plays the game in such a fun way.

I just don't quite think he has the impact those other 3 big men have individually. Stick each of them on a random hypothetical team, and I think he's doing a little less than the other 3 would in a similar circumstance. He's right there behind them. But I do think it is a tiny bit behind.

:shrug:


Judging defense is a hard thing to do. I'm not going to pretend like I have it right...because there are a billion ways to look at it and not a single way that's even close to definitive.

Pacerlive
02-28-2014, 09:25 PM
No noah doesnt deserve it evry year. Im not sure u can say he needs more help than hibb or dwight when he has less help than both of those guys. Well at least hibbert. Dwight has more help overall not sure how that translates defensively tho.
So you are saying Noah is a good one on one defender? Sorry I don't see that and I think he struggles with guys who have size to back him down. Bynum was good example this year.

Hawkeye15
02-28-2014, 09:31 PM
Defensive rebounding is just one aspect but DPOY demands a holistic defense impact .I do not know how much defensive rebounding should be attributed to the overall D

exactly, that was my point haha

Tony_Starks
02-28-2014, 10:45 PM
TOP 10 IN DEFENSIVE RATING:

1. Roy Hibbert-IND 94.8
2. Paul George-IND 95.1
3. Andrew Bogut-GSW 95.4
4. David West-IND 95.8
5. Joakim Noah-CHI 96.1
6. Draymond Green-GSW 97.0
7. Tim Duncan-SAS 98.1
8. Carlos Boozer-CHI 98.3
9. Lance Stephenson-IND 98.5
10. DeAndre Jordan-LAC 98.6

Even though it wont happen i would love to see George get it. He makes it a point to defend the teams best player the whole game, not just in spurts. And he's a old school straight up defender, not a roamer.

To do what he does and still be as good as he is offensively is impressive. Best 2 way player in the game IMO.....

JasonJohnHorn
02-28-2014, 10:55 PM
Judging defense is a hard thing to do. I'm not going to pretend like I have it right...because there are a billion ways to look at it and not a single way that's even close to definitive.

This is the BEST possible answer you can give.

Defense is the hardest thing to gauge. There are some many ways to be good at it. John Stockton is a great example. One-on-one defense? Simply not that great? Bad. No. Not at all. He knew how to get position, and he worked hard, but he wasn't the kind of lock-down defender Payton was. That said, he was an AMAZING team defender. You want him to trap the Hakeem with a double team and then still get between his man and the basket once the ball gets kicked out. He can do that. He was great at that. And he was AMAZING at guarding the passing lanes. He is one guy who seldom took a gamble to get a steal. He just kept his eyes open. How do you gauge that next to Payton? Or Darrell Walker? Or Joe Dumars?

We have so many great one-on-one defenders like Tony Allen and Iggy and from what I hear in this thread Paul George has really stepped it up to (haven't seen too much of him this season, but I watched him lots in the playoffs last year and he seemed like a good defender), and then we get a guy who gets blocks (Dwight), but is he doing as much defensively as Hibbert? Or Marc Gasol? Or Noah?


Is Paul George looking good because he plays with Hibbert? Has Boozer improved that much defensively? Or is it just playing alongside Noah?

It is so hard to judge these things. Stats simply DO NOT show you everything on the defensive end. Not even close.

Swashcuff
02-28-2014, 11:07 PM
This is the BEST possible answer you can give.

Defense is the hardest thing to gauge. There are some many ways to be good at it. John Stockton is a great example. One-on-one defense? Simply not that great? Bad. No. Not at all. He knew how to get position, and he worked hard, but he wasn't the kind of lock-down defender Payton was. That said, he was an AMAZING team defender. You want him to trap the Hakeem with a double team and then still get between his man and the basket once the ball gets kicked out. He can do that. He was great at that. And he was AMAZING at guarding the passing lanes. He is one guy who seldom took a gamble to get a steal. He just kept his eyes open. How do you gauge that next to Payton? Or Darrell Walker? Or Joe Dumars?

We have so many great one-on-one defenders like Tony Allen and Iggy and from what I hear in this thread Paul George has really stepped it up to (haven't seen too much of him this season, but I watched him lots in the playoffs last year and he seemed like a good defender), and then we get a guy who gets blocks (Dwight), but is he doing as much defensively as Hibbert? Or Marc Gasol? Or Noah?


Is Paul George looking good because he plays with Hibbert? Has Boozer improved that much defensively? Or is it just playing alongside Noah?

It is so hard to judge these things. Stats simply DO NOT show you everything on the defensive end. Not even close.

A single stat can never capture an individual's overall defensive value in a team sport such as basketball. I mean yes we have Synergy who does as good a job as possible of tracking and individual defense against his opponents but it doesn't take into consideration the sheer impact another defender would have on the decision making of that player.

What I have realized however is in cases where most of the more accurate defensive statistics paint a player as a quality defender that player usually is. I mean Boozer has accumulated quite a large number of DWS since playing in Chicago and has about the best DRtg of any PF over that time as well but when you take a deeper dive into the more telling statistics (the synergy number, DRAPM and his opponent counter-production) you see where Boozer falls way short.

As for if Boozer benefits from playing next to Noah I remember most recently for Philly the buzz Evan Turner got when he played the perimeter with Iggy defensively in a quality defensive system we had in place in Iggy's last couple years. The pundits were raving about Evan's improved D that that and not his offense was the most impressive part of his game. Fast forward a couple years and now look at Evan, Paul George said he seem to be winded when he had to get back on D so quickly in just his first game as a Pacer.

ricky recon
02-28-2014, 11:53 PM
Why bring up irrelevant stats like rebounds and fg% when it should be about defense?

Anyways, Hibbert is taking it home rather easily, have complete faith the voters are going damn near unanimous in this one

Rebounding is defense in a way.

ohreally
03-01-2014, 01:35 AM
Noah. No question. No knock on Hibbert, but really, Noah on any team improves overall defense more than Hibbert does. Take the Knicks (please). Sure, Hibbert would help a ton in situations, and much more than another (ahem) recent DPOY, but Noah's activity would do a lot more and he'd be less likely to foul out trying to cover for all the dunderheaded defenders that were (ahem) playing around him.

Noah. Give the guy his props.

And I still hate the Bulls for for all the bs calls they got that allowed them to deny Ewing a ring or two.

Chronz
03-01-2014, 01:58 AM
Rebounding is defense in a way.

Sure, its called DEFENSIVE Rebounding. Overall rebounding includes offensive rebounding, which in no way effects the opposing teams offensive efficiency.

Chronz
03-01-2014, 02:23 AM
I think where we are diverging here is that you see a rebound as either part of the defensive effort, or part of the offensive effort. I don't see the two as mutually exclusive.
So then why would the NBA go through the trouble of distinguishing between the 2 and why do statisticians find differing values in their worth?


If you take the ball away from the other team, or stop them from getting it, you are helping your offense by getting possession of the ball.
Yea that doesn't vibe with me, the fact that teams favor transition defense instead of pursuing offensive rebounds the way they used to, tells me that its not vital to your defensive efficiency the same way securing actual defensive rebounds are. I prefer the analytical approach and you wont see GM's that are trying to improve their teams defensive efficiency look at offensive rebounding as any sort of gauge for defensive impact.


You've earned your team an offensive possession. Now, does it matter which end of the floor that happens at? It is part of the offense either way.
Of course it matters, thats precisely why we began tracking the differences between the 2. Offensive rebounding enhances your offensive efficiency and defensive rebounding enhances your defensive efficiency. Its common sense in my book, what you are suggesting is that every act on the court has an equal influence in your teams offensive AND defensive efficiency, thats simply not true.



Getting a rebound STOPS the other team from getting a possession, regardless of where you are on the court.
Which has absolutely no influence on their offensive efficiency unless its a DEFENSIVE rebound. This is how teams analyze player contributions.


Keeping track of offensive rebounds is important because they are harder to get. When you are on offense, the opposing team generally has better position to get rebounds, so guys who get those rebounds are performing a task that is inherently more difficult, so it is interesting to keep track of that. Usually these guys are guys who aren't terribly important to the offense and once' they'd set a pick or drawn their defender out, they can crash the boards.
Agreed, tho its important to note that some coaches prefer not to crash the offensive glass because it COMPROMISES THEIR DEFENSE. For you to think they are of equal value/importance goes against common sense IMO. Offensive rebounding can often be a detriment to defensive efficiency whereas Defensive rebounding tends to enhance your teams defensive efficiency.


Offense and defense are often interwoven. It is hard to find where they diverge sometimes. just because you are on your offensive end of the court, doesn't mean you don't play defense down there. And as I said, once that ball is in the air you are on defense. Nobody has possession of a ball that's in the air. Even if you are on your own end, once your team no longer has possession, you are in defense mode. You need to stop the other team from getting the ball to prevent them from getting an offensive possession.
Its not hard for me, its called transition basketball. We'll just have to agree to disagree on the whole, both teams are playing defense at once, its pretty easy to see that the team shooting the ball is still playing offense until the opposing team grabs the defensive rebound.


Does getting an offensive rebound show up under the defensive stats in terms of how efficient the opposition is? No. It doesn't. But every time you get one, you've essentially given that team a missed FG that doesn't show up in the stat sheets, or a turnover. It is no different than a steal or a missed field goal. It is a possession they should have had, that they had the better position to obtain, and that you took from them. That is defense, regardless of which end of the court you are on, and just because it doesn't show up on the defensive stats or advance stats, doesn't mean it isn't defense.
Nope, its offense. You've extended your teams possession, the opposing team is still going to get there chance once your offensive efficiency has been determined. Like I said, I prefer the analytical take, there is history and data behind it, I've honestly never seen a single statistician begin to track offensive rebounding as part of a teams defensive efficiency.


It seems to me that your argument is twofold.

1. It doesn't show up in the defensive stats, so it's not defense.
2. It helps your offense.

My response is

1. All kinds of defensive efforts don't show up in the stats.
2. Every piece of good defense helps your offense.
Except thats not true, every TEAM defensive effort shows up in the stats, you either force a miss and grab the rebound or you force a turnover. Grabbing an offensive rebound is an OFFENSIVE contribution, not a defensive one. Thats why the NBA separated the 2 and its why the league began dissecting the importance and influence each has. Seems like the league moved on from your way of thinking, if it ever followed it, and you just refuse to accept the modern approach.


If you stop thinking about things in binaries, then you will see that good defense ALWAYS helps your offense, and if that is your reason for not recognizing rebounding on both ends of the court as part of the defensive effort, then you need to stop thinking in binaries. Aristotle is not a genius he thought he was.

Think of it as a Yin Yang.
Sounds like unsubstantiated cliche ridden garbage, Id much rather think like the people who study the league they work for.


And yes, when Rodman was focused on rebounds, his one-on-one defense was better, but as I said, I didn't say that a good rebounder = a good defender. I said a good defender = a good rebounder. All lions are felines, but not all felines are lions.
Was this a typo? I said Rodmans defense was at its WORST when he focused on rebounds. Neither of your calculations are true, there is no absolute stance here. You can be a good defender and a bad rebounder, you can be a great rebounder and bad defender, you can be bad at both and good at both.

ohreally
03-01-2014, 03:12 AM
Sure, its called DEFENSIVE Rebounding. Overall rebounding includes offensive rebounding, which in no way effects the opposing teams offensive efficiency.

Assuming a team is actually trying to defend, an offensive rebound gives the team another chance to score and an increased chance of drawing a foul. Both can affect the opponent's offensive efficiency since the foul could be committed by a key scorer on the opponent's team and if your team scores it has a better chance to be set on defense.

It's true that if you have your entire team focused on crashing the boards for offensive rebounds you're more likely to give up more easy baskets, but being alert to offensive rebounding opportunities or having a naturally good rebounder with good instincts for judging how a teammate's shot might be rebounded without his being required to go to great lengths in improving his chances to get the offensive rebound, it's almost certain that there would be some effect on the opponent's offensive efficiency.

Lots of folks put a lot of defensive value in blocked shots even though an overemphasis on them is likely to take the defender out of position to actually defend and more likely to foul the shooter.

Offense does have an effect on defense just as defense has an effect on offense. It just all depends on the skill and intelligence of the players involved--know when to hold them, know when to fold them.

ohreally
03-01-2014, 03:28 AM
Sure, its called DEFENSIVE Rebounding. Overall rebounding includes offensive rebounding, which in no way effects the opposing teams offensive efficiency.

Actually, my bad, you did say offensive rebounds in no way effects the opposing teams's offensive efficiency. Thought you said affects. True that a team's offensive rebounding doesn't add to the opposing team's offensive efficiency.

Chronz
03-01-2014, 03:45 AM
Assuming a team is actually trying to defend, an offensive rebound gives the team another chance to score and an increased chance of drawing a foul. Both can affect the opponent's offensive efficiency since the foul could be committed by a key scorer on the opponent's team and if your team scores it has a better chance to be set on defense.
Which is why its important to get DEFENSIVE rebounds. To prevent offensive rebounding.



It's true that if you have your entire team focused on crashing the boards for offensive rebounds you're more likely to give up more easy baskets, but being alert to offensive rebounding opportunities or having a naturally good rebounder with good instincts for judging how a teammate's shot might be rebounded without his being required to go to great lengths in improving his chances to get the offensive rebound, it's almost certain that there would be some effect on the opponent's offensive efficiency.
It doesn't have to be the entire team tho. And yes its very important to PREVENT offensive rebounding by rebounding the ball defensively


Lots of folks put a lot of defensive value in blocked shots even though an overemphasis on them is likely to take the defender out of position to actually defend and more likely to foul the shooter.
Agreed, block shots are pretty overrated. Positional defense is of the utmost importance but there is no doubt that blocked shots hold more value defensively than offensive rebounding.


Offense does have an effect on defense just as defense has an effect on offense. It just all depends on the skill and intelligence of the players involved--know when to hold them, know when to fold them.

To be honest, the only way it has an effect is if it leads to transition opportunities. Pursuit of offensive rebounds are probably the worst way to help your defense, if anything, it hurts it. But Im more inclined to say it has a negligible impact, whereas defensive rebounding is FAR more likely to help your defensive standing.

By saying offensive rebounds help your defense, you are saying we should stop looking at PPG allowed or PTS per possession allowed as barometers for team defense, yet not a single team has taken such a stance to my knowledge. Feel free to do what JJH has failed to do so, provide precedence

Pacerlive
03-01-2014, 10:08 AM
Noah. No question. No knock on Hibbert, but really, Noah on any team improves overall defense more than Hibbert does. Take the Knicks (please). Sure, Hibbert would help a ton in situations, and much more than another (ahem) recent DPOY, but Noah's activity would do a lot more and he'd be less likely to foul out trying to cover for all the dunderheaded defenders that were (ahem) playing around him.

Noah. Give the guy his props.

And I still hate the Bulls for for all the bs calls they got that allowed them to deny Ewing a ring or two.

The Pacers system to me is easier to run than what Thibs run in Chicago which involves a lot more rotations from the wings to help the helper. This is why Thibs likes a certain type of wing defender.

Pretty much the value of having wings feed into Hibbbert is that everyone knows he will alter the shot in some way and this is not how Noah is used.

Chroz,
I think it's apparent that teams look at overall opponent possessions per game and this is the defensive stats where offensive rebounds would show up as an indicator.

Pacers turned heads last year in the analytics world by giving up the least efficient transition points and being top 3 in offensive rebounds percent. Most people know you have to sacrifice one over the other and the Pacers didn't follow that old adage.

JasonJohnHorn
03-01-2014, 11:59 AM
Double post

JasonJohnHorn
03-01-2014, 12:07 PM
So then why would the NBA go through the trouble of distinguishing between the 2 and why do statisticians find differing values in their worth?


Yea that doesn't vibe with me, the fact that teams favor transition defense instead of pursuing offensive rebounds the way they used to, tells me that its not vital to your defensive efficiency the same way securing actual defensive rebounds are. I prefer the analytical approach and you wont see GM's that are trying to improve their teams defensive efficiency look at offensive rebounding as any sort of gauge for defensive impact.


Of course it matters, thats precisely why we began tracking the differences between the 2. Offensive rebounding enhances your offensive efficiency and defensive rebounding enhances your defensive efficiency. Its common sense in my book, what you are suggesting is that every act on the court has an equal influence in your teams offensive AND defensive efficiency, thats simply not true.



Which has absolutely no influence on their offensive efficiency unless its a DEFENSIVE rebound. This is how teams analyze player contributions.


Agreed, tho its important to note that some coaches prefer not to crash the offensive glass because it COMPROMISES THEIR DEFENSE. For you to think they are of equal value/importance goes against common sense IMO. Offensive rebounding can often be a detriment to defensive efficiency whereas Defensive rebounding tends to enhance your teams defensive efficiency.


Its not hard for me, its called transition basketball. We'll just have to agree to disagree on the whole, both teams are playing defense at once, its pretty easy to see that the team shooting the ball is still playing offense until the opposing team grabs the defensive rebound.


Nope, its offense. You've extended your teams possession, the opposing team is still going to get there chance once your offensive efficiency has been determined. Like I said, I prefer the analytical take, there is history and data behind it, I've honestly never seen a single statistician begin to track offensive rebounding as part of a teams defensive efficiency.


Except thats not true, every TEAM defensive effort shows up in the stats, you either force a miss and grab the rebound or you force a turnover. Grabbing an offensive rebound is an OFFENSIVE contribution, not a defensive one. Thats why the NBA separated the 2 and its why the league began dissecting the importance and influence each has. Seems like the league moved on from your way of thinking, if it ever followed it, and you just refuse to accept the modern approach.


Sounds like unsubstantiated cliche ridden garbage, Id much rather think like the people who study the league they work for.


Was this a typo? I said Rodmans defense was at its WORST when he focused on rebounds. Neither of your calculations are true, there is no absolute stance here. You can be a good defender and a bad rebounder, you can be a great rebounder and bad defender, you can be bad at both and good at both.

You are just repeating yourself at this point.

I understand what you are saying and I don't agree with it. Whenever you stop the other team from getting an offensive possession, you are helping your defensive effort. Period. What does it matter what end of the court this happens at? If you steal the outlet pass off of the opposing team's defensive rebound, that puts you back on offense. Is that steal an offensive steal? No. Of course not.

Explain to me this. How is getting an offensive rebound NOT a part of the defensive effort when to PREVENTS the other team from getting an offensive possession? It is really that simply. You see the rebound as either defensive or offensive, and they are, regardless of which end of the court you are on, a part of both. A rebound GIVES your team an offensive possession AND takes an offensive possession away from the other team. It helps your defense AND your offense, and if you can recognize that then there is no point in continuing this conversation.

I freely admit that a rebound, on either end of the court helps your offense. Why can't you see that it helps your defense as well? Why are you so married to this notion that a rebound can't simultaneously help both the defense AND the offense?


If a team picked up every offensive rebound, they'd likely win by a margin of no less than 70 points, limiting the opposing team to likely no more than 50 points, even if they shot at 50% from the floor. You don't think that would be an amazing defensive effort?

The first part of defense is making sure the other team doesn't get the ball, regardless of where you are on the court. If you stop them from getting the ball, that is defense. Period. Is that so hard to agree with?

Pacerlive
03-01-2014, 03:05 PM
Sure, its called DEFENSIVE Rebounding. Overall rebounding includes offensive rebounding, which in no way effects the opposing teams offensive efficiency.
It doesn't affect the offensive efficiency of the opposing team but efficiency measurements are normalized to 100 possessions. This makes them comparable from team to team but statistically limiting the amount of possessions of the opponent net affect is a defensive impact.

Chronz
03-02-2014, 01:22 AM
You are just repeating yourself at this point.

We both are.



I understand what you are saying and I don't agree with it. Whenever you stop the other team from getting an offensive possession, you are helping your defensive effort. Period. What does it matter what end of the court this happens at? If you steal the outlet pass off of the opposing team's defensive rebound, that puts you back on offense. Is that steal an offensive steal? No. Of course not.

There has never been an offensive steal, all steals are done by the defensive player. Not sure what your point is here. Those are truly taking away possessions because they end the opposing teams offensive possession whereas offensive rebounds are a symptom of the opposing team not finishing their own defensive possession.



Explain to me this. How is getting an offensive rebound NOT a part of the defensive effort when to PREVENTS the other team from getting an offensive possession?
I've explained it, we dont see eye to eye on this, you prefer treating all rebounds equally, I prefer the methodology employed by those in the NBA, which is to distinguish between the 2.


It is really that simply. You see the rebound as either defensive or offensive, and they are, regardless of which end of the court you are on, a part of both. A rebound GIVES your team an offensive possession AND takes an offensive possession away from the other team. It helps your defense AND your offense, and if you can recognize that then there is no point in continuing this conversation.
Actually, pursuing offensive rebounds can compromise your defense, certainly to a greater extent than defensive rebounding. Thats why I dont value them equally.



I freely admit that a rebound, on either end of the court helps your offense. Why can't you see that it helps your defense as well? Why are you so married to this notion that a rebound can't simultaneously help both the defense AND the offense?
Because I see no proof of this influence and because I do see that the NBA has gone through the trouble of distinguishing between the 2.



If a team picked up every offensive rebound, they'd likely win by a margin of no less than 70 points, limiting the opposing team to likely no more than 50 points, even if they shot at 50% from the floor. You don't think that would be an amazing defensive effort?

I dont believe you. If a team picked up every offensive rebound, they would have insane offensive efficiency, the other team would see their defensive efficiency fall but their offensive efficiency would remain unchanged.


The first part of defense is making sure the other team doesn't get the ball, regardless of where you are on the court. If you stop them from getting the ball, that is defense. Period. Is that so hard to agree with?
Its very hard to agree with because its simply not true, the first part of defense is to force a miss or a turnover, only then does rebounding come to play.

We can continue dancing in circles, or we can simply agree to disagree, you have your methods, I prefer the more analytical take. Im not saying I wont be swayed, but I need proof here.

Chronz
03-02-2014, 01:28 AM
It doesn't affect the offensive efficiency of the opposing team but efficiency measurements are normalized to 100 possessions. This makes them comparable from team to team but statistically limiting the amount of possessions of the opponent net affect is a defensive impact.

I care more about efficiency than raw totals. What you guys are talking about is the old adage, that sometimes, your best defense is your offense and your best offense can be your defense. Which I would agree with, but the NBA distinguishes the 2 as O/D rebounds for a reason, to separate the 2 sides of the court.

The simplest way to boil it down would be to say you either treat basketball as a game of net possessions or a game of net efficiency. Im an efficiency guy. Thats how those who study the league break down the value of possessions/stats.

And if we were to simply ignore that, it would make quantifying the game needlessly more difficult.

Chronz
03-02-2014, 01:33 AM
Put it this way, have you ever heard anyone say

"What a great offensive play" when a player forces a miss and grabs the rebound? Nope, they acknowledge the defensive act.

Just the same, when the team allows an offensive rebound, its acknowledged as poor defense, not poor offense.

Pacerlive
03-02-2014, 02:24 AM
I care more about efficiency than raw totals. What you guys are talking about is the old adage, that sometimes, your best defense is your offense and your best offense can be your defense. Which I would agree with, but the NBA distinguishes the 2 as O/D rebounds for a reason, to separate the 2 sides of the court.

The simplest way to boil it down would be to say you either treat basketball as a game of net possessions or a game of net efficiency. Im an efficiency guy. Thats how those who study the league break down the value of possessions/stats.

And if we were to simply ignore that, it would make quantifying the game needlessly more difficult.
I care more about efficiency as well but I understand the fact that offensive rebounds are in essence the same as steals. They both get quantified in efficiency differential.

Now in the context of this thread do you think the center position is important to fast break defense? I would argue its one of the least since most of the action occurs such as a outlet pass faster than a center can run. Teams focus less on crashing the offensive glass because the analytics tells them too but for a center to gobble up offensive boards hardly neglects the transition defense which was one of the reasons why I brought up the pacers last years ability to do both well.

Now after saying all that I think it's a moot point since people who vote will inevitably look at defensive stats and the break down of them which won't include offensive rebounds. That doesn't bother me since Hibbert net affect will be captured in the fact that he changes how the best player in the game plays.

The last thing I will say is that by removing pace from the efficiency equation I think you can miss its influence on a teams offense and defense. I won't say its uniform for all teams but I think it's there and it can influence the perception of a players overall defensive impact.

JasonJohnHorn
03-02-2014, 03:17 AM
There has never been an offensive steal, all steals are done by the defensive player. Not sure what your point is here. Those are truly taking away possessions because they end the opposing teams offensive possession whereas offensive rebounds are a symptom of the opposing team not finishing their own defensive possession.

I know this. My point is it happens at the offensive end of the court. You agree that this play, which happens on the offensive end, is a defensive play, so why would a rebound be any different?




I've explained it, we dont see eye to eye on this, you prefer treating all rebounds equally, I prefer the methodology employed by those in the NBA, which is to distinguish between the 2.

I don't see how "those in the NBA" agree with you. This is an 'appeal to authority' when the authority in question hasn't even backed you up on it.

I have agreed that there IS a reason to distinguish, because it is harder to get an offensive rebound because they defenders have position. The fact that they differentiate them doesn't mean that they don't both have a defensive impact.

Offensive rebounds are harder to get. So they keep track of them. It doesn't mean that there is an implication that they don't have a defensive impact on the game. This is a conclusion you are drawing and then projecting on to the "those at the NBA".




Because I see no proof of this influence and because I do see that the NBA has gone through the trouble of distinguishing between the 2.

The NBA does not state "We differentiate between the two kinds of rebounds because one contributes to defense and the other does not." That is NOWHERE in ANY NBA handbook, so stop using language like the "NBA" backs you up.

Instead, show me our logic. Explain how it doesn't help defense. I've clearly showed that it PREVENTS the opposing team from getting a possession. Just because that doesn't show up in the stats you like to use, doesn't mean it doesn't impact the opposing team's offense.




I dont believe you. If a team picked up every offensive rebound, they would have insane offensive efficiency, the other team would see their defensive efficiency fall but their offensive efficiency would remain unchanged.

So if a teams' effort on the OFFENSIVE glass limited the opposition to 50 points, you wouldn't see any correlation with the offensive rebounds and the impact on the other team's scoring total? Seriously?




We can continue dancing in circles, or we can simply agree to disagree, you have your methods, I prefer the more analytical take. Im not saying I wont be swayed, but I need proof here.

You use the word 'analytical' as if I'm not using analysis. I am. I offered analysis and explained how offensive rebounds impact the defensive effort. You reduce the number of possession the other team gets, BY ANY MEANS, you reduce the number of points the get. THAT IS DEFENSE!

Does an offensive rebound prevent the opposing team from getting a possession? Yes or no? If the answer is yes, then it IS contributing to the defensive effort. It is that simple.

You use language that makes it sound like I'm not using analysis and that the NBA agrees with you when neither is true. You simply refuse to recolonize that an offensive rebound prevents the other team from getting possession of the ball. That is ZERO points that team scored because of that offensive rebound. That is efficient defense.

I can't see why are person who is generally quite reasonable as yourself REFUSES to recognizes that an offensive rebound can help BOTH the offense AND the defense.


And you suggest that the offensive rebound helps the offense, but if that extra possession leads to a miss field goal, it hasn't actually help the offense. It HAS, however, even in instances where the team doesn't score, keeps the ball out of the opposing team's hands and giving them less time with the ball and therefore less opportunity to score. Now. Tell me that is not true.

Are you seriously telling me that you don't think an offensive rebound prevents a possession? And that taking a potential possession away from a team doesn't impact that defensive effort? You admit that getting a steal on the offensive end of the court DOES help the defensive effort, so why wouldn't a rebound on the same end do the same? There is not logic there.


Now, if the league does 'differentiate' between them, why to they lump them together? On 2.27.2010, Zach Randolph scored 31 points, grabbed 15 defensive rebounds and 10 offensive rebounds. Is that a triple-double? You say the league differentiates them, but the league also differentiates between 3pt% and 2p%, but still combines them into FG%, just as they combine OR and DR for TR. Why is that? If they are unrelated?

JasonJohnHorn
03-02-2014, 03:27 AM
the NBA distinguishes the 2 as O/D rebounds for a reason, to separate the 2 sides of the court.

Yes. Because one is harder to get than the other. That is the reason. NOT because one only impact defense and one only impact offense.

Do you have an NBA guide book you can site that states the reason they differentiate is the reason YOU THINK it is that they differentiate them? Or are you just trying to pass your opinion off as NBA gospel?


You need to stop thinking in binaries. We all figured out Aristotle was flawed in the modernist period, if not in the Renaissance. Stop hanging on to those binaries and free your mind.

Chronz
03-02-2014, 02:56 PM
know this. My point is it happens at the offensive end of the court. You agree that this play, which happens on the offensive end, is a defensive play, so why would a rebound be any different?
Because the player is playing transition defense.
And because the nba never differentiated between Offensive and defensive steals, this despite ur assertion That what side of the floor you're on will determine the difficulty, there are no offensive steals




I don't see how "those in the NBA" agree with you. This is an 'appeal to authority' when the authority in question hasn't even backed you up on it.
Could be true, but find me a single statistician that gauges defensive impact in ANY manner, by looking at offensive influence.


I have agreed that there IS a reason to distinguish, because it is harder to get an offensive rebound because they defenders have position. The fact that they differentiate them doesn't mean that they don't both have a defensive impact.
Its also getting harder because teams are sending less people to attack the OFFENSIVE glass because they prefer DEFENSIVE BALANCE. Should tell you something when the league at large is prioritizing defense by focusing less on offensive rebounding.


Offensive rebounds are harder to get. So they keep track of them. It doesn't mean that there is an implication that they don't have a defensive impact on the game. This is a conclusion you are drawing and then projecting on to the "those at the NBA".
So then why did they not call them easy rebounds and harder rebounds?



The NBA does not state "We differentiate between the two kinds of rebounds because one contributes to defense and the other does not." That is NOWHERE in ANY NBA handbook, so stop using language like the "NBA" backs you up.
Its implied in the language, hence the name OFFENSIVE rebounding and DEFENSIVE rebounding, its also evident in the fact that there are no barometers (that I know of) that attempts to calculate defensive efficiency by looking at offensive rebounding, those people that come up with these barometers WORK IN THE NBA. Therefore, those in the biz back me. Meanwhile you have unsubstantiated theories because no one (to my knowledge anyways) even attempts to care that much.


Instead, show me our logic. Explain how it doesn't help defense. I've clearly showed that it PREVENTS the opposing team from getting a possession. Just because that doesn't show up in the stats you like to use, doesn't mean it doesn't impact the opposing team's offense.
Except its not just the stats I like to use, its the stats that just about every statistician uses.






So if a teams' effort on the OFFENSIVE glass limited the opposition to 50 points, you wouldn't see any correlation with the offensive rebounds and the impact on the other team's scoring total? Seriously?
LOL your not limiting anything. The other team can still score 100. You're seriously exposing how little you know about stats. Just because you grab every offensive rebound doesn't mean you somehow take away the opposing teams chance at scoring. LMFAO. They still get the possession once your possession is over.





You use the word 'analytical' as if I'm not using analysis. I am. I offered analysis and explained how offensive rebounds impact the defensive effort. You reduce the number of possession the other team gets, BY ANY MEANS, you reduce the number of points the get. THAT IS DEFENSE!
Show me a single statistician/GM that would agree.


Does an offensive rebound prevent the opposing team from getting a possession? Yes or no? If the answer is yes, then it IS contributing to the defensive effort. It is that simple.
Nope, its contributing to your offensive possession by giving you another crack. The opposing team can still score at a high rate.


You use language that makes it sound like I'm not using analysis and that the NBA agrees with you when neither is true. You simply refuse to recolonize that an offensive rebound prevents the other team from getting possession of the ball. That is ZERO points that team scored because of that offensive rebound. That is efficient defense.

I can't see why are person who is generally quite reasonable as yourself REFUSES to recognizes that an offensive rebound can help BOTH the offense AND the defense.
Because you have not provided any evidence, Im using barometer used by those in the business, but feel free to finally provide something other than opinion.



And you suggest that the offensive rebound helps the offense, but if that extra possession leads to a miss field goal, it hasn't actually help the offense. It HAS, however, even in instances where the team doesn't score, keeps the ball out of the opposing team's hands and giving them less time with the ball and therefore less opportunity to score. Now. Tell me that is not true.


Are you seriously telling me that you don't think an offensive rebound prevents a possession? And that taking a potential possession away from a team doesn't impact that defensive effort? You admit that getting a steal on the offensive end of the court DOES help the defensive effort, so why wouldn't a rebound on the same end do the same? There is not logic there.
You're going in circles man, your logic doesn't vibe with the statistical movement that I follow because it allows us to quantify aspects of the game. Feel free to show me some actual analysis because your logic isn't enough to sway me from the methods employed by those in the NBA, nor the fact that the NBA differentiated between O and D rebounds.




Now, if the league does 'differentiate' between them, why to they lump them together?
What? If they just lumped them together, we wouldn't have defensive and offensive rebounds.


On 2.27.2010, Zach Randolph scored 31 points, grabbed 15 defensive rebounds and 10 offensive rebounds. Is that a triple-double? You say the league differentiates them, but the league also differentiates between 3pt% and 2p%, but still combines them into FG%, just as they combine OR and DR for TR. Why is that? If they are unrelated?
LOL yea, and you would be a moron if you were to imply all shots were equal even tho the league differentiated between the 2 and we have methods to quantify the differing value of said shots.

Show me a single instance where someone praised a DEFENDER for forcing a stop and grabbing a rebound by saying "GREAT OFFENSE THERE"

Chronz
03-02-2014, 03:03 PM
Yes. Because one is harder to get than the other. That is the reason. NOT because one only impact defense and one only impact offense.
Based on what?


Do you have an NBA guide book you can site that states the reason they differentiate is the reason YOU THINK it is that they differentiate them? Or are you just trying to pass your opinion off as NBA gospel?
Its not my opinion that the NBA tracks OFFENSIVE and DEFENSIVE rebounding for the purpose of differentiating between OFFENSIVE and DEFENSIVE contributions, its right there in plain ol English. You have an unsubstantiated theory that isn't backed by the language (OFFENSE AND DEFENSE) nor have you provided a SINGLE methodology of those employed by the NBA, where they gauge defensive impact by including O-REBS. Nor have you acknowledged that defenses have evolved by prioritizing defensive balance rather than crashing offensive glass. Feel free to do anything other than regurgitated a flawed premise.



You need to stop thinking in binaries. We all figured out Aristotle was flawed in the modernist period, if not in the Renaissance. Stop hanging on to those binaries and free your mind
LOL, except the NBA is trending in my direction, you need to open your eyes and realize you stand alone in the NBA.

3RDASYSTEM
03-02-2014, 03:23 PM
Put it this way, have you ever heard anyone say

"What a great offensive play" when a player forces a miss and grabs the rebound? Nope, they acknowledge the defensive act.

Just the same, when the team allows an offensive rebound, its acknowledged as poor defense, not poor offense.

No they say that because the actual play wasn't complete since the shot was missed but the 'offensive move' could still provide a 'wow' calling, they acknowledge both but I notice all players/analyst say they would take better O over better D anyday allday so does that outweigh your political analytical outlook on basketball?

or if a team gets a offensive board it could be because the team was out of position because of ball movement or long rebound off missed 3, that doesn't equate to bad d more so bad bounce luck of the ball, but I guess we all live in our own fishbowl sports world for sure because no current or former player would take your efficiency talk serious when discussing the cream of the crop at what they do because you would talk about efficiency all thru the debate

always watch the game/film to see where these so called efficient players excelled and its usually with high talent, or equal sidekick to start with, other than that players are the same, just like KD was against grizz in that series and so on, so you are basically saying you like the best players of each era or you like guys who take 10 shots and make 6-8 each game, or you like CENTERS who shoot 60pct fg, nothing wrong with that

beasted86
03-02-2014, 03:55 PM
FG% should be considered for defensive player of the year? Jesus Christ do you ever say anything that maKes sense?

Def between Ibaka and Roy Hibbert.
This.

Chronz
03-02-2014, 03:58 PM
There's an ai thread that requires your attending system, everything you said was either a lie our irrelevant to my point, I'll stick to the methods employed by the nba thank you very much

Chronz
03-02-2014, 06:41 PM
You're much more likely to limit the opposing teams offensive efficiency by grabbing every DEFENSIVE rebound than offensive ones, and that's putting it nicely

JasonJohnHorn
03-02-2014, 10:07 PM
Based on what?[QUOTE]

The fact that you are asking this is demonstrating that you are either being facetious, or didn't read my post. I said the offensive rebounds are harder because the defensive players have better position.


[QUOTE]Its not my opinion that the NBA tracks OFFENSIVE and DEFENSIVE rebounding for the purpose of differentiating between OFFENSIVE and DEFENSIVE contributions, its right there in plain ol English. You have an unsubstantiated theory that isn't backed by the language (OFFENSE AND DEFENSE) nor have you provided a SINGLE methodology of those employed by the NBA, where they gauge defensive impact by including O-REBS. Nor have you acknowledged that defenses have evolved by prioritizing defensive balance rather than crashing offensive glass. Feel free to do anything other than regurgitated a flawed premise.

It's your opinion that the track them because one impacts offense ONLY and one impact defense ONLY. It doesn't say that anywhere in any NBA hand book. The reason the differentiate them, again, is because one is harder to get than the other. The reason they give them the names 'defensive' and 'offensive' are because one is picked up at the offensive end of the court and the other is picked up on the defensive end of the court, NOT because the only impact defense and offense exclusively.




LOL, except the NBA is trending in my direction, you need to open your eyes and realize you stand alone in the NBA.

What are you even talking about? Several people agree that it impacts. I don't see ANYBODY but you suggesting that offensive rebounds don't help your defensive effort.


Now... I have asked several question, and you have refused to answer them. Either you can answer them and take part in a reasoned conversation, are you can just keep repeating the same argument over and over.


Does an offensive rebound prevent the other team from getting a possession? Yes or no?

You talk about 'transition defense'. Transition defense starts AS SOON AS THE BALL IS NO LONGER IN YOUR POSSESSION.

What is the difference between stealing the ball on the outlet pass and stealing the ball before the guy making the outlet pass get the rebound? Either way you are preventing the team from a possession and the impacts your defense. That rebound gives the opposing team less time with the ball, and therefore gives them less scoring opportunities, thereby reducing the number of points the get.

Is there anything in that statement that is not true? Once you accept that as fact, which it is (there is no interpretation required there), you MUST concede that the offensive rebound helps your defensive effort. PERIOD.


Just because you like a certain advance stat that doesn't show this impact, doesn't mean it isn't making an impact on the defensive end.

Chronz
03-02-2014, 10:19 PM
Im well aware of your stance bro, just find me actual evidence, not flawed statistical examples but actual barometers. A single one would suffice, preferably a barometer employed by those in the NBA.

When a GMs/statisticians like Morey or Dean O discuss Defensive Efficiency, its well known they are talking about PPP or the 4 factors of defense. Stop thinking its just my pet stat, its the entire community at large here. They arent known as hard rebounds and easy rebounds, they are known as defensive rebounds and offensive rebounds. They are also separated that way in EVERY barometer to gauge defensive/offensive impact.

And yes, technically every stat can be somewhat related to another, it doesn't mean we dont distinguish between offensive and defensive stats.

Chronz
03-02-2014, 10:27 PM
Now... I have asked several question, and you have refused to answer them

Either you can answer them and take part in a reasoned conversation, are you can just keep repeating the same argument over and over.
Coming from the guy that doesn't directly respond to my statements and outright ignores them, this is meaningless to me.

I've answered everything, I await for a SINGLE shred of evidence, even your hypothetical was awful and indicative of how little you understand statistics. Once again, we are BOTH repeating ourselves, only you have failed to provide a single barometer to back you.

JasonJohnHorn
03-02-2014, 10:33 PM
Because the player is playing transition defense.
And because the nba never differentiated between Offensive and defensive steals, this despite ur assertion That what side of the floor you're on will determine the difficulty, there are no offensive steals

If that steal, on the offensive end, that prevents a possession IS a defensive play, then how is a rebound that takes the possession away before the outlet pass NOT a defensive play?




Could be true, but find me a single statistician that gauges defensive impact in ANY manner, by looking at offensive influence.

This is devoid of reason. You are asking me to appeal to an authority and the appeal to an authority is a faulty logic.




Its also getting harder because teams are sending less people to attack the OFFENSIVE glass because they prefer DEFENSIVE BALANCE. Should tell you something when the league at large is prioritizing defense by focusing less on offensive rebounding.

I don't disagree with this. But this doesn't change the fact that when you do get an offensive rebound, you take a possession away from the other team. This has NOTHING to do with the argument. You can say the same thing about a guy who goes for a steal and leave with an open lane to the basket. It was still a defensive play, just one that didn't pay off. If a guy can crash the offensive glass and get back on defense when he doesn't get the board, it has not negative impact on the defensive end and at least gives you an opprotunity on the other end of the floor.



So then why did they not call them easy rebounds and harder rebounds?

Seriously? Again. I have said this. One is collected on the defensive end, one is collected on the offensive end. What they are called does not change how they impact the game. You need to learn the difference between the signifier and the signified. You put too much weight into the signifier and ignore the signified.

I don't have time to teach you the basics of semiology, but go here to learn more: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferdinand_de_Saussure






Its implied in the language, hence the name OFFENSIVE rebounding and DEFENSIVE rebounding, its also evident in the fact that there are no barometers (that I know of) that attempts to calculate defensive efficiency by looking at offensive rebounding, those people that come up with these barometers WORK IN THE NBA. Therefore, those in the biz back me. Meanwhile you have

Again, see above. You are projecting something onto the rebound based on the name given it. That is a signifier. The rebound itself is the signified. And what do all rebounds do? ALL OF THEM? They prevent the other team from getting a possession AND give you one.

And again, they are named based on what end of the court they are picked up at and NOT because the ONLY impact one part of the game.



Except its not just the stats I like to use, its the stats that just about every statistician uses.

I never said other people don't use it. I said that certain stats are limited. And just because you think the term 'offensive' rebound means it ONLY it impacts offensive, doesn't mean that other people who look at that stat interpret it the way you do.






LOL your not limiting anything. The other team can still score 100. You're seriously exposing how little you know about stats. Just because you grab every offensive rebound doesn't mean you somehow take away the opposing teams chance at scoring. LMFAO. They still get the possession once your possession is over.

You ARE limiting something. If you get an offensive rebound and then use up 18 second of the clock, that give you back-to-back possessions and takes 18 seconds away from them. If you don't think limiting the time the opposing team has with the ball impact their offensive potential, then you are simply ignoring facts.

The more offensive rebounds you get, the less possession the opposing team gets. Less possession, they get, less points they get. How is this hard for you to understand?






Show me a single statistician/GM that would agree.

Show me one who agrees with you? Again, you are asking me to 'appeal to an authority'. If Danny Ferry says he agrees with me, or Greg Popovich, will you be satisfied? No. And if they did or didn't agree with mean wouldn't mean that I was right or wrong. The appeal to the authority is a flawed logic. You are using it because you are not using reason. Let's talk about the impact on the floor and forget what some stats guys gets a hard on for.



Nope, its contributing to your offensive possession by giving you another crack. The opposing team can still score at a high rate.

First. Just because it helps your offense doesn't mean it doesn't help you defense. Again, you are talking in binaries. Does a steal help you offense? Or defense? It helps BOth. Just like an offensive rebound.

Second. They might score at a high rate, but they get less opportunities to score. I didn't say it was the ONLY impact on defense, I said it was an aspect of the defensive game and contributed to the defensive effort. You are speak in part here to an argument I'm not even making.



Because you have not provided any evidence, Im using barometer used by those in the business, but feel free to finally provide something other than opinion.

The evidence is an offensive rebound prevents the opposing team from getting possession of the ball. That is a fact. That is evidence. The more you get, the less time the other team has with the ball, the less opportunity they will have to score. Fact. That is not an opinion. It is a fact.



You're going in circles man, your logic doesn't vibe with the statistical movement that I follow because it allows us to quantify aspects of the game. Feel free to show me some actual analysis because your logic isn't enough to sway me from the methods employed by those in the NBA, nor the fact that the NBA differentiated between O and D rebounds.

I am the only one of the two of us using actual logic. You are using flawed linguistic arguments, confusing the signified with the signifier, employing flawed binaries, and then asking me to use a flaw reasoning approach known as the 'appeal to the majority'.

I am using a fact. You get an offensive rebound, you prevent the opposing team from getting a possession. Will they get one eventually? Yes. But when they do, you will have taken away time from them, which reducing their chances to score. That is a fact. Show me a stat that disputes that.





What? If they just lumped them together, we wouldn't have defensive and offensive rebounds.


Firstly, they do lump them together. Under TR. Have you not looked at a stat sheet since the league came into existence?

Secondly, what if they just lumped FG and 3pt percentages together? Yo are confusing the issue by asking questions that don't matter.

It doesn't matter what they are called or what they are lumped together as, it matter how they impact the game.




LOL yea, and you would be a moron if you were to imply all shots were equal even tho the league differentiated between the 2 and we have methods to quantify the differing value of said shots.

Show me a single instance where someone praised a DEFENDER for forcing a stop and grabbing a rebound by saying "GREAT OFFENSE THERE"

Again, you are asking me to 'appeal to an authority'. I don't get what the commentator says. I'm talking about how that ACTUAL play impact BOTH ends of the court.


You are being closed minded and REFUSING to recognize the impact a play can have on both end of the court.

Franky, at this point it sounds like you are trolling.


Why don't you collect all the people in 'authority' that you keep telling me to get and show me how they deny that an offensive rebound takes time away from the other team and limits their opportunities to score.


And stop being so arrogant. Just because you are smart and have a lot of insight (which you do), doesn't mean you know everything. I can agree to disagree, but you are simply refusing to recognize facts.

NBA_Starter
03-02-2014, 10:38 PM
I would personally vote for DeAndre Jordan but it will probably go to Hibbert.

Blitzbolt
03-02-2014, 10:43 PM
Why Dj??? The clippers D is garbage.

Chronz
03-02-2014, 10:47 PM
Yeah yeah, just find me a single supporting barometer that coincides with your opinion. I never denied that every act can influence another, only that we still distinguish between offensive and defensive stats. And spare me the copout that its somehow my pet stat when in reality its the stat used by people in the business. And I am being open minded, its just that your argument is entirely underwhelming. Take a look at your statistical hypothetical that you've since abandoned for why. Or your nonsensical steals example.

Chronz
03-02-2014, 11:45 PM
Got tired of waiting so I actually read what you wrote, you brought up some new points to address, I thought you were just repeating everything all over again, Ill stick to those new points here.



You ARE limiting something. If you get an offensive rebound and then use up 18 second of the clock, that give you back-to-back possessions and takes 18 seconds away from them. If you don't think limiting the time the opposing team has with the ball impact their offensive potential, then you are simply ignoring facts.

An outdated way of thinking that has long been improved. Time of possession doesn't win games, EFFICIENCY does. The object of the game isn't to slow down or speed up possessions, its not to grab rebounds, its to score efficiently while limiting the opposing teams efficiency.

What you are asking is to ignore the effects of pace and efficiency, thats not very scientific in my book. You're not impacting the opposing teams offense, otherwise the Heat would be seen as a lesser offensive team simply because they get crushed on the boards, when in reality, they are one of the best offensive teams in the league.


The more offensive rebounds you get, the less possession the opposing team gets. Less possession, they get, less points they get. How is this hard for you to understand?

Yea if this were the stone age and we still measured offenses and defenses by PPG instead of barometers that actually account for pace of play and overall efficiency.

How hard is it for you to understand that you can allow a low number of PPG while still being among the worst defenses in the league. A team that slows the game down will artificially enhance their defensive ranking in that way, yet when teams look to improve their teams defense, they will actually consider pace of play. Thats pretty much what began the statistical revolution, the importance of per possession analysis.



Show me one who agrees with you? Again, you are asking me to 'appeal to an authority'. If Danny Ferry says he agrees with me, or Greg Popovich, will you be satisfied? No. And if they did or didn't agree with mean wouldn't mean that I was right or wrong. The appeal to the authority is a flawed logic. You are using it because you are not using reason. Let's talk about the impact on the floor and forget what some stats guys gets a hard on for.

Thats actually a great person to ask, want to know what has been a long standing tradition with Pop-Duncan led teams when it comes to post season play vs regular season play? He prioritizes defense by not crashing the offensive glass. Funny how the guy wants to improve his teams defense by focusing less on the very stat you seem to think is so conducive. Funny how THE ENTIRE LEAGUE has gone away from that way of thinking. Offensive rebounding has gone down, so to has transition play, funny how that works huh. But hey, appealing to the authority of the league at large isn't your cup of tea, Im sure you would ignore those philosophies if you were coaching your team too. Thank god the voters for DPOY dont follow that mindset.


I am the only one of the two of us using actual logic.
Yet you cannot find a single credible barometer that applies the same logic? You can use the copout of appeal to authority but if you're fine with being alone on this matter then so be it, Ill take pride in KNOWING I side with the guys who actually try to gauge offensive and defensive influence, the kind of guys who influence decision making in the NBA. It would be one thing if your hypothetical examples actually made sense but you've only exposed how little you understand statistics.



You are using flawed linguistic arguments, confusing the signified with the signifier, employing flawed binaries, and then asking me to use a flaw reasoning approach known as the 'appeal to the majority'.

I am using a fact. You get an offensive rebound, you prevent the opposing team from getting a possession. Will they get one eventually? Yes. But when they do, you will have taken away time from them, which reducing their chances to score. That is a fact. Show me a stat that disputes that.
Its called offensive efficiency. Nobody cares about time of possession, we already know you can artificially enhance stats by pace of play, its not as transferable (player to player, team to team, league to league) the way possession based metrics are. You're essentially asking me to decide between a flawed rationale that I never agreed with, or the APBR community whos work can actually be reviewed by their peers and makes complete sense.

Tell me again why I would choose your stance with such little backing going for it?








Firstly, they do lump them together. Under TR. Have you not looked at a stat sheet since the league came into existence?
Have you not been paying attention to how stats have evolved? We are no longer limited to just rebounding the same way we are no longer limited to just FG%.


Secondly, what if they just lumped FG and 3pt percentages together? Yo are confusing the issue by asking questions that don't matter.

It doesn't matter what they are called or what they are lumped together as, it matter how they impact the game.
I see no evidence to support your opinion, the very fact that we can distinguish between all stats is what allows us to measure the influence they have on both sides.







You are being closed minded and REFUSING to recognize the impact a play can have on both end of the court.

Franky, at this point it sounds like you are trolling.

You're not showing any sort of impact, that would imply that you have shown me any sort of quantifiable claim. Just look at your hypothetical for a truly troll worthy response. And I have already said (from the beginning) that all actions can influence both sides of the court. Negatively and positively, it just so happens that when it comes to offensive rebounding, league trends show us that teams are attacking the offensive glass less in order to prioritize defense. What does that say of how impactful it is for defense?


Why don't you collect all the people in 'authority' that you keep telling me to get and show me how they deny that an offensive rebound takes time away from the other team and limits their opportunities to score.
LOL because I already know how outdated that stance is, you may be fine with unscientific stances that have very little backing but I rather stick to the methods that allow us to actually quantify stats.



And stop being so arrogant. Just because you are smart and have a lot of insight (which you do), doesn't mean you know everything. I can agree to disagree, but you are simply refusing to recognize facts.
So then why even use statistics if you're just going to ignore the work being done in the field?

Chronz
03-03-2014, 12:07 AM
The fundamental difference between our arguments is that you value time of possession and I value overall efficiency. Its basically traditional approach vs modern approach, I guess we can both be wrong/right here and neither one of us will admit it. But to say I dont think offense can influence defense and vice versa is dead wrong. Accumulating steals can often be a detriment to defense because it puts you out of position, that doesn't mean its not a defensive stat or that it shouldn't be considered. With rebounding, it can influence your defense in the same manner, but defensive rebounds are far more likely to help your defense than an offensive stat.

I've sent a request to the egg heads to see if they can make my argument for me, I have failed in trying to explain to you why the league has gone this route in terms of objective analysis.

I'll let you know when I have a response to the old cliches you spew.

JasonJohnHorn
03-03-2014, 07:42 AM
The fundamental difference between our arguments is that you value time of possession and I value overall efficiency. Its basically traditional approach vs modern approach, I guess we can both be wrong/right here and neither one of us will admit it.

The point of the matter is that my way of thinking includes BOTH an appreciation for efficiency AND an appreciation for the value of time with a possession, and you only appreciate one.

There is a reason why the shot clock was invented. Because teams with a lead would eat the time up, knowing that it limited the opposing team's ability to score. And it worked. The shot clock was introduced to make the game more exciting and create higher scoring games. It wasn't because it didn't, it was because it made for a boring game.


I value efficiency as much as you. You just have no appreciation for time. I'm not in opposition to what you value. You are in opposition to what I value. And you keep putting it in binaries, as if valuing the time means you DON'T value efficiency or vice versa. That is NOT the case.


Valuing the time with the ball is NOT mutually exclusive with valuing efficiency, despite what you try to say.


And I'm not spewing cliches. I'm stating facts.

JasonJohnHorn
03-03-2014, 08:04 AM
Got tired of waiting so I actually read what you wrote, you brought up some new points to address, I thought you were just repeating everything all over again, Ill stick to those new points here.


An outdated way of thinking that has long been improved. Time of possession doesn't win games, EFFICIENCY does. The object of the game isn't to slow down or speed up possessions, its not to grab rebounds, its to score efficiently while limiting the opposing teams efficiency.

Time of possession doesn't win games by itself, no. But that is not what I said. I said it helps the overall effort. Which it does. Which is why teams used to eat up the clock before the shot clock was introduced.

TIME + EFFICIENCY is what I am talking about. You are just talking about efficiency. The two CAN work together and when they do, a team is almost unbeatable.


What you are asking is to ignore the effects of pace and efficiency, thats not very scientific in my book. You're not impacting the opposing teams offense, otherwise the Heat would be seen as a lesser offensive team simply because they get crushed on the boards, when in reality, they are one of the best offensive teams in the league.

I didn't say a team HAD to be great rebounders to be good defenders. I said it helps. The Heat shoot at a very high percentage, and are good defenders. I agree. And they do this despite not being a great rebounding team. That is an EXCELLENT point. But wouldn't they be even better if they were out rebounding the other teams? They have one of the best record in the league right now, but the DON'T have the best.

And is that because they are so good defensively? Or does the fact that they shoot a very high percentage also help? There is more than one factor at play here.



Yea if this were the stone age and we still measured offenses and defenses by PPG instead of barometers that actually account for pace of play and overall efficiency.

How hard is it for you to understand that you can allow a low number of PPG while still being among the worst defenses in the league. A team that slows the game down will artificially enhance their defensive ranking in that way, yet when teams look to improve their teams defense, they will actually consider pace of play. Thats pretty much what began the statistical revolution, the importance of per possession analysis.

Again, you are speaking to my argument as if I am using the same binaries you are and I'm not.

Firstly, slowing the game down CAN help. HOF coach Lenny Wilkens did that came to Altanta and helped the team improve. But you can't ONLY do that. And I never said that was the case. I only claim the offensive rebounds are one factor that gives you more time with the ball and your opposition less time with the ball, which in turn gives you more chances to score and them less.



Thats actually a great person to ask, want to know what has been a long standing tradition with Pop-Duncan led teams when it comes to post season play vs regular season play? He prioritizes defense by not crashing the offensive glass. Funny how the guy wants to improve his teams defense by focusing less on the very stat you seem to think is so conducive. Funny how THE ENTIRE LEAGUE has gone away from that way of thinking. Offensive rebounding has gone down, so to has transition play, funny how that works huh. But hey, appealing to the authority of the league at large isn't your cup of tea, Im sure you would ignore those philosophies if you were coaching your team too. Thank god the voters for DPOY dont follow that mindset.

I NEVER suggested a team focus on offensive rebounds. This is not an argument I'm making. I merely said that offensive rebounds can be considered part of the defensive effort. I'm not saying you have to do it, or that you have to focus on it, or that a team can succeed by not doing it, simply that a team that can do it efficiently improves their chance of winning by increasing their possession and simultaneously decreasing the oppositions possessions.

If you shoot 50% from the floor and you get 100 possession, you scoring on half of those possession.
If you allow your opponents to shoot 60%, but limit them to 80 possessions, they will score less.

This is NOT the only way to go about it. This example merely illustrates that getting offensive rebounds can help. This doesn't mean teams should focus on that, but if a team has a guy like Ben Wallace or Dennis Rodman, who isn't a huge part of the offense, who sets a pick and then know when the ball is being shot, it doesn't hurt to have them in position for an offensive board.



Yet you cannot find a single credible barometer that applies the same logic? You can use the copout of appeal to authority but if you're fine with being alone on this matter then so be it, Ill take pride in KNOWING I side with the guys who actually try to gauge offensive and defensive influence, the kind of guys who influence decision making in the NBA. It would be one thing if your hypothetical examples actually made sense but you've only exposed how little you understand statistics.

Less possession = less points. Period.

If you get more possessions that the opposing team, you put yourself in a better position to win.


What other barometer do you need?


Its called offensive efficiency. Nobody cares about time of possession, we already know you can artificially enhance stats by pace of play, its not as transferable (player to player, team to team, league to league) the way possession based metrics are. You're essentially asking me to decide between a flawed rationale that I never agreed with, or the APBR community whos work can actually be reviewed by their peers and makes complete sense.

Tell me again why I would choose your stance with such little backing going for it?

Again, you are talking in binaries. I don't disagree with efficiency. I agree with it 100%. I just also agree that the more possession you get and the less your opponent gets, gives you a better chance to put more points on the board. The two can work in concert. All I am saying is that offensive rebounds prevent the opposition from getting a possession and that that helps your overall defensive effort. It is not complicated.




Again. I am not saying Time > Eff
Nor am I saying that Eff isn't > time

I am saying that time + eff is better than just eff. And it is. The two can work in concert.

you point to the Heat as an example, but you don't mention their offensive out put. They are shooting at a high rate. You also fail to mention that they don't have the best record in the league. Three teams have more wins right now, and two more are close behind. The Heat would be better if they were better rebounder. It doesn't mean that EFF doesn't make them great, but EFF + Time would make them better. You don't think if they took 5 possession away from their opposition each game and add it to their possessions that they wouldn't have 50 wins already?

Chronz
03-03-2014, 04:42 PM
The point of the matter is that my way of thinking includes BOTH an appreciation for efficiency AND an appreciation for the value of time with a possession, and you only appreciate one.

There is a reason why the shot clock was invented. Because teams with a lead would eat the time up, knowing that it limited the opposing team's ability to score. And it worked. The shot clock was introduced to make the game more exciting and create higher scoring games. It wasn't because it didn't, it was because it made for a boring game.


I value efficiency as much as you. You just have no appreciation for time. I'm not in opposition to what you value. You are in opposition to what I value. And you keep putting it in binaries, as if valuing the time means you DON'T value efficiency or vice versa. That is NOT the case.


Valuing the time with the ball is NOT mutually exclusive with valuing efficiency, despite what you try to say.


And I'm not spewing cliches. I'm stating facts.
I dont understand your shot clock example, efficiency still existed back then as well. Time of possession literally changes nothing when it comes to offensive and defensive efficiency. And its not just what I say, its the standard definition that everyone in the business uses, and with good reason, its far more accurate of an indicator of a teams level of play that is more transferable than raw per game averages.

We have differing definitions of possessions, yours is traditional and mine is the more analytical approach.

Ill get to the rest of your cliches once Im done with some research.

Chronz
03-03-2014, 06:13 PM
Time of possession doesn't win games by itself, no. But that is not what I said. I said it helps the overall effort. Which it does. Which is why teams used to eat up the clock before the shot clock was introduced.
Time of possession serves only to establish your teams pace of play, Efficiency is the byproduct of EVERYTHING, time of possession is merely a single symptom. Why would I care about time of possession when efficiency is what wins games? Game to game, you can have the greatest time of possession in NBA history and still lose every game, however, if you have the greatest efficiency of all time, you will have the most wins of all time. Why put any sort of importance on something so minuscule?


TIME + EFFICIENCY is what I am talking about. You are just talking about efficiency. The two CAN work together and when they do, a team is almost unbeatable.
Cmon man, you're operating well beyond your reach now... almost unbeatable? Umm, the team with the best efficiency wins 100% of the time, what you just said is like saying when offense and defense are both excelling, your team can win alot of games. Time of possession determines pace, those philosophies have a direct effect on your per game averages, which is why teams now measure offensive/defensive efficiency by looking at per possession metrics. Thats literally what began this whole MIT Sloan Conference type of analysis. When teams breakdown the efficiency of lineups, they standardize them by looking at efficiency (per possession), synergy tracks down a players effectiveness PER POSSESSION. It just seems like you dont understand the terminology and use them in vague ways that dont align with those that are actually in the business of measuring efficiency.




I didn't say a team HAD to be great rebounders to be good defenders. I said it helps. The Heat shoot at a very high percentage, and are good defenders. I agree. And they do this despite not being a great rebounding team. That is an EXCELLENT point. But wouldn't they be even better if they were out rebounding the other teams? They have one of the best record in the league right now, but the DON'T have the best.
They've actually played subpar defense for much of the year. To answer your question, it depends on the influence it has on the rest of the team, but all things remaining the same, of course, but if we were to factor in the stats you want, they would look worse than they actually are is my point.


And is that because they are so good defensively? Or does the fact that they shoot a very high percentage also help? There is more than one factor at play here.
Yup, but that doesn't make say, passing the ball a defensive act. By limiting turnovers you are limiting transition opportunities for the other team, that doesn't mean we designate a great pass as a great defensive act. It has an influence beyond its own offensive contribution for sure, but do you see anyone touting assists when discussing the DPOY? You yourself said you could ignore FG% in this DPOY discussion yet finishing a possession has an impact on defense too, the reason we dont discuss these metrics for DPOY is because the influence is so minimal compared to the actual defensive stats. Otherwise, we may as well just look at PPG as well when discussing DPOY.



Again, you are speaking to my argument as if I am using the same binaries you are and I'm not.
I know, thats why Im saying that our terminologies dont align because yours do not follow the scientific methods applied by those in the field. Thats part of the problem.


Firstly, slowing the game down CAN help. HOF coach Lenny Wilkens did that came to Altanta and helped the team improve. But you can't ONLY do that. And I never said that was the case. I only claim the offensive rebounds are one factor that gives you more time with the ball and your opposition less time with the ball, which in turn gives you more chances to score and them less.
Again, this line of thinking is outdated and no longer how we measure offensive and defensive efficiency. Time of possession doesn't change your efficiency because we account for possessions in the barometer, maybe back in the stone age when teams were less aware of its superiority. Tho some coaches like Hubie Brown, used per possession metrics since day 1.

The best way I can explain to you how the statistical movements has evolved is with a simple question, which is the better defensive team, the one that allows less PPG or the one that allows less efficiency?



I NEVER suggested a team focus on offensive rebounds. This is not an argument I'm making. I merely said that offensive rebounds can be considered part of the defensive effort. I'm not saying you have to do it, or that you have to focus on it, or that a team can succeed by not doing it, simply that a team that can do it efficiently improves their chance of winning by increasing their possession and simultaneously decreasing the oppositions possessions.
Again, scoring a bucket or making the right pass technically influences defense, that doesn't make it a defensive act because its simply not as influential as actual defensive acts.

And your definition of possessions is an outdated way of measuring efficiency that isn't practiced by actual statisticians and the teams that employ. I dont follow those barometers and less and less voters do as well, we cannot have this discussion if we dont agree to the same terminology, and I'd rather not abide to such a flawed/outdated barometer such as yours.


If you shoot 50% from the floor and you get 100 possession, you scoring on half of those possession.
If you allow your opponents to shoot 60%, but limit them to 80 possessions, they will score less.
Rebounds are part of the efficiency equation, show me this hypothetical by distinguishing between offensive and defensive rebounds, then we can actually assess your example. Otherwise I dont see what your point is, other than you still dont understand that we have entirely different terminologies. Your idea of efficiency doesn't align with the APBR movement, and its why we cant agree on this. You pretend to value both sides of the argument but how can you when you dont have any backing or evidence to support it?



Less possession = less points. Period.

If you get more possessions that the opposing team, you put yourself in a better position to win.


What other barometer do you need?
Both teams always get roughly the same number of possessions, and before you spew some cliches about possessions, Ill spew a cliche of my own, you dont have possession until the defensive rebound is secured. So in my book, you cant take away what the other team never had.




Again, you are talking in binaries. I don't disagree with efficiency. I agree with it 100%. I just also agree that the more possession you get and the less your opponent gets, gives you a better chance to put more points on the board. The two can work in concert. All I am saying is that offensive rebounds prevent the opposition from getting a possession and that that helps your overall defensive effort. It is not complicated.
Not only is it not complicated, its far too simplistic to the point of uselessness. So much so that decision makers within the NBA have abandoned the terminology completely.




Again. I am not saying Time > Eff
Nor am I saying that Eff isn't > time

I am saying that time + eff is better than just eff. And it is. The two can work in concert.
You're not getting me, time + efficiency is no different than just efficiency, so why would I bother with something so irrelevant?

Whats more important, to allow less PPG, or to allow less efficiency?


you point to the Heat as an example, but you don't mention their offensive out put. They are shooting at a high rate. You also fail to mention that they don't have the best record in the league. Three teams have more wins right now, and two more are close behind. The Heat would be better if they were better rebounder. It doesn't mean that EFF doesn't make them great, but EFF + Time would make them better. You don't think if they took 5 possession away from their opposition each game and add it to their possessions that they wouldn't have 50 wins already?
Still not getting the example, you dont think they would be better if they shot a higher% and thus had less available chances to get a rebound? This argument works both ways, what matters is the totality of their efficiency, and not a single barometer would measure efficiency in the ways you do.

Chronz
03-03-2014, 06:25 PM
Its a semantic argument we are having. You believe every rebound is a possession and I believe a possession doesn't begin until teams actually exchange possessions. Offensive rebounds extend the possession you currently have in my book. Thats why roughly both teams get the same number of possessions, though not the same number of shot attempts.

Beyond that, you've contradicted your stance about FG% not being a defensive stat by ignoring the influence it has on both sides vs the opposing team. The reason I abide by my standard is because if we were to go with your terminology, then the offensive act of an assist would be considered a defensive stat, because it influences the opposing teams defense. Yes, all aspects of the game are interwoven to some degree, that doesn't make every stat an offensive and defensive stat. We distinguish between them all for a reason.

Mike G said it best;

An offensive rebound is roughly equivalent to a first down in football -- you get another set of downs or 24 seconds.
And in football, your possession lasts until the other team gets the ball. Same as basketball.