Coming to an the NLSC near you, tomorrow.
This will begin tomorrow with the Eastern Conference Central Divison.
Mostly I started the thread as a reminder to myself to do it. This will be good, and deep. I will cover every hole and hidden crevice of your team and tell you exactly how shitty they'll be, unless your team is the Pacers.
If only that's what it could really be.
In depth team by team previews
112 posts
• Page 1 of 5 • 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
by Indy on Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:19 am
Eastern Conference
Central Divison
This is a division that 2 years ago sent every team to the playoffs. Last year Indiana and Milwaukee had some setbacks, but I think this year every team in this division will again be headed for the playoffs, barring major injuries.
I will do these previews in order of where I think they will finish.
1.) Chicago Bulls
Predicted record- 59-23
The Bulls won 49 games a year ago, but were really even better then that record indicated. They started out the season dreadfully, and had to work hard to get back on their feet.
Major additions: Joakim Noah, Joe Smith
Major subtractions: P.J. Brown (Not officially signed anywhere, but the Bulls are not bringing him back)
Point Guards (league rankings in italics)
Offensively- 9/30
Defensively- 1/30
Overall 6/30
Starter: Kirk Hinrich
Backup: Chris Duhon
3rd Sring: Andre Barrett
STRENGTHS
Kirk Hinrich has quickly become one of the most underrated point guards in the NBA. He has been overshadowed by Luol Deng and Ben Gordon, but that speaks more about the development of those 2 players then anything else. Kirk is the second best defender at the point guard position in the league behind Jason Kidd, and with J-Kidd losing a little bit of quickness Kirk could be tops in that regard this season. His backup Chris Duhon is also a very tough defender, all this adds up to teams having a tough time getting their offense started. Scot Skiles was a hardnosed point guard himself, so there is no coach more suited for Kirk Hinrich. The Bulls like to press the ball all the way up the floor more then any other team in the NBA.
Offensively Kirk's role is different then most point guards. The Bulls like to swing the ball around the perimiter and try to use Luol Deng in the post to initiate offense. They don't often use Kirk in drive and dish situations, but they don't really have to. Kirk knocks down an excellent percentage of his outside shots and he plays his best when the offense isn't run through him and he can get a lot of open shots through double teams off of a slashing Luol or Ben. Quick ball rotation is what makes this team go, because they do not have a go to guy in the post.
Overall this is a fluid unit. Chris and Kirk have been together for a few years now, and have been in this system their whole careers. They know what their roles are, and they play them well. One of the better PG units in the NBA.
Shooting Guards
Offensively- 10/30
Defensively- 13/30
Overall- 10/30
Starter: Ben Gordon
Backup: Thabo Sefolosha
3rd String: JamesOn Curry
Ben Gordon has established himself as one of the games lethal shooters and clutch performers. He is one of the guys on now a long list of NBA players that are capable of scoring 50+. It will be interesting to see how he does in a full time starting role, because he hasn't had that since he's been in the league. This is a guy that you think of as a little bit of a chucker, but he actually picks his spots very well, and is a deadly accurate shooter. He could put up 24+ ppg this season if they really try and establish him as a go-to guy.
Sometimes he can get a little bit out of control when slashing, and he has always had the exact same problem. He feels like when driving around a guy he has to beat him ridiculously fast. If a guy stays with Ben step for step he doesn't change direction or pull up nearly often enough. Ben also turns the ball over far too often for a guy that isn't a point guard. He needs to get a little bit smarter in that regard. He improved a HUGE amount on the defensive side of the ball last year, so it was hard for me to rank them defensively. Ben could be a pretty solid defender this year, and if that happens the Bulls will be a force to be reckoned with and will be able to go toe to toe with San Antonio in a knock em down drag em out type game.
Thabo is very versatile and tall, so he brings a nice change of pace when he comes in for Ben. Thabo will play a big role in the Bulls success next year because he is really the only big guard they have. There are a lot of bigger 2s in this division like Dunleavy, Redd, Hamilton etc. that Thabo will have to guard. He showed some pretty smooth athleticism on the offensive side of the court, and anything they get from him there will be a bonus.
Small Forwards
Offensively- 7/30
Defensively- 8/30
Overall- 7/30
Starter: Luol Deng
Backup: Tyrus Thomas
3rd String: Adrian Griffin
Other players to recieve time at the 3: Andres Nocioni, Thabo Sefolosha
I did not put Nocioni as the backup 3, because I think the Bulls are going to continue using him as the starting 4. Luol Deng really became a star last year. We saw him get really good 2 years ago, but last year he really showed how good he really is. This is an all-star quality player that rounds out the best 1-2-3 wing combination in the NBA. Lu meshes so well with Ben and Kirk its scary. Luols offensive game is like a smoother Ron Artest. He does a lot of the same things Ron does offensively. One thing in specific is that he will start on the wing, without the ball, go hard towards the rim, and pick up a defender pushing him down towards the block. This way you have all the momentum and you dictate where you will get the ball, the defender is helpless. Lu has perfected this move, and has a lot of moves to score out of it. He can spin and shoot the jumper or go right around the guy. There are very few players that can defend this move.
Defensively Luol is more then servicable for them, but that's as far as I'll go. In a system that had less capable defenders around him, I think we would see Luol exploited a little bit more. He too often looks lost defensively, but because of the team defensive scheme the Bulls have he is a working gear. He isn't asked to do more then he can. Danny Granger has really taken advantage of Luol every time they've played each other. Look for big games out of Danny every time the Bulls play the Pacers. The reason I didn't rank them closer to 11th or 12th defensively, is because they have Adrian Griffin, Tyrus Thomas and Nocioni who are all excellent defenders that will also play the 3 spot.
That brings me to the man with all the energy Tyrus Thomas. I know he'll also get a lot of minutes at the 4 because the Bulls like to go with a small group, but the Bulls can form a pretty formidable defensive frontcourt now if they put Tyrus at the 3 and then use any combination of Joe Smith, Ben Wallace and Joakim Noah. To the Bulls fans here I pose the question, how many times do you think we will see Tyrus Thomas and Joakim bashing in to each other while flying from opposite ends of the court for an offensive rebound? Far too often from my perspective. The Bulls will be one of the best offensive rebounding teams in the league thanks simply to these 2 guys, and I didn't even mention Ben Wallace. Whatever Tyrus can develop offensively, like Thabo, will be a bonus.
Power Forwards
Offensively 19/30
Defensively 9/30
Overall 16/30
Starter: Andres Nocioni
Backup (a): Joakim Noah
Backup (b.): Joe Smith
Other players to recieve time at the 4: Tyrus Thomas, Aaron Gray
Obviously this unit is a little bit, well, little. Andres is a hybrid 4, but is tough enough to play bigger. The Bulls are an interesting team in the regard that they follow the trend of smaller lineups, but they don't play a run and gun style at all. In fact, they play quite the opposite. They are the only team in the NBA that plays the way they do, with the type of personnel they have. Other teams that slow it down like Utah and San Antonio all have dominant post players as their go to guys. All the Bulls top scorers are wing players.
The frontcourt questions could bring this team back to earth this season and force them to make a change next year in that regard. They still don't have a post player that you can go to, and its really difficult to win over the course of the 100+ games that the Bulls hope to play this year without a guy that can do things while everyone else stands around. The Bulls need to keep their energy up all year long, and Andres Nocioni and Joakim Noah will be very important. These guys along with Tyrus Thomas need to get garbage points for this team and they need to do it often.
Joakim Noah is going to be abused on the post whenever the Bulls play Jermaine O'Neal, Rasheed Wallace or Andrew Bogut. Noc, Ben and Joe Smith will have to collapse any time he is stuck one on one against a guy like that.
Centers
Offensively- 27/30
Defensively- 3/30
Overall- 16/30
Starter: Ben Wallace
Backup: Joe Smith
3rd String: Aaron Gray
I think Joe Smith was a great signing for this team. He will play the exact same role PJ Brown played for them on defense, and he will excel. Ben Wallace is at his best when he is able to play as a help defender instead of having to guard the other teams best post player, and he'll be able to do that with Joe Smith here.
They still can't score though that's for sure. Joe Smith will actually probably average around 10-11 ppg early in the year, but as the year goes on it'll start to take a toll on him, and you'll see him fall more and more out of the rotation in favor of Jokim Noah and Tyrus.
The Bulls strategy is to have a high energy defensive frontcourt with most of the scoring coming from the backcourt, and who better to have on your team in that case then Ben Wallace. Despite how much I hate him, despite the fact that he is horribly overrated as a post defender, and despite the fact that he is getting old and beat up he will still be important to the Bulls this year.
The Bulls are a team that has fallen just short of being a championship caliber team the last 2 years, but this year I think they take advantage of a still weaker Eastern Conference and reach the finals. They will have trouble with Boston and Detroit, but it will be the mix of youth and leadership that they have put together that will get them over the top.
I will get all of the teams done before the season starts and they will all have the same in depth coverage.
Central Divison
This is a division that 2 years ago sent every team to the playoffs. Last year Indiana and Milwaukee had some setbacks, but I think this year every team in this division will again be headed for the playoffs, barring major injuries.
I will do these previews in order of where I think they will finish.
1.) Chicago Bulls
Predicted record- 59-23
The Bulls won 49 games a year ago, but were really even better then that record indicated. They started out the season dreadfully, and had to work hard to get back on their feet.
Major additions: Joakim Noah, Joe Smith
Major subtractions: P.J. Brown (Not officially signed anywhere, but the Bulls are not bringing him back)
Point Guards (league rankings in italics)
Offensively- 9/30
Defensively- 1/30
Overall 6/30
Starter: Kirk Hinrich
Backup: Chris Duhon
3rd Sring: Andre Barrett
STRENGTHS
Kirk Hinrich has quickly become one of the most underrated point guards in the NBA. He has been overshadowed by Luol Deng and Ben Gordon, but that speaks more about the development of those 2 players then anything else. Kirk is the second best defender at the point guard position in the league behind Jason Kidd, and with J-Kidd losing a little bit of quickness Kirk could be tops in that regard this season. His backup Chris Duhon is also a very tough defender, all this adds up to teams having a tough time getting their offense started. Scot Skiles was a hardnosed point guard himself, so there is no coach more suited for Kirk Hinrich. The Bulls like to press the ball all the way up the floor more then any other team in the NBA.
Offensively Kirk's role is different then most point guards. The Bulls like to swing the ball around the perimiter and try to use Luol Deng in the post to initiate offense. They don't often use Kirk in drive and dish situations, but they don't really have to. Kirk knocks down an excellent percentage of his outside shots and he plays his best when the offense isn't run through him and he can get a lot of open shots through double teams off of a slashing Luol or Ben. Quick ball rotation is what makes this team go, because they do not have a go to guy in the post.
Overall this is a fluid unit. Chris and Kirk have been together for a few years now, and have been in this system their whole careers. They know what their roles are, and they play them well. One of the better PG units in the NBA.
Shooting Guards
Offensively- 10/30
Defensively- 13/30
Overall- 10/30
Starter: Ben Gordon
Backup: Thabo Sefolosha
3rd String: JamesOn Curry
Ben Gordon has established himself as one of the games lethal shooters and clutch performers. He is one of the guys on now a long list of NBA players that are capable of scoring 50+. It will be interesting to see how he does in a full time starting role, because he hasn't had that since he's been in the league. This is a guy that you think of as a little bit of a chucker, but he actually picks his spots very well, and is a deadly accurate shooter. He could put up 24+ ppg this season if they really try and establish him as a go-to guy.
Sometimes he can get a little bit out of control when slashing, and he has always had the exact same problem. He feels like when driving around a guy he has to beat him ridiculously fast. If a guy stays with Ben step for step he doesn't change direction or pull up nearly often enough. Ben also turns the ball over far too often for a guy that isn't a point guard. He needs to get a little bit smarter in that regard. He improved a HUGE amount on the defensive side of the ball last year, so it was hard for me to rank them defensively. Ben could be a pretty solid defender this year, and if that happens the Bulls will be a force to be reckoned with and will be able to go toe to toe with San Antonio in a knock em down drag em out type game.
Thabo is very versatile and tall, so he brings a nice change of pace when he comes in for Ben. Thabo will play a big role in the Bulls success next year because he is really the only big guard they have. There are a lot of bigger 2s in this division like Dunleavy, Redd, Hamilton etc. that Thabo will have to guard. He showed some pretty smooth athleticism on the offensive side of the court, and anything they get from him there will be a bonus.
Small Forwards
Offensively- 7/30
Defensively- 8/30
Overall- 7/30
Starter: Luol Deng
Backup: Tyrus Thomas
3rd String: Adrian Griffin
Other players to recieve time at the 3: Andres Nocioni, Thabo Sefolosha
I did not put Nocioni as the backup 3, because I think the Bulls are going to continue using him as the starting 4. Luol Deng really became a star last year. We saw him get really good 2 years ago, but last year he really showed how good he really is. This is an all-star quality player that rounds out the best 1-2-3 wing combination in the NBA. Lu meshes so well with Ben and Kirk its scary. Luols offensive game is like a smoother Ron Artest. He does a lot of the same things Ron does offensively. One thing in specific is that he will start on the wing, without the ball, go hard towards the rim, and pick up a defender pushing him down towards the block. This way you have all the momentum and you dictate where you will get the ball, the defender is helpless. Lu has perfected this move, and has a lot of moves to score out of it. He can spin and shoot the jumper or go right around the guy. There are very few players that can defend this move.
Defensively Luol is more then servicable for them, but that's as far as I'll go. In a system that had less capable defenders around him, I think we would see Luol exploited a little bit more. He too often looks lost defensively, but because of the team defensive scheme the Bulls have he is a working gear. He isn't asked to do more then he can. Danny Granger has really taken advantage of Luol every time they've played each other. Look for big games out of Danny every time the Bulls play the Pacers. The reason I didn't rank them closer to 11th or 12th defensively, is because they have Adrian Griffin, Tyrus Thomas and Nocioni who are all excellent defenders that will also play the 3 spot.
That brings me to the man with all the energy Tyrus Thomas. I know he'll also get a lot of minutes at the 4 because the Bulls like to go with a small group, but the Bulls can form a pretty formidable defensive frontcourt now if they put Tyrus at the 3 and then use any combination of Joe Smith, Ben Wallace and Joakim Noah. To the Bulls fans here I pose the question, how many times do you think we will see Tyrus Thomas and Joakim bashing in to each other while flying from opposite ends of the court for an offensive rebound? Far too often from my perspective. The Bulls will be one of the best offensive rebounding teams in the league thanks simply to these 2 guys, and I didn't even mention Ben Wallace. Whatever Tyrus can develop offensively, like Thabo, will be a bonus.
Power Forwards
Offensively 19/30
Defensively 9/30
Overall 16/30
Starter: Andres Nocioni
Backup (a): Joakim Noah
Backup (b.): Joe Smith
Other players to recieve time at the 4: Tyrus Thomas, Aaron Gray
Obviously this unit is a little bit, well, little. Andres is a hybrid 4, but is tough enough to play bigger. The Bulls are an interesting team in the regard that they follow the trend of smaller lineups, but they don't play a run and gun style at all. In fact, they play quite the opposite. They are the only team in the NBA that plays the way they do, with the type of personnel they have. Other teams that slow it down like Utah and San Antonio all have dominant post players as their go to guys. All the Bulls top scorers are wing players.
The frontcourt questions could bring this team back to earth this season and force them to make a change next year in that regard. They still don't have a post player that you can go to, and its really difficult to win over the course of the 100+ games that the Bulls hope to play this year without a guy that can do things while everyone else stands around. The Bulls need to keep their energy up all year long, and Andres Nocioni and Joakim Noah will be very important. These guys along with Tyrus Thomas need to get garbage points for this team and they need to do it often.
Joakim Noah is going to be abused on the post whenever the Bulls play Jermaine O'Neal, Rasheed Wallace or Andrew Bogut. Noc, Ben and Joe Smith will have to collapse any time he is stuck one on one against a guy like that.
Centers
Offensively- 27/30
Defensively- 3/30
Overall- 16/30
Starter: Ben Wallace
Backup: Joe Smith
3rd String: Aaron Gray
I think Joe Smith was a great signing for this team. He will play the exact same role PJ Brown played for them on defense, and he will excel. Ben Wallace is at his best when he is able to play as a help defender instead of having to guard the other teams best post player, and he'll be able to do that with Joe Smith here.
They still can't score though that's for sure. Joe Smith will actually probably average around 10-11 ppg early in the year, but as the year goes on it'll start to take a toll on him, and you'll see him fall more and more out of the rotation in favor of Jokim Noah and Tyrus.
The Bulls strategy is to have a high energy defensive frontcourt with most of the scoring coming from the backcourt, and who better to have on your team in that case then Ben Wallace. Despite how much I hate him, despite the fact that he is horribly overrated as a post defender, and despite the fact that he is getting old and beat up he will still be important to the Bulls this year.
The Bulls are a team that has fallen just short of being a championship caliber team the last 2 years, but this year I think they take advantage of a still weaker Eastern Conference and reach the finals. They will have trouble with Boston and Detroit, but it will be the mix of youth and leadership that they have put together that will get them over the top.
I will get all of the teams done before the season starts and they will all have the same in depth coverage.
-
Indy - Posts: 5240
- Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2004 1:32 pm
- Location: Dublin
by TheMC5 on Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:46 am
You seriously think all 5 central division teams will be back in the playoffs? I mean, I realize you're a Pacers fanboy, but there is no way in hell they're any better this year than last. Kareem Rush? Andre Owens? Travis Diener? Stephen Graham? Are you kidding? You're expecting those guys to put Indiana back in playoff contention? Sorry, it's not happening.
Nice Chi-town preview, though. Everything there seems pretty on point. Can't really argue with or elaborate on it any further, as I pretty much agree with the whole Bulls preview.
Nice Chi-town preview, though. Everything there seems pretty on point. Can't really argue with or elaborate on it any further, as I pretty much agree with the whole Bulls preview.
- TheMC5
- Posts: 875
- Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 7:53 pm
by --- on Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:52 am
That's a huge post and a massive acclomplishment if you somehow get through all 30 teams, so good job on that. But I got a few things to pick at.
I wouldn't say Chris plays his role very well. He actually isn't a great fit for this team. He doesn't work very well in the offence. He is a nice defender and a good talent, but one that doesn't quite fit in Chicago. That's why I wanted Javaris Crittenton in the draft (not at 9 though).
I seriously doubt Tyrus plays backup minutes at the 3. In fact, I'd be suprised if he averaged 5-10 minutes at the 3. He just doesn't have the outside game that it takes. His ballhandling is actually pretty good for a big and he passes well, but he has no jumpshot and scores almost everything off alley oops and putbacks. I don't see him creating for himself or others on the perimeter.
For the lineup, I'm guessing Skiles goes with:
C - Wallace/Smith/Noah/Gray
PF - Smith(at least till Jan-Feb)/Thomas/Noah
SF - Deng/Nocioni/Griffin/Khryapa
SG - Gordon/Sefolosha/Curry
PG - Hinrich/Duhon/
Barrett most likely won't be back, so that last spot is up for grabs.
Overall this is a fluid unit. Chris and Kirk have been together for a few years now, and have been in this system their whole careers. They know what their roles are, and they play them well. One of the better PG units in the NBA.
I wouldn't say Chris plays his role very well. He actually isn't a great fit for this team. He doesn't work very well in the offence. He is a nice defender and a good talent, but one that doesn't quite fit in Chicago. That's why I wanted Javaris Crittenton in the draft (not at 9 though).
Backup: Tyrus Thomas
I seriously doubt Tyrus plays backup minutes at the 3. In fact, I'd be suprised if he averaged 5-10 minutes at the 3. He just doesn't have the outside game that it takes. His ballhandling is actually pretty good for a big and he passes well, but he has no jumpshot and scores almost everything off alley oops and putbacks. I don't see him creating for himself or others on the perimeter.
For the lineup, I'm guessing Skiles goes with:
C - Wallace/Smith/Noah/Gray
PF - Smith(at least till Jan-Feb)/Thomas/Noah
SF - Deng/Nocioni/Griffin/Khryapa
SG - Gordon/Sefolosha/Curry
PG - Hinrich/Duhon/
Barrett most likely won't be back, so that last spot is up for grabs.
-
--- - Posts: 4553
- Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2005 3:04 pm
by Christopherson on Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:55 am
He just doesn't have the outside game that it takes
I heard he's been shooting 700 jumpers every day this offseason. Maybe he'll have what it takes this year.
Go Zags!
-
Christopherson - Posts: 610
- Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2006 3:08 pm
- Location: Idaho
by benji on Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 am
Joe Smith was a below average defender last season, one of the worst defensive bigs.
I think it would be better to not split between five positions. Instead Guards, Fowards and Centers would be more realistic. Hinrich played pretty much as many minutes at the two as he did the point. (He was also nowhere near the second best defensive guard.)
There is a definite possiblity the Bulls shooting percentages will plummit this year, they were a lot higher last season than the two years previous. Deng and Gordon have both been unchanged since their rookie years in the non-shooting precentage offensive areas of their game.
But, the Bulls were the 6th fastest paced team in the league last year. Even so, a team like the Pistons were 30th and their offense was generated from their backcourt.
I think it would be better to not split between five positions. Instead Guards, Fowards and Centers would be more realistic. Hinrich played pretty much as many minutes at the two as he did the point. (He was also nowhere near the second best defensive guard.)
There is a definite possiblity the Bulls shooting percentages will plummit this year, they were a lot higher last season than the two years previous. Deng and Gordon have both been unchanged since their rookie years in the non-shooting precentage offensive areas of their game.
Other teams that slow it down like Utah and San Antonio all have dominant post players as their go to guys. All the Bulls top scorers are wing players.
But, the Bulls were the 6th fastest paced team in the league last year. Even so, a team like the Pistons were 30th and their offense was generated from their backcourt.
Last edited by benji on Sat Sep 15, 2007 7:51 am, edited 2 times in total.
-
benji - Posts: 14545
- Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2002 9:09 am
Re: In depth team by team previews
by c0nr4d on Sat Sep 15, 2007 5:01 am
Indy wrote:This will be good, and deep. I will cover every hole...
well put sir.
nice job on the Bulls preview, i'll definitely be looking forward to all of these, especially my Pistons
-
c0nr4d - The One and Only
- Posts: 3211
- Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2004 8:31 am
- Location: East TN
by TheMC5 on Sat Sep 15, 2007 5:06 am
Just to elaborate on the whole Central division making the playoffs, even though we're on the Bulls still:
If Indiana and Milwaukee make it (I'm assuming Cleveland, Chicago, and Detroit are all locks), who does that bump out of the playoff picture? In the Atlantic you've got Boston, New Jersey, and Toronto who are all pretty much locks, as well. So that's 8 teams right there, in addition to the strong likelihood of Miami and Washington both getting back into the post-season. Also consider that New York (I know, no defense, but how many Eastern teams expect to defend against Curry/Randolph?), Orlando, Charlotte, and possibly even Atlanta will all make considerable strides to the playoffs this year, and the prospects for both Milwaukee and Indiana look pretty bleak, more so for the Pacers.
So I'm curious, if you really think all 5 Central teams will make it, who gets knocked out? You need at least 1 team from each division, so that means at least 1 of Boston, New Jersey, or Toronto will be out. Are the Pacers or Bucks really better than those 3 teams? I don't think so, not by a long shot.
If Indiana and Milwaukee make it (I'm assuming Cleveland, Chicago, and Detroit are all locks), who does that bump out of the playoff picture? In the Atlantic you've got Boston, New Jersey, and Toronto who are all pretty much locks, as well. So that's 8 teams right there, in addition to the strong likelihood of Miami and Washington both getting back into the post-season. Also consider that New York (I know, no defense, but how many Eastern teams expect to defend against Curry/Randolph?), Orlando, Charlotte, and possibly even Atlanta will all make considerable strides to the playoffs this year, and the prospects for both Milwaukee and Indiana look pretty bleak, more so for the Pacers.
So I'm curious, if you really think all 5 Central teams will make it, who gets knocked out? You need at least 1 team from each division, so that means at least 1 of Boston, New Jersey, or Toronto will be out. Are the Pacers or Bucks really better than those 3 teams? I don't think so, not by a long shot.
- TheMC5
- Posts: 875
- Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 7:53 pm
by --- on Sat Sep 15, 2007 5:11 am
(He was also nowhere near the second best defensive guard.)
Point gaurd or gaurd?
As Indy mentioned, the only other PG I can think of that is a better defender than Hinrich is Kidd. Hinrich is a legit All Defensive team talent.
-
--- - Posts: 4553
- Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2005 3:04 pm
by Indy on Sat Sep 15, 2007 5:30 am
TheMC5 wrote:You seriously think all 5 central division teams will be back in the playoffs? I mean, I realize you're a Pacers fanboy, but there is no way in hell they're any better this year than last. Kareem Rush? Andre Owens? Travis Diener? Stephen Graham? Are you kidding? You're expecting those guys to put Indiana back in playoff contention? Sorry, it's not happening.
The Pacers were a playoff team last year, but had to adjust to a lot of new players on the fly, and had the worst possible coach to do it. Did you know instead of a film room the Pacers had a game room with foosball and pinball machines? The first thing Jim O'Brien did was turn that room in to a film room. What a revolutionary idea, watching film with your team.
The fact of the matter is that the Pacers made the biggest change you can possibly make in overhauling an entire coaching staff, and most of the team had completely quit on Rick Carlisle by the All Star break last year. That says a lot for these guys that they won as many games as they did. That's why no changes have been made, because we really don't know what we have, but its going to surprise a lot of people.
Ack, now you've got me talking about the Pacers already.
Milwaukee may not make the playoffs, but we'll be getting in.
-
Indy - Posts: 5240
- Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2004 1:32 pm
- Location: Dublin
by TheMC5 on Sat Sep 15, 2007 5:35 am
I disagree. I think they were a playoff team before the Dunleavy-Murphy deal. I understand needing to get rid of Stephen Jackson, and Al Harrington was a pretty confusing signing to begin with, but that was simply an atrocious trade, unless Ike Diogu starts ripping it up. As it stands right now, they look an awful lot like GSW from 2-3 years ago, except replace J-Rich and Baron Davis with O'Neal.
But I guess I should save all this for when you actually post the Pacers previes.
But I guess I should save all this for when you actually post the Pacers previes.
- TheMC5
- Posts: 875
- Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 7:53 pm
by benji on Sat Sep 15, 2007 5:36 am
Shannon wrote:As Indy mentioned, the only other PG I can think of that is a better defender than Hinrich is Kidd. Hinrich is a legit All Defensive team talent.
Hinrich wasn't even the best defensive guard on his own team last season, Duhon was. So I can't see how he can be better than everyone but Kidd.
Especially since Kidd isn't the best in the league.
-
benji - Posts: 14545
- Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2002 9:09 am
by --- on Sat Sep 15, 2007 6:35 am
benji wrote:Shannon wrote:As Indy mentioned, the only other PG I can think of that is a better defender than Hinrich is Kidd. Hinrich is a legit All Defensive team talent.
Hinrich wasn't even the best defensive guard on his own team last season, Duhon was. So I can't see how he can be better than everyone but Kidd.
Especially since Kidd isn't the best in the league.
Are you serious? Chris Duhon is a pretty nice defender, but Hinrich is leaps and bounds ahead of him.
I know you will have a bunch of stats to back up your claim, but seeing a player beats stats 10 times out of 10.
There's a bunch of really nice defenders at the PG spot - take Rajon Rondo for example - but because they haven't played enough to have too much of an impact, I didn't mention them. Kidd and Hinrich are most definately up there in the top 2-3.
-
--- - Posts: 4553
- Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2005 3:04 pm
by benji on Sat Sep 15, 2007 6:58 am
Shannon wrote:but seeing a player beats stats 10 times out of 10.
That is such fucking bullshit, and everyone knows it.
Unless you can remember (without errors), and quantify, every single defensive play all 80+ point guards had last season, no one on this forum can use the games they watched to define the defensive abilities of the point guards of the league.
Just saying they're better because you watched them, therefore you know, is the lowest argument you can fathom.
If you hate facts and data, then I'll do it your way.
You know what, I saw them play, and I saw Duhon be better. QED. Duhon is better. Case closed.
-
benji - Posts: 14545
- Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2002 9:09 am
by benji on Sat Sep 15, 2007 7:09 am
That is bullshit too.
Especially since you just defined it. (And yeah...subjective limited viewing of players is never flawed.)
EDIT: If you are trying, Laxation style, to claim there are absolutely zero ways to measure defensive production for teams and players, you are completely irrational. Especially in situations where things called points are the most important aspect of the stituation.
Especially since you just defined it. (And yeah...subjective limited viewing of players is never flawed.)
EDIT: If you are trying, Laxation style, to claim there are absolutely zero ways to measure defensive production for teams and players, you are completely irrational. Especially in situations where things called points are the most important aspect of the stituation.
-
benji - Posts: 14545
- Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2002 9:09 am
by --- on Sat Sep 15, 2007 7:36 am
benji wrote:Shannon wrote:but seeing a player beats stats 10 times out of 10.
That is such fucking bullshit, and everyone knows it.
Unless you can remember (without errors), and quantify, every single defensive play all 80+ point guards had last season, no one on this forum can use the games they watched to define the defensive abilities of the point guards of the league.
Just saying they're better because you watched them, therefore you know, is the lowest argument you can fathom.
If you hate facts and data, then I'll do it your way.
You know what, I saw them play, and I saw Duhon be better. QED. Duhon is better. Case closed.
I disagree.
Stats are overrated. Sure, there are plenty of statistics that are great to look at and provide in depth analysis of each defensive play, but watching a game is a whole nother story. I sure as hell don't remember every single play of the season, yet alone one quarter, but a players defensive ability is measured over time. I may be watching Hinrich and see him shutting down a player and think to myself - "That's some great defence he's playing" - I see that enough and it will develop into an opinion of - "Kirk Hinrich is a great defender".
Stats can tell you alot of stuff you don't know about. But so can watching a game.
Is there a stat that records how many times Kirk has denied a player the ball? Is there a stat that records how many times Kirk has forced a player to give up the ball when he's looking to score because he simply cannot move? Is there a stat that records how many times Kirk has forced a lose ball, even if it was recovered by the opposition? Is there a stat that records how many times a player wanted to go right, only to be forced left due to Kirk's defensive presence? Is there a stat that records how many times a team defers to another player because Kirk is gaurding the guy they would usually go to?
Statistic pick up on things like FG% and the like. If the guy got a shot off, you weren't playing good enough defence. I would take A over B in this stuation as a more impressive defensive effort:
A) Kirk is gaurding Player A, who is shut down and forced to pass to player B, who misses a shot over Ben Gordon.
B) Kirk is gaurding player A, shuts him down but eventually Player A get's a shot off, only to miss.
Do stats record those moments like "Scenario A"?
-
--- - Posts: 4553
- Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2005 3:04 pm
by benji on Sat Sep 15, 2007 7:49 am
Shannon wrote:I sure as hell don't remember every single play of the season, yet alone one quarter
Then you know nothing about his actual defensive success.
I may be watching Hinrich and see him shutting down a player and think to myself - "That's some great defence he's playing" - I see that enough and it will develop into an opinion of - "Kirk Hinrich is a great defender".
So you instantly discredited your opinion. By thinking "that's some great defense" you are already adding qualification to the data. You are more likely to dismiss any defensive failures. Once you decided Kirk Hinrich is a great defender (which is not being argued here, instead he is supposidly the second best defender in the league and "miles better" than Chris Duhon) you are now more likely to dismiss any contrarian data. Which you are doing.
Stats can tell you alot of stuff you don't know about. But so can watching a game.
But watching a game will also taint the input of data you are using. You can miss a shit ton while watching a game. You also do not ever watch in an objective manner, so you are not ever acquiring accurate data to develop your opinion from.
Is there a stat that records how many times Kirk has denied a player the ball? Is there a stat that records how many times Kirk has forced a player to give up the ball when he's looking to score because he simply cannot move? Is there a stat that records how many times Kirk has forced a lose ball, even if it was recovered by the opposition? Is there a stat that records how many times a player wanted to go right, only to be forced left due to Kirk's defensive presence? Is there a stat that records how many times a team defers to another player because Kirk is gaurding the guy they would usually go to?
But all of those are ultimately irrelevant to his defensive production. He either denies his man a point or allows his man a point. Hinrich could be doing every single one of those things, and still allowing his man to score 100% of the time. He is not a good defender in this situation, even if all of his intangibles are top notch.
The ultimate goal of a defender is to deny a point. He does this by forcing missed shots or turnovers. Forcing a player left instead of right, will either lead to a point by a made shot, or not lead to a point through a missed shot or turnover.
Statistic pick up on things like FG% and the like. If the guy got a shot off, you weren't playing good enough defence.
So your requirement for a good enough defense is to never allow a shot? You must consider every team and player in the league to be horrible defensive failures, what with their allowing of the opposing teams players to get a shot off 85% of the time.
I would take A over B in this stuation as a more impressive defensive effort:
A) Kirk is gaurding Player A, who is shut down and forced to pass to player B, who misses a shot over Ben Gordon.
B) Kirk is gaurding player A, shuts him down but eventually Player A get's a shot off, only to miss.
Do stats record those moments like "Scenario A"?
None of that is relevant to the defensive production. In both cases, there is a missed shot and around a 70% likelihood of a denied point.
It may look "impressive" to you or even be "impressive" but how "impressive" something is has no effect on production. If Tracy McGrady makes a difficult shot or has a great dunk, he doesn't get extra points. And Hinrich isn't disallowing extra points for his more "impressive" defensive stop.
-
benji - Posts: 14545
- Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2002 9:09 am
by TheMC5 on Sat Sep 15, 2007 8:07 am
Benji, I totally agree with your arguments here. Though, you could have shortened the whole thing with two simple words: confirmation bias. That's obviously the mistake Shannon was making.
Stats can be invaluable when evaluating players, but they certainly do not take precedence over traditional player evaluating/scouting (i.e. watching them play). Rather, the 2 combined offer the greatest level of accuracy, because then you see why some hypothetical player scored much better by any given metric than you would expect due to his reputation.
Stats can be invaluable when evaluating players, but they certainly do not take precedence over traditional player evaluating/scouting (i.e. watching them play). Rather, the 2 combined offer the greatest level of accuracy, because then you see why some hypothetical player scored much better by any given metric than you would expect due to his reputation.
- TheMC5
- Posts: 875
- Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 7:53 pm
by --- on Sat Sep 15, 2007 8:21 am
Then you know nothing about his actual defensive success.
I watch the Bulls and follow their performances, Kirk included. I may not recall every single play, but I do recall gathering up enough infomortion over time to call Kirk a great defender - which I think he has earned.
So you instantly discredited your opinion. By thinking "that's some great defense" you are already adding qualification to the data. You are more likely to dismiss any defensive failures. Once you decided Kirk Hinrich is a great defender (which is not being argued here, instead he is supposidly the second best defender in the league and "miles better" than Chris Duhon) you are now more likely to dismiss any contrarian data. Which you are doing.
How so?
If you mean I add quilification to the data because I'm noticing and forming an opinion from what I'm seeing - which is what it's recording - that's not entirely true. There are plenty of situations that stats just don't or can't record. Some things that I see will never show up in stats, eg. scenarios like "Scenario A", defensive positioning, etc.
But watching a game will also taint the input of data you are using. You can miss a shit ton while watching a game. You also do not ever watch in an objective manner, so you are not ever acquiring accurate data to develop your opinion from.
I know you can miss alot while watching a game, and that the data never misses on what it's recording. My problem is not so much what it is recording as it's what's not being recorded - real signs of great defensive skill and effort.
But all of those are ultimately irrelevant to his defensive production. He either denies his man a point or allows his man a point. Hinrich could be doing every single one of those things, and still allowing his man to score 100% of the time. He is not a good defender in this situation, even if all of his intangibles are top notch.
The ultimate goal of a defender is to deny a point. He does this by forcing missed shots or turnovers. Forcing a player left instead of right, will either lead to a point by a made shot, or not lead to a point through a missed shot or turnover.
Or lead to a tat player having to pass out because he can't get a good shot - which statistics don't record.
Yes, denying points is the ultimate goal of a defender. However, the way he denies those points are what really matters. A guy could be out of position, have a bad stance, come out on help slow and get just get lucky. The statistics would show he played good defence when we all know he didn't. This is why I don't think stats can come close to watching a real game.
It works the same way in this situation - Kirk could show all the intangibles I mentioned and the guy may score a lucky shot of find an open teammate who scores. The data would show he played bad defence when everyone who watched knows that he did everything he possibly could to stop his man.
I know a lucky shot isn't going to happen enough to really taint the data, but when the data doesn't record something like Kirk forcing a player to give it up or even get the ball in the first place - it's not picking up on a huge part of what defence is.
So your requirement for a good enough defense is to never allow a shot? You must consider every team and player in the league to be horrible defensive failures, what with their allowing of the opposing teams players to get a shot off 85% of the time.
My bad, that came out wrong.
What I mean is:
Play defence, man get's off a shot and misses < Play defence, man can't get off a shot and is forced to pass (or doesn't get the ball altogether).
None of that is relevant to the defensive production. In both cases, there is a missed shot and around a 70% likelihood of a denied point.
It may look "impressive" to you or even be "impressive" but how "impressive" something is has no effect on production. If Tracy McGrady makes a difficult shot or has a great dunk, he doesn't get extra points. And Hinrich isn't disallowing extra points for his more "impressive" defensive stop.
How someone scores on offence can not really be compared to defence. If Tracy makes a difficult shot - yes that is impressive, but more often than not it's a luck thing. A lucky bounce. A lucky no look "just-chuck-it-up-there". One of those lucky shots that just happen to drop - not exactly caused by skill.
Defence is the opposite. If you manage to actually shut a guy down so hard that he can't even create space to get a shot off, you have played better defence than if he managed to create that space and get his shot off - even if he misses.
If Tracy makes a difficult shot, I wouldn't say he "shot better". More often than not, it's lucky. When it comes to defence, it's alot more about skill when it comes to "how" you shut a guy down.
I may not mean much production-wise statistically, because a miss is a miss. But if we compared 200 defensive plays from Chris Duhon and Kirk Hinrich (in which both players were not scored on) and Hinrich showed these intangibles and impressive defensive plays while Duhon just played solid defence and forced a miss, the statistics would show them as even - which is not even remotely true.
Don't get me wrong, Chris Duhon is a fine defensive player. Just not at Kirk's level.
-
--- - Posts: 4553
- Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2005 3:04 pm
by benji on Sat Sep 15, 2007 8:50 am
I watch the Bulls and follow their performances, Kirk included. I may not recall every single play, but I do recall gathering up enough infomortion over time to call Kirk a great defender - which I think he has earned.
No, you only think you do. You are not acquiring anywhere near enough objective data. You are taking your opinion, and reinforcing it by seeing what you want to see. You have a handful of select plays you remember of Hinrich playing good defense, out of around 3,000 defensive possessions by his man over the last three years..
If you mean I add quilification to the data because I'm noticing and forming an opinion from what I'm seeing - which is what it's recording - that's not entirely true.
Everytime Kirk Hinrich makes a defensive play you are placing it into subjective values: Good defense, or bad defense. Instead of gathering the data and then evaluating it, you are evaluating it as you are measuring it. Injecting an systematic measurement error to the data that can only grow larger with each input.
There are plenty of situations that stats just don't or can't record. Some things that I see will never show up in stats, eg. scenarios like "Scenario A", defensive positioning, etc.
But the stats record what matters, whether or not points are allowed.
Yes, denying points is the ultimate goal of a defender. However, the way he denies those points are what really matters.
No, it doesn't. What matters is whether or not the points are denied. Not that how you did it appears better.
It works the same way in this situation - Kirk could show all the intangibles I mentioned and the guy may score a lucky shot... The data would show he played bad defence when everyone who watched knows that he did everything he possibly could to stop his man.
I removed the entire other player scoring. The data would show he played bad defense, BECAUSE HE DID, his man scored. Good defense = man not scoring, bad defense = man scoring. It is irrelevant if he gives it his all and does everything he can, the guy still scored. He does not get points for effort.
Play defence, man get's off a shot and misses < Play defence, man can't get off a shot and is forced to pass (or doesn't get the ball altogether).
Unless, whoever gets the ball scores. Then the first one is always better, as you have around a 70% chance of denying a point.
Defence is the opposite. If you manage to actually shut a guy down so hard that he can't even create space to get a shot off, you have played better defence than if he managed to create that space and get his shot off - even if he misses.
But in both cases, the result is the same. He missed, points were denied.
But if we compared 200 defensive plays from Chris Duhon and Kirk Hinrich (in which both players were not scored on) and Hinrich showed these intangibles and impressive defensive plays while Duhon just played solid defence and forced a miss, the statistics would show them as even - which is not even remotely true.
Since I have some data, we don't have to say they were not scored in every single one. Which would mean they were equal in results, the rest is just evaluating how they looked while they did it. Which is irrelevant.
(And although I prefer to count stops related to the team, not individuals, I am doing so here, I will do the other in an aside later.) Hinrich's more impressive defensive plays last year resulted in a stop on 48.9% of his counterparts possessions, Duhon's solid defense resulted in 53.4% of counterparts possessions being stops. Over 200 possessions, Hinrich is getting 98 stops, and Duhon is getting 107 stops. Assuming just two points per made basket, Hinrich is giving up 204 points, Duhon is giving up 186 points. (Using, the team relation, which I prefer. Hinrich got a stop on 12.26% of Bulls opponents possessions, Duhon on 13.20%, over 200 possessions, Hinrich racked up 25 stops and Duhon got 26. On 200 shots, Hinrich forces 17 misses, Duhon 16. But on 200 possessions, Hinrich forces just 7 turnovers to Duhon's 10)
-
benji - Posts: 14545
- Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2002 9:09 am
112 posts
• Page 1 of 5 • 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests