Come fly with us, Birdman:

[Kingster]

You know, there have been times and places in history when making a statement that your 1.2blk a game a center and your 0.7blk a game power forward, anchoring the worst defense in the NBA, for a team that may well have allowed more points in the paint than any other team in the league on the way to being ranked 24th of 30 teams in shotblocking, would be just fine if the center got a little stronger...would have resulted in them locking you up. Probably right next to the guy who thought the solution was to hire a 6'0" PG to solve the problem.

Meanwhile in the NBA Finals the #6 team in the league in shotblocking, anchored by the league leader and Defensive Player of the Year and having just knocked off the #7 team in the league in shotblocking, faces off with the #10 team in the league in shotblocking, who would have been higher had their 7'1" center played more than half the season, and who just eliminated the #2 team in the league in shotblocking. The winner of the faceoff getting to take home the trophy annually won by teams anchored by Garnett/Perkins, Duncan, Shaq, Big Ben, Admiral etc. etc. etc.

But I'm sure if Spencer just gets a little stronger we'll be right there. Right there.

So if shot blocking is so important, then why isn't a top 5 shotblocking team in the playoffs? And why is it that the favorite - LA - is a measly crummy lousy #10? That's only the top third of the league. Just another reason not to take Thabeet.

 

[CaminoChaos]

I think you simply fundamentally misunderstand the impact of a shotblocker back there. Not a guy who sometimes blocks shots. A shotblocker. give me Bill Russel on this team and I will shave, with not a single other move made, 5 ppg off of our points against. Easy. Maybe more.

There is no position, no other trait, NOTHING that makes as big a difference on defense. And this foolishness of rather than getting a shotblocker yeah we'll just draft a whole team of perimeter stoppers is just duh. Yeah, that's the better approach -- jsut draft 15 guys to do the work of 1. You will eventually need 1, maybe even 2. But the heart and sole is the backline. The backline players, by their very position ont he court, not to mention by being bigger than anybody else (and thus able to intimidate anybody), make your whole team better. Nobody else does that. You give me Bill Russel, not only does he directly block 3 or 4 shots or whatever. Not only does he intimidate or alter another 6 or 8. But he makes every single perimeter defender better by his mere presence back there. Everybody gets to crowd their man an extra foot. Everybody can gamble. Because they all know there is a goalie behind them. You have 1 1/2 men guarding every one of their perimeter players, and a lot of guys won't even challenge and just settle for jumpers.

Listening to Jerry Reynolds on shotblocking will end up leaving you with a career record very much like his.

Not once did I a say shotblocking was not important. I believe it is but with out some type perimeter defensive presence it's not going to make that big of a difference having shot blocker. Example: Clippers / Warriors. As long as guards keep getting into the paint all it will do is get a shotblocker into foul trouble or force him to leave his man for an easy dish off and bucket.

 

[fnordius]

So if shot blocking is so important, then why isn't a top 5 shotblocking team in the playoffs?

Well, there are only 2 teams left in the playoffs, and one's #6, could be that why you chose "top 5," perhaps?

But nothing's as simple as a single stat... if you can block shots, but totally suck otherwise, you're the Warriors at that point. Just the same, shotblocking differential comes out looking interesting WRT the playoffs... of the top 10 in shotblocking differential, 8 were in the playoffs. Of the bottom 10 in the same stat, 8 were lottery teams. Coincidence?

 

[JB_kings]

Shot blocking threat is what's important here. Stats may not mean much because teams will shy away from going to the basket if the tall trees are there. Points in the paint allowed is something you should work to eliminate. Shot blocking is a part of that, but so are other factors.

 

[mane]

Bring me the Birdman

The ultimate Arco seat filler.

 

[Kingster]

Well, there are only 2 teams left in the playoffs, and one's #6, could be that why you chose "top 5," perhaps?

But nothing's as simple as a single stat... if you can block shots, but totally suck otherwise, you're the Warriors at that point. Just the same, shotblocking differential comes out looking interesting WRT the playoffs... of the top 10 in shotblocking differential, 8 were in the playoffs. Of the bottom 10 in the same stat, 8 were lottery teams. Coincidence?

That's exactly why I chose the "top 5". And that's why I pointed out LA at #10. And I totally agree that nothing is as important as a simple stat - shotblocking included. I just don't buy into the recipe that you have to have a great shotblocker to get a championship. Teams can be constructed in a myriad of ways. You can have excellent defensive guards, and have big men who aren't shot blockers, but who can move well laterally. That paradigm doesn't need a great shot blocker to be very good defensively. I'm not saying that shot blocking shouldn't be valued, just that I think it tends to be overvalued. And one other thing - you can have an excellent shot blocker who IS NOT a very good defensive player. Thabeet has shown he is an excellent shot blocker in college, yet he got eaten alive by Blair and Monroe. So is Thabeet really that great of a defensive player, or is he a one-trick pony?

 

[bajaden]

That's exactly why I chose the "top 5". And that's why I pointed out LA at #10. And I totally agree that nothing is as important as a simple stat - shotblocking included. I just don't buy into the recipe that you have to have a great shotblocker to get a championship. Teams can be constructed in a myriad of ways. You can have excellent defensive guards, and have big men who aren't shot blockers, but who can move well laterally. That paradigm doesn't need a great shot blocker to be very good defensively. I'm not saying that shot blocking shouldn't be valued, just that I think it tends to be overvalued. And one other thing - you can have an excellent shot blocker who IS NOT a very good defensive player. Thabeet has shown he is an excellent shot blocker in college, yet he got eaten alive by Blair and Monroe. So is Thabeet really that great of a defensive player, or is he a one-trick pony?

Harangody also had a pretty good game against him.

 

[SacKings7]

That's exactly why I chose the "top 5". And that's why I pointed out LA at #10. And I totally agree that nothing is as important as a simple stat - shotblocking included. I just don't buy into the recipe that you have to have a great shotblocker to get a championship. Teams can be constructed in a myriad of ways. You can have excellent defensive guards, and have big men who aren't shot blockers, but who can move well laterally. That paradigm doesn't need a great shot blocker to be very good defensively. I'm not saying that shot blocking shouldn't be valued, just that I think it tends to be overvalued. And one other thing - you can have an excellent shot blocker who IS NOT a very good defensive player. Thabeet has shown he is an excellent shot blocker in college, yet he got eaten alive by Blair and Monroe. So is Thabeet really that great of a defensive player, or is he a one-trick pony?

You didn't have to go to Thabeet to make that argument. The Birdman himself isn't a very good defensive player

 

[Bricklayer]

That's exactly why I chose the "top 5". And that's why I pointed out LA at #10. And I totally agree that nothing is as important as a simple stat - shotblocking included. I just don't buy into the recipe that you have to have a great shotblocker to get a championship. Teams can be constructed in a myriad of ways. You can have excellent defensive guards, and have big men who aren't shot blockers, but who can move well laterally. That paradigm doesn't need a great shot blocker to be very good defensively. I'm not saying that shot blocking shouldn't be valued, just that I think it tends to be overvalued. And one other thing - you can have an excellent shot blocker who IS NOT a very good defensive player. Thabeet has shown he is an excellent shot blocker in college, yet he got eaten alive by Blair and Monroe. So is Thabeet really that great of a defensive player, or is he a one-trick pony?

And again, there is a level of...well, ignorance might be the word but I'll settle for stubborness, that is staggering.

Entirely beside the point that those are were all NBA PFs, that they were basically the only guys who beat Thabeet all year, that Harangody shot a combined 17-41 in his two games against UConn, and had all of 14 and 5 in the second matchup (he averaged 23 and 12 on the year), that Blair too was figured out and beaten in the second matchup (finsished with 8 pts 8rebs (averaged 15 and 12 on the year)...entirely apart form all that:

A shotblocker's primary effect is NOT ON THE MAN HE GUARDS. That's not why you have them. Their effect is on everybody ELSE'S man. Ben Wallace did not win 4 DPOY awards for stopping his own man -- in fact the stats say he was rather mediocre at that. He won them for stopping EVRYBODY ELSE'S man. Dwight Howard did not win the DPOY this year for stopping opposing centers -- there aren't that many high scoring ones to stop. He won DPOY for stopping EVERYBODY ELSE'S man.

Let's go to the diagram shall we?

In this relatively standard set who does the PG have to beat to get to the rim? PG, PF, C.

The SG? SG, C, maybe PF.

The SF? SF, maybe PF if he rotates, C.

The PF? PF, C.

The C? C.

Focusing on the 5th case entirely misses the point -- a big shotblocking C plays defense on EVERY player on the court.

 

[CaminoChaos]

Your theory proves my point.

There PG or SG has to get by the PG(Udrih)or SG(Martin),then PF(Thompson), then the C (Shotblocker of your choice).

Well we all know he's getting by Udrih or Martin(given). So next in line is Thompson. Thompson has a choice at this point, leave his man open and help or let him go by and let the C (shot blocker) take care of him. Let's for the sake of arguement say he let's him go by. This is what happens at this point. First of all we will all be yelling at the TV, swearing and cursing at Thompson for not rotating. Second, We have a showdown between there PG(or SG) and our C (the shot blocker). At this point there are few things that can happen.

1. The PG(or SG) decides he wants to be on ESPN Top 10 by having his shot sent in to the 5th row pissing off one of the very few Arco Fans in the building by making his beer explode in his lap and giving his team the ball back to try the same thing. Unlikely. I would take a guess that 95% (+/-) PG's in the league would prevent this from happening by......

2. Dishing the ball to C who is wide open because our shot blocker was force to rotate over to help our defensively incompitant PG and now horrible help defending PF.

3. This next option I feel is the most hurtful. After the PG is in the paint our C decides to stay on his man for as long as possible to prevent the PG from dishing it to the man he's covering. Then at the last second he switches over and our worst fear most likely comes true. He fouls him. Unfortunatelty for us our shotblocker has 3 fouls in 10 minutes and he has to be taken out of the game.

Now this is just based off of the senario that you provided. I could make an argument for every set in the NBA playbook but the results are going to be similar for every situation.

My solution is you draft or sign a PG that is some what good defensively to replace the often injured Udrih then you find a defensive SF that can guard two positions so that we can keep one of the most offensively efficient SG's and have the SF switch to SG on defense.

I have no problem picking up a "shotblocker" for a back up but I feel that he needs to posses some other tangibles. Rebounding, scrappiness, hustle, etc. All the Bigs you mentioned before brought an offensive game to the table with the exception Big Ben (who I feel was a good man-on-man defender). But all those guys had the perimeter defensive guys. Bowen, Prince, Fox, etc. Without any perimeter defense it doesn't matter.

 

[Bricklayer]

I have no problem picking up a "shotblocker" for a back up but I feel that he needs to posses some other tangibles. Rebounding, scrappiness, hustle, etc. All the Bigs you mentioned before brought an offensive game to the table with the exception Big Ben (who I feel was a good man-on-man defender). But all those guys had the perimeter defensive guys. Bowen, Prince, Fox, etc. Without any perimeter defense it doesn't matter.

Which is all fine and good and a task for the future. But all of those perimeter defenders were picked up AFTER the big anchors were set inside, and their effectiveness was tremendously enhanced by having a backstop behind them. You can pick up a Bruce Bowen off the FA scrap heap, draft a Tayshaun Prince in the teens or 20s --perimeter players, and perimeter defenders are far more common than the big guys inside. And yet it it the big guys inside who dominate the history of NBA champions and elite teams, who dominate the DPOY awards, and who dominate the game on defense. Bruce Bowen was a great defender, but hsi great defense did not help Tim Duncan's defense nearly as much as Tim Duncan's defense helped Bowen's. And it had almost no effect at all on Parker's or Giinobili's. Duncan was the heart of the defense, THEN you take on the comparatively simple task of finding a Bowen (and note the power fo the shotblocker, they only found one Bowen -- Parker or Ginobili aren't great individual defenders. There are a lot more 6'7" guys in the world than there are 7'0" shotblockers.

 

[fnordius]

I just don't buy into the recipe that you have to have a great shotblocker to get a championship.

Well, let's look at the last 20 years or so and see how many top shotblockers those teams had... I'm listing those who got 0.8 BPG or higher, since that's usually about the cutoff for being a top-50 shotblocker.

Here's how we'd look:
'09: SAC: Hawes (1.2), Garcia (1.0)

The Champions, plus the '02 Lakers:
'08: Celtics: Perkins (1.5 BPG), KG (1.3 BPG)
'07: SAS: Duncan (2.4), Elson (0.8)
'06: Heat: Mourning (2.7), Shaq (1.8), Wade (0.8)
'05: SAS: Duncan (2.6), Nesterovic (1.7), Mohammed (1.1), Horry (0.8)
'04: Pistons: B. Wallace (3.0), R. Wallace (2.0), Okur (0.9), Campbell (0.8), Prince (0.8)
'03: SAS: Duncan (2.9), Robinsion (1.7)
'02: LAL*: Shaq (2.0), Walker (1.3), Horry (1.1)
'01: LAL: Shaq (2.8), Grant (0.8)
'00: LAL: Shaq (3.0), Horry (1.1), Bryant (0.9)
'99: SAS: Duncan (2.5), Robinson (2.4)
'98: Bulls: Longley (1.1), Pippin (1.0)
'97: Bulls: Longley (1.1)
'96: Bulls: Longley (1.4), Salley (0.9)
'95: Rockets: Olajuwon (3.4), Horry (1.2)
'94: Rockets: Olajuwon (3.7), Horry (0.9)
'93: Bulls: Grant (1.2), Williams (0.9), Pippen (0.9), Jordan (0.8)
'92: Bulls: Grant (1.6), Pippen (1.1), Jordan (0.9)
'91: Bulls: Pippen (1.1), Jordan (1.0), Grant (0.9), Purdue (0.8)
'90: Pistons: Salley (1.9), Laimbeer (1.0)
'89: Pistons: Laimbeer (1.2), Salley (1.1), Mahorn (0.9), Rodman (0.9)
'88: LAL: Abdul-Jabbar (1.2), Thompson (1.0), Smrek (0.9)
'87: LAL: Abdul-Jabbar (1.2), Green (1.0), Worthy (1.0), Thompson (0.9)

Looks to me like, if you're the late-'90s Bulls, you can get by with Kings-level shotblocking. Other teams, not.

 

[NME]

Looks to me like, if you're the late-'90s Bulls, you can get by with Kings-level shotblocking. Other teams, not.

So, all we need is two or three of the best individual defenders of all time, and we're in business!

 

[LPKingsFan]

Well, let's look at the last 20 years or so and see how many top shotblockers those teams had... I'm listing those who got 0.8 BPG or higher, since that's usually about the cutoff for being a top-50 shotblocker.

Here's how we'd look:
'09: SAC: Hawes (1.2), Garcia (1.0)

The Champions, plus the '02 Lakers:
'08: Celtics: Perkins (1.5 BPG), KG (1.3 BPG)
'07: SAS: Duncan (2.4), Elson (0.8)
'06: Heat: Mourning (2.7), Shaq (1.8), Wade (0.8)
'05: SAS: Duncan (2.6), Nesterovic (1.7), Mohammed (1.1), Horry (0.8)
'04: Pistons: B. Wallace (3.0), R. Wallace (2.0), Okur (0.9), Campbell (0.8), Prince (0.8)
'03: SAS: Duncan (2.9), Robinsion (1.7)
'02: LAL*: Shaq (2.0), Walker (1.3), Horry (1.1)
'01: LAL: Shaq (2.8), Grant (0.8)
'00: LAL: Shaq (3.0), Horry (1.1), Bryant (0.9)
'99: SAS: Duncan (2.5), Robinson (2.4)
'98: Bulls: Longley (1.1), Pippin (1.0)
'97: Bulls: Longley (1.1)
'96: Bulls: Longley (1.4), Salley (0.9)
'95: Rockets: Olajuwon (3.4), Horry (1.2)
'94: Rockets: Olajuwon (3.7), Horry (0.9)
'93: Bulls: Grant (1.2), Williams (0.9), Pippen (0.9), Jordan (0.8)
'92: Bulls: Grant (1.6), Pippen (1.1), Jordan (0.9)
'91: Bulls: Pippen (1.1), Jordan (1.0), Grant (0.9), Purdue (0.8)
'90: Pistons: Salley (1.9), Laimbeer (1.0)
'89: Pistons: Laimbeer (1.2), Salley (1.1), Mahorn (0.9), Rodman (0.9)
'88: LAL: Abdul-Jabbar (1.2), Thompson (1.0), Smrek (0.9)
'87: LAL: Abdul-Jabbar (1.2), Green (1.0), Worthy (1.0), Thompson (0.9)

Looks to me like, if you're the late-'90s Bulls, you can get by with Kings-level shotblocking. Other teams, not.

Great post. Especially liked the proper designation for the 02 winning team.

 

[CaminoChaos]

Here's how we'd look:
'09: SAC: Hawes (1.2), Garcia (1.0)

Actually Thompson averaged 0.8 blks/gm as a starter.

 

[fnordius]

Actually Thompson averaged 0.8 blks/gm as a starter.

So are you going to provide the "starter versus non-starter" stats for all those other teams? I'm sure not going to.

 

[Bricklayer]

'86 Celtics: McHale (2.0), Parrish (1.4), Walton (1.3)
'85 Lakers: Abdul Jabbar (2.1), Worhty (0.8), McAdoo (0.8)
'84 Celtics: McHale (1.5), Parrish (1.5), Bird (0.8)
'83 76ers: Malone (2.0), Erving (1.8), Jones (1.2)
'82 Lakers: Abdul Jabbar (2.7), Rambis (1.2), McAdoo (1.1), Cooper (0.8)
'81 Celtics: Parrish (2.6), McHale (1.8), Maxwell (0.8), Bird (0.8)
'80 Lakers: Abdul Jabbar (3.4), Chones (0.8), Haywood (0.8)


Just carrying it back to the dawn of my own NBA watching, and the dawn of the generally acknowledged "modern era" (post Magic/Bird entering the league).

I will note too that it is the big first numbers that are the most important. Somebody blocking 0.8 is making a contribution of some sort, but it is the big intimidators that dominate defensively. A team with 4 guys averaging 0.8 can have no presence at all, while a team with one guy avergaing 3.2 will dominate the middle. An exception of course is if the 0.8 is in limited minutes off the bench in whihc case maybe he's fairly dominant himself.

 

[gunks]

Spencer has to step up his shotblocking game...

...Dude was showing some serious signs of being legit in the catagory, but as his offensive game came along it seemed like he put in less effort on the other end of the floor. You can check out his split stats, month to month as his ppg went up his bpg and rpg went down.

Ah well, such is how it tends to go with King's bigs.

I can see JT topping out at a little over 1 block a game, maybe even 1.5. He's kinda a hacker, so I think his block numbers were hurt by him getting the rook treatment from refs. Every game I watched he got a foul called on at least one clean deflection.

But yeah, we do need our 2.5+ shot blocking intimidator.

Perhaps we'll get Thabeet this draft (although I'm not a huge fan of his, I think he's a specialist bencher, not what I'd use a #4 pick on). I think it more likely we suffer through a couple more seasons without that intimidator. They dont really grow on trees...We're probably looking at another top 6 or 7 pick next season, maybe we get one then.

 

[hammystyle]

Well, let's look at the last 20 years or so and see how many top shotblockers those teams had... I'm listing those who got 0.8 BPG or higher, since that's usually about the cutoff for being a top-50 shotblocker.

Here's how we'd look:
'09: SAC: Hawes (1.2), Garcia (1.0)

The Champions, plus the '02 Lakers:
'08: Celtics: Perkins (1.5 BPG), KG (1.3 BPG)
'07: SAS: Duncan (2.4), Elson (0.8)
'06: Heat: Mourning (2.7), Shaq (1.8), Wade (0.8)
'05: SAS: Duncan (2.6), Nesterovic (1.7), Mohammed (1.1), Horry (0.8)
'04: Pistons: B. Wallace (3.0), R. Wallace (2.0), Okur (0.9), Campbell (0.8), Prince (0.8)
'03: SAS: Duncan (2.9), Robinsion (1.7)
'02: LAL*: Shaq (2.0), Walker (1.3), Horry (1.1)
'01: LAL: Shaq (2.8), Grant (0.8)
'00: LAL: Shaq (3.0), Horry (1.1), Bryant (0.9)
'99: SAS: Duncan (2.5), Robinson (2.4)
'98: Bulls: Longley (1.1), Pippin (1.0)
'97: Bulls: Longley (1.1)
'96: Bulls: Longley (1.4), Salley (0.9)
'95: Rockets: Olajuwon (3.4), Horry (1.2)
'94: Rockets: Olajuwon (3.7), Horry (0.9)
'93: Bulls: Grant (1.2), Williams (0.9), Pippen (0.9), Jordan (0.8)
'92: Bulls: Grant (1.6), Pippen (1.1), Jordan (0.9)
'91: Bulls: Pippen (1.1), Jordan (1.0), Grant (0.9), Purdue (0.8)
'90: Pistons: Salley (1.9), Laimbeer (1.0)
'89: Pistons: Laimbeer (1.2), Salley (1.1), Mahorn (0.9), Rodman (0.9)
'88: LAL: Abdul-Jabbar (1.2), Thompson (1.0), Smrek (0.9)
'87: LAL: Abdul-Jabbar (1.2), Green (1.0), Worthy (1.0), Thompson (0.9)

Looks to me like, if you're the late-'90s Bulls, you can get by with Kings-level shotblocking. Other teams, not.

That lays it out pretty nicely. Also worth noting that those Bulls team probly had the two greatest non-center defenders of all time in Pippen and Rodman and then Jordan who's probly top 5.

 

[vikinginferno]

In all of those stats you also have to look at how many of those guys were good post defenders, not only shotblockers. Almost all of them were also good in the post and shotblocking is extremely helpful, but when you have a one-dimensional shotblocker it creates other problems.

 

[gunks]

^^^^ And thats why I'm not really on the Thabeet bandwagon.

 

[Kingster]

You didn't have to go to Thabeet to make that argument. The Birdman himself isn't a very good defensive player

I agree. I got of our topic a little bit.

 

[Kingster]

And again, there is a level of...well, ignorance might be the word but I'll settle for stubborness, that is staggering.

Entirely beside the point that those are were all NBA PFs, that they were basically the only guys who beat Thabeet all year, that Harangody shot a combined 17-41 in his two games against UConn, and had all of 14 and 5 in the second matchup (he averaged 23 and 12 on the year), that Blair too was figured out and beaten in the second matchup (finsished with 8 pts 8rebs (averaged 15 and 12 on the year)...entirely apart form all that:

A shotblocker's primary effect is NOT ON THE MAN HE GUARDS. That's not why you have them. Their effect is on everybody ELSE'S man. Ben Wallace did not win 4 DPOY awards for stopping his own man -- in fact the stats say he was rather mediocre at that. He won them for stopping EVRYBODY ELSE'S man. Dwight Howard did not win the DPOY this year for stopping opposing centers -- there aren't that many high scoring ones to stop. He won DPOY for stopping EVERYBODY ELSE'S man.

Let's go to the diagram shall we?

In this relatively standard set who does the PG have to beat to get to the rim? PG, PF, C.

The SG? SG, C, maybe PF.

The SF? SF, maybe PF if he rotates, C.

The PF? PF, C.

The C? C.

Focusing on the 5th case entirely misses the point -- a big shotblocking C plays defense on EVERY player on the court.

So you think that if college power forwards can man-handle Thabeet, that he'll really be up to the challenge of NBA centers? After all, those NBA centers aren't half the players those college power forwards are. And you continue to assume that an NBA coach will play right into the hands of a player like Thabeet by not matching him up with a mobile player who can shoot outside and/or take him to the basket. It reminds of the British redcoats assuming that the revolutionaries would line up like men and shoot volleys at each other. Didn't quite work out that way.

I just don't value as highly a guy who pretty much only can block shots, but who doesn't make shots, make shots for others, rebound, or guard his own man.

By the way, Ben Wallace defended Shaquille O'Neal straight up to win an NBA championship. He could actually guard his own man, not just shot block from the weak side.

 

[Kingster]

Well, let's look at the last 20 years or so and see how many top shotblockers those teams had... I'm listing those who got 0.8 BPG or higher, since that's usually about the cutoff for being a top-50 shotblocker.

Here's how we'd look:
'09: SAC: Hawes (1.2), Garcia (1.0)

The Champions, plus the '02 Lakers:
'08: Celtics: Perkins (1.5 BPG), KG (1.3 BPG)
'07: SAS: Duncan (2.4), Elson (0.8)
'06: Heat: Mourning (2.7), Shaq (1.8), Wade (0.8)
'05: SAS: Duncan (2.6), Nesterovic (1.7), Mohammed (1.1), Horry (0.8)
'04: Pistons: B. Wallace (3.0), R. Wallace (2.0), Okur (0.9), Campbell (0.8), Prince (0.8)
'03: SAS: Duncan (2.9), Robinsion (1.7)
'02: LAL*: Shaq (2.0), Walker (1.3), Horry (1.1)
'01: LAL: Shaq (2.8), Grant (0.8)
'00: LAL: Shaq (3.0), Horry (1.1), Bryant (0.9)
'99: SAS: Duncan (2.5), Robinson (2.4)
'98: Bulls: Longley (1.1), Pippin (1.0)
'97: Bulls: Longley (1.1)
'96: Bulls: Longley (1.4), Salley (0.9)
'95: Rockets: Olajuwon (3.4), Horry (1.2)
'94: Rockets: Olajuwon (3.7), Horry (0.9)
'93: Bulls: Grant (1.2), Williams (0.9), Pippen (0.9), Jordan (0.8)
'92: Bulls: Grant (1.6), Pippen (1.1), Jordan (0.9)
'91: Bulls: Pippen (1.1), Jordan (1.0), Grant (0.9), Purdue (0.8)
'90: Pistons: Salley (1.9), Laimbeer (1.0)
'89: Pistons: Laimbeer (1.2), Salley (1.1), Mahorn (0.9), Rodman (0.9)
'88: LAL: Abdul-Jabbar (1.2), Thompson (1.0), Smrek (0.9)
'87: LAL: Abdul-Jabbar (1.2), Green (1.0), Worthy (1.0), Thompson (0.9)

Looks to me like, if you're the late-'90s Bulls, you can get by with Kings-level shotblocking. Other teams, not.

Do you think guys improve their shot blocking over time? Might we not assume that Spencer and Thompson would both improve in that area? Greene, as well? Isn't it as much about recognition and technique as physical skill, both of which improve over time? So why are we making the assumption that what is, shall be?

 

[sidney]

Thabeet is an elite talent. Just a monster. The guy is going to anchor somebody's defense for a decade. He can rebound and paired with a good point guard should not have trouble averaging 10-12 points/game.

An nobody is going to smallball Thabeet and be effective. The will get destroyed in other ways as a consequence.

My perfect draft scenario was walking away with Thabeet and Rubio. I just hope one of them falls to us now...

 

[hammystyle]

By the way, Ben Wallace defended Shaquille O'Neal straight up to win an NBA championship. He could actually guard his own man, not just shot block from the weak side.

So which would you give Wallace more credit for?:
1) "Holding" Shaq to 26.6 ppg on 63.1% shooting
or
2) Being the lynchpin of the D that held the rest of the Lakers to a combined 55.2 ppg on 35.5% shooting

 

[fnordius]

Do you think guys improve their shot blocking over time? Might we not assume that Spencer and Thompson would both improve in that area? Greene, as well? Isn't it as much about recognition and technique as physical skill, both of which improve over time? So why are we making the assumption that what is, shall be?

Well, I don't know how much improvement we can expect, off the top of my head, so let's take a look at some guys known for blocking well, and see how they developed, per 36 minutes. I'll pick some, then look up the results.

Hakeem the Dream: 2.7, 3.4, 3.3, 2.7, 3.4, 4.3, 3.9, 4.2, 3.8, 3.3, 3.1, 2.7, 2.2, 2.1, 2.5, 2.4, 2.1, 2.4. Career avg: 3.1
Shaq the fat and arrogant: 3.4, 2.6, 2.4, 2.1, 2.7, 2.4, 1.7, 2.7, 2.5, 2.0, 2.3, 2.4, 2.5, 2.1, 1.7, 1.8, 1.9, 2.0. Career avg: 2.4
Yao Ming: 2.2, 2.1, 2.4, 1.7, 2.1, 2.0, 2.1. Career avg: 2.1

Okay, I'm getting a feel for how that's going, let's try some less exalted players.

Joel Przybilla: 4.0, 3.8, 3.0, 1.8, 3.2, 3.4, 1.8, 1.8. Career avg: 2.7
Vlade Divac: 2.5, 2.0, 1.3, 2.0, 1.5, 2.2, 1.9, 2.3, 1.9, 1.0, 1.6, 1.4, 1.4, 1.6, 1.2, 0.3. Career avg: 1.7
Dikembe Mutumbo: 2.8, 3.4, 4.2, 3.7, 4.4, 3.2, 3.4, 2.9, 3.2, 2.8, 2.4, 2.6, 3.0, 3.0, 2.1, 2.1, 2.8, 4.0. Career avg: 3.2
Marcus Camby: 2.5, 4.1, 2.8, 2.7, 2.3, 1.8, 2.3, 3.1, 3.6, 3.6, 3.5, 3.7, 2.5. Career avg: 3.1

Okay, there's 7, and while the pattern vary some, I'm not finding too much to be encouraged by. Camby, Divac, Przybilla and O'Neal had their best (blocking) seasons by their second year in the NBA. Yao's best year was his third. Olajuwon and Camby showed some signs of improvement over time, but it wasn't quick or dramatic, they were doing well by year 2, and somewhat better by year 8-10. The others generally stayed pretty flat or declined.

So I guess I'd have to say that for many, shotblocking is helped by youth and energy, and that most don't improve much with age, if at all. Sucks, don't it?

 

[Kingster]

In all of those stats you also have to look at how many of those guys were good post defenders, not only shotblockers. Almost all of them were also good in the post and shotblocking is extremely helpful, but when you have a one-dimensional shotblocker it creates other problems.

Exactly.

Did anyone happen to notice that Shaq, Duncan, Olajuwon, and Jabbar happen to be fairly good offensive players? So really, all we need is a center with that kind of offense, and we're set to go the championship...

 

[Kingster]

So which would you give Wallace more credit for?:
1) "Holding" Shaq to 26.6 ppg on 63.1% shooting
or
2) Being the lynchpin of the D that held the rest of the Lakers to a combined 55.2 ppg on 35.5% shooting

I'd give him almost all of the credit for Shaq, and some for the rest of the Lakers.