Do Blocked Shots Really Matter?

[nbrans]

Everyone thinks the Kings need a shotblocker. Is that really the case? I tend to believe that the shot block is the most overblown stat in the book. After all, it's just forcing the other team to miss a shot -- a blocked shot doesn't even guarantee that the other team won't score on the same possession or even that the same player won't just go back up with the ball and score. When it comes down to it, however you force the other team to miss, whether it's a hand in the face or a blocked shot, has the same effect -- the other team is missing a shot.

Now, some people might say that having a shotblocker will make penetrators think twice about coming into the lane. A shotblocker has a psychological effect on the other team. A shotblocker keeps other teams from taking high percentage shots and getting layups. Ok, let's see if that's the case.

A good measure of team defensive ability is measured by opposing field goal percentage. After all, the goal of defense is getting the other team to miss shots, so whoever is getting their opponent to miss the most shots is the best defensive team. Here are this year's top 10 defensive teams in terms of opp FG%:

1. Chicago (42.633%)
2. Houston (42.906%)
3. San Antonio (43.238%)
4. LA Clippers (43.336%)
5. Memphis (43.661%)
6. Indiana (43.753%)
7. New Jersey (43.766%)
8. Minnesota (43.942%)
9. Miami (44.008%)
10. Dallas (49.089%)

Here are the top 10 shotblocking teams (I've bolded the ones that are also in the top 10 in defensive %):

1. LA Clippers
2. Utah
3. Dallas
4. Detroit
5. Minnesota
6. Denver
7. San Antonio
8. Miami
9. Memphis
10. Portland

So it looks like a lot of the teams with good shotblocking are also good defensive teams (although I don't know what Portland is doing in there).

Taking a look at the data, I conclude that YES, shotblocking does matter. Although you don't have to be a good shotblocking team to be a good defensive team (Chicago, Houston), and you can be a terrible defensive team and have good shotblocking (Portland). But it seems to help.

In other news, the earth is round. Also I'm bored.

 

[beemerr23]

Even though you haven't written a body, I'll say I hope you're kidding from the title. Hell yea blocked shots matter, in many ways.

- it's a crowd pleaser
- momentum swinger
- it brings swagger to your team
- they save baskets and lead to fastbreaks/points on the other end, a 4/5 point swing
- it gives you a mental edge on the competition when they drive inside, you better believe it'll throw off their shot or make them think twice
- defense wins games

that about covers it

 

[Yoda]

Chicago and Houston may have good fg% against but as a team, they both stink.
A shot blocker can cover up some of a teams defensive weakness. ie. Bibby.

 

[nbrans]

Chicago and Houston may have good fg% against but as a team, they both stink.
A shot blocker can cover up some of a teams defensive weakness. ie. Bibby.

Chicago and Houston stink because they're bad on offense. They're good defensively though.

 

[MrBiggs]

Not necessarily a big time shot blocker. They just need inside defense and someone who can intimidate players from driving the hole. Take a look at the Pistons, you'll see that players driving always kinda stutter when they see Big Ben coming to greet them.

 

[Kings113]

Yup, and we should get another shot-blocker/good prescence (unless Sampson becomes it) over the summer.

 

[VF21]

Not necessarily a big time shot blocker. They just need inside defense and someone who can intimidate players from driving the hole. Take a look at the Pistons, you'll see that players driving always kinda stutter when they see Big Ben coming to greet them.

Exactly.

 

[VF21]

- it's a crowd pleaser
- momentum swinger
- it brings swagger to your team
- they save baskets and lead to fastbreaks/points on the other end, a 4/5 point swing
- it gives you a mental edge on the competition when they drive inside, you better believe it'll throw off their shot or make them think twice
- defense wins games

1. Crowd pleaser? Okay, that's like not even on the radar.
2. Momentum swinger? Not necessarily.
3. Swagger? Maybe on the playground.
4. Save baskets? Well, yeah. Lead to fastbreaks on the other end? Maybe, maybe not.
5. Mental edge? Quite possibly, for the reason MrBiggs pointed out above.
6. Defense wins games? Erm, not exactly. You still have to score more points than your opponent.

 

[VF21]

nbrans - Where did the Kings stand in these types of things in the GLORY years?

 

[nbrans]

nbrans - Where did the Kings stand in these types of things in the GLORY years?

Good question. Here is the opposing field goal percentage and shotblocking number year by year since 1998/1999

98/99: .446%, 4.64 bpg
99/00: .452%, 4.65 bpg
00/01: .432%, 5.27 bpg
01/02: .440%, 4.57 bpg
02/03: .420%, 5.57 bpg
03/04: .454%, 3.96 bpg
04/05: .459%, 3.85 bpg
05/06: .454%, 3.59 bpg

At least for the Kings, there seems to be a direct correlation between opposing shooting percentage and blocked shots.

So yeah. I'd say we really need a shotblocker.

The problem is that, as 82games.com has observed, the more shotblocking you have the more your offense tends to suffer: http://www.82games.com/chemblock.htm. I think this really reinforces the idea that the Kings need BOTH a rebounder/shotblocker and an alpha offensive force.

 

[HndsmCelt]

Blocked shots is one of those nebulas stats that is very very diffcult to evaluate. This does not make them either over blown or vital, just complicated. The truth is that not all blocked shots saves a basket. frequently the offense gets the ball back and socres. Bad shot blocking attmepts go up with the number of total attmepts, and often translate into goaltending calls. BUT on the other hand having shot blockers arround the rim changes the game forcing teams to be more carefull about taking the ball to the rack and altering shots; this inevitably results in lower percentage shots.

What does all this mean? Well it means the statistic is murky, unlike TO=bad, assist=good... block= probably good but needs to be seen in combination with high offensive rebounding and poor out side shooting of competitor.

 

[VF21]

To rephrase and add to what Celt has said, I think the main point is that in order to even be in a position to block a shot, the player pretty much has to be inside. And that is what we truly lack...a consistent inside presence.

If there's one thing that drives me absolutely nuts, it's how many times I look in the paint and see nothing but the other team in there.

 

[Kings113]

Sampson should be played a ton of minutes if theres a blow-out down the stretch here.

 

[NewMonkey]

So it looks like a lot of the teams with good shotblocking are also good defensive teams (although I don't know what Portland is doing in there).

Portland has Joel Pryzbilla and Theo Ratliff, who block more shots per game than the entire Kings team.

 

[Kings113]

They've been in and out with injuries in 2006 though.

 

[SacKings4Life21]

nbrans - Where did the Kings stand in these types of things in the GLORY years?

D winds the rings... we dont have a ring... (because of the refs and free throws I know...) but we were never great at D, though we had a good percentage.

Name 1 championship team without a shot blocker...

 

[kennadog]

D winds the rings... we dont have a ring... (because of the refs and free throws I know...) but we were never great at D, though we had a good percentage.

Name 1 championship team without a shot blocker...

Kings were considered arguably the best defensive team in that 2002-2003 season. It wasn't solely FG% against, altho the Kings were #1 in that category that year and many consider that the true test of a team's defense. They had some pretty good stats in other areas, too. If not the best, at least in the top 5. And still had awesome offense.

 

[SacTownKid]

Definately more about that intimidation factor than the actual "shot block".

Thats why I was so happy when we signed Greg Ostertag last year. He isn't necessarily going to block 15 shots a game, but he may change that many shots a game by at least trying to block it.

A shotblocker is important especially with a player like Bibby. He needs help, and we can't stop everybody on the perimeter anyway.

Some people think our defensive woes can be blamed on Mike Bibby. So what do we do? Get rid of Mike Bibby for a better defender who will be nowhere near the talent and player Mike is. Or go out and get him some help? I think Mike Bibby is worth getting some help D on the interior.

 

[SacKings4Life21]

Kings were considered arguably the best defensive team in that 2002-2003 season. It wasn't solely FG% against, altho the Kings were #1 in that category that year and many consider that the true test of a team's defense. They had some pretty good stats in other areas, too. If not the best, at least in the top 5. And still had awesome offense.

I said we have a good percentage, but we never got stops when we needed.... exceptm maybe keon clark, agaisnt hte mavs that one time lol

 

[Bricklayer]

I was thinking about that when I saw this topic come up (also after the last time I heard Jerry Reynolds try to excuse out own lack of shotblocking by saying it was the most overrated stat in basketball ).

Closest I could come up with in the last 25 years was the 2nd Bulls dynasty (96-98). But even they a) featured 3 former DPOY winners, and b) had Luc Longely, who blocked a lot more shots than people realize (about 1.5). Actually both Bulls dynasties lacked the dominant shotblockers of other champions, but made up for it by perhaps the best pairing of perimeter defenders in NBA history.

Otherwise:

Spurs (Duncan)
Pistons (Wallace)
Spurs (Duncan/Admiral)
Lakers (Shaq)
Spurs (Duncan/Admiral)
Bulls (Longely + (maybe this is the exception)
Rockets (Hakeem)
Bulls (Grant + Pippen/Jordan themselves actually blocked a lot at the time)
Pistons (Salley)
Lakers (Kareem)
Boston (McHale/Parish)
Sixers (Moses/Dr. J)

 

[Bricklayer]

Kings were considered arguably the best defensive team in that 2002-2003 season. It wasn't solely FG% against, altho the Kings were #1 in that category that year and many consider that the true test of a team's defense. They had some pretty good stats in other areas, too. If not the best, at least in the top 5. And still had awesome offense.

And as nbrans showed in his earlier post -- during our best/peak years, when we WERE contenders, we actually had sufficient shotblocking. Before he got ancient, Vlade could block a shot, before the injuries Webb was actually a potent shotblocker, Pollard came in and went after things, and then in 02-03 of course we added Clark as well.

 

[SacTownKid]

I also recall hearing Reef talk about his days with Theo Ratliff and how the team would get a jolt when Ratliff would send one back. He said that kind of thing can you going and playing harder.

 

[BawLa]

Shotblocking shows that your team is hustling and it shows that they are on top of opponents' game plans without drawing penalties.

I'm all for one!

 

[beemerr23]

1. Crowd pleaser? Okay, that's like not even on the radar.
2. Momentum swinger? Not necessarily.
3. Swagger? Maybe on the playground.
4. Save baskets? Well, yeah. Lead to fastbreaks on the other end? Maybe, maybe not.
5. Mental edge? Quite possibly, for the reason MrBiggs pointed out above.
6. Defense wins games? Erm, not exactly. You still have to score more points than your opponent.

probably one of the more retarded posts ive read. do you recall the block josh powell had on Brad Miller, and how it pleased the CROWD? Or maybe gave the team some SWAGGER? Or you know, gave them some MOMENTUM? Defense does win games, quit disagreeing with me just to disagree.

 

[Rome]

1. Crowd pleaser? Okay, that's like not even on the radar.
2. Momentum swinger? Not necessarily.
3. Swagger? Maybe on the playground.
4. Save baskets? Well, yeah. Lead to fastbreaks on the other end? Maybe, maybe not.
5. Mental edge? Quite possibly, for the reason MrBiggs pointed out above.
6. Defense wins games? Erm, not exactly. You still have to score more points than your opponent.

I agree with the most part but I do think you have a better chance of winning if you play with more defense then rather just outscoring the opposing team.

Just look at a team like Memphis. They don't amaze your offensively but win games because of their lock down hard defense. I believe they allow the fewest points in the NBA right now. There's a few others that I can mention like the Pacers, Jazz, and even the Pistons before this year.

 

[VF21]

probably one of the more retarded posts ive read. do you recall the block josh powell had on Brad Miller, and how it pleased the CROWD? Or maybe gave the team some SWAGGER? Or you know, gave them some MOMENTUM? Defense does win games, quit disagreeing with me just to disagree.

Don't flatter yourself. I made a legitimate response to your post. You, in turn, have reduced your response to something resembling a puerile attempt to insult me.

It's not going to fly. Keep your responses civil or they will be dealt with in an appropriate manner.

 

[beemerr23]

are you really being serious? I can't believe you don't think Defense wins games, instead you made an obvious comment like "You need offense to outscore them" Well no, really? You really don't think blocked shots please the crowd? You really don't think a blocked shot and a dunk/3 pointer on the other end could be a momentum swinger? I fail to see where your post brings out good points.

 

[VF21]

My point #6 was a bit of humor. Apparently it went over your head.

I didn't say blocked shots don't please the crowd. I simply do not believe the first consideration should be "crowd pleaser." As far as a blocked shot and a dunk/3 pointer goes, there's no reason to assume that every blocked shot results in a turnover and a score at the other end. That's why I said "NOT NECESSARILY."

Not necessarily means it might or might NOT happen. The momentum swing isn't a constant predictable outcome of a blocked shot.

I'm sorry if you fail to see where my post brings out good points. Unfortunately, there's really nothing I can do about your lack of comprehension.

 

[beemerr23]

My point #6 was a bit of humor. Apparently it went over your head.

I didn't say blocked shots don't please the crowd. I simply do not believe the first consideration should be "crowd pleaser." As far as a blocked shot and a dunk/3 pointer goes, there's no reason to assume that every blocked shot results in a turnover and a score at the other end. That's why I said "NOT NECESSARILY."

Not necessarily means it might or might NOT happen. The momentum swing isn't a constant predictable outcome of a blocked shot.

I'm sorry if you fail to see where my post brings out good points. Unfortunately, there's really nothing I can do about your lack of comprehension.

Anything might or might Not happen, but a block shot can lead it on. Sorry I can't notice humor through text, it doesn't show tone of voice or emotion. Plus it was pretty dry

 

[beemerr23]

I also recall hearing Reef talk about his days with Theo Ratliff and how the team would get a jolt when Ratliff would send one back. He said that kind of thing can you going and playing harder.

^^

See, it gets you playing harder and gives you a jolt of energy. That momentum and swagger I was talking about, plus the mental edge. Why dispute how effective blocking shots is...