Under the radar players worth a look
- Thread starter KingsFanGER
- Start date
When it comes to Rudy, I am not concerned about the offense. I think he will be able to score even when he slows down. I am concerned on the defensive side of the ball. He was never a great defender but he could be a good one in the right defensive scheme. This past season there have been signs of him slowing down a step on that end. Now it could be going through the motions but the guy is 30 so he is not going to improve much. If anything he will start declining.
I have no doubt that Divac wants to get younger and by younger I don't mean load up with kids but load up on young veterans around Boogie's age so that he has a core that is similar age and he can add pieces around the edges. I have no doubt that if we had a chance to trade for a young veteran that is equally as good as Rudy, we would do it. It's probably one of the reasons why we are reportedly not going to keep Rondo at all costs. Vlade likes veterans and ready made players but he also likes young veterans around Boogie's age so that he can get that core together going forward. Think about it, if this team starts going forward and improving, in 2 years time, it needs the new #2 option because Rudy won't be the sort of player he has been in Sacramento to this point and we are not getting that guy via free agency I am afraid. We are either going to need to draft him this year, or we will need to trade for him.
I have no doubt that Divac wants to get younger and by younger I don't mean load up with kids but load up on young veterans around Boogie's age so that he has a core that is similar age and he can add pieces around the edges. I have no doubt that if we had a chance to trade for a young veteran that is equally as good as Rudy, we would do it. It's probably one of the reasons why we are reportedly not going to keep Rondo at all costs. Vlade likes veterans and ready made players but he also likes young veterans around Boogie's age so that he can get that core together going forward. Think about it, if this team starts going forward and improving, in 2 years time, it needs the new #2 option because Rudy won't be the sort of player he has been in Sacramento to this point and we are not getting that guy via free agency I am afraid. We are either going to need to draft him this year, or we will need to trade for him.
I'm pretty sure I'm one of the people you're referring to (or I'm just revealing my sense of guilt about it...) -- but this is the kind of thing where it's impossible for me to give a simple answer. I saw a lot of the same things you're referring to and I hate it just as much as you do. Probably even more so because I go to bat for him on this forum and he's making me look bad. 
But then I also recall some games where Rondo was the best defender on our team and a constant menace in the passing lanes and on the defensive boards. I would agree that Rondo was a really lazy defender this year overall -- the poor games far outnumbered the good ones -- and I'm not okay with that next season or any subsequent season. Where I feel the need to interject into these discussions is when people write that he's a terrible defender or the worst defender on the team because I don't think that's really an accurate description of what I see going on.
Maybe his past life as an All-Defense mainstay makes his complete lack of effort twice as obvious and twice as inexcusable, but I don't think it's fair to hold him to a higher standard than everyone else and judge him more harshly because of it. Marco Belinelli doesn't guard anybody and when he actually does try for a possession or two he's almost always out of position and ineffective. Both in terms of his effort and his capability he's terrible. Rondo is plenty capable, he just doesn't expend any effort or very little anyway. And yet "20% effort Rondo" was still a more effective defender than every other guard on the team. I'm not just talking about the steal numbers. Marco has the worst defensive rating on the team (113) so that seems irrefutably bad but Rondo at 107 is actually tied with WCS and Koufos for the second best rating on the team. If you want to look instead at opponent shooting %s (Rondo, Collison, Curry, McLemore, Belinelli, Anderson) -- only McLemore and Anderson were better. Goerge Karl said at one point that Seth Curry was the best backcourt defender on the team yet he has the worst marks in opponent shooting % and a defensive rating of 112.
But then I also recall some games where Rondo was the best defender on our team and a constant menace in the passing lanes and on the defensive boards. I would agree that Rondo was a really lazy defender this year overall -- the poor games far outnumbered the good ones -- and I'm not okay with that next season or any subsequent season. Where I feel the need to interject into these discussions is when people write that he's a terrible defender or the worst defender on the team because I don't think that's really an accurate description of what I see going on.Maybe his past life as an All-Defense mainstay makes his complete lack of effort twice as obvious and twice as inexcusable, but I don't think it's fair to hold him to a higher standard than everyone else and judge him more harshly because of it. Marco Belinelli doesn't guard anybody and when he actually does try for a possession or two he's almost always out of position and ineffective. Both in terms of his effort and his capability he's terrible. Rondo is plenty capable, he just doesn't expend any effort or very little anyway. And yet "20% effort Rondo" was still a more effective defender than every other guard on the team. I'm not just talking about the steal numbers. Marco has the worst defensive rating on the team (113) so that seems irrefutably bad but Rondo at 107 is actually tied with WCS and Koufos for the second best rating on the team. If you want to look instead at opponent shooting %s (Rondo, Collison, Curry, McLemore, Belinelli, Anderson) -- only McLemore and Anderson were better. Goerge Karl said at one point that Seth Curry was the best backcourt defender on the team yet he has the worst marks in opponent shooting % and a defensive rating of 112.
You're correct that Rondo held his man to a lower % than Collison (+2.1% vs. +3.0%), but many times Collison was matched up against SGs. In fact, Collison played 47% of his minutes this year at SG. Putting a 6'1" 175 lbs with a 6'3" wingspan on SGs is not a recipe for success.
When you actually look at 2014-2015 when Collison was exclusively played at PG, his differential comes down to +0.1% which was much better than Rondo's this year.
Defensive rating has it's uses but it also has many flaws. For the most part, I typically like to use it to tell who's the top defenders and worst defenders WITHIN A TEAM. Looking at some of these guys in the middle without additional data can be borderline reckless which seems to be where you have entered.
First of all, you have Rondo's Defensive Rating wrong. You should always default to NBA.com as they are much more accurate. NBA.com has him with the 5th worst Defensive Rating on the team not the 4th best as you suggested.
Second of all, Defensive Rating does not do a good job at all accounting for teammates, and in Rondo's case, his defensive statistics benefited based on who he played with. It's true that Collison has a slightly worse Defensive Rating than Rondo (106.8 vs. 107.2) but again that does not contain the context of Collison playing half of his minutes at SG this season having to guard many of these types of players. It also doesn't consider or adjust for the teammates they play with most often.
For example, Cousins is easily the best defender we have on our team as of today while Belinelli is easily the worst defender. 70.2% of the minutes Rondo played this year, he also had Cousins (our best defender) out on the floor with him. Meanwhile only 35.6% of Rondo's minutes were with Belinelli. Compare that to Collison who only played 52.7% of his minutes with Cousins and 47.2% of his minutes with Belinelli.
These are just two small examples why taking defensive rating at face value can be reckless.
My answer to your first part is...who cares? Who cares if the assists go down? Who cares if the turnovers stay the same? Who cares if our assist to turnover rotation looks ugly? Seriously, talk about seeing the forest for the trees. We were a HIGHLY effective team with that 5 man lineup. I don't care how ugly it was. We got s*** done, and that's all that really matters in the end. This sort of argument makes me think of PDA "Style of play over production/wins."
I'm assuming Joerger will play to the team's strengths which is what Malone did. Joerger is seen as a better coach than Malone. Is it such a stretch to think he won't get this group headed in the right direction?
No, you don't "absolutely need" a better rounded SG. With Malone at the helm & a solid bench, that team 2 years ago would have easily been a playoff team. Easily....
We're not going to be horrible for forever. Make the playoffs this season, keep out the dysfunction this year, and we immediately look much more attractive. Cousins is a top 10 player, we have a great coach, solid FO, the best stadium in the world, and the best fans in the NBA. And by this time, we'd be considered a playoff team. I don't buy the idea that we won't be able to lure FAs here. We obviously won't be able to bring a guy LeBron, Durant, Curry, or Westbrook, but guys like Hayward, Lowry. & Holiday are realistic options. Now realistic doesn't mean it is going to happen, but I'm sure those players wouldn't mind hearing us out if we come knocking when we already have a top 10 player on a playoff team.
Besides, if we can't sign any substantial FAs, I don't see us having any shot at a title unless Cauley-Stein turns into Anthony Davis, Luwawu turns into Paul George, etc. To me, that's more "unrealistic" and a bigger "if." We also don't have the assets to make trades that will catapult our team into contention so really our hope of becoming a contender lies with Vlades ability to bring people in through FA whether you like it or not.
I'm still waiting for that plan of yours that strengthens our roster so much that there is no doubt that we will make the playoffs. Again, it's easy to sit back and post these types of comments, but when you actually dive into the situation & data, you come back with a much different opinion. It's fine if you don't want to put forth the effort, but don't sit there saying "not good enough" when there is really nothing else we can do to catapult our team any further.
I'm assuming Joerger will play to the team's strengths which is what Malone did. Joerger is seen as a better coach than Malone. Is it such a stretch to think he won't get this group headed in the right direction?
No, you don't "absolutely need" a better rounded SG. With Malone at the helm & a solid bench, that team 2 years ago would have easily been a playoff team. Easily....
We're not going to be horrible for forever. Make the playoffs this season, keep out the dysfunction this year, and we immediately look much more attractive. Cousins is a top 10 player, we have a great coach, solid FO, the best stadium in the world, and the best fans in the NBA. And by this time, we'd be considered a playoff team. I don't buy the idea that we won't be able to lure FAs here. We obviously won't be able to bring a guy LeBron, Durant, Curry, or Westbrook, but guys like Hayward, Lowry. & Holiday are realistic options. Now realistic doesn't mean it is going to happen, but I'm sure those players wouldn't mind hearing us out if we come knocking when we already have a top 10 player on a playoff team.
Besides, if we can't sign any substantial FAs, I don't see us having any shot at a title unless Cauley-Stein turns into Anthony Davis, Luwawu turns into Paul George, etc. To me, that's more "unrealistic" and a bigger "if." We also don't have the assets to make trades that will catapult our team into contention so really our hope of becoming a contender lies with Vlades ability to bring people in through FA whether you like it or not.
I'm still waiting for that plan of yours that strengthens our roster so much that there is no doubt that we will make the playoffs. Again, it's easy to sit back and post these types of comments, but when you actually dive into the situation & data, you come back with a much different opinion. It's fine if you don't want to put forth the effort, but don't sit there saying "not good enough" when there is really nothing else we can do to catapult our team any further.
I have the same thought about defensive rating -- I don't like to make blanket comparisons across the league, I instead use it to judge a player's relative value to their team. That's what I did here. Showing the top 20 player list was only meant to illustrate that the stat is actually measuring something significant rather than random statistical noise. When I went to the list of guards sorted by defensive rating, I was comparing team to team there but the thing to keep in mind is that the numbers are partially dependent on team performance so players on top ranked defenses like San Antonio and Atlanta get a bit of a boost from their team and players on terrible defensive teams like Sacramento have the opposite effect. If anything, Rondo's rating of 107 would probably be better if you normalized the numbers league wide to remove the team-dependent bias (let's say 106) so there's nothing dishonest about posting a list that ranks him 19th out of 53 using a number that would only improve relative to his peers if you did account for the team bias.
You're not the first person to say that NBA.com's defensive rating is superior but I like basketball-reference.com better for several reasons. (1) They show exactly how it's calculated here: stat glossary and transparency is important with advanced stats (2) I've tracked it long enough that I trust it's results in a way that I don't yet trust nba.com's results (case in point: nba.com has Willie Cauley-Stein as the worst individual defender on the Kings this season which makes zero intuitive sense to me -- br.com has him tied for second best on the team and that's a huge discrepancy between the two from worst to second best) and (3) nba.com's interface is clunky and hard to use while br.com is really easy to navigate and search through.
Your argument for how we should adjust each player's defensive ratings starts with you assuming that Cousins is the best defender on the team and Belinelli is the worst. That's circular reasoning. If you need to make assumptions about who is or is not a good defender in order to properly adjust a stat than you can't use that stat to tell you who is or is not a good defender -- you're assuming your own conclusion. And as for Collison's defensive percentages or defensive rating being unfairly hampered by playing the SG position, couldn't you also argue that Rondo's numbers are unfairly hampered by the fact that he spent more time guarding PGs than Collison did and the PG position right now is the toughest it's ever been to defend whereas the SG position is relatively weak? The more you start fudging things one way or another the more opportunity there is for your own bias to pre-determine the outcome.
You're not the first person to say that NBA.com's defensive rating is superior but I like basketball-reference.com better for several reasons. (1) They show exactly how it's calculated here: stat glossary and transparency is important with advanced stats (2) I've tracked it long enough that I trust it's results in a way that I don't yet trust nba.com's results (case in point: nba.com has Willie Cauley-Stein as the worst individual defender on the Kings this season which makes zero intuitive sense to me -- br.com has him tied for second best on the team and that's a huge discrepancy between the two from worst to second best) and (3) nba.com's interface is clunky and hard to use while br.com is really easy to navigate and search through.
Your argument for how we should adjust each player's defensive ratings starts with you assuming that Cousins is the best defender on the team and Belinelli is the worst. That's circular reasoning. If you need to make assumptions about who is or is not a good defender in order to properly adjust a stat than you can't use that stat to tell you who is or is not a good defender -- you're assuming your own conclusion. And as for Collison's defensive percentages or defensive rating being unfairly hampered by playing the SG position, couldn't you also argue that Rondo's numbers are unfairly hampered by the fact that he spent more time guarding PGs than Collison did and the PG position right now is the toughest it's ever been to defend whereas the SG position is relatively weak? The more you start fudging things one way or another the more opportunity there is for your own bias to pre-determine the outcome.
Someone is getting their knickers in a knot and I am honestly not interested in getting into a pissing contest with you about it.
Just a couple of points
- I have said numerous times that a lot of what we do in terms of roster moves will depend a great deal on what we do in the draft. I will happily put my ideas forward once I know who we draft because what we do with that pick 8 dictates which direction the team will go in.
- We couldn't attract Lowry level talent even when we were the best team in basketball during the "golden era". We will NOT be attracting that level talent even with Boogie on the team and making the play offs. Best predictor of the future behavior is part behavior and as much as we hate it Sacramento has never been nor will it ever be an attractive free agency destination for all-star level talent.
Bottom line is what we do with the 8th pick will greatly shape the direction this team takes heading into the free agency.
Just a couple of points
- I have said numerous times that a lot of what we do in terms of roster moves will depend a great deal on what we do in the draft. I will happily put my ideas forward once I know who we draft because what we do with that pick 8 dictates which direction the team will go in.
- We couldn't attract Lowry level talent even when we were the best team in basketball during the "golden era". We will NOT be attracting that level talent even with Boogie on the team and making the play offs. Best predictor of the future behavior is part behavior and as much as we hate it Sacramento has never been nor will it ever be an attractive free agency destination for all-star level talent.
Bottom line is what we do with the 8th pick will greatly shape the direction this team takes heading into the free agency.
When did I say we would adjust the defensive rating? I'm saying it's a variable that does not get captured by defensive rating and in this case, is over inflating his already underwhelming defensive statistics.
So do you not agree that Cousins is the best (if not one of the best) defenders on our team? Vice versa w/ Belinelli? It doesn't take much for me to support either one of those claims. I find it puzzling that you aren't on board, but maybe not so puzzling as you continue to think Rondo is a good/adequate defender.
I don't think you fully understand how Defensive Rating works judging by your comments. It's represents the point per 100 possessions. This stat does not factor out or account for the variability in teammates. If a guy plays 70% of his minutes with a guy like Cousins who happens to be a big tie defensive player, he's going to reap the benefits. Collison only played 50% of his minutes with this level of defender which is not a level playing field when comparing defensive rating. That's the problem.
To your last point, no you can't make that argument because defensive rating isn't about Rondo having the more difficult assignment at PG or Collison about having the more difficult matchup at SG. It's about how many points THE TEAM gives up on defense. when you put in a defender who is overmatched at one position, it will make the defensive rating worse for all others (including that person). When half of Collison's minutes are when he's at SG and half of his minutes are when Belinelli is on the floor, it's not a very fair comparison. Especially when you look at the split with Cousins.
So do you not agree that Cousins is the best (if not one of the best) defenders on our team? Vice versa w/ Belinelli? It doesn't take much for me to support either one of those claims. I find it puzzling that you aren't on board, but maybe not so puzzling as you continue to think Rondo is a good/adequate defender.
I don't think you fully understand how Defensive Rating works judging by your comments. It's represents the point per 100 possessions. This stat does not factor out or account for the variability in teammates. If a guy plays 70% of his minutes with a guy like Cousins who happens to be a big tie defensive player, he's going to reap the benefits. Collison only played 50% of his minutes with this level of defender which is not a level playing field when comparing defensive rating. That's the problem.
To your last point, no you can't make that argument because defensive rating isn't about Rondo having the more difficult assignment at PG or Collison about having the more difficult matchup at SG. It's about how many points THE TEAM gives up on defense. when you put in a defender who is overmatched at one position, it will make the defensive rating worse for all others (including that person). When half of Collison's minutes are when he's at SG and half of his minutes are when Belinelli is on the floor, it's not a very fair comparison. Especially when you look at the split with Cousins.
It doesn't matter whether I agree with you that Cousins is the best defender on the team and Belinelli is the worst. The whole point of calculating defensive rating is that it's supposed to tell us something we don't already know. If we run the numbers and they say that Cousins is the best defender on the team and Belinelli is the worst (which they do, at least if you use Dean Oliver's formula) than that supports our hypothesis. But if we run the numbers and Rondo is slightly ahead of Collison but you think that Collison is a better defender so you start to make adjustments like lowering Collison's score because he spent more time on the floor with Belinelli or whatever it is, you're now rendering the impartiality of defensive rating moot. And that's when it becomes useless.
Maybe you didn't say that we should adjust individual defensive rating to account for the team, but I said it. And I'll prove it to you. This is the exact formula used to calculated Dean Oliver's defensive rating, which is what basketball-reference.com uses and what all my linked examples used:
There's a lot going on there, but to try to break it down to the basic concept, you're looking at defensive possessions that did not end with a made basket. Stops1 attempts to account for steals, blocks, and defensive boards. Stops 2 attempts to account for missed baskets, missed free throws, and turnovers which have not already been tabulated as steals. So stop% is theoretically telling you how many of the other team's possessions ended without a made basket.
Then you plug that into the defensive rating formula which starts with the team defensive rating and adjusts it based on how many stops the Stop% estimates "Player X" accounted for. Sacramento had a team defensive rating of 108.4 this season so every player on the team will have their individual defensive rating calculated using that number. Collison doesn't get penalized for playing alongside Belinelli and Rondo doesn't get a boost for playing with Cousins. That may be a fault of nba.com's defensive rating but as I already said before I don't know how their formula is calculated -- nor have I been able to find an explanation on their website -- so I don't use it.
It's self-evident just from looking at the formula that a player with a lower team defensive rating is going to end up with a lower individual defensive rating. The only variable as far as that player is concerned is Stop% and if you took a player with the exact same Stop % as Rondo and put them on a team with a defensive rating that's better than 108.4, they will end up with an individual defensive rating that's better than 107.
Not everyone likes Oliver's defensive rating -- it has obvious limitations. The players who lead the league in defensive rating usually come from good or great defensive teams. There's some cause and effect there, but it's also possible for an average defensive player to look better than they are simply because of the elite team defensive rating. It's also connected to counting stats which don't take into account the full measure of a player's defensive contribution. Despite it's limitations I think it's been remarkably effective at identifying elite defensive players. Players known as defensive stoppers do (on average) get more steals and blocks than their peers, dominate the defensive glass, or force a lot of misses and turnovers.
But it's hardly the only stat out there which is why I look at other measures too like nba.com's opponent shooting percentages. And while individual defensive assignments may not affect defensive rating, they should affect the defended field goal percentages I linked to. What makes my arbitrary decision to mentally round those numbers down any more arbitrary than your arbitrary decision to mentally round Collison's defensive rating down? That was just an example meant to emphasize this point:
Maybe you didn't say that we should adjust individual defensive rating to account for the team, but I said it. And I'll prove it to you. This is the exact formula used to calculated Dean Oliver's defensive rating, which is what basketball-reference.com uses and what all my linked examples used:
There's a lot going on there, but to try to break it down to the basic concept, you're looking at defensive possessions that did not end with a made basket. Stops1 attempts to account for steals, blocks, and defensive boards. Stops 2 attempts to account for missed baskets, missed free throws, and turnovers which have not already been tabulated as steals. So stop% is theoretically telling you how many of the other team's possessions ended without a made basket.
Then you plug that into the defensive rating formula which starts with the team defensive rating and adjusts it based on how many stops the Stop% estimates "Player X" accounted for. Sacramento had a team defensive rating of 108.4 this season so every player on the team will have their individual defensive rating calculated using that number. Collison doesn't get penalized for playing alongside Belinelli and Rondo doesn't get a boost for playing with Cousins. That may be a fault of nba.com's defensive rating but as I already said before I don't know how their formula is calculated -- nor have I been able to find an explanation on their website -- so I don't use it.
It's self-evident just from looking at the formula that a player with a lower team defensive rating is going to end up with a lower individual defensive rating. The only variable as far as that player is concerned is Stop% and if you took a player with the exact same Stop % as Rondo and put them on a team with a defensive rating that's better than 108.4, they will end up with an individual defensive rating that's better than 107.
Not everyone likes Oliver's defensive rating -- it has obvious limitations. The players who lead the league in defensive rating usually come from good or great defensive teams. There's some cause and effect there, but it's also possible for an average defensive player to look better than they are simply because of the elite team defensive rating. It's also connected to counting stats which don't take into account the full measure of a player's defensive contribution. Despite it's limitations I think it's been remarkably effective at identifying elite defensive players. Players known as defensive stoppers do (on average) get more steals and blocks than their peers, dominate the defensive glass, or force a lot of misses and turnovers.
But it's hardly the only stat out there which is why I look at other measures too like nba.com's opponent shooting percentages. And while individual defensive assignments may not affect defensive rating, they should affect the defended field goal percentages I linked to. What makes my arbitrary decision to mentally round those numbers down any more arbitrary than your arbitrary decision to mentally round Collison's defensive rating down? That was just an example meant to emphasize this point:
Again, it's not "fudging" or "adjusting" the numbers. It's simply explaining the limitations & problems with a stat you hold so much weight in.
You're saying "Look at how much better Rondo's defensive rating is compared to Collison or that his opponents score 2% higher than their average when Rondo guards them (which isn't a positive by the way). His lazy defense must be paying off!" While I am sitting here saying that Defensive Rating is calculated in a way that doesn't account for the talent of your teammates. If everyone on the team played with everyone equally, then yeah, it could do a good job at telling you who are the better and worse defenders WITHIN A TEAM. Unfortunately, NBA teams don't play their players in such a way to make defensive rating a great defensive metric.
When Player X plays the majority of his minutes with the better defenders on the team and Player Y plays the majority of his minutes with the worst defenders on the team, Defensive Rating can be utterly useless. That's all I'm saying here. Now Player Y could be such a good defensive player that he overcomes his worse defensive teammates and ends up with a better defensive rating which can certainly happen. However, this leads into my other argument. Collison is best guarding PGs, is he not? His individual defensive impact which factors into the Defensive Rating is being hampered because he is now a less effective defender at SG (where he spent 50% of his minutes this year).
It's not hard to see why these metrics are the way they are. They just take a little context & effort.
You're saying "Look at how much better Rondo's defensive rating is compared to Collison or that his opponents score 2% higher than their average when Rondo guards them (which isn't a positive by the way). His lazy defense must be paying off!" While I am sitting here saying that Defensive Rating is calculated in a way that doesn't account for the talent of your teammates. If everyone on the team played with everyone equally, then yeah, it could do a good job at telling you who are the better and worse defenders WITHIN A TEAM. Unfortunately, NBA teams don't play their players in such a way to make defensive rating a great defensive metric.
When Player X plays the majority of his minutes with the better defenders on the team and Player Y plays the majority of his minutes with the worst defenders on the team, Defensive Rating can be utterly useless. That's all I'm saying here. Now Player Y could be such a good defensive player that he overcomes his worse defensive teammates and ends up with a better defensive rating which can certainly happen. However, this leads into my other argument. Collison is best guarding PGs, is he not? His individual defensive impact which factors into the Defensive Rating is being hampered because he is now a less effective defender at SG (where he spent 50% of his minutes this year).
It's not hard to see why these metrics are the way they are. They just take a little context & effort.
Not only that- but according to NBA.com's defensive rating Collison is better, and if you look at b/r's the slight advantage Rondo has in DRTG- DC more than makes up in ORTG- which means at the end of the day, based on this stats DC is better for the team.
And about what you said about guarding positions, we don't have to guess 82games.com calculates PER for opponents:
PG's guarded by Rondo- 18.1
PG's guarded by Collison- 15.6
But this conversation isn't worth your time, trust me on this one.
And about what you said about guarding positions, we don't have to guess 82games.com calculates PER for opponents:
PG's guarded by Rondo- 18.1
PG's guarded by Collison- 15.6
But this conversation isn't worth your time, trust me on this one.
Last edited:
Again, this amounts to another "my stats are better than your stats" argument which is beyond pointless in the context of this conversation. I was attempting to explain to bajaden how I can value defense highly and still want a lazy defender on the team next season. Maybe you don't like the way I use defensive rating, maybe you think Rondo is indefensible, maybe you'd rather we start Collison at PG next season. That's fine. It's all good. I don't have a problem with any of that. But if you think there's objective evidence that Rondo is a terrible defender -- whether that means one of the worst on the team, one of the worst at his position, or one of the worst in the league -- on that we disagree.
As far as stats are concerned I want something objective, I want something repeatable and falsifiable, and I want something which works. That's it. If either of you wants to undertake a comprehensive analysis of defensive statistics, which ones are worth caring about, and how to contextualize them more power to you. I'll read it with interest. But I'm not going to justify my process for every off-hand comment I make. I've done it once for you Amit149 until it became clear that it was going nowhere. Now I've done it again here for twslam07 and your inaccurate paraphrase of my comments to bajaden indicates to me that this is going nowhere too. I've put more than enough effort into explaining my point of view on this topic already and you're still not getting it. What else do you expect me to do if I can't even get you to understand what I've already said?
I'll try though. Here's the long and short of it...
ASSERTION: Rondo was a terrible defender this season.
MY REBUTTAL: Find me an objective stat which shows me he was a terrible defender. I think he played lazy this season too and yet he still wasn't terrible -- either relative to his teammates or other PGs in the league.
This is where we go off on a long tangent where twslam07 explains that Collison might be slightly better than Rondo for several reasons and then that Collison last season was better than Rondo this season -- even if I concede both of these points, what do they have to do with my rebuttal? Isn't it possible that neither one of them is terrible? Then twslam07 tells me that I don't understand how defensive rating works and proceeds to explain how points allowed per 100 possessions is skewed because backups and starters play with different units (a point which I not only agree with by the way, I made it myself in this post in reference to all on/off or plus/minus derived stats). I've already made it abundantly clear that I'm not using nba.com's points allowed per 100 possessions, I'm using basketball-reference.com's defensive rating which is calculated completely differently and is not influenced one way or another by which teammates a particular player shared the court with. But just in case I quoted the exact formula in my response so there shouldn't be any further confusion right? Nope, you still assume I mean points allowed per 100 possessions and somehow your argument about comparing Collison and Rondo has morphed in your head into my argument about comparing Collison and Rondo.
Not even close. I'll again direct you to MY REBUTTAL paraphrased above and this post which you're (inaccurately) attempting to paraphrase. I was comparing Rondo to all of the guards on the team -- Collison, Curry, McLemore, Belinelli, and Anderson and pointing out that there's no objective evidence that Rondo was the worst of them by far. Then I was comparing him to other starting guards in the league this season and asking how it's possible for a terrible defender to rank 19th out of 53. You're the one who brought up points allowed per 100 possessions not me so I don't see what you're hoping to prove by arguing on behalf of it's flaws. If you prefer that stat to Dean Oliver's Defensive Rating, than doesn't this show that Kosta Koufos, Seth Curry, and Willie-Cauley Stein were the worst defenders on the team? If that's the stat you're using to show that Rondo was terrible at defense this season, then weren't they even worse? Now you have an objective stat that shows Rondo was at least one of the worst defenders on the team, but your problem is that it requires you to say that Kosta Koufos, Willie Cauley-Stein and Seth Curry are all terrible defenders too. I'll let you argue on behalf of that one if you'd like to. I've said all along that I don't trust that stat and I don't like to use it.
And since you tucked a little shot in there at Rondo for allowing opposing players to shoot 2% better against him than league average, here are the other guards who allowed their opponents to shoot 2% better than league average against them this season: Jimmy Butler, Damian Lillard, Chris Paul, James Harden, Brandon Knight. All of these guys are terrible defenders too? My point all along has been that "terrible defense" is a relative term. For him to actually be terrible he would have to be either the worst defender on the team by far or one of the absolute worst in the league at his position. I have yet to find any objective stat which says that either of these is true. So it must be hyperbole then right?
As far as stats are concerned I want something objective, I want something repeatable and falsifiable, and I want something which works. That's it. If either of you wants to undertake a comprehensive analysis of defensive statistics, which ones are worth caring about, and how to contextualize them more power to you. I'll read it with interest. But I'm not going to justify my process for every off-hand comment I make. I've done it once for you Amit149 until it became clear that it was going nowhere. Now I've done it again here for twslam07 and your inaccurate paraphrase of my comments to bajaden indicates to me that this is going nowhere too. I've put more than enough effort into explaining my point of view on this topic already and you're still not getting it. What else do you expect me to do if I can't even get you to understand what I've already said?
I'll try though. Here's the long and short of it...
ASSERTION: Rondo was a terrible defender this season.
MY REBUTTAL: Find me an objective stat which shows me he was a terrible defender. I think he played lazy this season too and yet he still wasn't terrible -- either relative to his teammates or other PGs in the league.
This is where we go off on a long tangent where twslam07 explains that Collison might be slightly better than Rondo for several reasons and then that Collison last season was better than Rondo this season -- even if I concede both of these points, what do they have to do with my rebuttal? Isn't it possible that neither one of them is terrible? Then twslam07 tells me that I don't understand how defensive rating works and proceeds to explain how points allowed per 100 possessions is skewed because backups and starters play with different units (a point which I not only agree with by the way, I made it myself in this post in reference to all on/off or plus/minus derived stats). I've already made it abundantly clear that I'm not using nba.com's points allowed per 100 possessions, I'm using basketball-reference.com's defensive rating which is calculated completely differently and is not influenced one way or another by which teammates a particular player shared the court with. But just in case I quoted the exact formula in my response so there shouldn't be any further confusion right? Nope, you still assume I mean points allowed per 100 possessions and somehow your argument about comparing Collison and Rondo has morphed in your head into my argument about comparing Collison and Rondo.
Not even close. I'll again direct you to MY REBUTTAL paraphrased above and this post which you're (inaccurately) attempting to paraphrase. I was comparing Rondo to all of the guards on the team -- Collison, Curry, McLemore, Belinelli, and Anderson and pointing out that there's no objective evidence that Rondo was the worst of them by far. Then I was comparing him to other starting guards in the league this season and asking how it's possible for a terrible defender to rank 19th out of 53. You're the one who brought up points allowed per 100 possessions not me so I don't see what you're hoping to prove by arguing on behalf of it's flaws. If you prefer that stat to Dean Oliver's Defensive Rating, than doesn't this show that Kosta Koufos, Seth Curry, and Willie-Cauley Stein were the worst defenders on the team? If that's the stat you're using to show that Rondo was terrible at defense this season, then weren't they even worse? Now you have an objective stat that shows Rondo was at least one of the worst defenders on the team, but your problem is that it requires you to say that Kosta Koufos, Willie Cauley-Stein and Seth Curry are all terrible defenders too. I'll let you argue on behalf of that one if you'd like to. I've said all along that I don't trust that stat and I don't like to use it.
And since you tucked a little shot in there at Rondo for allowing opposing players to shoot 2% better against him than league average, here are the other guards who allowed their opponents to shoot 2% better than league average against them this season: Jimmy Butler, Damian Lillard, Chris Paul, James Harden, Brandon Knight. All of these guys are terrible defenders too? My point all along has been that "terrible defense" is a relative term. For him to actually be terrible he would have to be either the worst defender on the team by far or one of the absolute worst in the league at his position. I have yet to find any objective stat which says that either of these is true. So it must be hyperbole then right?
Last edited:
Maybe you've got something there. Can you make some comparisons to other guards in the league? What's expected for opponent PER and what's below average across the league? Do starters typically have higher numbers than bench players? I'm not trying to be confrontational in my responses to you, I'm really not, but part of the problem I have with your posts is that you never link to anything! You can't expect me to do all the legwork of tracking down whatever stat you're referring to and verifying it every time. It's exhausting! You already looked it up, do us all a favor and throw in a link! I don't care all that much what the "experts" have decided is the new hotness in statistics anyway. As you get older you realize that the experts are changing their story every few years. I just care about stats that I can use. If you've got something that I don't know, I want to know about it. But not if I have to spend my whole afternoon looking it up.
You know, you guys can do what you want, and maybe your having fun, but frankly, your boring the hell out of me with all these stats. Now I readily admit that I'm not a stat guy. That doesn't mean I don't read them, or use them at times, but that I trust what my eyes tell me, and my eyes tell me that Rondo was not a good defender last season. You can make the point that he's smarter than everyone else on the team when it comes to defense, and that only makes what he did on the court worse.
If you think that Rondo was a good defender last season then your letting your bias toward him cloud your judgement. No one in the NBA with a lick of knowledge thinks that Rondo defended well last season. He did get a lot of steals, but that had to do with cheating off his man. On the ball, when indeed he was on the ball, he was a decent defender. But off the ball, he stunk the place out. He made no effort to keep track of the player he was guarding, and the stupid defensive scheme that Karl ran made it easier for him to float. You can pretend that didn't happen if you want, but your in a very small select minority.
But, as I've said, if the price is right, then I don't have a problem, at least financially bringing him back. I'am concerned about how he'll fit Joerger's offensive scheme. Both Vlade and Joerger have talked about better ball movement, and player movement. Your not going to get better ball movement with Rondo on the floor. It's not his style of play. Can Rondo adapt? I don't know, but in the past, most of his blowups have been over a coach trying to get him to adapt. In a perfect world where your looking for better ball movement, you want a PG that can play off the ball more. AKA Mike Bibby! If you go back and look at the old Kings, why did Petrie trade J. Will and bring in Bibby? There were a lot of reasons that were put forth, but I think the main reason was that like Rondo, J. Will needed the ball in his hands to be effective.
If you think that Rondo was a good defender last season then your letting your bias toward him cloud your judgement. No one in the NBA with a lick of knowledge thinks that Rondo defended well last season. He did get a lot of steals, but that had to do with cheating off his man. On the ball, when indeed he was on the ball, he was a decent defender. But off the ball, he stunk the place out. He made no effort to keep track of the player he was guarding, and the stupid defensive scheme that Karl ran made it easier for him to float. You can pretend that didn't happen if you want, but your in a very small select minority.
But, as I've said, if the price is right, then I don't have a problem, at least financially bringing him back. I'am concerned about how he'll fit Joerger's offensive scheme. Both Vlade and Joerger have talked about better ball movement, and player movement. Your not going to get better ball movement with Rondo on the floor. It's not his style of play. Can Rondo adapt? I don't know, but in the past, most of his blowups have been over a coach trying to get him to adapt. In a perfect world where your looking for better ball movement, you want a PG that can play off the ball more. AKA Mike Bibby! If you go back and look at the old Kings, why did Petrie trade J. Will and bring in Bibby? There were a lot of reasons that were put forth, but I think the main reason was that like Rondo, J. Will needed the ball in his hands to be effective.
Just noticed, that one of the popular "sleepers" of 2014 draft, Okaro White, was just named MVP of Greek league. He'll be only 24 in September, and is a true two-way player. Actually coming out of college he was mostly defensive guy, but it seems offense is rapidly catching up: despite bigger role TOs seem to be dropping; after being limited C&S shooter just two years ago Okaro is now shooting coming off a screen or just pulling up, if given a bit of space, and he was certainly attacking the basket with about 75% FTs/2ptFGs ratio. White split time between SF and PF in Greece and collected 10.5 rebs per 40 minutes, which is basically the rate most centers have in Europe. He's still skinny though, and while it's tempting to compare him to Aminu, White just doesn't have the same strength, so he's probably a true wing, unless the other team plays SF masquerading as PF themselves. With the constant talk of not enough good players for all the available money, I wonder, why his name hasn't been mentioned anywhere?
I remember White well, and I can't imagine him playing PF. He was one skinny dude at Florida St. I also can't imagine him attacking the basket unless he's really improved his ballhandling, which is possible. To me he's a SF. He improved his perimeter shot his senior year shooting somewhere around 36/37 percent if memory serves. He was a decent to good rebounder for the position despite lack of strength. Defense was his main attribute. I think he had his share of blocked shots as well. He sounds like a candidate for our, or somebody's summer league team.
White is a prominent player in Europe for 2 seasons now, so he's not going to try out in Summer league, especially as he reportedly has an offer from Olympiacos, one of two Greek giants, on the table. White can create off the dribble a bit, mostly attacking closeouts, but he's definitely not a main playmaker type. 6'5" center played in Euroleague final, so White is fine as a PF overseas, but as I mentioned, he's a true wing in the NBA, at least defensively.
What about Brandon Rush? He was injured last year, not sure if he's lost a step, but he's only 30 years old, and has been a pretty solid 3pt shooter throughout his career. He's coming from a winning team where he's not getting a whole lot of minutes, but he's still hitting 3's when he's on the floor. I think he could be a nice rotational backup for the Kings. I have no idea what his reputation is as a defender though...
A player that maybe looking for a make good deal and opportunity is Eric Gordon.
If the kings can sign him to mid level type 2 or 3 year deal (I.e. 3 year/21 mil contract), he may be worth the gamble.
Gordon Could turn into a perennial sixth man of the year candidate and spot starter at shooting guard.
If the kings can sign him to mid level type 2 or 3 year deal (I.e. 3 year/21 mil contract), he may be worth the gamble.
Gordon Could turn into a perennial sixth man of the year candidate and spot starter at shooting guard.
Just like his former teammate, Holiday, Gordon is a good candidate for a healthy season: his original knee problems haven't bothered him for 2 years now, though he still managed to pick up some upper body injury each season. He's not the same athlete, he was before injuries, but he can still produce some offense, compete on D and really shoot.