Why hasn't our perimeter defense improved one bit this season?
- Thread starter GoSACtown
- Start date
I don't really need to defend Brick, but he's not wrong here. He also pointedly referred to a long 6'1" or 6'2" guy. Jimmer is a 6'1" guy with a 6'4" wingspan and an 8' standing reach. Asking about Jimmer is a non-sequitur.
By comparison, Avery Bradley is a 6'2" guard with a 6'7" wingspan and an 8'3" standing reach. Rondo is a 6'1" guard with a 6'9" wingspan. Those are long guards. Length and athleticism are necessary but not sufficient qualities of above average defenders.
Isaiah Thomas is a 5'9" guard with a 6'1" wingspan and a 7'8.5" standing reach. Thomas has very good leaping ability, but he just doesn't control floor space the way larger guards do. He is a very good scoring guard, but his physical limitations are always going to be part of his game on defense.
By comparison, Avery Bradley is a 6'2" guard with a 6'7" wingspan and an 8'3" standing reach. Rondo is a 6'1" guard with a 6'9" wingspan. Those are long guards. Length and athleticism are necessary but not sufficient qualities of above average defenders.
Isaiah Thomas is a 5'9" guard with a 6'1" wingspan and a 7'8.5" standing reach. Thomas has very good leaping ability, but he just doesn't control floor space the way larger guards do. He is a very good scoring guard, but his physical limitations are always going to be part of his game on defense.
Jimmer has got the yips right now. He's taking that extra dribble before he shoots because he doesn't quite have the edge in confidence necessary to be successful. He's got to dribble less, and shoot and pass more. I'm routing for Jimmer. If he goes out there and starts hitting 3 pointers I'll be absolutely delighted.
I'm not sure what's going on with McLemore other than he's probably thinking about the zillion of things he's been told by the coaching staff and he has rookie brain overload. Hopefully, he can just go out and play with some aggression on the defensive end of the floor. Forget about making a mistake and just commit to sticking to your guy like glue.
I'm not sure what's going on with McLemore other than he's probably thinking about the zillion of things he's been told by the coaching staff and he has rookie brain overload. Hopefully, he can just go out and play with some aggression on the defensive end of the floor. Forget about making a mistake and just commit to sticking to your guy like glue.
He is wrong and you're wrong because it's like comparing a gnat to a flee. (And because you're not reading the post! Read the freaking post! We're not discussing point guard D in general; we're discussing it one respect: bothering bigs on pops and rolls!) One may be a little bigger than the other, but the difference is insignificant. There is a threshold that has to be met in order to really bother a big, and 6'1" is certainly NOT it.
The length is a big issue for bothering bigs on those shots. If we're talking about Horford, he takes slow set shots on the pick and pop. He doesn't jump at all. I would be surprised if his release point was higher than 7'4". Thomas on a closeout isn't going to bother that shot much while Rondo or Bradley will.
The other aspect is that while Rondo or Bradley is recovering to the point guard, those long arms are cutting off passing lanes both over the top and in the pocket. Thomas is quick, but no quicker than either of those two guards and gives up between 6" and a foot of effective space around him to the pass in comparison to longer guards.
For instance, in the pick and pops down the stretch in the fourth quarter, Teague just threw the ball over Isaiah's head a few times. He can still make that pass over a longer defender, but the angle of the pass will need to be higher, meaning it either has to be a slower pass or Horford has to catch it outside the shooting pocket and recover. Those extra tenths of a second are crucial for close-outs to bother the shot.
The importance of length to disrupt the pass is doubly important in roll situations as the only way to prevent a basket or a foul is to disrupt the catch there.
The other aspect is that while Rondo or Bradley is recovering to the point guard, those long arms are cutting off passing lanes both over the top and in the pocket. Thomas is quick, but no quicker than either of those two guards and gives up between 6" and a foot of effective space around him to the pass in comparison to longer guards.
For instance, in the pick and pops down the stretch in the fourth quarter, Teague just threw the ball over Isaiah's head a few times. He can still make that pass over a longer defender, but the angle of the pass will need to be higher, meaning it either has to be a slower pass or Horford has to catch it outside the shooting pocket and recover. Those extra tenths of a second are crucial for close-outs to bother the shot.
The importance of length to disrupt the pass is doubly important in roll situations as the only way to prevent a basket or a foul is to disrupt the catch there.
Agreed. The extra length makes a huge difference. How often does a player block a shot with the tips of their fingers? Very often. How often does a player get a steal by barely poking the ball away before grabbing it? All of the time. There are so many plays that get decided by mere inches every game i don't see how someone can dispute it.
Wingspan and reach are measured because they can tell an important part of the story.
Wingspan and reach are measured because they can tell an important part of the story.
People just tend to assume since IT is short that he gets shot over all the time. I hardly ever see players just completely disrespect his height and pull up for a jumper right in his face.
IT doesn't get shot over. He's never even in position to get shot over. I wish he got shot over because it would mean he was able to stay in front of his man and fight through screens. It doesn't matter if you're 5'9 or 6'5, if you're 8 feet away from the guy shooting, you aren't going to contest the shot anyway.
IT doesn't get shot over. He's never even in position to get shot over. I wish he got shot over because it would mean he was able to stay in front of his man and fight through screens. It doesn't matter if you're 5'9 or 6'5, if you're 8 feet away from the guy shooting, you aren't going to contest the shot anyway.
Which is the bigger problem in my eyes, and something i think he can fix. Clogging the passing lane and being in position to put a hand up after losing his man should be possible for him. Whether he is starting or the 6th man it is still important. As a starter the issues of his size is normally more of a problem though.
I made another post that this discussion of IT, beyond getting to the point of boredom for some of us, is also losing all sense of logic. I am used to people making up stuff to respond to someone else but, in the game of basketball, when one poster has to prove that being taller is better than being shorter, we are in the twilight zone. No one should have to explain that. I am not saying that the arguments should stop but there are certain aspects of the game that have never seemed arguable and one is that tall > short. 6 inches is a lot or so would a lot of guys claim. Some people play taller than they appear. Score one for the people who think height has little impact in basketball. But .. a lot of the game is played flat footed or at best in a running motion and the actual measurement from the soles of the feet to the top of the head or end of the finger tips depending on the athletic move being attempted makes a difference. What more needs to be said? Better yet, why does more need to be said? There has to be a point of agreement when people discuss an issue or the issue can never be resolved in any fashion. That's my view.
Carry on.
Carry on.
I think a large part of the problem IS that he's starting - playing man D and help D against most of the NBA benches helps to mask his deficiency on D. Right now, just like when he was starting before, his weakness is exposed, and most teams will game plan it to their advantage. You don't really worry about planning to attack a poor defender on the second unit, but if your starting PG is a sieve, then you'd better believe that most of the good coaching staffs will look to exploit it on a regular basis, and that's what we're seeing. It's not a coincidence that guards are having monster games against the Kings.
Perimeter is coaching. It may be likely that Malone started the D emphasis with blocking the middle and switching. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. Its all new to everyone: coaches, players, GM. It takes time. This is a rebuilding team maybe from a core of only 3-4 players. Progress needs to be measured in Team terms, not individual stats. Sure stats are nice for Fan Forums but not necessarily in Team Building.
Look at the Mavs game and the first 3 quarters of the Hawks game. The Kings played good team defense and led most if not all the way in both games (3 qtr in Hawks game). Perimeter defense broke down and the guards did not step up with better one-on-one defense. Getting it right for 3 quarters is progress. Not gonna happen over night. PDA is looking for better pieces we can be sure. But since no one wants to come to SacTown yet, makes getting what you want tougher. And the other team in any trade is always expecting to get the better end of a trade because of SacTowns rebuilding.
Look at the Mavs game and the first 3 quarters of the Hawks game. The Kings played good team defense and led most if not all the way in both games (3 qtr in Hawks game). Perimeter defense broke down and the guards did not step up with better one-on-one defense. Getting it right for 3 quarters is progress. Not gonna happen over night. PDA is looking for better pieces we can be sure. But since no one wants to come to SacTown yet, makes getting what you want tougher. And the other team in any trade is always expecting to get the better end of a trade because of SacTowns rebuilding.
It's also talent and ability. Coaching can mask some deficiencies. It won't however make poor defenders above average defenders. Coaches aren't magicians. A lot of it is what you have to work with.
Take Duncan off SA, or MJ/Pippen/Rodman off Chi, or Kobe/Shaq off the Lakers, and it doesn't matter that those teams had two of the top coaches ever. They would have suffered due to having less talent and less ability on their roster.
If it was just coaching, the Clips would look better under Doc. But, just coaching isn't turning Griffin into a good defender or adding an element of toughness to the squad which the Clips lack in comparison to Boston when Doc was there.
Take Duncan off SA, or MJ/Pippen/Rodman off Chi, or Kobe/Shaq off the Lakers, and it doesn't matter that those teams had two of the top coaches ever. They would have suffered due to having less talent and less ability on their roster.
If it was just coaching, the Clips would look better under Doc. But, just coaching isn't turning Griffin into a good defender or adding an element of toughness to the squad which the Clips lack in comparison to Boston when Doc was there.
I assume the IT huggers look about as bad as the Evans huggers that constantly wanted him at PG eh? No, I am not an IT or Evans hugger. But we weren't lighting it up defensively with either player playing PG so your argument that it's because of IT that we're so bad is invalid. We were bad with every player we have had playing guard (for at least a season here) for many years now. I remember we have been at or near the bottom in opp 3pt% the last few years.
A guy like Rubio puts all our defenders to shame.
You introduce a name you shouldn't have into this conversation because yes, Tyreke Evans defensively is about >>>> above any guard currently on the roster, even during his rookie year when as a 19yr old he was carrying an NBA basketball team on his back and laying on screens. He certainly is more than big enough to switch a pick and roll and be a significant impediment to whoever he switches to, given a real coach and system.
The answer is pretty simple. We do not have a single guard on the roster that is a good defender. In fact we had better defensive players on the perimeter last year than we do this year but last year we had a much worse coach that does not how to coach at all, let alone defensively!
I suspect if we still had Evans and Douglas along with Mbah a Moute, we would be better this year defensively. As good a defensive coach as Malone is, he cannot work miracles. To be a good defensive team, you need more good defenders on the roster than average ones and we have average or below average defenders on the roster. At the moment, JT is probably our best defender and he is only average or slightly above average defensively. Therein lies the problem!
I suspect if we still had Evans and Douglas along with Mbah a Moute, we would be better this year defensively. As good a defensive coach as Malone is, he cannot work miracles. To be a good defensive team, you need more good defenders on the roster than average ones and we have average or below average defenders on the roster. At the moment, JT is probably our best defender and he is only average or slightly above average defensively. Therein lies the problem!
The two biggest problems with Thompson, as have been mentioned before:
- He's only really good at one aspect of defense (man defense versus back-to-the-basket players). He's about average at man defense against face-up players (as long at they don't take him out to the three-point line), he's slightly below average at defending "true" stretch 4's, and he's just plain bad at help defense.
- He whines too much, and he's subject to lose focus when he's preoccupied with the refs.