Damian Lillard's Progress On Defense (1 Viewer)

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Boise Blazer

Thread Lightly
Joined
Dec 12, 2008
Messages
7,265
Likes
2,592
Points
113
"By Ben Golliver" ... literally

http://www.blazersedge.com/2013/12/...blazers-g-damian-lillards-progress-on-defense

[video=youtube;LxBp__rY0tQ]

Damian Lillard is an electric offensive player, but as the second-year guard continues to log minutes, many are wondering just how good he is on the defensive end of the floor.

We can look at his points per possession allowed (PPP) to get a baseline of where he's at compared to last season. While not an exact indicator of defensive value, PPP gives a general idea comparatively within the context of team defense and success.

Damian Lillard has improved his PPP numbers in nearly every major category in 2013-2014.

He's made noticeable improvement in almost every major play type this year save for a .02 PPP increase in the pick-and-roll. He's a little better in isolation, and much better in the post. That being said, there are a few areas Lillard needs to work on.

First, he has a tendency to jump plays in isolation. Lillard plays quick and tight, and a simple hesitation move can get him to bite. Because of this, he's often open to the double move as players crossover or give him an in-and-out dribble. His hips end up out of position, and he gives up open lanes.

Consistent effort in transition is something I've already talked about in breakdowns, but it's worth pointing out again. When Lillard is caught underneath the free throw line on offense in transition, he rarely makes an effort to get back on defense. His teammates could use an extra hand, especially against the secondary break as they set up a quick play in transition. The last two weeks we've seen him getting back on defense, and I suspect the coaching staff has stressed the importance of his effort....
 
Its not Ben Golliver....read the article.
 
Its not Ben Golliver....read the article.

I could have sworn that it said Ben Golliver before. Perhaps it was just his tweet. Either way if I was wrong then my bad and either way I still thought it was interesting and encouraging.
 
Summary: he's improved so now he's average.
Basically I agree with this. Hopefully he has another jump in improvement next year which is very possible if he plays much in the playoffs.
 
Summary: he's improved so now he's average.
Basically I agree with this. Hopefully he has another jump in improvement next year which is very possible if he plays much in the playoffs.

What's encouraging is that the improvement is all him; he didn't meet with anyone in particular, just kept his nose to the grindstone all summer. I want him and Payton to chat some more; I think Lillard will improve a bunch from that.
 
Well if it's not Golliver then it is gospel

interesting that to you, if it bashes the Blazers you give it more credibility. And if it doesn't bash the Blazers, you say it has no credibility.

So basically, what you complain about Portland fans doing, you do the exact reverse.
 
interesting that to you, if it bashes the Blazers you give it more credibility. And if it doesn't bash the Blazers, you say it has no credibility.

So basically, what you complain about Portland fans doing, you do the exact reverse.

I've noticed that too. I just don't get why fans feel this way. Is wanting to be right more important to the success of the franchise?
 
interesting that to you, if it bashes the Blazers you give it more credibility. And if it doesn't bash the Blazers, you say it has no credibility.

So basically, what you complain about Portland fans doing, you do the exact reverse.

That's not what I am saying at all, actually.

What I am saying is Golliver, Canzano and a lot of National writers have been called a hack by virtually everyone in the forum. And people that posted article by them regarding trades or whatever were chastised by most of the forum for it. Now those same people are posting articles by the same writers because they are praising the team, and I find it humorous.
 
Is wanting to be right more important to the success of the franchise?

I literally don't understand what you're saying here. Literally. Please explain (because I tend to share MM's outlook on the Blazers, if little else).
 
That's not what I am saying at all, actually.

What I am saying is Golliver, Canzano and a lot of National writers have been called a hack by virtually everyone in the forum. And people that posted article by them regarding trades or whatever were chastised by most of the forum for it. Now those same people are posting articles by the same writers because they are praising the team, and I find it humorous.

a lot of them have been called a "hack" because they write something that is factually inaccurate, or done solely to get a response out of people.

I find it humorous that you can't see the difference (or aren't willing to, or are willfully ignoring that).

I also find it humorous that you seem to take the act of a few (and it is a few) and pretend like it's rampant among the forum as a whole. I don't know whats more tiring, them doing that or you doing this.
 
if he believes what I do, then you were talking about both of us

No it was a reply to how you use the media as the opposite as what the homers use it for, applying it when it gives you a reason to call out the forum, then discrediting it when it goes against what you believe.

Basically, you are doing exactly what you complain about.
 
Part of the reason he over plays isolation is because he is told to. Giving up three point attempts is not acceptable in this system, allowing the defender by for an open 18 foot jumper is acceptable because the shoot is generally not high percentage. Still in a playoff series his Iso defense will need to improve significantly. The West is full of guards capable and willing to attack in ISO, we have already seen what Dragic and Bledsoe can do to this team. Lawson, Westbrook, Paul, Conley and Lin also represent players that could take advantage of Lillard's iso deficiency.
 
Part of the reason he over plays isolation is because he is told to. Giving up three point attempts is not acceptable in this system, allowing the defender by for an open 18 foot jumper is acceptable because the shoot is generally not high percentage. Still in a playoff series his Iso defense will need to improve significantly. The West is full of guards capable and willing to attack in ISO, we have already seen what Dragic and Bledsoe can do to this team. Lawson, Westbrook, Paul, Conley and Lin also represent players that could take advantage of Lillard's iso deficiency.

I think our defense, especially Lillard's second half D has been stellar. What matters is what you do after the half, as long as the team keeps it close for the first 2.
 
Here's my problem Mags. IMHO,
Lillard is a good defender (NBA average or better).
Wes is a very good defender.
Ditto for Batum.
Ditto for Lopez.
LMA's defense has improved.

However, I can't rectify my opinions with the fact that we have been a poor defensive team, and yes we ARE a poor defensive team. (I'm hopeful that changes but I too am somewhat of a homer).

I think our defense, especially Lillard's second half D has been stellar. What matters is what you do after the half, as long as the team keeps it close for the first 2.
 
Here's my problem Mags. IMHO,
Lillard is a good defender (NBA average or better).
Wes is a very good defender.
Ditto for Batum.
Ditto for Lopez.
LMA's defense has improved.

However, I can't rectify my opinions with the fact that we have been a poor defensive team, and yes we ARE a poor defensive team. (I'm hopeful that changes but I too am somewhat of a homer).

I don't understand how we are "poor" when we are middle of the pack right now. We are 15th in defense right now, #2 in Three point %. I agree we aren't elite, but we aren't definitely a poor defensive team.
 
Yea no way we beat OKC, IND, GSW, SA if we're a poor defensive team.
 
Our DRtg of 106.1 is 21sth in the league.
League median would be 15.5th.
League average is 12th.

Fortunately, our ORtg is a mindboggling 3 points above 2nd place Houston.

I don't understand how we are "poor" when we are middle of the pack right now. We are 15th in defense right now, #2 in Three point %. I agree we aren't elite, but we aren't definitely a poor defensive team.
 
Our DRtg of 106.1 is 21sth in the league.
League median would be 15.5th.
League average is 12th.

Fortunately, our ORtg is a mindboggling 3 points above 2nd place Houston.

But haven't we discussed that DRtg isn't the tell all regarding defense? We are a good rebounding team, we limit possessions, and are one of the best at defending the three point line. I think when it matters "The second half", I would suspect our rating is much higher. We have become a deadly 2nd half team, especially on the defensive end.
 
link? I've spent way too much F'ing hours on these boards and I haven't seen it. DRtg is a great way to measure defense. We're not good.

But haven't we discussed that DRtg isn't the tell all regarding defense? We are a good rebounding team, we limit possessions, and are one of the best at defending the three point line. I think when it matters "The second half", I would suspect our rating is much higher. We have become a deadly 2nd half team, especially on the defensive end.
 
link? I've spent way too much F'ing hours on these boards and I haven't seen it. DRtg is a great way to measure defense. We're not good.

http://www.82games.com/1314/1314POR3.HTM

On this profile, I see defensively we giving up an eFG% of 47.5%, while having a 51.5%. But looking at the shooting details, 65% of the shots are rated at 42.7% eFG. That is holding them to a very inefficient offense. So as the teams are able to score in the paint, they aren't doing it efficiently.

The offense vs. defense numbers in this link show we are outperforming our opponents in almost every category.
 
http://www.82games.com/1314/1314POR3.HTM

On this profile, I see defensively we giving up an eFG% of 47.5%, while having a 51.5%. But looking at the shooting details, 65% of the shots are rated at 42.7% eFG. That is holding them to a very inefficient offense. So as the teams are able to score in the paint, they aren't doing it efficiently.

The offense vs. defense numbers in this link show we are outperforming our opponents in almost every category.

Why are you singling out jumpshots? Defense is a measure of everything on the court, and giving up a 47.5% eFG% is bad. The 51.5% offensive eFG% is irrelevant, we know Portland is a really good offensive team, but that has nothing to do with the defense.

Just about every measure out there has us as a sub-par defensive team. We're tied for 21st in the league in defensive efficiency, give up the 7th worst TS% in the league at 54.7% and give up almost 45 points in the paint every night (good for 24th in the league). The eye test pretty much matches this. They've shown spurts of good defense, whether in the final seconds or the certain quarters, but on the whole, their defense is poor and they're winning by dominating the opponents offensively.
 
Honestly I think if you're using eFG% you're cherry picking the stats to fit the story. I would LOVE to agree with you that the blazers are an awesome defensive team, but eFG% does not take FTs or turnovers in account. These are pretty big factors to miss.

http://www.82games.com/1314/1314POR3.HTM

On this profile, I see defensively we giving up an eFG% of 47.5%, while having a 51.5%. But looking at the shooting details, 65% of the shots are rated at 42.7% eFG. That is holding them to a very inefficient offense. So as the teams are able to score in the paint, they aren't doing it efficiently.

The offense vs. defense numbers in this link show we are outperforming our opponents in almost every category.
 
Why are you singling out jumpshots? Defense is a measure of everything on the court, and giving up a 47.5% eFG% is bad. The 51.5% offensive eFG% is irrelevant, we know Portland is a really good offensive team, but that has nothing to do with the defense.

Just about every measure out there has us as a sub-par defensive team. We're tied for 21st in the league in defensive efficiency, give up the 7th worst TS% in the league at 54.7% and give up almost 45 points in the paint every night (good for 24th in the league). The eye test pretty much matches this. They've shown spurts of good defense, whether in the final seconds or the certain quarters, but on the whole, their defense is poor and they're winning by dominating the opponents offensively.

I singled out jump shots because we allow the majority of our opponent's shots being "jump shots". Other teams are taking 65% of their shots from this area. And looking at those numbers, we aren't allowing many dunks or tips, meaning we are protecting the rim. If teams are making those 10-15 ft jumpers, then my hat's off to them. They overcame the odds.
 
Honestly I think if you're using eFG% you're cherry picking the stats to fit the story. I would LOVE to agree with you that the blazers are an awesome defensive team, but eFG% does not take FTs or turnovers in account. These are pretty big factors to miss.

I didn't say they were an "awesome defensive team". I am saying they are a mediocre defensive team. I think we are awesome in the second half though. We just give up so many easy shots in the first halves of games.
 
I singled out jump shots because we allow the majority of our opponent's shots being "jump shots". Other teams are taking 65% of their shots from this area. And looking at those numbers, we aren't allowing many dunks or tips, meaning we are protecting the rim. If teams are making those 10-15 ft jumpers, then my hat's off to them. They overcame the odds.

You're still singling out a certain stat and saying the defense is good based on that. Why are you ignoring the fact that they allow nearly 55% TS (which takes EVERYTHING into account including FTs) to account AND that they have one of the worst defensive efficiency's in the league? The truth is staring you in the face.

Oh and by the way, if you look at other teams defensive stats on 82games.com, you'll see most teams are forcing more than 65% jumpshots. Hell, the Utah Jazz force more jumpers and less paint shots than the Blazers.
 
You're still singling out a certain stat and saying the defense is good based on that. Why are you ignoring the fact that they allow nearly 55% TS (which takes EVERYTHING into account including FTs) to account AND that they have one of the worst defensive efficiency's in the league? The truth is staring you in the face.

Oh and by the way, if you look at other teams defensive stats on 82games.com, you'll see most teams are forcing more than 65% jumpshots. Hell, the Utah Jazz force more jumpers and less paint shots than the Blazers.

I am not saying they are a "GOOD DEFENSIVE TEAM". Why are you guys thinking I keep saying that. I said they are mediocre. I am arguing they aren't bad and I believe I'm right. And for the "forced jump shots", it's not "forced jump shots" it's the % of those shots going in. Doesn't matter if the Jazz are forcing 100% of the shots from 15 ft. If the teams are hitting 60% of them, then it's bad defense.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top