Is it too soon to talk about defensive rating?

[wizenheimer]

Correct. Comparing raw offensive or defensive ratings would probably not be the best measure.

For example, in Billups two years the defensive ratings have been (113.5 and 116.3) which would be the worst and 4th worst defensive rating for Portland in the last 10+years.

Currently, we're ranked 10th in the NBA if offensive rating. We were 27th last year. In the previous 8 seasons, we finished top 6, five different times. I do expect us to finish inside top 10 this year though.

 

[BonesJones]

1) I like Billups - I think we're doing some very good things.
2) I disagree with your assumption that Billups is trying harder (or less) than Stotts. Nothing to back that up.
3) I feel the versatility of the roster (defensively) is better 1-10 than it has been for a while, but see #4
4) Comparing defensive rating 30 games in (this year) to a full season result would be unwise. The further we get from one roster to another, the more difficult it is to compare. We did have a defensive rating from last year (first 30 games before all the injuries) to best compare with the defensive rating of the 2020-21 season, of which had similar rosters. Both were horrible.

You can't be serious with number 2...

 

[BonesJones]

It's pretty obvious Chauncey is a better defensive coach and Terry offensive. Don't know how anyone can argue that right now.

Chauncey's a better offensive coach too but that's another argument

 

[Tince]

View attachment 52093

https://www.nba.com/stats/teams/advanced?dir=A&sort=OFF_RATING

 

[OneSport3]

Correct. Comparing raw offensive or defensive ratings would probably not be the best measure.

For example, in Billups two years the defensive ratings have been (113.5 and 116.3) which would be the worst and 4th worst defensive rating for Portland in the last 10+years.

Currently, we're ranked 10th in the NBA if offensive rating. We were 27th last year. In the previous 8 seasons, we finished top 6, five different times. I do expect us to finish inside top 10 this year though.

Cmon man. You can’t use any data from last season when the team was actively trying to lose games. Trying to use any data from last season to make your point would be completely disingenuous.

 

[Tince]

You can't be serious with number 2...

I've been pretty consistent (I've probably slipped a few times) that I don't use "effort" "heart" "caring" and all these other meaningless terms when trying to make a point. Those things are incredibly prone to confirmation bias and are typically only used when people are unable to back up their opinion with substantive information.

I think Billups is a good coach though!

 

[Tince]

Cmon man. You can’t use any data from last season when the team was actively trying to lose games. Trying to use any data from last season to make your point would be completely disingenuous.

I did mention earlier there was data in the first 30ish game of last season that also had our defensive rating near the bottom (before Dame was out and we were tanking).

I think to say our defense is way better in the last 2 years in comparison to the previous 8 years, would be completely ignoring the data. If you want to throw out last year all together due to injuries (but keep other seasons when Nurk was out), that's fine. This year, still wouldn't rank in the top 3 defensive ratings we've had in the last 10 years. Does that mean Billups sucks? No way, he's a good coach.

I get this is tough for the people who said any change would be a major upgrade for our defense. Instead of using data, we want to talk process and evaluate the effort, heart, hustle, etc.

 

[Tince]

Cmon man. You can’t use any data from last season when the team was actively trying to lose games. Trying to use any data from last season to make your point would be completely disingenuous.

Here is where Portland ranked in November of 2021 when we were still trying to win. I don't consider 29th out of 30, a significant improvement.

https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/nba-teams-defensive-rating-this-season-by-month-november-2021

December of 2021 we improved to 28th out of 30 teams.

https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/nba-teams-defensive-rating-this-season-by-month-december-2021

This was with nearly the same roster as we finished the 2020-21 season with. Is that completely disingenous?

 

[OneSport3]

I did mention earlier there was data in the first 30ish game of last season that also had our defensive rating near the bottom (before Dame was out and we were tanking).

I think to say our defense is way better in the last 2 years in comparison to the previous 8 years, would be completely ignoring the data. If you want to throw out last year all together due to injuries (but keep other seasons when Nurk was out), that's fine. This year, still wouldn't rank in the top 3 defensive ratings we've had in the last 10 years. Does that mean Billups sucks? No way, he's a good coach.

I get this is tough for the people who said any change would be a major upgrade for our defense. Instead of using data, we want to talk process and evaluate the effort, heart, hustle, etc.

I get that this has been the hill you’ve been willing die on for years, but to compare last season to seasons when “Nurk was out” is completely laughable and disingenuous. Let me say this again, the team/organization was actively trying to lose games last season.

 

[OneSport3]

Here is where Portland ranked in November of 2021 when we were still trying to win. I don't consider 29th out of 30, a significant improvement.

https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/nba-teams-defensive-rating-this-season-by-month-november-2021

December of 2021 we improved to 28th out of 30 teams.

https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/nba-teams-defensive-rating-this-season-by-month-december-2021

This was with nearly the same roster as we finished the 2020-21 season with. Is that completely disingenous?

Yes it is absolutely disingenuous. The team had a new coach and was trying to implement new systems. This is where you’re being disingenuous and hypocritical because you yourself have stated on multiple occasions this season that it’s still too early to judge the team. Yet you’re using the same timeframe and data set from last season to make this point and arrive at your conclusion?

I’m not even debating if there is any improvement or not. The only point I’m arguing is using any data from last season is disingenuous. That includes the “first 30ish” games from last season.

 

[Tince]

Yes it is absolutely disingenuous. The team had a new coach and was trying to implement new systems. This is where you’re being disingenuous and hypocritical because you yourself have stated on multiple occasions this season that it’s still too early to judge the team. Yet you’re using the same timeframe and data set from last season to make this point?

I’m not even debating if there is any improvement or not. The only point I’m arguing is using any data from last season is disingenuous. That includes the “first 30ish” games from last season.

I think waiting until we have 3 new starters and a brand new bench to measure the effectivness of a coaching changes impact on the defensive end would be far less meaningful than using the first 3 months of last season when we were still trying to win and had a very similar roster to the previous season.

 

[Tince]

I get that this has been the hill you’ve been willing die on for years, but to compare last season to seasons when “Nurk was out” is completely laughable and disingenuous. Let me say this again, the team/organization was actively trying to lose games last season.

The stance I've maintained is that I didn't think a coaching change would yield a significant change and that the roster was by far the primary cause of the problems. This current team has 3 rotation players from the 2020-21 season left. That's it.

The people who were saying any new coaching staff with a pulse would be light years better than the previous staff, want to make this about "process" and "caring" because story telling is all that they have.

 

[BonesJones]

I've been pretty consistent (I've probably slipped a few times) that I don't use "effort" "heart" "caring" and all these other meaningless terms when trying to make a point. Those things are incredibly prone to confirmation bias and are typically only used when people are unable to back up their opinion with substantive information.

I think Billups is a good coach though!

Man, you watched Stotts never switch up what he was running despite being constantly horrible and heard him act like DJJ wasnt any better defensively than Melo but you sit here talking about OTHERS not backing up their opinions? As if Chauncey isn't running different stuff to keep teams off balance, actively searching for what scheme works best for his roster while also holding guys accountable? And it's led to improvement no matter how much you want to act like it hasn't. AND he hasn't had his best defender.

 

[Tince]

Man, you watched Stotts never switch up what he was running despite being constantly horrible and heard him act like DJJ wasnt any better defensively than Melo but you sit here talking about OTHERS not backing up their opinions? As if Chauncey isn't running different stuff to keep teams off balance, actively searching for what scheme works best for his roster while also holding guys accountable? And it's led to improvement no matter how much you want to act like it hasn't. AND he hasn't had his best defender.

You are a great story-teller, I'll give you that. Keep pointing to 100% subjective terms like process, accountability, effort, searching, etc. and I'll stick with the data: Off/Def Rtg, wins, playoff success, etc.

I won't even go into depth about the flaw in pointing out that "the best defender" is missing on this roster when that same player was missing on the previous 9 rosters as well. As mentioned before, I would expect the defensive productive to improve when the defensive talent on the roster has improved. That's been my stance for years.

 

[wizenheimer]

View attachment 52094

https://www.nba.com/stats/teams/advanced?dir=A&sort=OFF_RATING

I don't know how nba.com derives their offensive rating. It's not explained in their glossary. I'd tend to trust bbref a little more, but I'd also maintain a little skepticism of either.

I believe the standard formula is



so no, I'm not going to try and verify....geeeezuz

 

[illmatic99]

We give up way to many corner 3s and rolls/drives to the rim. This is probably my biggest gripe with our defense: From Synergy

 

[Tince]

I don't know how nba.com derives their offensive rating. It's not explained in their glossary. I'd tend to trust bbref a little more, but I'd also maintain a little skepticism of either.

I believe the standard formula is

View attachment 52096

so no, I'm not going to try and verify....geeeezuz

I agree with you!

 

[wizenheimer]

We give up way to many corner 3s and rolls/drives to the rim. This is probably my biggest gripe with our defense: From Synergy

nearly impossible to glean anything substantial just from that chart. I can't gauge how many passes after the initial PnR Synergy says are derived from the PnR.

from NBA.com:

*Portland allows 0.80 PPP to PnR ball-handlers which is 3rd best in the NBA. Portland allows 1.05 PPP to PnR roll men and again, that is 3rd best in the NBA. That tells me that Portland's PnR defense at the point of attack is excellent. Those roll man stats tells me there is a significant conflict between NBA.com and Synergy.

* Portland allows the 5th lowest PPP on isolation
* Portland is the 26th on PPP on transition (about average frequency)
* Portland is 14th in PPP on post-up (only 5% of defensive possessions)
* Portland is 23rd in PPP on spot-up (24th in frequency at 28%)

********************
from bbref:

* Portland gives up the 3rd most corner 3's in the NBA at 27.7%; and they are 13th in opponent corner three conversion rate. So yeah, that's a weakness

* Portland is 14th in opponent FG% at the rim and they give up the highest rate in the league. So yeah, another weakness

* in other shooting zones Blazers are 10th in opponent FG% in the 3-10' zone; 4th in the 10-16' zone; and 6th in the long-two 16-#P zone

all that tells me the Blazers are poor at defensive rotations and likely allow too much penetration. Both of those seem substantially correctible

 

[BonesJones]

You are a great story-teller, I'll give you that. Keep pointing to 100% subjective terms like process, accountability, effort, searching, etc. and I'll stick with the data: Off/Def Rtg, wins, playoff success, etc.

I won't even go into depth about the flaw in pointing out that "the best defender" is missing on this roster when that same player was missing on the previous 9 rosters as well. As mentioned before, I would expect the defensive productive to improve when the defensive talent on the roster has improved. That's been my stance for years.

The data shows we've improved. The data shows the starting lineup is a top 10 defense. Derrick Jones Jr. was a better point of attack defender than anyone the Blazers have on this roster. Gary Payton II is our point of attack defender.

 

[BonesJones]

nearly impossible to glean anything substantial just from that chart. I can't gauge how many passes after the initial PnR Synergy says are derived from the PnR.

from NBA.com:

*Portland allows 0.80 PPP to PnR ball-handlers which is 3rd best in the NBA. Portland allows 1.05 PPP to PnR roll men and again, that is 3rd best in the NBA. That tells me that Portland's PnR defense at the point of attack is excellent. Those roll man stats tells me there is a significant conflict between NBA.com and Synergy.

* Portland allows the 5th lowest PPP on isolation
* Portland is the 26th on PPP on transition (about average frequency)
* Portland is 14th in PPP on post-up (only 5% of defensive possessions)
* Portland is 23rd in PPP on spot-up (24th in frequency at 28%)

********************
from bbref:

* Portland gives up the 3rd most corner 3's in the NBA at 27.7%; and they are 13th in opponent corner three conversion rate. So yeah, that's a weakness

* Portland is 14th in opponent FG% at the rim and they give up the highest rate in the league. So yeah, another weakness

* in other shooting zones Blazers are 10th in opponent FG% in the 3-10' zone; 4th in the 10-16' zone; and 6th in the long-two 16-#P zone

all that tells me the Blazers are poor at defensive rotations and likely allow too much penetration. Both of those seem substantially correctible

Or that the Blazers are overhelping on the Pick n Roll which often leads to corner 3s, and would result in the statistical profile you posted.

 

[Tince]

The data shows we've improved. The data shows the starting lineup is a top 10 defense. Derrick Jones Jr. was a better point of attack defender than anyone the Blazers have on this roster. Gary Payton II is our point of attack defender.

If you want to compare apples to oranges, compare our average defensive rating(league ranking) from 2012-21 and compare it to our average defensive ranking from 2021-22. It's not improved.

If you want to compare apples to apples, compare our defensive rating/ranking from when we aquired Powell to the end of that season (under Stotts) with the defensive rating/ranking (under Billups) before Dame got hurt and we started tanking. Again, no significant improvement.

The data just does not back up what you predicted would happen and therefore doesn't back up the story you're attempting to present today.

 

[BonesJones]

If you want to compare apples to oranges, compare our average defensive rating(league ranking) from 2012-21 and compare it to our average defensive ranking from 2021-22. It's not improved.

If you want to compare apples to apples, compare our defensive rating/ranking from when we aquired Powell to the end of that season (under Stotts) with the defensive rating/ranking (under Billups) before Dame got hurt and we started tanking. Again, no significant improvement.

The data just does not back up what you predicted would happen and therefore doesn't back up the story you're attempting to present today.

Norm and RoCo didn't buy in, it was obvious. The play at home with that lineup was easily better than any defense they played at all the season before. On the road they played with the worst level of effort I've ever seen. Chauncey had to learn how to hold guys accountable while keeping them engaged, which I think he's figured out. Part of being a young coach and improving instead of being tenured, stubborn and stuck in your ways.

 

[Tince]

Norm and RoCo didn't buy in, it was obvious. The play at home with that lineup was easily better than any defense they played at all the season before. On the road they played with the worst level of effort I've ever seen. Chauncey had to learn how to hold guys accountable while keeping them engaged, which I think he's figured out. Part of being a young coach and improving instead of being tenured, stubborn and stuck in your ways.

Again, you're telling a story, with your favorite buzz words that really don't mean anything: "accountable" "engaged" "effort". It's the same go to stuff with the data failed to meet your predictions.

To clarify, I'm not saying being accountable, engaged, or giving effort doesn't matter. I'm saying people people see those things the way they want to, to help them win a debate. You and I have seen this first hand when people tried to over-state the shortcomings of guys like Whiteside (or even Nurk), the first card the play is "effort".

 

[BonesJones]

Again, you're telling a story, with your favorite buzz words that really don't mean anything: "accountable" "engaged" "effort". It's the same go to stuff with the data failed to meet your predictions.

To clarify, I'm not saying being accountable, engaged, or giving effort doesn't matter. I'm saying people people see those things the way they want to, to help them win a debate. You and I have seen this first hand when people tried to over-state the shortcomings of guys like Whiteside (or even Nurk), the first card the play is "effort".

Ah so basically don't describe things that make a difference to a team and describe coaching without talking about coaching traits... how am I supposed to argue with you with zero vocabulary? I think all the vocabulary you just used means nothing. There, now reply!

The coach felt the same why I did. What I've heard is the organization agreed. I provided numerous examples. Nothing else describes the drastic fall off between home and road last season.

 

[SharpeScooterShooter]

Again, you're telling a story, with your favorite buzz words that really don't mean anything: "accountable" "engaged" "effort". It's the same go to stuff with the data failed to meet your predictions.

To clarify, I'm not saying being accountable, engaged, or giving effort doesn't matter. I'm saying people people see those things the way they want to, to help them win a debate. You and I have seen this first hand when people tried to over-state the shortcomings of guys like Whiteside (or even Nurk), the first card the play is "effort".

Those things you are shrugging off directly effect the outcome. Those words you say mean nothing, mean everything.
Where would Jordans stats be if he didn't give the effort he did?

Take Shae for example. Whats the biggest thing that could hold him back? His height? His running style? Or could it be his desire to be great? His discipline to learn the game?
Desire isnt measurable. But its probably the single most important word to to determine how his career will go. Will he put effort into learning the game? How much desire does he have to be great?
You shrug these things off as inconsequential aNd they are everything. Roco had no desire to play billups ball and so he gave little effort into learning it.

Not everything important to stats is quantifiable or measurable.
Ive been reading this and im sorry man, but you are painting only half of a picture based on numbers. Numbers lie all the time.
I 100% agree roco didnt buy into Billups system. But there isn't a stat to verify that. But “that” would effect all of his other stats except maybe minutes played.
Just because there isn't a stat, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

 

[Fairly-Hard]

over-state the shortcomings of guys like Whiteside (or even Nurk), the first card the play is "effort".

Guilty as Charged!
I love what Nurkic can do. I really like it when he plays well.
I see a lack of effort at times. I absolutely cannot back that up with any definitive metric or statistical evidence.

I have been taken to task over this multiple times in game threads. Rightfully so most likely.

 

[Tince]

Those things you are shrugging off directly effect the outcome. Those words you say mean nothing, mean everything.
Where would Jordans stats be if he didn't give the effort he did?

Take Shae for example. Whats the biggest thing that could hold him back? His height? His running style? Or could it be his desire to be great? His discipline to learn the game?
Desire isnt measurable. But its probably the single most important word to to determine how his career will go. Will he put effort into learning the game? How much desire does he have to be great?
You shrug these things off as inconsequential dd they are everything. Roco had no desire to play billups ball and so he gave little effort into learning it.

Not everything important to stats is quantifiable or measurable.
Ive been reading this and im sorry man, but you are painting only half of a picture based on numbers. Numbers lie all the time.
I 100% agree roco didnt buy into Billups system. But there isn't a stat to verify that. But “that” would effect all of his other stats except maybe minutes played.
Just because there isn't a stat, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

The words mean something, which is why I say "they matter".... The issue isn't if those things matter, the issue is not only are they near impossible to measure, they are things that people see to validate what they already believed.

For example: If you thought CJ sucked, you'd be far more prone to come to the conclusion that he doesn't give great effort. If you thought CJ was an all-star level player, you'd be prone to think he gave great effort. So while CJ's effort is the same, one person would see it as poor, while the other would see it as great. Who is right?

Another great example about preceived effort was in a book, I believe "The Undoing Project" by Michael Lewis. The study asked coaches to rate the effort of their players. There was a strong correlation between the players the coaches say gave the best effort and those who were the fastest. So they weren't really rating effort, they were falsely assigning effort, with results.

This message board will say the Blazers effort on defense is bad when other teams shoot the ball really well against us. Last night though, when Houston got plenty of open threes, but only made 10% of them, the complaints about effort weren't there. Why? Houston missing open shots has nothing to do with the effort Portland was putting in on defense.

 

[Tince]

Guilty as Charged!
I love what Nurkic can do. I really like it when he plays well.
I see a lack of effort at times. I absolutely cannot back that up with any definitive metric or statistical evidence.

I have been taken to task over this multiple times in game threads. Rightfully so most likely.

We ALL do this, not just you... the people who realize they do it are many steps ahead of those who think they are evaluating those types of things objectively.

 

[SharpeScooterShooter]

The words mean something, which is why I say "they matter".... The issue isn't if those things matter, the issue is not only are they near impossible to measure, they are things that people see to validate what they already believed.

For example: If you thought CJ sucked, you'd be far more prone to come to the conclusion that he doesn't give great effort. If you thought CJ was an all-star level player, you'd be prone to think he gave great effort. So while CJ's effort is the same, one person would see it as poor, while the other would see it as great. Who is right?

Another great example about preceived effort was in a book, I believe "The Undoing Project" by Michael Lewis. The study asked coaches to rate the effort of their players. There was a strong correlation between the players the coaches say gave the best effort and those who were the fastest. So they weren't really rating effort, they were falsely assigning effort, with results.

This message board will say the Blazers effort on defense is bad when other teams shoot the ball really well against us. Last night though, when Houston got plenty of open threes, but only made 10% of them, the complaints about effort weren't there. Why? Houston missing open shots has nothing to do with the effort Portland was putting in on defense.

I get what you are saying. But i think anyone watching the games could tell roco wasnt playing team ball.
Ill go so far as to say i don't think he would have welcomed any rookie coach, regardless.

Either way, there is no stat to measure it, but all of his stats are reflected by his attitude.

 

[Tince]

I get what you are saying. But i think anyone watching the games could tell roco wasnt playing team ball.
Ill go so far as to say i don't think he would have welcomed any rookie coach, regardless.

Either way, there is no stat to measure it, but all of his stats are reflected by his attitude.

Personally, I'm not comfortable coming to that conclusion. This year, under a veteran coach, he's averaging 5pts/3rebs; the lowest production since his rookie year. I think it's possible he's on the decline of his career and/or the style of the NBA no longer matches his skill set.

I think blaming effort/attitude/etc is the easy way out. I could be wrong though.