Uh oh, Aldridge is an awesome post defender

[magnifier661]

It all boils down to one thing. The haters gonna hate. You could see Aldridge swat 30 shots in a row and still they would make some excuse why this doesn't apply to Aldridge being a good defender.

 

[jlprk]

Some people could see a cow jump over the Moon and still say we shouldn't make a cow our PF.

Good job proving your case, Mags. Niiiiice slow, passive cow. Here cowie, cowie.

 

[Hobbesarable]

It all boils down to one thing. The haters gonna hate. You could see Aldridge swat 30 shots in a row and still they would make some excuse why this doesn't apply to Aldridge being a good defender.

This is a forum after all. A place where people can discuss criticisms, positive and negative, in regards to our team's management, coaches, and players. Gotta love it!

 

[PapaG]

Literally the perfect compliment to Aldridge

Outside of bizarro Blazer world where Greg Oden is healthy and dominating the paint.

 

[jlprk]

Someone doesn't understand what post defense means

word

It means exactly what your stat measures--the opponent's FG% whenever Aldrige is within 5 feet of the hoop, loitering under a tall rusty lamppost, singing, "Standing on the corner, watching all the girls go by."

Accurate thread title there.

 

[magnifier661]

Some people could see a cow jump over the Moon and still say we shouldn't make a cow our PF.

Good job proving your case, Mags. Niiiiice slow, passive cow. Here cowie, cowie.

The stats by an MIT group doesn't lie; why do I need to prove anything more?

 

[magnifier661]

This is a forum after all. A place where people can discuss criticisms, positive and negative, in regards to our team's management, coaches, and players. Gotta love it!

Nothing wrong with that. Just explaining that the haters won't care. They will make some excuse why the study is meaningless, just like jplk and blue9 just proved.

 

[Sinobas]

Ok. Batum is an awesome defender, Matthews is an awesome defender, LA is an awesome defender, and we have boy-genius coordinating or defense, yet this team has one of the worst in the league at defense.

How do you explain that? Hickson and Lillard are not THAT bad.

 

[magnifier661]

Ok. Batum is an awesome defender, Matthews is an awesome defender, LA is an awesome defender, and we have boy-genius coordinating or defense, yet this team has one of the worst in the league at defense.

How do you explain that? Hickson and Lillard are not THAT bad.

Actually batum isn't that great of a man on man defender. Only Aldridge and Matthews are good in that regard. Then count that our bench was pretty much god awful for most the season and you got a huge mess.

Did you know our 4th quarter d is actually pretty stellar? Reason?! Well our starters are in the game with the exception of hickson for most that time.

 

[Sinobas]

The Blazers seem to turn up the intensity in the 4th....

 

[B-Roy]

Actually batum isn't that great of a man on man defender. Only Aldridge and Matthews are good in that regard. Then count that our bench was pretty much god awful for most the season and you got a huge mess.

Did you know our 4th quarter d is actually pretty stellar? Reason?! Well our starters are in the game with the exception of hickson for most that time.

The league is rarely about individual defense anymore. A bad defensive gameplan can make good defenders look like bad ones. Batum and Matthews are above average defenders, but they look like below average ones in the Blazer system.

 

[blue9]

Nothing wrong with that. Just explaining that the haters won't care. They will make some excuse why the study is meaningless, just like jplk and blue9 just proved.

OMG, mags. You clearly don't understand how to interpret stats...or even how to think about them. All you see is a number and believe that it must be saying whatever it's attempting to say. You should really try to think about what's at work when you're using stats, rather than believing in them so wholeheartedly.

So, according to this new stat teams shoot 43.9% from close range when LMA is within 5' of the hoop. That's good for 5th in the NBA. That's pretty good! But this doesn't tell you as much as you think it does. It certainly doesn't mean that LMA is the 5th best post defender in the NBA. Why not? Well, for one, LMA is RARELY within 5' of the hoop when a shot is taken from close range - he ranks #37 on the list in this regard. A great post defender would be IN THE POST PROTECTING THE HOOP a lot more than LMA is. Also, given that LMA rarely leaves his man a certain % of the 221 "shots faced" - probably a majority, though we don't have the data - are being taken by the guy he's guarding. Given that LMA is given the easiest defensive assignment, he's generally guarding bigs with lower FG%s and lesser skills - they probably shoot better than 43.9%, but again we don't have the data. Hoopdata breaks it down by "at rim" and "3'-9'", which doesn't really capture "within 5'" - perhaps averaging out the two HD percentages, and then compiling the numbers for LMA's defensive assignments would give us a better idea of just how well he's doing? I have no doubt that he's holding his opponent to a respectable FG% around the hoop. But this new stat doesn't make a case for LMA being the 5th best post defender, he just ranks 5th in OppFG% when he's within 5' of the hoop - that's it.

Looking at Appendix 2b we see that LMA is ranked #19 is Proximal FG% - that is, the FG% of shots taken when LMA is within 5' of the shot. Even this doesn't say as much as you think it might. Just by looking at the other names/ranks on the list we ought to see that there's more at play and the stat is misleading. Do you really think that LMA is a better defender than KG, Collison, Chandler, Dalembert, Noah, Asik, Gortat, etc? Is Bargnani the 2nd best defender in the league?

Just because this stat came out of MIT doesn't mean that it measures what they're trying to measure. You've got a brain, I encourage you to use it. Stats are a whole lot more than just a number - there's a whole lot of noise in them and you have to ask yourself what's being measured, what's not being measured, and what peripheral actions are affecting the measurement.

 

[magnifier661]

It all boils down to one thing. The haters gonna hate. You could see Aldridge swat 30 shots in a row and still they would make some excuse why this doesn't apply to Aldridge being a good defender.

OMG, mags. You clearly don't understand how to interpret stats...or even how to think about them. All you see is a number and believe that it must be saying whatever it's attempting to say. You should really try to think about what's at work when you're using stats, rather than believing in them so wholeheartedly.

So, according to this new stat teams shoot 43.9% from close range when LMA is within 5' of the hoop. That's good for 5th in the NBA. That's pretty good! But this doesn't tell you as much as you think it does. It certainly doesn't mean that LMA is the 5th best post defender in the NBA. Why not? Well, for one, LMA is RARELY within 5' of the hoop when a shot is taken from close range - he ranks #37 on the list in this regard. A great post defender would be IN THE POST PROTECTING THE HOOP a lot more than LMA is. Also, given that LMA rarely leaves his man a certain % of the 221 "shots faced" - probably a majority, though we don't have the data - are being taken by the guy he's guarding. Given that LMA is given the easiest defensive assignment, he's generally guarding bigs with lower FG%s and lesser skills - they probably shoot better than 43.9%, but again we don't have the data. Hoopdata breaks it down by "at rim" and "3'-9'", which doesn't really capture "within 5'" - perhaps averaging out the two HD percentages, and then compiling the numbers for LMA's defensive assignments would give us a better idea of just how well he's doing? I have no doubt that he's holding his opponent to a respectable FG% around the hoop. But this new stat doesn't make a case for LMA being the 5th best post defender, he just ranks 5th in OppFG% when he's within 5' of the hoop - that's it.

Looking at Appendix 2b we see that LMA is ranked #19 is Proximal FG% - that is, the FG% of shots taken when LMA is within 5' of the shot. Even this doesn't say as much as you think it might. Just by looking at the other names/ranks on the list we ought to see that there's more at play and the stat is misleading. Do you really think that LMA is a better defender than KG, Collison, Chandler, Dalembert, Noah, Asik, Gortat, etc? Is Bargnani the 2nd best defender in the league?

Just because this stat came out of MIT doesn't mean that it measures what they're trying to measure. You've got a brain, I encourage you to use it. Stats are a whole lot more than just a number - there's a whole lot of noise in them and you have to ask yourself what's being measured, what's not being measured, and what peripheral actions are affecting the measurement.

Point proven. Thanks blue9!

 

[blue9]

So, you're not going to try using that brain, eh?

 

[magnifier661]

So, you're not going to try using that brain, eh?

You mean like this?

I agree that Hickson would be far better off if he were guarding PFs. I'd actually like to see it to know whether he or LMA is the better defender at that position - I think with Hickson's energy and tenacity he may actually be the better defender at that position. But that's one area where I don't hate LMA - his man-defense is adequate. However, I completely disagree that LMA is a good weakside defender. Yes, he occasionally comes from the weakside for a block. But more often than not he doesn't do anything and just lets the other team score an uncontested lay-up. He's abysmally bad at protect the hoop and patrolling the paint. Those weaksided blocked shots - while fun to watch - are not really indicative of good defense. There's SO much more to help-defense than weaksided blocks.

Hickson is actually worse defending other PFs and saying Hickson is a better defender is laughable

 

[blue9]

Try having a thought of your own for once, please.
Also, note that I wasn't saying that Hickson WAS better, I was merely wondering how things would look if the roles were reversed. I'm willing to buy into LMA being the better man-defender (as I've said!) - but it's not as black/white as you think it is with your simpleton view on statistics.

 

[magnifier661]

Try having a thought of your own for once, please.

I don't understand what you mean. I mean isn't that your post? Isn't this what you think? I mean if you are accusing peeps for not using their brain and post a gem like this; how seriously can we respect that you are heeding your own advice?

 

[magnifier661]

Then again, there are other posts that have things like this.

I use to give the (slight) nod to LMA on defense, but now I'm not so sure. Both are abysmally poor at team/help defense, so we'll just call that a wash. As far as man-defense I use to think LMA was adequate, and thus I thought he was a better defender than Hickson. But recently I've been watching them on the defensive end and there are two things that have at least equalized them, if not pushed Hickson slightly ahead:
1 - Hickson is TRYING. When he's guarding a guy with the ball he is engaged and working hard to stop the ball. LMA doesn't seem to put forth much energy on defense. He occasionally makes a nice poke at the ball, tipping it out for a steal, but he's not digging down and putting forth a gritty defensive effort.
2 - Hickson is guarding guys he's physically incapable of guarding while LMA is generally given the easiest defensive assignment on the floor. Makes the comparison that much more tough - this isn't apples to apples.
Since both are doing a poor job, but one of them has a very tough job and the other has a relatively easy job, I'm apt to give the nod to the guy trying hard in a tough match-up.

I just don't understand blue9. So are we going to use our brain or our imagination?

 

[magnifier661]

But then again, I understand you have a huge Batum love fest; calling Batum a better player than Aldridge.

blue9
Exactly - Nic is a very nice (IMO, the BEST) complimentary player. But that's all LMA is too. LMA shouldn't be anything more than a 3rd option. And as 3rd options go, Nic is better than LMA. Nic plays defense (2nd best at his position), whereas LMA is a terrible defender. Also, Nic's rebound #s are "low" because he's generally guarding perimeter players. What's LMA's excuse?

See my post on the next page for a far more detailed description of my feelings on Nic, along with a comparison to Tayshaun Prince. I also touch on the fact that Nic's potential hasn't come to fruition because he's never had the benefit of good NBA coaching. Imagine what a good coach, who understands his strengths, could do with Nic. But even if he stays the same he's still an extremely important cog in a championship machine.

http://www.oregonlive.com/sports/index.ssf/2012/04/nba-trail-blazers-spurs-nicolas-batum.html

 

[blue9]

I don't understand what you mean. I mean isn't that your post? Isn't this what you think? I mean if you are accusing peeps for not using their brain and post a gem like this; how seriously can we respect that you are heeding your own advice?

So nobody should ever have a thought that's incorrect? We should only form ideas that are completely, 100% accurate at the time they're conceptualized? Gadzooks! Now I understand why you're so unwilling to think!
It's lunch time and arguing with you is like arguing with a door knob.

 

[magnifier661]

So nobody should ever have a thought that's incorrect? We should only form ideas that are completely, 100% accurate at the time they're conceptualized? Gadzooks! Now I understand why you're so unwilling to think!
It's lunch time and arguing with you is like arguing with a door knob.

Now you are understanding the concept of opinions! Now you are getting somewhere. Next time you pout that someone has to use their brain, keep in mind you must heed your own advice. This is a forum and we are all entitled to our opinions. So stop throwing rocks in a glass house.

And no they aren't accurate. In fact, Aldridge has shown he is an excellent man on man defender and helps alter shots when he is close to the basket

 

[blue9]

Now you are understanding the concept of opinions!

There are opinions, there are facts, and there are stats. You seem to always confuse stats with facts. Just put some thought into what goes into a stat before you go believing them. I gave you examples of how this stat doesn't adequately measure post-defense and you do what you do by throwing out an army of straw men rather than addressing the FACT that the STAT doesn't do a good job of what it sets out to do. You look at the #s, see LMA at #5 and conclude - without any thought - that LMA is the 5th best post-defender in the league.
You may not always agree with me, and I may not always be right, but there is always some level of thought/reason behind my arguments - I can't say the same for yours.

 

[magnifier661]

There are opinions, there are facts, and there are stats. You seem to always confuse stats with facts. Just put some thought into what goes into a stat before you go believing them. I gave you examples of how this stat doesn't adequately measure post-defense and you do what you do by throwing out an army of straw men rather than addressing the FACT that the STAT doesn't do a good job of what it sets out to do. You look at the #s, see LMA at #5 and conclude - without any thought - that LMA is the 5th best post-defender in the league.
You may not always agree with me, and I may not always be right, but there is always some level of thought/reason behind my arguments - I can't say the same for yours.

And if you'd actually pay attention; I was being very sarcastic about Aldridge being the #5 defense in the league. But go on back peddling on the countless bias blunders you have trying to devalue Aldridge. I think it's kinda cute!