Your defensive philosophy?

[BrianFromWA]

Over the last couple of weeks, I've seen more than a few posts talking about "defensive-mindedness" in players, or "potential", or great posts like MM's on coaching guys like Leonard and NOVoodoo's about Trick-or-Treat Tony that just seem to do with defense in general. It brought a couple of questions to my mind:

What does being a great defensive team (we aren't one, currently) entail?
What would need to change to make us one?
How do you do that?

In your eyes, is it a matter of getting a great team of "defensive-minded" players (like a lineup of guys like Allen, LBJ, CP3, Duncan, Tyson Chandler, etc)? Or is a balanced team with a couple of those All-Defense Team types enough? Or can a relatively weak team on D (like us, currently) benefit from getting just one of those guys? Or can you take anyone, and just teach them defensive principles? Does your head coach have to be a Mark Jackson type, or can a guy like Stotts bring in an assistant like 2007 Tom Thibodeau or Mike Budenholzer or something and have it work?

IMHO, it seems like you need to have an enduring philosophy that works with average-to-middling defensive players, but with at least a couple of above-average one-on-one defenders on the floor. The NBA is built around stars and isos for the most part, and you need guys to stop that. It's also a heavy P&R league, so you need bigs that can show out and defend it (we don't). I also think that, while I don't mind Stotts as a coach, you really need someone in the top spot who, even if he isn't the best defensive coach out there, emphasizes it and builds around it. It would take a Phil Jackson/Tex Winter-level trust and working relationship to have the head coach not be the main implementer of your style. I mean, it didn't even really work with Thibodeau and Doc Rivers after the championship season as well as it had with Thibodeau and Jeff Van Gundy (the previous 7 years).

I just don't think that adding a stud center (even if there was one around, either in the draft or FA) would help us as much as getting a team of guys who were open to playing balls-out D (I think of Batum and Matthews on our team), and put them under a guy like David Joerger or Alex Jensen (or David Blatt?!) who focuses on team D.

In Fairy-Tale Land, I think trading out LMA for MKG and Charlotte's #4 pick would be great. LMA doesn't want to (and shouldn't have to) go to CHA, though, and 3-ways are tough to get to work. But if the 5 guys getting minutes in your 1/2/3 were Lillard/Oladipo/Wes/MKG/Batum, I think you could just get the best big available at 10 (Len? Zeller? Gobert? Dieng? Olynyk? Adams?) and have a pretty monster young lineup. And a boatload of cap space. And you still can move Wes or Nic in the next couple of years (or one of the younguns) if it gets too crowded.

 

[Natebishop3]

I like physical defense, and I feel like we've been a soft ass defensive team for years.

 

[Mediocre Man]

With all of the seminars I have been to, including ones by guys like Wooden, Knight and Boeheim, and books I have read on defense, I have come to the conclusion that you don't need "defensive" minded players all over the floor. In fact, you really don't need "good" defensive players on the floor. What you do need, however, is guys that will actually play defense. Not passing lanes, not just blocking shots, but rotation and funneling. The scheme of the defense is probably more important than anything, IMO anyway. A great example of that is during game threads here people complain that we are missing wide open shots, but the reason for that, most likely, is that teams are putting us in a position to fail. LaMarcus Aldridge, for example, shoots a much higher % from the left side of the floor than the right. Lillard does as well, but it's not as drastic. So a good defensive scheme would be to push Portland to the right side of the floor. We aren't talking about the entire game, but the defensive should be able to "force" the team into wide open mid range looks on the right side maybe 10 times a game. That could easily be the difference in 10 points a game...although I haven't done that math. A good defense takes a team out of what they want to do.

Lebron James LOVES the left side of the floor, so a good defense should simply force him to the right side. If they can do that 10 times a game, it could make a huge difference.

So, long story long, scheme is the most important part of any defense, and having guys that will put an effort in. Guys like Hickson, Z-Bo etc, have to be surrounded by defensive players because they won't play defense. Poor defensive guys like Batum simply need to have a scheme that enables them to succeed. You absolutely don't need someone protecting the rim to be a good defensive team. Charlotte was 6th in the league in blocked shots, and dead last in defensive rating. the reason for this is they had a shitty defensive scheme.


My 3.5 cents

 

[BrianFromWA]

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Mediocre Man again.

 

[Run BJM]

You don't need great individual defensive players, but they do help. The Warriors were 4th in the league in opponent FG% and they were without Bogut and Rush most of the year. Thats with Steph Curry, David Lee, and Harrison Barnes starting too. They did well because those guys executed Mike Malone's defensive system- forced guys to the baseline instead of the paint, gave opponents shots they aren't great at and took away the opposition's bread and butter, etc.

I think of the championship Mavericks of a few years ago as well. They had Chandler anchoring the defense and Marion and Stevenson on the wing but they also had plenty of poor defenders as well- Dirk, Terry, old Kidd, Barea, etc. Those guys' poor individual defense didn't kill the team because they're all smart guys who played Carlisle's system well.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

With all of the seminars I have been to, including ones by guys like Wooden, Knight and Boeheim, and books I have read on defense, I have come to the conclusion that you don't need "defensive" minded players all over the floor. In fact, you really don't need "good" defensive players on the floor. What you do need, however, is guys that will actually play defense. Not passing lanes, not just blocking shots, but rotation and funneling. The scheme of the defense is probably more important than anything, IMO anyway. A great example of that is during game threads here people complain that we are missing wide open shots, but the reason for that, most likely, is that teams are putting us in a position to fail. LaMarcus Aldridge, for example, shoots a much higher % from the left side of the floor than the right. Lillard does as well, but it's not as drastic. So a good defensive scheme would be to push Portland to the right side of the floor. We aren't talking about the entire game, but the defensive should be able to "force" the team into wide open mid range looks on the right side maybe 10 times a game. That could easily be the difference in 10 points a game...although I haven't done that math. A good defense takes a team out of what they want to do.

Lebron James LOVES the left side of the floor, so a good defense should simply force him to the right side. If they can do that 10 times a game, it could make a huge difference.

So, long story long, scheme is the most important part of any defense, and having guys that will put an effort in. Guys like Hickson, Z-Bo etc, have to be surrounded by defensive players because they won't play defense. Poor defensive guys like Batum simply need to have a scheme that enables them to succeed. You absolutely don't need someone protecting the rim to be a good defensive team. Charlotte was 6th in the league in blocked shots, and dead last in defensive rating. the reason for this is they had a shitty defensive scheme.


My 3.5 cents

Perfect.

I'll add this as well. About 3 or 4 years ago there was a stat that said something like this- fully uncontested jump shot shooting percentage in the NBA is around 60%, average contested around 40%, well contested around 25%. The better defensive teams fight to contest every shot.

 

[Pinwheel1]

OK it sounds like we are all in agreement. JUST getting a big shot blocker in the middle will do little unless we have a better scheme and players are "encouraged" to stick to the defensive plan.

Of course we still need another big or two. But where will the new scheme come from? Tibbetts may help, but it sounds like there will not be a scapegoat this year. Terry knows he needs to have a lot of improvement this year or he is gone.

 

[julius]

My defensive philosophy regarding the Blazers?

Actually play defense.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

Logical positivism.

 

[BBert]

Great post Mr. Mediocre Man. Good defensive coaching/scheme + players willing to bust their ass to defend/implement scheme > good individual defenders and stat whores (steals/blocks/rebounds at the expense of good team defense).

Maybe you should consider coaching.

 

[blue9]

Before I go reading the responses I just wanted to say that I largely agree with BFW. First comes coaching, next comes players who will carry out the coach's orders, last comes great individual defenders. You can have 5 of the best individual defenders on the floor together, but if they don't have a sound defensive philosophy that has them working as a single unit then you're going to get mediocre results. Defense, far more than offense, is a team game - no one player can take over the defensive end of the floor like we often see happen on the offensive end.

 

[blue9]

rotation and funneling

This.

 

[Denny Crane]

On defense, most teams play something like a zone. If they play defense at all.

On offense, most teams pass the ball around the perimeter (to beat the zone) and hoist up 3pt shots.

If you have a really great defender, you can play box and one (zone with 4 guys, man with the great defender on their best player)

I personally think you want guys like George Gervin on offense who can play defense like Ben Wallace.

 

[Wizard Mentor]

OK it sounds like we are all in agreement. JUST getting a big shot blocker in the middle will do little unless we have a better scheme and players are "encouraged" to stick to the defensive plan.

What MM said sounds good, but I don't give a DAMN how good your defensive scheme is if you get outrebounded 18-3 in the first quarter like in the only game I went to this year. You have to have a guy that the other team can't just back him under the basket and get score after score, rebound after rebound. So, while I do agree that getting a defensive big man may not be enough in itself, I'll worry about our "defensive scheme" after we get the bare minimum rim protection.

 

[blue9]

What MM said sounds good, but I don't give a DAMN how good your defensive scheme is if you get outrebounded 18-3 in the first quarter like in the only game I went to this year. You have to have a guy that the other team can't just back him under the basket and get score after score, rebound after rebound. So, while I do agree that getting a defensive big man may not be enough in itself, I'll worry about our "defensive scheme" after we get the bare minimum rim protection.

Not to downplay the importance of a rim protector, but good team defense really should limit the need for "rim protection" - if your 5 guys are working as an effective defensive unit that will limit the "at rim" opportunities of the opponent. But of course you do still need that last line of defense...but it's just that - a "LAST line".

 

[Denny Crane]

Not to downplay the importance of a rim protector, but good team defense really should limit the need for "rim protection" - if your 5 guys are working as an effective defensive unit that will limit the "at rim" opportunities of the opponent. But of course you do still need that last line of defense...but it's just that - a "LAST line".

Some defensive schemes are designed to steer the offensive player toward the shot blocker.

 

[BigGameDamian]

I like physical defense, and I feel like we've been a soft ass defensive team for years.

Will the NBA let teams play really physical anymore?

 

[mgb]

Just kick them in the balls!

 

[jlprk]

Funny that came up. I was known for physical defense at ages 12-14. Everyone complained (that ended when I discovered message boards). Then I moved from Obama's private middle school to a Mexican high school in Southern California. So I'm guarding my best friend Nick Beltran, a short Mexican, and he's complaining, so he kicks me in the balls. It's my first time, and I sit out the rest of the P.E. period. I never played harassing defense again.

 

[blue9]

Some defensive schemes are designed to steer the offensive player toward the shot blocker.

Oh, for sure! But with the idea that the shot blocker will be in position so that the ball will have to stop and go over the top before getting to the rim...or get kicked back out without a shot being taken. The shot blocker / rim protector is an important part of the puzzle, but it only really makes a difference when used within a good team-oriented defense.

 

[Fez Hammersticks]

Indy's smash mouth defense.

 

[BigGameDamian]

I wouldn't mind seeing a little pushing and shoving action being allowed in the post.

 

[OregonHuskerMan]

Funnel baseline into a tall shot blocking/altering presence.

Then, tilt the floor appropriately for players that warrant such defensive attention. Force them into there "weak areas" or to make tougg decisions/bad decisions/shots.

 

[MARIS61]

Mine's the same on or off the court.

"Bust through my door, end up dead on the floor".