Warriors' Defensive Problem in a Nutshell.....

From Zach Lowe's Point Forward blog on si.com:

And third, Orlando is among the most well-coached teams in the league, especially on defense, and smart, well-executed systems are just as important as individual talent in building an elite defense. Stan Van Gundy has an ideal, and he demands that each of his players commit to that ideal — stay in front of your man, don’t gamble for steals, make absolutely sure to secure defensive rebounds and generally avoid aggressive double-teaming. Howard once told me that the worst sin you can commit in Van Gundy’s system is a reach-in foul, that Van Gundy will stop practice and order some form of punishment if anyone commits one.​

Do the Warriors even ever play a possession without violating Van Gundy's ideal?

Today's post-game recaps say Granger "torched" the Warriors. Well, he made exactly 5 FGs, but he was 16-16 on FTs. What's that? Stupid reach-in fouls.

If VG was running the Warriors, everyone would be running all practice because every single one of them think the reach-in is the only way to play D.

Frankly, the Warriors' horrible D is the reason I turn them off and really find it painful to watch Monta on the court.

 

lol I thought you made it a whole post without an anti-Monta comment. So close. Anyway, yeah, I completely agree with you. Our major problem is that we are actually too aggressive, with everything. Reach-ins, block attempts, and double teams. It's like they think that if you don't get a block, you're not doing anything...I don't care if we don't get a block the whole game, just change shots! It's just not worth the gamble. And we double team wayyyy too much and way too aggressively. Any half-decent passer just gets the ball to the weakside for an open lane. Granger and Love have both "torched" us this week without having to really hit any field goals. We GIVE them the opportunity to torch us. It's not that we aren't capable of playing decent defense, it's that our whole philosophy is fucked up. It's the mental side that's holding us back, not the physical side. It would be amazing to get a good defensive philosophy going in Oakland...I can't even imagine.

 

Battier is universally seen as a good defender, sometimes he will just cover the shooter's eyes. You don't have to put your hand on the ball to play good D. Just be a nuisance and force them into something unnatural.

 

I'm not disagreeing with Phil. Still, the defense starts with the coach and how much he wants to play it versus the type of players he has. The Warriors have started to gather good individual "defensive" players that are willing to play defense in DWRight, Udoh, Lou and others. Monta is a good defensive player, too, because he gets steals; Steals count the same as a defensive board and more because the transition game can start much quicker. The biggest need is the center position as we do not have a center who can clog the paint and block shots. Someone like that would be a player who could start the transition, too, with a well placed block. Andris Biedrins is 24, but his contract hurts him in the Ws keeping him. I rather try to land a free agent like Corey Brewer and see if he would be willing to sign for something more reasonable.

Yeah, I agree about baby steps. The problem is the Ws score 102.66 while giving up 105.88 - a differential of -3.22. We need more offensive talent!

 

We allow less points this year, but aren't we scoring less ourselves? I think we have just slowed our pace, I don't know if there has been much defensive improvement.

And I agree with Jason, it's mostly about the coach and the defensive philosophy that's in place, not just the 5 dudes on the court.

 

Oh this is as much a criticism of the coaching and the front office as the players.

The front office has to try to get players who play the coach's system and has to ship out those that don't. Turkoglu and JRich are horrible individual defenders but the Magic still brought them in and are demanding that they play VG defense. That's the blueprint I want for the Warriors.

 

Interesting.

 

I respectfully disagree. How many steal attempts results in the other team scoring or getting fouled? Monta probably has more failed steal attempts than successful steal attempts.

On the other hand, how many defensive rebound attempts results in the other team scoring or getting fouled?

What's the success rate on steals, especially Monta?

If Monta would just stop reaching and decided to stay in front of his man, he would be helping out his team.

It's embarrassing.

 

Totally agree philsmith. And the Warriors aren't really making baby steps either. They are still dead last in assists against (last time I checked) because of their porous defense. Good defensive teams force the offense to settle for 1-on-1 possessions, or forcing a shot. The Warriors, on the other hand, allow constant penetration (which allows the draw and kick) and they allow their men to get by them, resulting in double teams or someone coming to help, which then obviously results in the easy dump and finish.

They give up a ton of assists because it's so damn easy to move the ball against them and find open men.

The Warriors had a little stretch there of a few scattered games before the break where they looked like a new defensive team, rotating, and denying and trying to do the right things.

But that was a fluke. A mirage. The Warriors are the team you've seen against Minny and Indy. The team that everyone loves to "get right" against. They're like the one "cheat meal" in all the other teams' diet plans. The one where you think, "okay, I know this week's been hard, but just wait until Saturday against GS... I'm gonna pig out!"

 

I don't know if it's coaching or player roster, but I sure as hell hope we don't break the bank trying to go for a defensive role player. The defense will get a lot better if we replace Monta with either of Andre Iguodala, Danny Granger, or Joe Johnson.

 

I don't have the answer to your questions, but I do have efficiency ratings which you do not agree with either. Instead of jumping to conclusions, how about providing some facts to the statements that you made? Then we could continue this discussion.

This is exactly what I am talking about. If you go for a starting defense oriented player, then you may improve one position, but it does not necessarily improve the team defense and scoring differential. You have to remember that if you trade a starter, you have to replace what he was giving you as well as improve the defense. If you do well in the trade, it's a zero sum game, i.e. you get back what you traded away; It is a rare occasion that there was an imbalanced trade because one team was wrong in its judgment. Not only that, one has to reach agreement with another party to make the trade and fulfill the salary requirements. It's a rare occasion when you can take advantage of a situation. For example, Houston traded Aaron Brooks before the deadline. That was a bad deal player wise and what I call an advantage for PHX. However, the Rox made up for the imbalance somewhat by getting a first round pick. What I am saying is gather first and second round picks and then make a trade using that and expiring contracts. Then one can come out ahead and it's easier to trade those pieces because everyone at one time or another wants those. Then we can build upon the players that we have and improve the team.

 

You called Monta a good defensive player because he gets a lot of steals. I don't think anyone on this forum would agree to that statement. I don't have the resources or the time to look up stats that backup my argument that missed steal attempts by Monta make him a bad defensive player, but I can tell you that reaching, gambling defense as a team's mainstay isn't employed by the top teams in the NBA. If you want to challenge me to that, go right ahead.

Your use of EFF was debunked so I don't know why you think it's me that disagrees with it. EFF is just a poor metric to use.

 

Yeah, I don't think SPG is always a good indicator of defensive talent. The thing is, Monta has proven that he can be a legit defender...that's what's so frustrating. In the past, he has stepped to the plate and guarded elite players, like Kobe for example, and really looked like he was defensively proficient. Looking at him this year, it's easy to forget those games. But I think there is something behind the argument that Monta leads the league in Minutes, and it's pretty hard to play 40+ mins a game, 82 games a year, going balls out on both ends of the court. I'm really disappointed that last year's "defensive coordinator" doesn't seem to have the capability or desire to implement an effective defensive scheme. The only improvement I see over Don Nelson is that he doesn't mind running with multiple bigs. Besides that, it's the same shit, different toilet. Lacob needs to back up all that talk and do something.

 

At least you admit, you're just hypothesizing. You're entitled to your opinions, but this season I started taking a look at Sabermetrics more and it's changed my outlook. I was one of those fans that had a GM point-of-view, so it was an eye opener and revelation. Monta can play individual defense, stay in front of his man with his speed and guard bigger players, but he doesn't focus on it (He's done it before. http://articles.sfgate.com/2010-10-11/sports/24130179_1_tyreke-evans-oracle-arena-monta-ellis). A different coach and philosophy would change his focus such as taking a charge, but that's not what is happening. I would say Ellis did not play much defense against the Wizards and he didn't get steals, so he did not contribute, but other times and in other areas he is contributing to the team. To say his steals don't count is ridiculous. I've addressed the issue, too, with getting a big defensive '2' guard instead of playing Ellis so many minutes. Moreover, if Ellis' defense is hurting the team, then he would be benched and play less minutes. It's the opposite. That's a fact. Instead, people focus on the negatives and end up with trade scenarios that do not help the team. Just trading Ellis for Andre Iguodala would not help improve the team significantly on defense. It would just improve the individual defense, but not necessarily the team defense. Nor would it significantly improve the winning differential which is the key component.

 

Yes, I agree that Monta has the ability to play sound, fundamental defense. As philsmith says, it's all about effort. Monta was doing some of this last night against Nick Young. I agree that he has it in him, but he always goes back to his lazy, reaching defense that yes, once in a while results in a steal and a fast break score. Great, good for him. I never said steals don't count. I said it's the reaching and the gambling that results in the other team scoring with ease that counts (negatively).

In my opinion, your interest and use in advanced statistics has taken a wrong turn somewhere as your use of it has been off.

 

I did agree with Phil about defense, baby steps and the Ws still needed to get more talent. Where we may disagree is whether to bring in a defensive starter or offensive one (and whether to trade Monta or not). I think offense, i.e. someone in the middle who can score like Nene or Chris Kaman so we can have an inside outside game. But if we can't get those guys, then we can still get someone like DeAndre Jordan who can clog the middle, grab boards and block shots and get other pieces to generate more offense from the bench. Giving Reggie a rotation spot, a solid 25-30 mins at SF, would help a lot in this regard. And we probably would bring back Vlad the Radman.

Umm... perhaps you should check your metrics. I'm more right and you're more wrong because management decided to build around Monta and Curry and they got rid of Don Nelson .

It's difficult to trade and get back a top ten production player if we traded Monta. I think the Ws will go after Nene or Chris Kaman as stated above. That should maximize the points differential as well as improve our defense. As for coach, I think they may extend Smart for next year because a good coach isn't available right now. I have a hard time seeing Jerry Sloan coach another team besides the Jazz, but never say never. Riley should be shown the door and the Ws hire someone like Kevin Pritchard who I think knows how to use metrics. I hope Rowell goes, too. We shall see at the end of season.