http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_2013_leaders.html Our own Carlos Boozer 20th in field goals 6th in defensive rebounds 10th in total rebounds 11th in personal fouls 10th in rebounds per game 7th in defensive rebound pct. 17th in total rebound pct. (Noah was 18th) 19th in Defensive Rating (Noah was 7th, Deng does not appear) 13th in Defensive Win Shares (Noah is 11th)
For a guy with a reputation of being a poor defender, the advanced stats say he was among the best in the league.
Most of the stats are neither advanced nor surprising. Boozer's a very good offensive player and his main defensive contribution is that he's an exceptional defensive rebounder. The problem with his defensive rebounding has always been that Boozer often ignores his help responsibilities in order to maintain defensive rebounding position (you need eyes and game knowledge, not stats, for this). The defensive rating and defensive game shares stats qualify as advanced stats. I've never seen the calculations for these stats. As a result, you'll never see me use them.
Yes, basketball-reference.com describes it as an estimate of opponents points per 100 possessions. I'd like to see the actual calculation.
Because they're trusting the software gets it 100% right. Or the scorekeeper enters the data correct. http://espn.go.com/nba/playbyplay?gameId=400467339 (an example file)
OK, does the fact that Boozer is 19th in Defensive Rating and 13th in Defensive Win Shares mean anything to you, and if so, what? As you know, I'm kind of into advanced NBA stats. These particular stats, when taken down to the individual player, add nothing to my understanding of player performance. If they help you, great. I promise not to use individual Ratings or Win Share stats in my posts.
His defensive rebounds are stops. His defense is underrated. It's not a measure of his individual defense. With him on the floor, the team's defense was better than for most players in the league, no matter who was on the floor with Boozer (well, the aggregate of who was on the floor with him).
So, in your studied opinion, Carlos Boozer is a very good defensive player? A good defensive player? An average defensive player? A below average defensive player? Please advise.
I hear people complain about him a lot. Yet when I watch him play, he does make rotations and he does make people pull up for jump shots. Then again, the Bulls play a lot of zone, especially last year. Teams that don't shoot well over the zone play like crap and Boozer gets the stats for it.
Well, if you see him making rotations, then you also see him not making rotations or making rotations just a step or two late. I'll say this for him, he has improved under Thibodeau.
Agree, but Thibodeau doesn't want to play a lot of zone. He wants to play an aggressive helping man defense that contests every shot and closes the inside entirely.
Everything that I've seen from Thibs and read about his strategy is that his defense is a zone, if not zone-like. For example, http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id...trategy-forcing-coaches-rethink-their-offense The Heat are the most obvious example of a team that has torn down and rebuilt its entire offense over 18 months to counter defenses committed to clogging the lane, sending an extra defender toward the ball, and forcing offenses into second, third, and fourth options. It's no coincidence Miami plays in the same conference as Boston and Chicago — the two teams most associated, via Tom Thibodeau, with that strangling defense. Thibodeau didn't invent this system, and he's loath to take any public credit for it, but coaches, scouts, and executives all over the league agree he was the first coach to stretch the limits of the NBA's newish defensive three-second rule and flood the strong side with hybrid man/zone defenses.1 Other coaches have copied that style, and smart offenses over the last two seasons — and especially this season — have had to adapt. The evolution will have long-lasting consequences on multiple fronts — on the league's entertainment value, the importance of smart coaching, and the sorts of players that GMs seek out in the draft and via free agency. --- FWIW, I see the Bulls outright running 2-3 and 2-1-2 zones frequently. They don't run the same zone from possession to possession; the idea is to mix things up and try to thwart offenses' ability to adapt. You might ask how they play 2-3 zone without defensive 3 seconds. They can if Noah can guard their C in the blocks. They can if they play 2 guys on one side of the lane. They can play 2-1-2 if the center is at the FT line. The great defensive Pistons teams played 2-1-2 with the back two above the FT line. Try to throw over it and one of the two Wallaces got back in time.
The simplest way I know to tell if it's zone or man is to see what the defense does with a cutter. If a defender chases cutters, it's a man. If no one chases, it's a zone. The Bulls defense almost always chases cutters. This said, virtually no one in the NBA plays an old-fashioned straight man defense ("just stick to your man like white on rice"). They play man defenses that incorporate zone principles and zone defenses that incorporate man principles. When we talk about "help defense" or "defensive rotations," we're talking about a zone principle in a man scheme where defenders leave their man to stop the ball. From what I've seen, what gives Boozer problems is defensive awareness and anticipation. He may also be too concerned about his defensive rebounding stats because he's loathe to leave his man when he has established good rebounding position.
I think he worries about the big man on his side of the zone so he doesn't help out on Noah's man when Noah gets beat. I see 2-1-2 and think it's a zone. There's box and 1, too, which is a 2-2 zone with 1 guy (Deng) playing man on their best player.
