My adjusted +/- linear regression has Westbrook as a very good defender (but that's based on small sample for him as it really takes 3 years of data to reduce the noise). Sad thing is... Miller's defense is way down there with Nash, Blake. And that's based on 4 seasons unweighted so since he's getting older it's probably worse than even that. Roy's not so good either. BTW Mbah a Moute, Luc comes in as the 10th best defender on the list, one spot better than Joel. Westbrook -3.5 Iguodala -3.4 Battier -3.2 Rondo -3.2 Claxton -3.0 Harris -2.7 Kidd -2.7 Fisher -2.2 Bell -2.0 Farmar -1.8 Lowry -1.7 Paul -1.5 Parker -1.2 Davis -1.2 Ginnoboli -1.2 ... ... Roy +1.2 ... ... Miller +2.1 Nash + 2.4 Blake +2.4 Sessions +2.4 Rose +2.6 Calderon +3.1 Rodriguez +4.9
Perhaps we see now why the Blazers didn't exactly jump at the chance to sign Sessions. And it's reassuring to see that my impression that Paul shouldn't've been anywhere near first team defense is backed up by these numbers. Claxton must be a product of noise - and surely that's not Baron Davis? Also the Fisher number is, well, fishy.
What a shame Houston picked him up. Damn that Daryl Morey (or whatever his name is). I think Houston are being seriously underrated: I predict they'll do better than New Orleans and possibly even Denver, who I think are set to nosedive.
Claxton hasn't played enough either... stderror is about 2.1 so he could still be below average... same with Westbrook. Even the ones with 4 full seasons of data you're going to have anomalies (off by 2-3 points) every 20th player or so. That's the main problem with +/- it takes too much data so there will always be outliers. The problem with PER though is it basically hardly measures defense & intangibles at all.
I like Lowry too, but he can't shoot for shit from outside, he's almost purely a driver ... but regardless, I think Morey got a steal when he stole him from Memphis.
