C-Webb and Steve Kerr ripping into Mark Jackson's system

[tzill]

Check the link, tzill they are very very good defensively, 3rd best in the NBA. Yes they had a few bad games, every team does, but ball don't lie. Bogut, our best defender, was out too.

If anything Jackson deserves criticism for the offense not the D, as this thread (and Webber and Kerr) pointed out.

That's the thing, I don't think it's been a "few." It's been "far too many for an elite d." 13/50 games with "meh, we didn't play defense tonight" is too many. We can argue about the reasons (you say injuries, I say Avi and Jax) but the fact remains that this defense is too erratic to be considered "elite."

IMO.

 

[msgkings322]

That's the thing, I don't think it's been a "few." It's been "far too many for an elite d." 13/50 games with "meh, we didn't play defense tonight" is too many. We can argue about the reasons (you say injuries, I say Avi and Jax) but the fact remains that this defense is too erratic to be considered "elite."

IMO.

Including all those games the Ws have given up fewer points per possession than all other teams but 2. thats the bottom line measure of defense.

Have they had some bad games? of course, so has every other team. maybe they have 1 or 2 more, fine. but the reason they dont have a better record is their OFFENSE believe it or not. The turnover problem you rightly point out is why they are only 12th in scoring per possession. But you are flat wrong about this team being flawed defensively.

 

[Hambombs]

No, there's an even better stat: defensive efficiency, which is how many points given up per 100 possessions, which obviously accounts for pace. The Ws are third in the league behind only Indy and Chicago. They are a very very good defensive team this year, obviously due to a healthy (until now) Bogut and adding Iguodala.

Yep. Probably 2nd best defense if iguodala wasn't out

 

[Hambombs]

That's the thing, I don't think it's been a "few." It's been "far too many for an elite d." 13/50 games with "meh, we didn't play defense tonight" is too many. We can argue about the reasons (you say injuries, I say Avi and Jax) but the fact remains that this defense is too erratic to be considered "elite."

IMO.

You're wrong. Teams are going to make shots some nights

 

[Hambombs]

My assessment of the team in one sitting. Elite defensive team and a good offense but problematic a bit. But could still be top 10 in effciency by the end of the year

 

[msgkings322]

My assessment of the team in one sitting. Elite defensive team and a good offense but problematic a bit. But could still be top 10 in effciency by the end of the year

That's about right, the turnovers hurt the O a fair amount.
But if they get to full strength, and with their improved depth, who knows?

Well, actually, we all know: SA or OKC vs Indy or Miami in the Finals.

 

[tzill]

Including all those games the Ws have given up fewer points per possession than all other teams but 2. thats the bottom line measure of defense.

Have they had some bad games? of course, so has every other team. maybe they have 1 or 2 more, fine. but the reason they dont have a better record is their OFFENSE believe it or not. The turnover problem you rightly point out is why they are only 12th in scoring per possession. But you are flat wrong about this team being flawed defensively.

You do understand the difference between individual data points and overall average right? When they've been good, they've been very good. When they've been bad, they've been awful. They've been very good about 3x more than they've been awful, so the average is quite good. Simply put, the standard deviation of their defensive shooting percentage against is too high, IMO, to be considered elite.

They've had 7 or 8 bad losses. Every team has a couple, but I sincerely doubt the elite teams in the league (MIA, IND, OKC, SAN) have had more than four each. Add in 6 questionable home losses and you've got 13 problematic games. That's not, to me, elite.

Lastly, I watch every single game. I look at and use stats quite a bit but the eye test waaaaaay too many times has been failed by the defense. Are there other problems? Yes, especially turnovers. And overall, I'd agree that the defensive effort has been good. But the vacillation between good and "who fucking cares" on defense is especially irksome. This shows up in bad losses and questionable home losses, which elite teams minimize.

We can disagree, but that's the way I see it.

 

[tzill]

You're wrong. Teams are going to make shots some nights

Thanks for that lucid and insightful counterpoint.

I feel dumber for just having read it.

 

[tzill]

That's about right, the turnovers hurt the O a fair amount.
But if they get to full strength, and with their improved depth, who knows?

Well, actually, we all know: SA or OKC vs Indy or Miami in the Finals.

In other words, elite teams. Gotcha.

 

[msgkings322]

In other words, elite teams. Gotcha.

Exactly...the Ws aren't an elite team. They have an elite defense this year, but their offense is only average.

If they can keep the D and cut down turnovers next year with another year of the system and another year older, maybe they make the Finals.

 

[Hambombs]

That's about right, the turnovers hurt the O a fair amount.
But if they get to full strength, and with their improved depth, who knows?

Well, actually, we all know: SA or OKC vs Indy or Miami in the Finals.

West finals isn't a given just yet. I'm giving it more time

 

[Hambombs]

Just a Fyi. The nuggets who won 57 games last year were 35-22 at this point last year and clippers were 40-18. 3rd seed is still a possibility

 

[NBKLee]

Bump, how long before Jackson rips into Kerr's system?

 

[clyde_carbon]

Bump, how long before Jackson rips into Kerr's system?

Do you have a hard on for Jackson or something? Chill, bro.

 

[msgkings322]

West finals isn't a given just yet. I'm giving it more time

It wasn't hard to predict this year's final 4.