... unforeseen ... Sonics ... come ... softness ... Sheesh, life is frickin busy right now. Chemistry -- I guess you could say it is chemistry. But there isMessage 1 of 34 , Apr 7, 2003View Source--- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Tamada" <tamada@o...>
> that the Sonics' defense should improve next season, barringunforeseen
> happenstances? On the one hand, it's easy enough to believe, theSonics'
> defense has been soft for awhile so improvement is easy enough tocome
> buy. But on the other hand, it would seem that most of thatsoftness
> came from the C and PF positions, so if the Sonics do improve on DSheesh, life is frickin' busy right now.
> it would come from improved defensive play there, rather than from
> improved D from the guards.
> I suppose that what you might be saying is that improved D from the
> power positions would most likely come via a Payton-Allen trade ...
> this is not outlandish, in fact I might buy it, but it's hard to
> see the connection, except for the chemistry thing.
Chemistry -- I guess you could say it is chemistry. But there is
more. The Sonics have been horrible at perimeter defense. A lot of
that is the style they play trying to protect interior defenders.
Gary was never as good at help defense -- covering on the perimeter
out of a rotation -- as he was on straight cover D and most numbers
suggest that he'd lost a bit on that over the last several years. So
maybe Allen is a better perimeter help defender in the D the Sonics
play. That might be chemistry. My indicators weren't as clear as
this, but more pointed at the team results being worse than the sum
of the parts on D.
I haven't done the study yet but I would like to look at really what
type of player has hurt the Sonics the most this year.
Back to busy life.
... This is actually misleading. I won t say wrong, but misleading. Pace is very important. Many of the individual stats are offensive and without adjustmentMessage 34 of 34 , Apr 11, 2003View Source--- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "Mike G" <msg_53@h...> wrote:
> What matters is that x points and y rebounds occurred in z minutes.This is actually misleading. I won't say wrong, but misleading.
Pace is very important. Many of the individual stats are offensive
and without adjustment for pace overweight players who just put up a
lot of offensive stats _per minute_. And pace is mostly (not
entirely) a function of a decision about pace, not ability (though
ability has a small impact). How fast or slow teams play reflects
primarily on their style not their substance. How many points and
rebounds per minute reflects both style and substance. Removing pace
more isolates the substance.
The way common possessions do it is by isolating another variable in
addition to minutes that is common between both teams on the floor.
Both teams have 48 minutes to win. Both teams have 100 possessions
to win in a fast game or 85 in a slow game or whatever. But both
opponents have the same number (not true with small possessions
= "plays"). So, yes, what matters is what happens per minute, but it
is equivalent to say that what matters is what happens per
possession. And what happens per possession isolates quality better
than what happens per minute.