Re: What I saw defensively, LAL at SAN 5/19
- --- In APBR_analysis@y..., Dean Oliver <deano@t...> wrote:
> (Quick G 1 notes before G 2)
> The Lakers did force the Spurs to shoot a lot from the outside,
> the supposed improvement out there this year. Robinson seemedhesitant
> after the first outside shot. Rose obviously is a bricklayer.Bryant did
> a good job getting to some of the more important 3 pt shooters.Not sure
> if Derrik Anderson's presence would have helped.The Spurs' outside shooting is killing them. The lack thereof, I
should say. Duncan is more than holding his own, but maybe he should
guard Shaq more often. Malik Rose is surely the smallest guy I ever
saw attempt it, aside of Rodman. Rose was almost on his knees trying
to keep his position.
Daniels is playing great offense, considering his defensive
responsibilities. Ferry and Porter's shooting pct. are in free fall,
as is Avery's , though it hasn't far to fall.
Steve Kerr may have to come in just to show them how it's done.
If Tyronn Lue can get a minute, so can Steve.
> The Spurs' tight perimeter defense that they normally play becauseof the
> presence of the 2 big guys didn't work, mainly against Kobe, whocan go by
> anyone playing him tight. They should perhaps rethink that, but theFerry has yet to shoot a free throw in the playoffs.
> quickness is going to hurt them no matter what.
> Other notes
> - Danny Ferry is slow. He does rotate a lot, but ineffectively.
> - I think Elliott is a little more effective on Kobe than Daniels.After
> this game, I'd think hard about starting Elliott.I had this thought about Elliott, as well. I might try Ferry and
Porter off the bench, Elliott and Avery back in the saddle.
> - Why didn't Porter play more? He did not play particularly well,but
> he's bigger than Johnson and Phil Jackson has more fear of Porterthan
> Johnson.Porter is suddenly looking very old, again
> - Taking these stats really emphasizes -- both while I'm watchingthe game
> and in the numbers -- that defense is a team effort. My recordedsimilar
> defensive numbers make teammates' defensive ratings a lot more
> to each other than when I roughly estimate them from stl, blk, anddef
> rebs.they make
> After every game, I look at the Net Pts columns and see whether
> sense. Qualitatively, they generally do. But sometimes theabsolute
> number seems weird. Here, for instance, Horry's net pts were about0,
> either way you look at it. (There is a 3rd way that suggests hisnet pts
> were -6.5. That doesn't seem right.) My gut was that seemed low.I
> think about it and it seems fine. It just makes me wonder about gutFisher
> instincts on what net pts ought to be. Was Kobe +7 or +22? Was
> +3.5 or -2.1?Dean, I can't decide if your defensive scorekeeping is downright
heroic, or if you should just enjoy the game.
Gotta love the effort, though.