LakersGround.net :: View topic - X's and O's Discussion (With Video)

X's and O's Discussion (With Video)
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 ... 14, 15, 16 ... 19, 20, 21 Next

This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.

LakersGround.net Forum Index -> Topic HOF

This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

tirebiter
Starting Rotation

Joined: 31 Jul 2014
Posts: 401

Posted: Tue Jan 13, 2015 9:45 am Post subject:

fiendishoc wrote:

azrael187 wrote:

Interesting breakdown fiendishoc. Is there a way to add the average opposing teams ORtg and DRtg during each span next to the Laker's? Think that would be an easy way to show strength of schedule.

Here it is. The ratings for the opponents are for the full season to date. I also added the average betting lines for each section from teamrankings (higher = harder game). It's better in that it probably takes into account the opponent injuries, scheduling, and other issues. But it's worse in that it already takes into account any improvement in the team.

Code:

Bet Off Def Net
A 469 106 101 4.7
B 280 105 103 1.4
C 223 104 103 1.2
D 180 102 104 -1.8
E 357 105 102 3.7

dang that opening stretch was brutal!

so based on your data (thanks for pulling them, btw), our best stretch, objectively, was after young came back and implemented more conservative defensive scheme. does that sound right?

JLinfanJoe
Starting Rotation

Joined: 10 Dec 2014
Posts: 253

Posted: Tue Jan 13, 2015 10:00 am Post subject:

Remembered your earlier comments about the simplified Portland defense and just saw this article today:

Quote:

"Some of it was personnel, obviously, but some of it was we changed our focus, we didn’t extend. My first year we got out and showed on pick-and-rolls, we tried to be athletic. We are much more conservative in our approach to the pick-and-roll. I thought we made good progress last year and this year the focus was on not allowing as many shots at the rim while still taking away the three. Our weak side needed to be better, and I think our defensive rebounding has been better both years.”

Part of it was personnel. The Blazers have Wesley Matthews out on the perimeter as a physical and tough defender, plus they have the length of Nicolas Batum. Most important was the addition last season of the intelligent paint defense of Robin Lopez (who is currently out with broken hand until around the All-Star break). Then it became a culture — Lillard has a bad defensive reputation but he puts in the effort (Lillard’s size can hurt him defensively and he can get rubbed of his man on a screen a little too easily, but he’s game on that end).

The Blazers system isn’t rocket science — they want to take away the most efficient shots on the court, particularly threes, and force teams more into the midrange.

“Their system defensively is to make sure you don’t get threes,” the Lakers’ Scott said. “They do a hell of a job just running you off the threes, they want you to take twos. They’re one of the best in the league at doing that.”

This season teams average 17.5 three point attempts a game against Portland, second fewest in the league, and they shoot just 28.7 percent on those, the lowest percentage in the league. More specifically, teams shoot a league low 30.4 percent on corner threes against the Blazers — that’s the efficient spot that the Spurs and other teams target. Above the break teams are shooting just 28.4 percent from three against the Blazers, also a league low.

That’s a step forward, last season the Blazers were 11th in opponent three point percentage. Two seasons ago when the Blazers used Aldridge’s athleticism to show out on picks they did a good job at the arc but it left the paint exposed and they paid that price. Now, they have Lopez and a new defensive philosophy.

This season Blazers’ opponents are getting shots in close — Portland is allowing 28.6 shots in the restricted area a game on average, top 10 in the league — but they aren’t making them, hitting just 57.9 percent, sixth lowest percentage allowed in the league.

With the size of Aldridge and Lopez in the paint, the Blazers pick-and-roll defense has the big stay back and take away the penetration of the guard coming off the screen. Then, if said ball handler has three-point range, the Blazers’ guard usually tries to fight over the pick and take away the deep ball. Again the goal is simple — force the other team into the midrange for their shot. It’s something they are doing well this season."

http://probasketballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/01/13/lillard-aldridge-are-nice-but-portlands-improved-defense-makes-them-contender

Any observations from last two Portland games on what really worked well against Lakers, or what might even apply to Lakers first unit defense itself?

azrael187
Sixth Man

Joined: 03 Nov 2014
Posts: 42

Posted: Tue Jan 13, 2015 3:47 pm Post subject:

fiendishoc wrote:

azrael187 wrote:

Interesting breakdown fiendishoc. Is there a way to add the average opposing teams ORtg and DRtg during each span next to the Laker's? Think that would be an easy way to show strength of schedule.

Code:

Bet Off Def Net
A 469 106 101 4.7
B 280 105 103 1.4
C 223 104 103 1.2
D 180 102 104 -1.8
E 357 105 102 3.7

Oof, there went that hypothesis. From what I watched (minus the brutal initial stretch) it looked like the Lakers were competing well against good teams, but from the expected averages they underperformed (except in span C). The only easy stretch they had was in span D and they produced the worst against expected there.

fiendishoc
Star Player

Joined: 23 Jun 2005
Posts: 8488
Location: The (real) short corner

Posted: Tue Jan 13, 2015 5:18 pm Post subject:

JLinfanJoe wrote:

Any observations from last two Portland games on what really worked well against Lakers, or what might even apply to Lakers first unit defense itself?

Nice find with that article, and interesting quotes from Byron that he probably wouldn't have made in the beginning of the season. Well the Lakers have already moved toward the Portland philosophy starting from the Toronto game, as I mentioned before. They no longer try to aggressively overhelp every time the ball gets inside. If your big drops back into the paint on the PnR, there's no need to bring too much help from the wings. They never had the personnel to play an aggressive defense in the first place.

In the two games against Portland, I thought the Lakers did a decent job offensively, considering their personnel. The first game had Jordan Hill knocking down all his jumpers, the kind of shots that Portland's defense gives you. In the second game, they weren't as good on offense, but the team missed a lot of uncontested outside shots.

catman2u
Starting Rotation

Joined: 07 Oct 2014
Posts: 349

Posted: Tue Jan 13, 2015 5:31 pm Post subject:

fiendishoc wrote:

JLinfanJoe wrote:

Any observations from last two Portland games on what really worked well against Lakers, or what might even apply to Lakers first unit defense itself?

They missed a lot of uncontested long range 2's. Except for Boozer no one is consistent enough on the team to go with that sort of offensive strategy. Its a tanking strategy IMHO. They need to do p&r's, work the ball inside and then occasionally pitch it back out for totally uncontested 3s. It wouldn't always be bad to have Price and Lin on the floor together since Lin is on of the teams best 3 point shooters to pitch it back to.

fiendishoc
Star Player

Joined: 23 Jun 2005
Posts: 8488
Location: The (real) short corner

Posted: Tue Jan 13, 2015 5:57 pm Post subject:

Quote:

My take is that the data does nothing to contradict our initial observations this season.

In the initial stretch they were a brutally bad team on defense, although getting Swaggy back helped the offense a bit. Then the coaching staff scrapped their aggressive defensive scheme in favor of a simpler, more conservative one, which limited the amount of helping and scrambling they were doing. They started to put out much improved defensive performances, although they're still not a good defensive team.

Then came the lineup change, after which the although the passing improved, but offensive output dropped off significantly, and the defensive performance didn't improve to offset it despite a soft schedule. And in the current stretch with Kobe resting/ passing, the offense has improved a bit from the previous stretch, not still not as good as from the beginning of the season. It's interesting that the lineup change came after the defense improved (granted, it was only a few games) but the pace got faster, and then after the switch, the pace slowed back down. As we know, pace has nothing to do with defensive efficiency, but did the coaches equate high scores with bad defense? I hope not, because that would be ridiculous.

Here are the tables again for easy reference:

Advanced Stats by Section

Code:

Section GP Record OffRtg DefRtg NetRtg AST% AST/TO AST Ratio OREB% DREB% REB% TO Ratio eFG% TS% PACE
A 10 1-9 103.6 114.7 -11.1 53.3 1.52 15 28.6 72.6 48.5 13.2 46.2 51.7 97.88
B 6 2-4 106.3 112.6 -6.4 50.8 1.66 15.7 28 74.8 50.3 12.6 49.7 53.2 96.17
C 4 2-2 104.9 105.2 -0.3 50.3 1.61 15 20.3 73.2 46.5 12.1 49.7 53.6 100.68
D 7 3-4 100.3 105.6 -5.3 58.8 2 16.3 24 74.4 47.7 10.9 45.5 49.8 96.85
E 11 4-7 102.4 105.9 -3.6 58.4 1.64 17 23.9 77.1 50.7 13.8 49.4 52.8 97.45

Strength of Opponents

Code:

Bet Off Def Net
A 469 106 101 4.7
B 280 105 103 1.4
C 223 104 103 1.2
D 180 102 104 -1.8
E 357 105 102 3.7

Code:

Section A: Start of the season, before Nick Young returned
Section B: Nick Young returns from injury
Section C: Team adopts a more conservative defensive philosophy
Section D: Boozer and Lin moved to the bench, Davis and Price become starters
Section E: Kobe begins to sit out nights, and plays the facilitator role when he returns

Last edited by fiendishoc on Tue Jan 13, 2015 7:15 pm; edited 5 times in total

catman2u
Starting Rotation

Joined: 07 Oct 2014
Posts: 349

Posted: Tue Jan 13, 2015 6:01 pm Post subject:

fiendishoc wrote:

Quote:

My take is that the data does nothing to contradict our initial observations this season.

In the initial stretch they were a brutally bad team on defense, although getting Swaggy helped the offense a bit. Then the coaching staff scrapped their aggressive defensive scheme in favor of a simpler, more conservative one, which limited the amount of helping and scrambling they were doing, and then they started to put out much improved defensive performances, although they're still not a good defensive team.

Then came the lineup change, after which the although the passing improved, offensive output dropped off significantly, and the defensive performance didn't improve to offset it despite a soft schedule. And in the current stretch with Kobe resting/ passing, the offense has improved a bit from the previous stretch, not still not as good as from the beginning of the season.

It's interesting that the lineup change came after the defense improved (granted, it was only a few games) but the pace got faster, and then after the switch, the pace slowed back down. As we know, pace has nothing to do with defensive efficiency, but did the coaches equate high scores with bad defense? I hope not, because that would be ridiculous.

I couldn't agree more about high scores/bad defense. One has NOTHNG to do with the other. Its all about efficiency. Of course a team that breaks often will give up points because the other team has the ball ore often. Conversely when teams like Indy play stall ball one offense of course the other team will school less, getter fewer touches. Its SO RARE it makes my head explode that announcers rarely bring this up.

maomao
Starting Rotation

Joined: 05 Jan 2015
Posts: 841

Posted: Tue Jan 13, 2015 11:29 pm Post subject:

well, there is one thing missing from those data, the strength of our opponents. please see who who we played the first 10 games suns twice, warriors twice, memphis, rockets, clippers, spurs, pelicans and bobcats (the one win)

fiendishoc
Star Player

Joined: 23 Jun 2005
Posts: 8488
Location: The (real) short corner

Posted: Tue Jan 13, 2015 11:31 pm Post subject:

maomao wrote:

well, there is one thing missing from those data, the strength of our opponents. please see who who we played the first 10 games
suns twice, warriors twice, memphis, rockets, clippers, spurs, pelicans
and bobcats (the one win)

The strength of the opponents is already there in bold with its own section.

maomao
Starting Rotation

Joined: 05 Jan 2015
Posts: 841

Posted: Tue Jan 13, 2015 11:41 pm Post subject:

fiendishoc wrote:

maomao wrote:

The strength of the opponents is already there in bold with its own section.

sorry I miss that, what is Bet?
it would be helpful to bring the opponent's strength into the first section to show our effective net +- vs an avg team changes with different changes.

azrael187
Sixth Man

Joined: 03 Nov 2014
Posts: 42

Posted: Wed Jan 14, 2015 5:51 am Post subject:

fiendishoc wrote:

Sorry, I wasn't clear explaining my thoughts. I was using the negative of the opposing team's Net Rating as an expected Net Rating for the Lakers and checking the difference. The expectation for me was that during span A the difference would be more negative (hard set of games and injuries) , B would be right around expected (getting Young integrated) and C, D and E would start performing above the expected (playing well against good teams).

Instead, A, B and C were way worse than expected and C and E would a little better than expected. I'm going to rearrange your tables a little bit to highlight that.

Expected Net Rating Vs. Actual using fiendishoc's work

Code:

Section GP Record OffRtg DefRtg NetRtg ExptRtg ExptVsAct
A 10 1-9 103.6 114.7 -11.1 -4.7 -6.4
B 6 2-4 106.3 112.6 -6.4 -1.4 -5.0
C 4 2-2 104.9 105.2 -0.3 -1.2 +0.9
D 7 3-4 100.3 105.6 -5.3 +1.8 -7.1
E 11 4-7 102.4 105.9 -3.6 -3.7 +0.1

fiendishoc
Star Player

Joined: 23 Jun 2005
Posts: 8488
Location: The (real) short corner

Posted: Wed Jan 14, 2015 6:32 am Post subject:

azrael187 wrote:

Code:

Ah ok, I think our initial expectations were slightly different, but our interpretation of the eventual data with regards to the strength of opponents was the same as to which segments they ended up meeting or failing expectations. Also, if you were expecting that they would stabilize around expected net ratings, that means you viewed them as becoming an average NBA team relative to the entire league in recent months. Unfortunately, they were still a below average team, in which you would see more negative net ratings than the inverse of their opponents, until the recent 11 game stretch where they were about average. Progress I guess, but they really dropped the ball in the D stretch.

Omar Little
Moderator

Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 90307
Location: Formerly Known As 24

Posted: Wed Jan 14, 2015 7:00 am Post subject:

JLinfanJoe wrote:

Remembered your earlier comments about the simplified Portland defense and just saw this article today:

Quote:

Any observations from last two Portland games on what really worked well against Lakers, or what might even apply to Lakers first unit defense itself?

that article reads like some of the conversations we were having early in this thread, eh fiendish?
_________________
“We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel

fiendishoc
Star Player

Joined: 23 Jun 2005
Posts: 8488
Location: The (real) short corner

Posted: Wed Jan 14, 2015 7:09 am Post subject:

24 wrote:

JLinfanJoe wrote:

Remembered your earlier comments about the simplified Portland defense and just saw this article today:

Quote:

Any observations from last two Portland games on what really worked well against Lakers, or what might even apply to Lakers first unit defense itself?

that article reads like some of the conversations we were having early in this thread, eh fiendish?

Hehe, yeah. It seems like quite a NBA few coaches (like Malone as well) go through the stage where analytics, watching other teams, as well as the reality of their personnel forces them to change their ideal vision of their defense. Some, a few years earlier than other(s).

sidestep
Sixth Man

Joined: 14 Dec 2012
Posts: 88

Posted: Wed Jan 14, 2015 3:53 pm Post subject:

The Lakers seem to the only team whose first choice of shot selection is long 2s -- precisely the kind of shot that good defenses are more than happy to give opponents. Especially from Hill and Boozer. Worse still, these are the kind of long 2s that, even when they go in, they don't really open up the floor for teammates. Young's terrible shot selection all around includes these as well, but my beef with him is less about where he shoots and more about his eagerness to take contested jumpers. I would say, eyeballing it, that more than half the time that Young takes a contested jumper, Lin is wide open on the 3. It doesn't even matter who is standing on that line, whether it is Lin or someone else -- as long as he is even league average at hitting the 3 -- that is a more efficient shot, and it is absolutely bad coaching on Byron's part that Young has made zero progress towards making that simple pass. It's not even something that requires a difficult cross-court pass or high court vision to pull off. Does Byron even review tape with this team? It is also really frustrating to see that the ball rarely moves from side to side. Take the recent game, even with Lebron gone, Miami still plays aggressive wing defense at times that leaves one Heat player guarding two Lakers on the weak side. That's how you attack that defense but that ball rarely gets over to the other side with this team. It's not just the personnel -- they aren't even trying to do it and it's not a point of emphasis.

tirebiter
Starting Rotation

Joined: 31 Jul 2014
Posts: 401

Posted: Wed Jan 14, 2015 4:33 pm Post subject:

sidestep wrote:

The Lakers seem to the only team whose first choice of shot selection is long 2s -- precisely the kind of shot that good defenses are more than happy to give opponents. Especially from Hill and Boozer. Worse still, these are the kind of long 2s that, even when they go in, they don't really open up the floor for teammates.

Young's terrible shot selection all around includes these as well, but my beef with him is less about where he shoots and more about his eagerness to take contested jumpers. I would say, eyeballing it, that more than half the time that Young takes a contested jumper, Lin is wide open on the 3. It doesn't even matter who is standing on that line, whether it is Lin or someone else -- as long as he is even league average at hitting the 3 -- that is a more efficient shot, and it is absolutely bad coaching on Byron's part that Young has made zero progress towards making that simple pass. It's not even something that requires a difficult cross-court pass or high court vision to pull off. Does Byron even review tape with this team?

It is also really frustrating to see that the ball rarely moves from side to side. Take the recent game, even with Lebron gone, Miami still plays aggressive wing defense at times that leaves one Heat player guarding two Lakers on the weak side. That's how you attack that defense but that ball rarely gets over to the other side with this team. It's not just the personnel -- they aren't even trying to do it and it's not a point of emphasis.

honestly, the three that kelly hit in Q4 that brought the bench within a few points was the most i've seen the ball move in a long time. like you said, he was wide open on the weak side and the ball found him. and it never happened again after that. it's like they can't do it for more than 1 possession at a time.

fiendishoc
Star Player

Joined: 23 Jun 2005
Posts: 8488
Location: The (real) short corner

Posted: Wed Jan 14, 2015 7:32 pm Post subject:

Phillycheese wrote:

It's because this team has a bunch of ball hogs that do not trust each other or the coach or Kobe, to do the right thing. Ellington, Young, Kobe, Wes, Boozer and Hill all look for their shots first, to heck with their teammates. The coach doesn't give a crap and does nothing to curb it. Heck even Sacre is becoming like that. I actually don't mind Lin or Price dribbling around to find the best shot because when they pass it off, it's never moving around anyways.

They're settling for jumpers and when they miss, and they have been missing, you get the 0-18 hole that we saw. Ok now two games where Lin has tried to get Swaggy going, they need to put a stop to this. Lin or Price needs to take the rock out of his hands and only deliver it when he is uncovered.

What's more likely? That seven non-PG rotation players just happen to be selfish players? Or that it's something to do with the coaching?

Ball movement needs to be constantly preached by the coaches. They also have to implement sets that have continued motion, multiple options, and good spacing, or else the players will either stand there or run into each other.

I'll repost what I posted in the other thread-

It seems like most of the called plays end with one option, which is a shot, isolation or a screen for a certain player. Once that option is exhausted, the players are on their own in terms of where to move, where to set screens, where to cut, etc.- in other words, pickup ball. The players then revert to their natural tendencies, rather than to seek efficient shots, and because the spacing is not structured, the lane is jammed with help defenders, so the only shot you're going to get is the long two.

Once in a while you see a Princeton/ Triangle based set with several options, but if they don't run it with a purpose, then it devolves back into what I described above, except with less time on the clock.-

So when Lin dribbles across the court and passes to Swaggy, who then gets a screen and then shoots off of it. Well, that's the play that the coaches have them running. If he doesn't get a shot, he passes back and then the team is on their own to figure out how to get a clear look. I'm sure the play has a name, but we might as well call it "get a shot for Swaggy". It's the kind of an old school kind of offensive system that's gradually being phased out of the league.

JLinfanJoe
Starting Rotation

Joined: 10 Dec 2014
Posts: 253

Posted: Wed Jan 14, 2015 8:03 pm Post subject:

Interesting article on Manu Ginobilli in last year's NBA Finals I thought might be of interest to some on this thread, especially since it is right after a Miami Heat game:

Quote:

"The Heat's aggressive trap out of pick and rolls is supposed to stall the ball, which allows them to lag off of shooters or the roll man. The Heat's length and strength is supposed to deter lob entry passes and quick-strike perimeter swings to shooters.

Ginobili rendered that element largely irrelevant.

Ginobili's passing isn't the laser-sharp precision instrument of Chris Paul, or the wide, sweeping tank rotation of LeBron James. His passing, which helped the Spurs win 110-95 in Game 1, is a brush stroke of creativity mixed with what Boris Diaw calls "craziness."

"It's really a bit of everything," Diaw said at practice Friday. "You can't define one quality in a passer like Manu. He's definitely got the vision, because he knows what's going to happen. It's the skill, to be able to make the pass and deliver the ball wherever you see somebody's free. Some guys have the [vision] but it's harder to efficiently, quickly make the pass to the right place. And he's got a little bit of craziness because he takes some risks sometimes by making passes others wouldn't if they're a little more conservative. "

Quote:

"The Heat defense is different from most of what you'll see. It's designed to trap aggressively, even risking open shooters, to create turnovers -- like the 22 Miami forced in Game 1. Tiago Splitter noted that's different from what most teams do, which makes it harder for the Spurs to counter.

"They play very aggressive," Splitter said. "They do some stuff different than other teams do. They double team you, they force those turnovers. Sometimes they don't care if they leave a guy open, they want to force those turnovers. That's why we got so many open looks, but also so many turnovers.

But Ginobili threaded passes through the Heat doubles, which meant they had multiple options. Watch the crazy angle he makes on this pass to Splitter, and also note how open the shooter is at the top of the arc if he needs to adjust at the last second."

Quote:

"Ginobili loves that jump pass. He used it to an excruciatingly effective degree in Game 1. Shane Battier noted that part of the issue is that Ginobili takes such unorthodox angles.

"His angles are not what you're used to," Battier said. "He can make a pass at any angle. Most guards, there's only a certain amount of slots they can pass from, so you can anticipate those. His unorthodox moves and balance, keeps you off guard. You can't really get into him as much."

http://www.cbssports.com/nba/eye-on-basketball/24582262/manu-ginobilis-passing-craziness-opens-up-the-spurs-offense

http://www.si.com/nba/point-forward/2014/06/16/manu-ginobili-finals-redemption-spurs-heat-championship

Last edited by JLinfanJoe on Wed Jan 14, 2015 8:24 pm; edited 2 times in total

kikanga
Retired Number

Joined: 15 Sep 2012
Posts: 29335
Location: La La Land

Posted: Wed Jan 14, 2015 8:08 pm Post subject:

Expected Net Rating Vs. Actual using fiendishoc's work

Code:

I like these stats alot.

But sample C is less than a point better than E (in ExptVsAct) even though the sample size is only a third as large.
I'm not sure that that proves during time period C our team employed its best strategy and rotations.
In that 4 game sample the two wins came from Kobe dropping a 30 point triple double and a 20 point double double.
If he does that enough in any sample size, it'll look good. But I don't think that is a reasonable expectation for him moving forward.
_________________
"Every hurt is a lesson, and every lesson makes you better”

fiendishoc
Star Player

Joined: 23 Jun 2005
Posts: 8488
Location: The (real) short corner

Posted: Wed Jan 14, 2015 8:19 pm Post subject:

kikanga wrote:

Expected Net Rating Vs. Actual using fiendishoc's work

Code:

That's a fair critique, as uncommon events will swing the numbers quite a bit with these small sample sizes. And in sample E, they have improved to playing somewhat average ball overall. But at the same time, in sample D and even in sample E, the offense is significantly worse than in any other period, while the defense is no better than in sample C. Sample C is not big enough, so the best I think we can say is that there is no evidence that putting those four players who can't generate offense in the starting lineup improves the defense beyond what could be done with the same defensive scheme, but there is some evidence that it hurts the offense.

azrael187
Sixth Man

Joined: 03 Nov 2014
Posts: 42

Posted: Thu Jan 15, 2015 6:15 am Post subject:

fiendishoc wrote:

azrael187 wrote:

Code:

Was thinking about this and what it would mean if a team beat all the bad teams and lost to all the good teams, would this make them a .500 team? Not in the crazy west, where the average of all the western teams Net Rating is 1.6ish (depending on the site you use).

I checked the Lakers schedule assuming a win against a team with Net Rating of below -1 and loss above +1 and a half a win in between +-1. Ended up with Lakers with 12.5 wins, so not a horrible proxy, but small sample sizes and all.

On a similar note, there are high variances in the games, but giving a deeper look into quarter by quarter blocks (or specific lineups at specific times) of offensive/defensive ratings to approximate starters/bench could tease out what the lineup changes did or it could be making the small sample size issue even worse. The problem with analytics, the end result has to be correctly tempered with context and intuition.

kikanga
Retired Number

Joined: 15 Sep 2012
Posts: 29335
Location: La La Land

Posted: Thu Jan 15, 2015 7:29 am Post subject:

fiendishoc wrote:

kikanga wrote:

Expected Net Rating Vs. Actual using fiendishoc's work

Code:

I agree. Even a relative basketball novice can see. Our offense is worse with price and davis starting and ending games instead of Lin and Boozer.

With Lin and Boozer starting we did give up the most points per game to opponents in the league. IIRC, at one point we gave up more than 4 points more than the second worst team in opponents points per game. Now we've dropped to 106.8 and are close to a point and a half better than the worst team (Minnesota). That could be due to pace of course and thus wouldn't show up in defensive efficiency stats.
_________________
"Every hurt is a lesson, and every lesson makes you better”

fiendishoc
Star Player

Joined: 23 Jun 2005
Posts: 8488
Location: The (real) short corner

Posted: Thu Jan 15, 2015 9:02 am Post subject:

kikanga wrote:

fiendishoc wrote:

kikanga wrote:

Expected Net Rating Vs. Actual using fiendishoc's work

Code:

The defensive efficiency stats for each section, as well as pace, are on the big table (Advanced Stats by Section), so there's no need to use ppg. Regarding how the original starting lineup could have been performing on defense around this point, it all comes down to how much one thinks that the coaching staff simplifying the scheme helped the defense. If you check around page 7 of this thread, or on the archive of DB's game recaps starting from the Toronto game, you can see the optimism we had that they were finally doing sensible things on defense, and how it would improve from there. And it did. The Boozer benching was probably warranted- he and Hill had no chemistry out there on both ends, and the effort was sometimes lacking. But throwing Price in there at the same time was opened up a glaring weakness in the spacing, and muddled things up without a clear indication that it did anything other than just slow the pace down. I would have tried only Davis first, and if that didn't work, have him go back to the bench and then Price in with the starters. And only after that failed would I entertain both- but probably not, because I would have tried Ellington in there with Kobe first, as 24 and GT suggested due to the common sense that you need several shooters out there.

Without experimenting like this, you can't really see what combinations maximize the team's potential. It makes more sense to search for something that seems to work, and THEN ride it for about 15 games to see if it sticks and to build up chemistry.

A Mad Chinaman
Star Player

Joined: 07 Apr 2005
Posts: 6145

Posted: Thu Jan 15, 2015 10:36 am Post subject:

fiendishoc wrote:

Phillycheese wrote:

Interested and appreciated observations

It seems as if Swaggy has any chance of taking the shot, he is going to take it and miss. Even though Swaggy has started to integrate Kobe's suggestion of being more efficient on offense, he still takes up precious time off the shot clock - hence the team does have the collective confidence to quickly run a set or the consistent shooters to bail them out. JLin has had several bad TOs where he was telegraphing the entry pass to Swaggy. (Is there a stat that documents the efficiency of JLin or Price - or success rate of an attempted passes. Is there a stat on how many times Swaggy takes a shot or passes the ball?)

Isn't it the PG's responsibility that if the team is disorganized on offense (forgetting the basic offensive principals) to take control or call a play? Given JLin's statiscal success in the past of driving the paint (acknowledging that this year his closing percentage has seemingly dropped), one wonders why this simple plan has not been seen more. The other elite/top guards have demonstrated that ability.

If JLin is unwilling or unable and Price's ability to create on his own is negligible, who/how/what should the team do to make sure they always get quality shots. With Price on the floor, it was Kobe (but what happens if he is not on the court). From the bench, who should they depend on - Ellington, Johnson, etc. The offensive consistent inefficiencies of Davis and JHill to force doubleteams has made it harder for JLin - hence the importance of Boozer and RKelly

Phillycheese
Starting Rotation

Joined: 13 Jul 2014
Posts: 332

Posted: Thu Jan 15, 2015 5:57 pm Post subject:

AMC brought up a good point and it is one that I tend to agree with. Lin appears to be force feeding SwagP just as he was when he was starting with Kobe. What is unsure is if this was the coach's plan or if Lin is deferring on his own. What I do know from Lin's history is if he is given freedom to pass to whomever, he tends to do the right thing more often than not - what people refer to as scoring within the flow of the game. However, when he is told to play a certain way he does that as well. Given the old school, disciplinarian ways of BS and his rotaions, I would guess that he is instructing Lin to play a certain way, or should I say penalising him when he does not play that way that BS wants. Everyone points to SA as the right way to play. but without familiarity and coaching one cannot simply play that style. Therefore, I think it will fail if LA tries to play that way. they probably need to play more like the Clippers, have a floor general playmake for the other players. Kobe did that well except for the turnovers. Scott does not trust Lin to do the same even thouh he has shown he can doit quite effectively.

Display posts from previous:

LakersGround.net Forum Index -> Topic HOF

All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 ... 14, 15, 16 ... 19, 20, 21 Next

Page 15 of 21

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

LakersGround is an unofficial news source serving the fan community since 1995.

We are in no way associated with the Los Angeles Lakers or the National Basketball Association.