View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
ribeye Franchise Player
Joined: 10 Nov 2001 Posts: 12642
|
Posted: Tue Jul 09, 2019 8:33 am Post subject: DRAYMOND--A Better Way To Evaluate NBA Defense? |
|
|
FiveThirtyEight has a new defensive metric called Draymond
Quote: | . . . a few years ago, when the NBA started publishing data on opponents’ shooting. Last regular season, for example, NBA Defensive Player of the Year Rudy Gobert defended a league-high 1,426 shots, according to motion tracking data by Second Spectrum, which identifies the nearest defender on every field goal attempt. Opponents made only 45 percent of those field goal attempts, well below the roughly 49 percent that Second Spectrum estimates “should” have gone in against average defense for a given distance to the basket. |
Quote: | In any event, what we found is that BPM and DRAYMOND basically do equally well in predicting long-term RAPM. What that means is that the opponents’ shooting data is basically as powerful as all box score defensive statistics combined in predicting how much value a player’s defense truly has over the long run. |
The leaders, with a rating of 1.00 or more:
Possesions DRAYMOND....... Player
.. Played...... Rating
38,282 3.16 Draymond Green
11,766 2.95 Joel Embiid
11,714 2.57 Kristaps Porzingis
24,889 2.40 Rudy Gobert
14,218 2.20 Tim Duncan
15,147 2.06 Andre Roberson
30,484 2.05 Anthony Davis
13,887 2.01 Andrew Bogut
14,695 1.92 Roy Hibbert
13,122 1.90 Josh Smith
18,508 1.87 Hassan Whiteside
24,324 1.86 Derrick Favors
17,509 1.73 Myles Turner
14,484 1.71 Aron Baynes
15,511 1.60 Joakim Noah
25,200 1.60 Brook Lopez
14,696 1.57 Timofey Mozgov
16,502 1.56 Luc Mbah a Moute
32,865 1.54 Serge Ibaka
11,843 1.52 Kyle O’Quinn
11,001 1.44 Montrezl Harrell
35,683 1.44 Kevin Durant
25,657 1.43 Robin Lopez
30,395 1.41 Al Horford
17,671 1.40 David West
18,110 1.39 Clint Capela
23,255 1.38 Pau Gasol
17,746 1.33 James Johnson
17,276 1.28 Josh Richardson
33,382 1.27 LaMarcus Aldridge
13,581 1.25 Dewayne Dedmon
13,507 1.25 Jaylen Brown
15,099 1.24 Jusuf Nurkic
33,511 1.23 Giannis Antetokounmpo
11,568 1.15 Nemanja Bjelica
15,221 1.14 John Henson
28,467 1.12 Danny Green
15,534 1.11 Kosta Koufos
20,433 1.10 Jerami Grant
13,358 1.10 Ben Simmons
28,973 1.09 Steven Adams
11,412 1.09 Tyler Zeller
12,931 1.08 Mike Dunleavy
41,713 1.05 Klay Thompson
14,520 1.04 Tony Allen
11,556 1.04 Miles Plumlee
24,075 1.00 DeMarcus Cousins
27,674 0.88 He who is not a Laker or can ever be called a true Laker fan
18,767 0.42 Jared Dudley
39,997 0.19 LeBron James
10,183-0.06 Kyle Kuzma
26,335-0.54 Avery Bradley
29,067-0.88 KCP
Oh, and sadly to say, very last:
22,941-1.55 Rajon Rondo _________________ "A metronome keeps time by using a Ringo"
Last edited by ribeye on Sat Jul 13, 2019 6:15 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Cutheon Franchise Player
Joined: 10 Jul 2009 Posts: 12216 Location: Bay Area
|
Posted: Tue Jul 09, 2019 11:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: | Defensive
Rating
Accounting for
Yielding
Minimal
Openness by
Nearest
Defender |
And, in case it was not obvious, 0.00 represents perfectly average defense.
Limiting results to 2018-2019:
AD: 1.15 (career low)
LBJ: .4
Kuz: -.2
Boogie: 2.17
KCP: -2.4
Danny Green: .08
Rondo: -1.7
Alex Caruso: 4.17 (in 1137.778 possessions; he posted a 1.459 across 1217.667 possessions as a rookie)
--
Lonzo: 1.001
Ingram: 1.148
Julius: -.4 (huge dropoff from his last year as a LAL)
DLO: .326 (first positive season)
--
Kawhi: .248
PG13: .092 (first positive season since 2016; career high of 3.05 in 2015)
Last edited by Cutheon on Tue Jul 09, 2019 11:16 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Cutheon Franchise Player
Joined: 10 Jul 2009 Posts: 12216 Location: Bay Area
|
Posted: Tue Jul 09, 2019 11:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
^For what it's worth, I've been poking around for a while and Caruso's is the highest I've seen (in 2019) with a minimum number of 1000 possessions. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Cutheon Franchise Player
Joined: 10 Jul 2009 Posts: 12216 Location: Bay Area
|
Posted: Tue Jul 09, 2019 11:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jared Dudley in 2018-2019: 1.402 across 2748.779 possessions (career high DRAYMOND rating). Huge turnaround after posting a career low -3.53 in ~1453 possessions. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ribeye Franchise Player
Joined: 10 Nov 2001 Posts: 12642
|
Posted: Tue Jul 09, 2019 11:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
As has been consistently the case, Avery Bradley's defensive metrics don't equal what some say is the eye test--with the exception of last year, to some degree.
2014 Avery Bradley 3716.956 -1.0746
2015 Avery Bradley 5257.806 -0.7967757
2016 Avery Bradley 5346.738 -0.1717675
2017 Avery Bradley 5034.262 -0.7749345
2018 Avery Bradley 2934.981 -0.9791553
2019 Avery Bradley 4044.191 +0.4150857 _________________ "A metronome keeps time by using a Ringo" |
|
Back to top |
|
|
slavavov Star Player
Joined: 03 Oct 2003 Posts: 8471 Location: Santa Monica
|
Posted: Thu Jul 11, 2019 5:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I don't trust any of these analytics when it comes to defense because defense is so hard to measure using numbers and formulas. We have to actually watch these guys over a period of time to see how good they are defensively. _________________ Lakers 49ers Chargers Dodgers |
|
Back to top |
|
|
SuperboyReformed Star Player
Joined: 07 Oct 2012 Posts: 4083
|
Posted: Thu Jul 11, 2019 8:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
lol |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ribeye Franchise Player
Joined: 10 Nov 2001 Posts: 12642
|
Posted: Fri Jul 12, 2019 12:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
slavavov wrote: | I don't trust any of these analytics when it comes to defense because defense is so hard to measure using numbers and formulas. We have to actually watch these guys over a period of time to see how good they are defensively. |
I don't entirely trust either. The eye test is horribly subjective; most aren't trained or experienced enough to know what to look for and how to look for it; it relies on the cameras that focus primarily on the ball, therefore much of the action is not viewable; and it takes the ability to see all at once, which is pretty much impossible. _________________ "A metronome keeps time by using a Ringo" |
|
Back to top |
|
|
PayasoLoco Franchise Player
Joined: 07 Jul 2001 Posts: 16663
|
Posted: Fri Jul 12, 2019 3:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
lol more useless analytics by nerds who havent touched a basketball |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Laker_Dynasty_01 Star Player
Joined: 06 Jun 2001 Posts: 1703
|
Posted: Fri Jul 12, 2019 10:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ribeye wrote: | slavavov wrote: | I don't trust any of these analytics when it comes to defense because defense is so hard to measure using numbers and formulas. We have to actually watch these guys over a period of time to see how good they are defensively. |
I don't entirely trust either. The eye test is horribly subjective; most aren't trained or experienced enough to know what to look for and how to look for it; it relies on the cameras that focus primarily on the ball, therefore much of the action is not viewable; and it takes the ability to see all at once, which is pretty much impossible. |
The press box angle gives enough of a view to know what defenders are messing up on a play, if the viewer can recognize what defense the team is in.
While watching Lakers games with friends who coach, they ask me to replay possessions 2-3 times to see who messed up. Many times last year it was Kuzma, even though another Laker was closer to the rim when the layup was made.
I doubt the DRAYMOND metric accounts for this, or for defensive strategies that may shade one side of the floor and force a guard to help and recover.
The stat seems to favor bigs who either camp in the lane, or are assigned to help on everything coming towards the rim. Would've been much more effective pre-2001 when defenses were static and restricted. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ribeye Franchise Player
Joined: 10 Nov 2001 Posts: 12642
|
Posted: Sat Jul 13, 2019 5:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
Laker_Dynasty_01 wrote: | ribeye wrote: | slavavov wrote: | I don't trust any of these analytics when it comes to defense because defense is so hard to measure using numbers and formulas. We have to actually watch these guys over a period of time to see how good they are defensively. |
I don't entirely trust either. The eye test is horribly subjective; most aren't trained or experienced enough to know what to look for and how to look for it; it relies on the cameras that focus primarily on the ball, therefore much of the action is not viewable; and it takes the ability to see all at once, which is pretty much impossible. |
The press box angle gives enough of a view to know what defenders are messing up on a play, if the viewer can recognize what defense the team is in.
While watching Lakers games with friends who coach, they ask me to replay possessions 2-3 times to see who messed up. Many times last year it was Kuzma, even though another Laker was closer to the rim when the layup was made. |
That is exactly what one has to do, either be informed or with someone who is, have the right viewpoint to see it all, and replay, replay replay. Coaches and players must do this in preparation so even though subjectivity remains, they are in a must better position to offer a valid analysis of the eye test of the all around defensive ability of most players than fans. _________________ "A metronome keeps time by using a Ringo" |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ribeye Franchise Player
Joined: 10 Nov 2001 Posts: 12642
|
Posted: Sat Jul 13, 2019 5:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
PayasoLoco wrote: | lol more useless analytics by nerds who havent touched a basketball |
Maybe you could offer more of your wisdom to explain why teams hire useless analysts to assist them in game preparation, rotations, player development, salaries, free agent targets, strategy, and everything else considered necessary to build a successful team. _________________ "A metronome keeps time by using a Ringo" |
|
Back to top |
|
|
PayasoLoco Franchise Player
Joined: 07 Jul 2001 Posts: 16663
|
Posted: Sat Jul 13, 2019 10:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
ribeye wrote: | PayasoLoco wrote: | lol more useless analytics by nerds who havent touched a basketball |
Maybe you could offer more of your wisdom to explain why teams hire useless analysts to assist them in game preparation, rotations, player development, salaries, free agent targets, strategy, and everything else considered necessary to build a successful team. |
so you agree with this stat that Hart was a better defender than Lonzo last year??? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ribeye Franchise Player
Joined: 10 Nov 2001 Posts: 12642
|
Posted: Sat Jul 13, 2019 1:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
PayasoLoco wrote: | ribeye wrote: | PayasoLoco wrote: | lol more useless analytics by nerds who havent touched a basketball |
Maybe you could offer more of your wisdom to explain why teams hire useless analysts to assist them in game preparation, rotations, player development, salaries, free agent targets, strategy, and everything else considered necessary to build a successful team. |
so you agree with this stat that Hart was a better defender than Lonzo last year??? |
As I said, I don't entirely trust either method (stats v eye test), but the more data one has for analysis, the better will be that analysis.
To answer your question, I agree that the opponent's shooting data for each player as calculated by DRAYMOND is an approximation of that aspect of defense. If I were seriously evaluating the two players' overall defensive prowess, I would use DRAYMOND, 82games Opponent Production (Ball 19.3; Hart 16.3 - lower is better), defensive win shares (Hart 1.9; Ball 1.7 - larger is better), and DBPM (Ball 1.5; Hart 1.1 - larger is better) to try to assess and understand the individual as well as the collective data relative how and what they measure.
Then, assuming access to sufficient tape showing various footage and camera angles of their games, I would observe and study the two to see how each performed according to the different defensive challenges the game presents. In order to arrive as some meaningful conclusion, I would then compare and contrast my findings with that of other observers, players and coaches; compare and contrast with the statistical analysis; and compare and contrast to other variables such as minutes played, when, and against whom.
Or something like that.
But since I don't have access to such tape (and even if I did I don't really have the desire to watch hours and hours of footage just to answer a question that will always be largely subjective), I tend to look at the stats and observe what I can as a casual fan, all the while (unlike many herein) comprehending the limited value of such casual observation.
When some say Danny Green is a mediocre or crappy defender, but I see he had the best RPM of any shooting guard, I realize one (possibly both) must be wrong, but, generally speaking, I will go with RPM over the casual fan. Regardless, for the serious, using RPM would only be a starting point. _________________ "A metronome keeps time by using a Ringo" |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
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
|
|