give me james posey. give me trevor ariza. give me roger mason. give me willie green. i can name a few more.
There's not way that can be true, because a team who gets limited attempts can still technically shoot a hig percentage, but won't have enough attempts to score a lot of points. In other words, if Houston plays 24-second D most of the game, making possession longer and slowing down the game,plus they create turnovers, then the opponents may only get off, let's say, 50 shots. If they make 25 of them, that's 50%, very good shooting %, but if that's all they are really getting, let's say only 10 freebies, add 4 points for 4 of those shots being threes, then their total points scored are 64 points. So would you say that was good defense or not???
i never said fg% is an end-all-be-all indicator of defense but it's a great one. that means you're CONTESTING shots and you're making the other teams shoot a very bad %. obviously you gotta close it with rebounding and not fouling. but the NBA ranks defense on fg%. cavs and boston are the 2 best defensive teams. and they own the 2 best fg% allowed in this league.
15 games isn't a big sample, but based on points allowed / possession, we did better defensively in those first 15 games. But one thing to keep in mind though is that teams, league wide, are generally worse offensively in the first month of the season.
that may be true, but i'm just pointing that out to counteract those who say we're lost defensively without shane--he's the guy who's telling us where to be and all that. but when in fact, we do fine without him defensively and that's where shane is supposed to make a BIG difference. let me mind you--that was with tmac on one leg and very little chemistry as that lineup didn't practice much together. again, battier obviously helps on defense, but by how much? and i think that 15 game sample (maybe small) tells quite a bit about that.
so now were talking playoffs offense? Since your argument wasn't supported by the regular season offense you decided to limit it o the playoffs? The same playoffs where tmac went off like crazy? How can you reach any logical conclusions when tmac playus above his normal level AND you only have 7 games as a sample size??? I've been a fan for along time, so i'll admit i get my years mixed up sometimes, but ESPN has deke listed as a rocket in 04-05, as well as yahoo, so either we're all wrong or you're wrong. As for jimmy and wesley, my point still stands, that the 04-05 team's role players were more capable defenders than what we have now. That team had several solid defenders, the last 3 years this team had like one or two really good ones and that's it, so it balances out.
It's not that our D went to another level, compared to that 04-05 team, rather that several good defenders, who also had intangibles, from that team are gone and we haven't replaced them with another combination of good defenders. So that's one of the major reason why shane is so important to this team. It's not that he's untouchable, it's more that you don't want to trade him for someone that at least brings what he brings, because this team doesn't have alot of it. For example, let's say we could get monta ellis for shane, on paper it's a no brainer, but what does that do to this team? Our D takes a huge hit, not only because Shane, a good defender himself, is gone, but because shane gets guys in defensive positions, points things out etc. He kind of makes everyone else a little better defensively. If we had several solid defenders, like in 04-05, then shane is more expendable because the team doesn't depend on him as much for to defense swingmen and provide defensive leadership. So you have two choices if you want to get rid of shane and not lose defensive play: 1. Get several solid defenders 2. Get another guy who is a great defender with qualities like shane that get everyone else motivated to step up their D Neither of those is easy. To do #1 you'd have to give up players, so you'd be filling one hole by creating another. To do#2, like i mentioned earlier, you'd have to get a Kobe or lebron type of player, or someone else's "battier", which team wouldn't want to trade in the first place. That's why it doesn't make sense to give him up.
I'm going to assume that we desire that shane be more offensively oriented and more athletic. We wish Shane's offensive game were the equivalent of...Von Wafer? Von can hit the 3, but he can dribble, drive in the lane, create, etc etc on offense. So, let's take a look at the numbers. WAfer: http://www.82games.com/0809/08HOU6.HTM Battier: http://www.82games.com/0809/08HOU8.HTM some highlights for the lazy. Offensive differential when on and off the court. WAfer: +4.5 Battier: +2.9 So, per 100 possesions, Wafer helps the team score 1.6 points more than Battier Defensive differential on/off Wafer: +4.0 Battier: -3.6 So, per 100 possessions, Wafer helps the other team score 7.6 point more than Battier NEt on/off WAfer: +.6 Battier: +6.5 For those who believe on/off is flawed, it depends on matchups, etc, etc, more numbers. Let's replace Battier with Wafer in the lineup, and compare the numbers. The only available comparable numbers are: 43 minutes of Brooks-Barry-Wafer-Landry-Hayes = +.01 offense vs. defense. 27 minutes of Brooks-Barry-Battier-Landry-Hayes = -.4 offense vs. defense. 41 minutes of Alston-Wafer-McGrady-Scola-Yao = -.2 161 minutes of Alston-McGrady-Battier-Scola-Yao = -.04 30 minutes of Alston-Wafer-Artest-Scola-Yao = +.12 134 minutes of Alston-Battier-Artest-Scola-Yao = +.17 21 minutes of Brooks-Wafer-Artest-Landry-Yao = +.09 26 minutes of Brooks-Battier-Artest-Landry-Yao = +.36 Not only does battier perform better in the last 3 lineups, but the offense produces more per possesion as well with BAttier instead of Wafer. THe first lineup includes Chuck Hayes...if we're playing chuck hayes at Center, then we're really screwed. One final thing about the "no championship can be built with a 6.6PPG wing player". Tmac is out, so the division of labor is out of whack. We have 20M of our salary cap not being utilized, so we're going to blame the 7M dollar guy for not picking up the slack? Slack that was never his role to do? Its like the Houston Astros of yesteryear. Ausmus and Everett were blamed for our offensive woes. EXcuse me? The offense is bad because our 7-8 hitter were under-producing? No, the offense sputtered because the top of the lineup underproduced, while the Everett-Ausmus produced what was expected of them. For the Rox, Battier is producing what is expected of him, and what is paid of him. Its the other guys (Tmac, and to a certain extent Yao in the 4th) that are under producing. I think Battier is just in a slump right now, because non-athletic players do not dramatically decline when they hit 30. How much slower can he get? His game is based on his IQ and hustle anyways.
Ah, see that's the idea that Shane is holding out on us. i keep mentioning he truly isn't athletic and everything is based on him working hard and being prepared. What you're refering to, not every player is able to do (which i believe you said earlier). When a game is tight, players are more careful more focused. Let's look at Kobe. When do you think Kobe is the most intense, the most aware? During crunch time. This means he's dribbling more carefully, doesn't gamble, guess, he's more precise. So the only way you're going to counter that is by being pretty damn good yourself and having special abilities. Shane isn't very quick or very strong,etc. That's why he can't just make things happen like that. Jordan, NBA finals strip on Malone. Bowen wouldn't have done that. It takes someone special to pull it off. Dream block on Starks in 94, wallace wouldnt have done that. It was Dreams special mixture of height and quickness that enabled him to go and get it. Shane really is closer to a Matt Bonner (as far as physicial abilities go) than we realize. He's actually overachieving. That's why he doesnt push it to the next level, he's already pushed it a lot. the type of guys who can do what you're asking have the extra physical ability AND the work ethic, shane just has work ethic. I think this is just people wanting him to be more than he is. Sort of like people wanting Yao to be more than he's capable of.
apparently some don't understand the term "many" which does not mean all. of the 20 on the list, you referenced 3 apparently some don't understand the term "tries", just because he tips the ball does not mean the rockets will result in the rebound. there are other players on the court i think................. The question is not the production, it's the ability to be productive if given the opportunity.
It is the system to to a certain extent, but who enforces the system? the coach who's system it is. EVen with JVG coaching, the team sometimes got away from the system and JVG had to get them back on track. So now without JVG there to enforce it, who do you think does it? It's not going to be the defensively challenge guys like scola and landry, or an offensive minded coach like Adelman, it's going to be the defensive minded like shane and deke. Exactly why Deke has/is so important, even if he's just sitting. You're spurs comparison has a small flaw. With houston, the "enforcer" of the system left, with the spurs he didn't. Pop was and still is the coach. The new guys are only good defensively because they were introduced to the system and are kept playing within the system by the coach. If they were to leave to another team, chances are they individually wouldn't keep being a good defender. In the rocket's case, shane is one of the enforcers of the system. He can go elsewhere and still be a good defender, but someone like Landry, who can be decent on D within the system, may go elsewhere and suck on D. So if you think we can get rid of shane, and JVg's system will live on, it won't. Once again, it will only live on if we get someone who brings what shane brough, and once again, that kind of player is hard to get!
A certain persons post always seem to bore me.........lets see if we can guess who it is??????????????
Well, the reason people are getting on him now is because his injuries are limiting him. Thats what injuries do. Especially to average starters. Tmac on one leg could get you 15 ppg, 4 apg, and 5 rpg. When healthy, he is a superstar. When Battier is healthy, he is a good defensive player, who can hit an open corner 3, occasionally post up a smaller defender, take charges, get a couple of offensive rebounds and has a very high bball IQ. In the last 2 years, he did those things very well. He never had any injury problems, so he could defend the great wing players effectively, making them work hard for their points and making them settle for jump shots. His corner 3 was usually money for him. When teams put their bigger wing player on Tmac, Battier was a legit offensive option (also there was no Artest, and Scola and Landry weren't as good). He used to be all over the place taking charges and getting steals and rebounds. He also made great decisions on the court. Now with his injury that he is playing through, it is tough to be the "hustle,glue guy". Its a lot of work for a player to do that. His defense has slipped noticably, his shooting has gone south (maybe due to a lack of touches) and his post game is non existent. To put it simple, he has not played up to the level we were used to seeing him play. He used to be a 15 ppg threat on any given night, and he could play 40+ minutes guarding Kobe, Lebron, Dwade etc. and be effective. His 3's used to be automatic. That isn't the case anymore this season. Until he takes care of that injury this upcoming offseason, he will never be the same. Luckily, we have more weapons, and another defensive stopper in Artest, so Battier is not needed as much. I do think his minutes should be reduced, but thats up to the coaching staff. Battier is still a quality player in the NBA, but he is just hurt, and trying to play through it the best he can. Its an injury, its not easy to play through those...
that was ron taking the place of shane. Ron came in with some crazy intensity, remember he started out the first 3 games of the season stealing the ball from all 3 opponents on their very first posession. He was setting a tone by playing great D from the opening second. This extra intensity went on until he sprained his ankle, then when he came back he couldn't keep going all out because of the ankle, so the whole thing died down eventually. I dont think he's gone back to that same intensity since. Maybe for a play here and there, but not as extended as early on.
You guys need to stop hating on Battier. Ever since his rookie year and hype before getting drafted. People knew that Shane was going to be a player that was going to impact the game without scoring. That's exactly what he's doing here. Am I enjoying his poor shooting? Absolutely not. However, I enjoy his intangibles, his defense and his huffort You guys just need to deal with who Shane Battier is.
Ariza is a gambler. He racks up steals by using his athleticism and gambling, he's not a great one on one defender, or defender in general. He's definitely not capable of getting a team to concentrate on D like shane. He doesn't draw charges like shane either. If you want to give up several posessions of extended D for an extra 2 steals a night, then Ariza is your man and shane should be traded. Good luck winning with that. (and i know you're going to reply saying the lakers do win with that, but they have kobe, who's a great defender and their defensive leader who gets them on the same page on d, not just offense. Ariza feeds off of him. You replace Ariza with shane, who's ariza going to feed off of? He aint getting anyone on the same page defensively, he's just going to look out for his steals. Roger mason? Cmon now, please don't imply his defense range is anywhere near shane's. Willie Green? My goodness...Go ahead and post a "Morey, Green for Shane, make it happen", and see what kind of responses you get.
Oh yeah as for posey, he's almost up there with guys who are hard to get because teams won't let them go very easily. Boston wouldn't have let him go, but he was a FA. Houston would have kept him, but he was a FA. Philly and Memphis traded him because they had bigger holes to fill. That's how poset got away, via free agency. He comes up short when it comes to directing guys on d though.
but you did say it was the best one though, which is what is being questioned... also, it could just mean the league's entire FG% that year is lower, similar to what durvasa mentioned, so that's why u have to take posessions into account.
