It changes all the time, but names that are usually in the top 5 conversation - Marcus Smart, Cory Joseph and Jrue Holiday. I don't think there ever is a constant top 5 with how PGs have to balance their energy on offense/defense (especially ones that have a main option workload), defensive scheme and how the ones that are used primarily for their defense sometimes don't get adequate enough minutes over the course of the season, or enough reps defending elite offensive players.
It's time we stop recognizing Chris Paul as a great defensive player
- Thread starter Gil Scott-Heroin
- Start date
No doubt, which is why I don't particularly like using stats unless they can actually break down a player's specific role/action on defense. At least the #s and %s I'm using actually try to outline what a player is doing on defense, whereas all your argument hinges on is a bunch of formula-based metrics around box score measurements that tie directly and/or value the rest of the players on the floor equally.
i) Box score stats should never be the foundation of defensive value
ii) Line up stats should never be the foundation of defensive value when comparing players on different teams
iii) Predictive stats should basically never be used at all.
When looking at individual defense through a statistical lens you have to identify which stats best isolate a player's role during a possession, else if you start wrapping your argument up in metrics like WP that are heavily influenced by that player's teammates and surface statistical rulers - you eventually lose any resemblance of that player's true defensive worth.
LV Koopa
Jester from Hell
All of them aren't box score measures. Example, ORTG, DRTG, RPM - all of these are based on LINEUP data. Not boxscore stats. And lineups are one of the closest thing to predicting wins we have as they are closest to pegging Point Differential (aka the thing you really want to know if you want to predict wins).
For Boxscore yes, the NBA boxscore misses a lot of crucial data. And yes, the public in general puts too much stock on some categories. But it isn't useless. It helps us with the 4 Factors of Basketball that explain 98% of how a team win's games. The problem comes down to figuring out how useful the data is from the current boxscore. Good thing there are ways around that even if it won't be close to accurate. But then again - this is why we use multiple types of data to make decisions. Even more so if you are against using predictive stats then boxscore stats aren't really the issue for you and neither should the OBSPM(offensive box score plus minus/defensive) be an issue.
Also, I'm not sure you're aware but the conversation when Synergy first came out is how they assigned credit to a defender. Years ago it was just based on who was the "first" defender even if that player clearly wasn't responsible for a missed FGA. Other times it was based on the "last" defender on a play even when the real work was done by the primary defender. So you see, by using Synergy stats you aren't really solving the issue you have in the first place.
Not only there is little difference between the frequency in which they guard the play, you also have to take into account defensive ISO possessions (where they're actually defending players with ball in hand) - where Curry had a 12.6% frequency (ended up 5th in total attempts defended, only behind the likes of Ibaka and Draymond) - literally TWICE the amount of Paul,
And stop twisting your initial position of Curry "chasing around non primary ball handlers " whereas Paul wasn't. You've turned this into splitting hairs over who guards ball-handlers more, when you made out that there was this great difference to begin with.
i) Who said elite defense?
ii) Westbrook was NOT beating Curry off the trouble/and scoring on him plenty - most of the possessions without screens Curry forced Westbrook into a contested jumper, closed down his driving lanes or stopped Westbrook from backing him down in the post. He clearly wasn't scoring on him plenty either: 8-25 and seven turnovers says otherwise.
iii) Not all defensive possessions are on an island, you can't take away Curry's positioning and effort simply because another player might rotate over after most of the work has been done (I'm talking about the ones where Curry is actually staying with him, not the ones where Westbrook gets past).
You're starting to veer off course here; discussing team-related factors rather than an individual's defensive impact - which certainly can not be found in those metrics.
I'm well aware of this (it seems their ISO possessions are more true to form where little-to-no help defense is involved - with a drop in attempts across the league over the last few seasons), which is why NO defensive stat is ever going to give a 100% reading and you're never going to completely solve the issue. Past that, you can use those #s in conjunction with contest rates/Keep-in-front%/Keep-in-front drive%, defensive workload and a team's defensive scheme to get an outline of their impact on that end - all things that point to CP no longer being a great defensive player.
What about the last two to three seasons? Do those suddenly not matterI only jumped back in the thread talking about this season.
You know your shyt.......except when it comes to j Kidd
I probably went to more Nets games than everybody else on this board combined during the early/mid 2000s.You know your shyt.......except when it comes to j Kidd
Not only there is little difference between the frequency in which they guard the play, you also have to take into account defensive ISO possessions (where they're actually defending players with ball in hand) - where Curry had a 12.6% frequency (ended up 5th in total attempts defended, only behind the likes of Ibaka and Draymond) - literally TWICE the amount of Paul,
And stop twisting your initial position of Curry "chasing around non primary ball handlers " whereas Paul wasn't. You've turned this into splitting hairs over who guards ball-handlers more, when you made out that there was this great difference to begin with.
i) Who said elite defense?
ii) Westbrook was NOT beating Curry off the trouble/and scoring on him plenty - most of the possessions without screens Curry forced Westbrook into a contested jumper, closed down his driving lanes or stopped Westbrook from backing him down in the post. He clearly wasn't scoring on him plenty either: 8-25 and seven turnovers says otherwise.
iii) Not all defensive possessions are on an island, you can't take away Curry's positioning and effort simply because another player might rotate over after most of the work has been done (I'm talking about the ones where Curry is actually staying with him, not the ones where Westbrook gets past).
Now you're changing your position it isn't a negative that Curry's team contributes, but that that is what it is a TEAM effort. And yes there were several times he beat Curry off the dribble even with Curry giving him slack forcing him to shoot. And I never commented on the primary ball handler thing after you disproved it you're fishing for moral victories and there ain't none here for you. Paul guarded ball handler more frequently and they attempted less FGA's. Curry guarded them less frequently and they attempted more. If the stat that literally had DEFENSIVE BALL HANDLER LEADERS titles at the top had the frequency of when they were guarding them isn't taking into account iso possessions then I don't what to tell you. And 13 more made on 5 more attempted isn't astronomical either, but you were 
about it weren't you?I haven't changed my position nor have I moved the goal posts ONCE in this thread.
If you read my post properly you'd see that I said this -
iii) Not all defensive possessions are on an island, you can't take away Curry's positioning and effort simply because another player might rotate over after most of the work has been done (I'm talking about the ones where Curry is actually staying with him, not the ones where Westbrook gets past).
BECAUSE IT ISN'T TAKING INTO ACCOUNT ISO POSSESSIONS - IT'S A SEPARATE CATEGORY:
Curry - 42.5% frequency and 326 attempts defended
Paul - 48.7% frequency and 321 attempts defended
Curry - 12.6% frequency and 96 attempts defended (5th most in league)
Paul - 6.0% frequency and 41 attempts defended
It would pay for you to know what you're talking about instead of acting like it. SMH.
And 13 more made on 5 more attempted isn't astronomical either, but you were
It's not about being astronomical - it was to point out you were horribly wrong in suggesting that Curry was chasing around non-primary ball handlers, when in fact he was right there above Paul on possessions defending the ball-handler.
No you weren't you were trying to say the frequencies were marginal had nothing to do with my earlier comment. And you realize this iso stat doesn't take into account which ones against the primary ball handler, right? Which is what we were arguing about, right? And you were hyping the shyt up. It was team effort regardless if you want it to be or not.I haven't changed my position nor have I moved the goal posts ONCE in this thread.
If you read my post properly you'd see that I said this -
iii) Not all defensive possessions are on an island, you can't take away Curry's positioning and effort simply because another player might rotate over after most of the work has been done (I'm talking about the ones where Curry is actually staying with him, not the ones where Westbrook gets past).
BECAUSE IT ISN'T TAKING INTO ACCOUNT ISO POSSESSIONS - IT'S A SEPARATE CATEGORY:
Curry - 42.5% frequency and 326 attempts defended
Paul - 48.7% frequency and 321 attempts defended
Curry - 12.6% frequency and 96 attempts defended (5th most in league)
Paul - 6.0% frequency and 41 attempts defended
It would pay for you to know what you're talking about instead of acting like it. SMH.
It's not about being astronomical - it was to point out you were horribly wrong in suggesting that Curry was chasing around non-primary ball handlers, when in fact he was right there above Paul on possessions defending the ball-handler.
You forgot Mike Conley
LV Loopa, I am enjoying your back and fore with Gil but simply put, Chris is a very intelligent defender and QB his defensive players like Jordan to where he knows how to hedge on defense. This makes Chris Paul an excellent BBIQ based defender. But him and Korver can't defend 1v1 nor can they cover the top on screens. These two do a great job with what they have to work with. Mediocre wingspan and athletic ability for their position but they have elite BBIQ which doesn't put the defense in a bad position.
I personally think Paul is a solid defender but Gil is right, Chris is one of the worst iso defenders in the NBA and is a liability to a degree. That said, like Korver, he's more helpful than not.
This is why I hate analytics to a degree. Some guys are great iso defenders like Dennis Schröder but mediocre over defenders because they don't make it easier for the other defenders. So much into what is and isn't a good defender.
I personally think Paul is a solid defender but Gil is right, Chris is one of the worst iso defenders in the NBA and is a liability to a degree. That said, like Korver, he's more helpful than not.
This is why I hate analytics to a degree. Some guys are great iso defenders like Dennis Schröder but mediocre over defenders because they don't make it easier for the other defenders. So much into what is and isn't a good defender.
Cory Joseph. Fake expert type of post. FOH
I don't really understand why this is still an argument; Gil clearly has the evidence to suggest that Paul is no longer a great on-ball defender. His effort shifts over to defense sometimes and he's still a very smart player, but he still isn't very great anymore at staying in front of his man and forcing them into tough shots. He doesn't put the heat on the defender the way he used to. Off-ball I'd say he's still good, his steals numbers and high team-oriented defensive numbers reflect that. But once you delve into his ISO/man-to-man defense, it's not what it used to be.