Can an elite defensive PG impact a defense as much as an elite center?

[Im Still Ballin]

I was reading some older threads about Jason Kidd and came across an interesting discussion about the defensive impact of point guards. Some posters argued that it's not as important as interior defense/paint protection/rim protection from bigs.


Defense isn't that important for a PG...


Great defending PG’s don’t lead top ranked defensive teams. It just doesn’t happen. Of course having a great defending pg is nice but it isn’t a crucial part of a championship team. Athletic defensive big men and wings have a greater impact.


Perimeter defense isn't very impactful.

For big men offense = defense in importance but for guards offense >> defense.

Nash is a way more impactful player than Payton in their primes even though the gap on offense is smaller than the gap on defense.


With as many pick and rolls and willingness to just switch, it's very easy to get a Gary Payton type defender off you in this era and instead attack a weaker defender.

Some posters provided responses:


completely wrong. Nba history is full of guys like Iverson, Lillaird, Hardaway, KJ, etc. that could take over a game offensively. You need to be able to defend those guys. Defense is important at every position.


I love the line "Defense isn't that important at PG." I would say C and PG are the most important positions to have good defense, especially if your PG can get in the passing lanes. That's a hot hot take, tho. It shows up on youtube. I've heard it too much. haha. People forget about Nash and how everyone shit on him because he'd give up career highs to everyone, even when he was MVP leading great teams. Another proof of defense being important at PG is the fact that a guy like Nate Robinson can be pretty darn good, but he is relegated to a 6th man energy guy because he's too small to play D properly.

Big wings get a lot of love on D cuz they can do a lot, but especially in this era, most wings aren't agile enough to switch onto PGs. Thus, PG D is important. They just gave Marcus Smart DPOY, in this trash no-D era. Back when people could actually press, like J Kidd days, it was even more important.


I've never understand that line of reasoning. You want to cut off the head of the snake if you can. Would you rather a lamp-post like Steve Nash who will let you get anything you want, or a Gary Payton who will harass you for 40 minutes and make it harder to make plays?


That doesn't reduce the importance of a point guard defender. Do you want to let Lillaird attack your point guard without even needing to force a switch or have a point guard that the Heat want to force to switch onto Jimmy Butler? The heavy switching of today just makes it important that everyone can defend and the weak link gets picked on.


That's normally true in terms of big men having more defensive impact but Kidd was a special case. He had the Nets ranked #1 in defense in 2002 and 2003. They were ranked 23rd in 2001 before he got there. So kidd literally took a trash defense and made them the best D in the whole NBA. That's absurd defensive impact.



Kidd nets were the top ranked defense. And it certainly wasn't because of their centers unless you think Jason Collins was anchoring it lol. Kmart and Kidd were the only ones locking shit down.


I’m not sure Kidd didn’t lead the top defense himself somewhere along the way. If it wasn’t the top, it was damn near there. When I started reading your post, I thought that’s where you were going with it.

It had to be the Nets, Pistons, Spurs, and pacers in the top spots those years.

My own response was the following:


I'd be cautious to throw out absolutes like PG defense doesn't matter. There are general rules, but there are players who break them.

Tpols' point about the Nets defense getting dramatically better is interesting. It's not even just about the position the defender plays: great communication and instruction can help the whole team.

The scheme matters too. The Big Three Miami Heat leveraged their athleticism on the perimeter/wings to run a high-energy, rotation-heavy, frenzied defensive attack. They were elite and didn't have much if any quality rim protection.

This discussion came back to me while I looked over the numbers of Jason Kidd's effect on New Jersey. The Nets went from 23rd to 1st in defense; besides Kidd, they added Jefferson, Collins, and MacCulloch. And they were healthier.


2000-01 Nets: 100.0 ORtg (-3.0 rORtg); 105.5 DRtg (+2.5 rDRtg); -5.5 net rating; -5.30 SRS; 26-56 W/L
2001-02 Nets: 104.0 ORtg (-0.5 rORtg); 99.5 DRtg (-5.0 rDRtg); +4.5 net rating; +3.67 SRS; 52-30 W/L

Improvement: +4.0 ORtg (+2.5 rORtg); -6.0 DRtg (-7.5 rDRtg); +10.0 net rating; +8.97 SRS; +26 wins

It's not all Kidd, but he seems to be at the center of it all. The defensive ON/OFF numbers don't show it but the core pieces are more or less the same from the season prior. I don't think it was Todd MacCulloch because he was gone the next year and their defense was even better. And RJ and Collins were bench guys in that first season with Kidd.

Teams like Kidd's Nets, LeBron's Heat, Pippen's Bulls, and Payton's Supersonics are good examples of teams that were elite on defense while lacking a strong rim protector. The late '60s and early-to-mid '70s Knicks as well.

The NCAA D1 Houston Cougars are ranked 1st in the country on the latest AP poll and its defense is historically good. And they do it with aggressive trapping, help defense, and rotations. They don't have that classic rim protector but a swath of mobile and long guys who are versatile enough to defend multiple positions and situations.

Here's a great video about them:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fjiEoU2_igQ

There's always going to be elements of the game that the statistics cannot account for. It has a hard enough time trying to separate offense from defense while acknowledging the context of scheme/system, personnel, and lineups/rotations.

[Im Still Ballin]

Big men tend to be the most impactful on defense for two reasons:

1) They're protecting the paint (the most valuable area on the court)
2) They're involved in the most defensive possessions

Defense is reactionary because the offense has a much greater level of control over what happens during a possession. Things usually default to drop coverage and running shooters off the three-point line. Everything funneled to the big protecting the paint.

But there are things that a defense can do to force the issue and gain some degree of control. Ball screen coverage, help defense/doubles, pre-switching off the ball/matchups, etc.

So, to answer the title: Yes, I believe an elite defensive PG can impact a defense as much as an elite center. You just need the right scheme and personnel but most teams at the pro level don't run those types of systems. Most NBA players don't want to run around trapping PnRs hard, pressing up, and having to rotate so much.

[Reggie43]

No easily. Somebody like Gary Payton will never be a more impactful defender than Hakeem.

[iamgine]

Against certain matchups yes. Mutombo would be a lot less useful if your opposing PG and C is Curry and Looney.

[tpols]

There are some centers from the past that couldn't play today, with the best example being DPOY Eaton. Stiff guys could be played off the floor by the long range shooting and switches.

[FireDavidKahn]

Nope. Caveats always apply but for 99% of cases

A dominant defensive big is way more impactful to a defense then a defensive wing

While on the other hand

A dominant offensive wing is way more impactful to an offense then a great offensive big.

[tpols]

Nope. Caveats always apply but for 99% of cases

A dominant defensive big is way more impactful to a defense then a defensive wing

While on the other hand

A dominant offensive wing is way more impactful to an offense then a great offensive big.

Jokic and Kidd are unicorns offensively and defensively respectively.

[FultzNationRISE]

Jokic and Kidd are unicorns offensively and defensively respectively.


Lebron is their hybrid offspring.

[Im Still Ballin]

The one-number advanced metrics point to Caruso as being the best defensive guard in the NBA. I can't believe LA let him go. He's really good.

D-EPM: +3.3 points per 100 possessions impact (5th for players who've played at least 35 games)
D-DRIP: +2.9 points per 100 possessions impact (2nd)
D-LEBRON: +1.99 points per 100 possessions impact (11th)

D-EPM and D-DRIP have him as impactful as Wemby on defense this season.

[dankok8]

Of course not. Defensive bigs have way more impact. They protect the paint where the most valuable shots are and also contest way more shots in an average game than a defensive PG ever can. That's also why defense for a guard is way less important than offense but for a big, they are equally important if not defense being a bit more important actually.

[Duffy Pratt]

Without answering the question, I will just raise a couple of points in favor of the point guard:

1) Blocks, as a statistic, are overrated. A block either goes out of bounds, or to another player. Thus, a block is really nothing more than a glorified deflection. If the defending team recovers the ball, it results in a change of possession. Thus, the block statistic encompasses both deflections and steals. They are slightly more important because shots tend to come later in the shot clock. (Also, when people talk about Bill Russell’s greatness on defense, part of that greatness was his ability to block shots by tipping them to his teammates. His blocks were more frequently steals.)

2) The two main things that a point guard defender should be trying to do are to eat time off the shot clock and to force the pg to start the offense in the direction opposite from where he wants to go. Both of these impacts are subtle and would be nearly impossible to quantify.

Here are the NBA teams that have won two or more championships within a handful of years:

Mikan’s Lakers
Russell’s Celtics
Frazier/Reed’s Knicks
Havlicek/Cowen’s Celtics
Magic/Kareem’s Lakers
Bird’s Celtics
Isiah’s Pistons
Jordan’s Bulls
Hakeem’s Rockets
Shaq/Kobe’s Lakers
Kobe/Pau’s Lakers
Duncan’s Spurs
LeBron’s Heat
Curry’s Warriors

Six of those teams are built around small ball, with no great defensive rim protection (but perhaps still with excellent defensive centers like Cowens and Reed)

Only four have inside presences who dominated the paint on defense (Mikan, Russell, Hakeem and Duncan).

Kareem, Shaq, and Pau are more offensively oriented and were simply good on D (Kareem less and less as he aged). And Bird’s Celtics dominated the paint through sheer size of the three of them, without any great shot blocking.

[Im Still Ballin]

Of course not. Defensive bigs have way more impact. They protect the paint where the most valuable shots are and also contest way more shots in an average game than a defensive PG ever can. That's also why defense for a guard is way less important than offense but for a big, they are equally important if not defense being a bit more important actually.

You don't think there can be exceptions? A player's impact is limited by the players they play with and the system they play in. Nash goes to Phoenix, is surrounded by great finishers, and gets to monopolize possession and run the offense. His offensive impact skyrockets. Goes through the roof.

Can't the same be true for the defensive end of the court?

How many teams are willing to acquire the personnel to run a system that maximizes the impact of a defensive PG? In the NBA, barely any. The 2023-24 Houston Cougars are doing it at the NCAA D1 level. They have the #1 defense in the country and its historically strong, ranking as one of the best of the 21st century. Its ten-man rotation includes the following:

LJ Cryer (6'1" Guard)
Jamal Shead (6'1" Guard)
Emanuel Sharp (6'3" Guard)
J'Wan Roberts (6'7" Forward)
Damian Dunn (6'5" Guard)
Ja'Vier Francis (6'8" Forward)
Mylik Wilson (6'3" Guard)
Joseph Tugler (6'7" Forward)
Terrance Arceneaux (6'5" Guard)
Ramon Walker (6'4" Guard)

They trap/blitz ball screens excessively hard, recover, rotate, close out hard, and force a ridiculous amount of turnovers. Now, according to Basketball Reference's DBPM, Jamal Shead - a 6'1" PG - is the most impactful defender: +6.9 points per 100 possessions.

I know it's college, but it's still interesting.

I don't see why a generational defensive guard couldn't have a defensive impact appreciable to an elite defensive big if he played with the right personnel and in the right system.

[tpols]

You don't think there can be exceptions? A player's impact is limited by the players they play with and the system they play in. Nash goes to Phoenix, is surrounded by great finishers, and gets to monopolize possession and run the offense. His offensive impact skyrockets. Goes through the roof.

Can't the same be true for the defensive end of the court?

How many teams are willing to acquire the personnel to run a system that maximizes the impact of a defensive PG? In the NBA, barely any. The 2023-24 Houston Cougars are doing it at the NCAA D1 level. They have the #1 defense in the country and its historically strong, ranking as one of the best of the 21st century. Its ten-man rotation includes the following:

LJ Cryer (6'1" Guard)
Jamal Shead (6'1" Guard)
Emanuel Sharp (6'3" Guard)
J'Wan Roberts (6'7" Forward)
Damian Dunn (6'5" Guard)
Ja'Vier Francis (6'8" Forward)
Mylik Wilson (6'3" Guard)
Joseph Tugler (6'7" Forward)
Terrance Arceneaux (6'5" Guard)
Ramon Walker (6'4" Guard)

They trap/blitz ball screens excessively hard, recover, rotate, close out hard, and force a ridiculous amount of turnovers. Now, according to Basketball Reference's DBPM, Jamal Shead - a 6'1" PG - is the most impactful defender: +6.9 points per 100 possessions.

I know it's college, but it's still interesting.

I don't see why a generational defensive guard couldn't have a defensive impact appreciable to an elite defensive big if he played with the right personnel and in the right system.

Yea your main point is right. Outliers exist in every aspect of life. Kidd was one of them. Growing up playing ball it wasn't shot blockers that had me shook it was good defensive trapping.

A lot of great defenders stats are heavily impacted by their rebounding totals as well since the two are lumped together. Kidd is by far the best rebounding point guard ever though and that was a huge part of his impact. He wasn't stealing boards from teammates... just had a master nose for the balls trajectory.

It would actually be even crazier today given all the long rebounds from 3pt shots. And perimeter defense being valued at a premium.

[Im Still Ballin]

Without answering the question, I will just raise a couple of points in favor of the point guard:

1) Blocks, as a statistic, are overrated. A block either goes out of bounds, or to another player. Thus, a block is really nothing more than a glorified deflection. If the defending team recovers the ball, it results in a change of possession. Thus, the block statistic encompasses both deflections and steals. They are slightly more important because shots tend to come later in the shot clock. (Also, when people talk about Bill Russell’s greatness on defense, part of that greatness was his ability to block shots by tipping them to his teammates. His blocks were more frequently steals.)

2) The two main things that a point guard defender should be trying to do are to eat time off the shot clock and to force the pg to start the offense in the direction opposite from where he wants to go. Both of these impacts are subtle and would be nearly impossible to quantify.

Here are the NBA teams that have won two or more championships within a handful of years:

Mikan’s Lakers
Russell’s Celtics
Frazier/Reed’s Knicks
Havlicek/Cowen’s Celtics
Magic/Kareem’s Lakers
Bird’s Celtics
Isiah’s Pistons
Jordan’s Bulls
Hakeem’s Rockets
Shaq/Kobe’s Lakers
Kobe/Pau’s Lakers
Duncan’s Spurs
LeBron’s Heat
Curry’s Warriors

Six of those teams are built around small ball, with no great defensive rim protection (but perhaps still with excellent defensive centers like Cowens and Reed)

Only four have inside presences who dominated the paint on defense (Mikan, Russell, Hakeem and Duncan).

Kareem, Shaq, and Pau are more offensively oriented and were simply good on D (Kareem less and less as he aged). And Bird’s Celtics dominated the paint through sheer size of the three of them, without any great shot blocking.

Great post. The 1996-1998 Bull had an -5.1 rDRtg. That has got to be up there for three-year stretches. I believe Phil Jackson took a lot of coaching inspiration from his time playing under Red Holzman in New York. Ball pressure and generating turnovers was a huge part of Chicago's gameplan.

Reminds me of how Lonzo and Caruso had The Bulls 7th in defensive rating despite playing with Vucevic, LaVine, and DeRozan. Just blowing up screening actions, passing lanes, and generating live-ball turnovers for easy transition offense.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bcBTMWyHOeE&ab_channel=ThinkingBasketball

[Duffy Pratt]

The other thing off about this discussion is the limitation of C and PG.

Typically, the center will be the main defensive presence in the middle but not always. Parrish and McHale shared it. AD does worse when he actually has to defend a center (Joker and Embid). Then there is Towns/Gobert, Giannis/Lopez.

Even more common is the peripheral defender who is not the PG. Dumars was the best peripheral defender on the Pistons. CCP takes up the role for the Nuggets. The Bulls had three elite defenders on the outside. For the Rockets, it was Mad Max. For the Magic Lakers it was either Cooper or Scott.

I haven’t done an exhaustive list, but I don’t think there are many championship teams whose point guard is also the best perimeter defender (Frazier, West, Oscar, DJ, Holiday immediately come to mind, probably missing a few). But almost all of them had elite D on the perimeter, probably more often than there has been elite rim protection.

[dankok8]

You don't think there can be exceptions? A player's impact is limited by the players they play with and the system they play in. Nash goes to Phoenix, is surrounded by great finishers, and gets to monopolize possession and run the offense. His offensive impact skyrockets. Goes through the roof.

Can't the same be true for the defensive end of the court?

How many teams are willing to acquire the personnel to run a system that maximizes the impact of a defensive PG? In the NBA, barely any. The 2023-24 Houston Cougars are doing it at the NCAA D1 level. They have the #1 defense in the country and its historically strong, ranking as one of the best of the 21st century. Its ten-man rotation includes the following:

LJ Cryer (6'1" Guard)
Jamal Shead (6'1" Guard)
Emanuel Sharp (6'3" Guard)
J'Wan Roberts (6'7" Forward)
Damian Dunn (6'5" Guard)
Ja'Vier Francis (6'8" Forward)
Mylik Wilson (6'3" Guard)
Joseph Tugler (6'7" Forward)
Terrance Arceneaux (6'5" Guard)
Ramon Walker (6'4" Guard)

They trap/blitz ball screens excessively hard, recover, rotate, close out hard, and force a ridiculous amount of turnovers. Now, according to Basketball Reference's DBPM, Jamal Shead - a 6'1" PG - is the most impactful defender: +6.9 points per 100 possessions.

I know it's college, but it's still interesting.

I don't see why a generational defensive guard couldn't have a defensive impact appreciable to an elite defensive big if he played with the right personnel and in the right system.

No.. simply because of the sheer number of possessions that bigs affect. An elite defensive big man can contest ~40% of shots at the rim while he's on the floor and deter countless others. There is nothing a guard can do to match that over a decently large sample.

[Im Still Ballin]

Now that I think about it, Kidd's Phoenix and New Jersey teams both lacked quality rim protectors. I mean, Kenyon Martin got blocks but I question how valuable that was. He was putting up the same stats the year before Nash came and they were 23rd on defense. Jason Collins was probably underrated even if he wasn't much of a swatter.

1998 Suns: 101.8 DRtg (6th) [-3.2 rDRtg]
2000 Suns: 99.0 DRtg (3rd) [-5.1 rDRtg]
2001 Suns: 98.0 DRtg (2nd) [-5.0 rDRtg]
2002 Nets: 99.5 DRtg (1st) [-5.0 rDRtg]
2003 Nets: 98.1 DRtg [1st] [-5.5 rDRtg]
2004 Nets: 98.0 DRtg [4th] [-4.9 rDRtg]
2005 Nets: 103.1 DRtg (7th) [-3.0 rDRtg]
2006 Nets: 102.4 DRtg (4th) [-3.8 rDRtg]

1998 + 2000-2006: -4.44 rDRtg
2000-2004: -5.1 rDRtg

That's pretty crazy. For comparison, Nash's Phoenix teams from 2005-2010 had an average of +6.7 rORtg.

Six straight seasons of Nash = +6.7 rORtg
Five straight seasons of Kidd = -5.1 rDRtg

I wonder what prime Kidd could've done with those Nash Suns supporting casts.

[Xiao Yao You]

Now that I think about it, Kidd's Phoenix and New Jersey teams both lacked quality rim protectors. I mean, Kenyon Martin got blocks but I question how valuable that was. He was putting up the same stats the year before Nash came and they were 23rd on defense. Jason Collins was probably underrated even if he wasn't much of a swatter.

1998 Suns: 101.8 DRtg (6th) [-3.2 rDRtg]
2000 Suns: 99.0 DRtg (3rd) [-5.1 rDRtg]
2001 Suns: 98.0 DRtg (2nd) [-5.0 rDRtg]
2002 Nets: 99.5 DRtg (1st) [-5.0 rDRtg]
2003 Nets: 98.1 DRtg [1st] [-5.5 rDRtg]
2004 Nets: 98.0 DRtg [4th] [-4.9 rDRtg]
2005 Nets: 103.1 DRtg (7th) [-3.0 rDRtg]
2006 Nets: 102.4 DRtg (4th) [-3.8 rDRtg]

1998 + 2000-2006: -4.44 rDRtg
2000-2004: -5.1 rDRtg

That's pretty crazy. For comparison, Nash's Phoenix teams from 2005-2010 had an average of +6.7 rORtg.

Six straight seasons of Nash = +6.7 rORtg
Five straight seasons of Kidd = -5.1 rDRtg

I wonder what prime Kidd could've done with those Nash Suns supporting casts.

the east was very weak at that time

[Jasper]

I will reference PAST era and Current Era

Past era's there was an article out some years ago that proved that a PG could never lead a team to a chip.
**THINK of Big O or Steve Nash.
That being said in that era a center's defense overlapped front court play and impacted the defense.

Current era : floor is spread , so any player could impact a teams defense.
Look at Rodman, Holiday , ape Man ,Lopez.

[iamgine]

Another point for PGs are defensive leadership. PGs are more likely to be natural leaders. Therefore they are more likely to have a great effect on team defense. i.e Holding others accountable on defense. Telling others their mistakes. What defense to run on certain plays. etc.

This aspect I guess is often overlooked or not counted.

[Im Still Ballin]

the east was very weak at that time

I don't think that matters all that much. It's all relative. He had worse supporting casts than the top-seeded Western Conference teams. You give him an appreciable level of help that Nash had in Dallas and Phoenix and you'd see similar results. Put him on Detroit instead of Chauncey; I think that's a comparable level of help.

[Im Still Ballin]

Amar'e Stoudemire, Shawn Marion, Joe Johnson, and Quentin Richardson

vs.

Rip Hamilton, Tayshaun Prince, Rasheed Wallace, Ben Wallace

Seems comparatively even to me. You add Kidd to that Detroit team instead of Chauncey and they get markedly better. Defense was their strength and Kidd was a better defender than Billups. And the offense would improve because whatever advantage Chauncey had in shooting Kidd made up for it and more with playmaking.

Switch out Billups for Kidd and you're getting 60+ win, 7+ SRS seasons just like Nash in '05 and '07.

[dankok8]

Kidd never had impact approaching Nash. Kidd offensively was solid but could not be a centerpiece of an offensive dynasty. He had Carter and Jefferson as running mates in NJ and that team never impressed on offense. You replace Nash with him in Phoenix and they get like 4 points worse on offense and like 1 point better on defense. And as all other perimeter players, his defense just doesn't move the needle much. That NJ team in 2002 and 2003 was elite defensively but that was because of Kenyon and Collins who were elite defenders.

[iamgine]

Kidd and Billups are at the same tier to me. With Billups peaking higher in the RS while Kidd peaked higher in the Playoff.

[Im Still Ballin]

Kidd never had impact approaching Nash. Kidd offensively was solid but could not be a centerpiece of an offensive dynasty. He had Carter and Jefferson as running mates in NJ and that team never impressed on offense. You replace Nash with him in Phoenix and they get like 4 points worse on offense and like 1 point better on defense. And as all other perimeter players, his defense just doesn't move the needle much. That NJ team in 2002 and 2003 was elite defensively but that was because of Kenyon and Collins who were elite defenders.

I know the numbers you're referencing but I just feel like they can't quantify/account for what Kidd brings. Kenyon was there the year before as a 23 y/o doing his thing, playing starter minutes and accumulating blocks and steals. And yet? The defense was terrible: 23rd out of 29; 105.5 DRtg (+2.5 rDRtg).

And Collins was a bench guy getting 18 minutes in that first season. How much was he moving the needle defensively when he wasn't playing 30 minutes of the game?

Prime Kidd had a lengthy run of seemingly elevating teams on defense that shouldn't have been as good as they were. When he joined them, the defense skyrocketed, and when he left, they plummeted.

Hell, Phoenix went from a 98.0 DRtg (-5 rDRtg) in 2001 to a 104.0 DRtg (-0.5 rDRtg) in 2002. The defense got 6 points per 100 possessions worse; a decrease of -4.5 rDRtg. Went from the 2nd-ranked defense to the 12th. The only changes were Kidd and Clifford Robinson for Marbury and Joe Johnson I think.

[Im Still Ballin]

And I think that unquantifiable impact is what FultzNationRISE was referring to in the other Kidd thread I made:


This. Both are hardnosed self starters who stay focused on getting the job done. Theyre not the flashiest athletes but they play tough and smart, and because they do this from the point guard position it elevates the whole team. They lead by example and I think it sets a certain tone for the teams they play on.


Kidd's intangibles and leadership had a systemic effect on his teams. One that isn't readily seen on stat sheets. One that doesn't appear to be attributed to him when you look at the numbers but most likely is. Even if he was an asshole off the court.

Even Nash's on/off, RAPM, and box-derived numbers don't speak to his true impact. His value is shown through deeper-level lineup analysis.

[tpols]

I know the numbers you're referencing but I just feel like they can't quantify/account for what Kidd brings. Kenyon was there the year before as a 23 y/o doing his thing, playing starter minutes and accumulating blocks and steals. And yet? The defense was terrible: 23rd out of 29; 105.5 DRtg (+2.5 rDRtg).

And Collins was a bench guy getting 18 minutes in that first season. How much was he moving the needle defensively when he wasn't playing 30 minutes of the game?

Prime Kidd had a lengthy run of seemingly elevating teams on defense that shouldn't have been as good as they were. When he joined them, the defense skyrocketed, and when he left, they plummeted.

Hell, Phoenix went from a 98.0 DRtg (-5 rDRtg) in 2001 to a 104.0 DRtg (-0.5 rDRtg) in 2002. The defense got 6 points per 100 possessions worse; a decrease of -4.5 rDRtg. Went from the 2nd-ranked defense to the 12th. The only changes were Kidd and Clifford Robinson for Marbury and Joe Johnson I think.

KMart was known for spiking the ball into like the 3rd row on his blocks and then screaming his head off. He brought great energy but the dude is kind of dumb. And like you said Jason Collins only played small minutes so to infer he was the reason for their #1 ranked defense is too absurd to put into words. Collins was also one of the least athletic centers in the league a slow plodder. That poster has absolutely no idea what he's talking about on this particular topic.

And like you showed everywhere Kidd went defense got dramatically better. Him and Nash were two opposite sides of the coin. Nash led #1 offenses with his offensive ability and leadership and Kidd led #1 defenses with his defensive / rebounding ability and leadership. Dude was a menace out there with his anticipation, natural instincts, speed, strength, and communication.

[Im Still Ballin]

KMart was known for spiking the ball into like the 3rd row on his blocks and then screaming his head off. He brought great energy but the dude is kind of dumb. And like you said Jason Collins only played small minutes so to infer he was the reason for their #1 ranked defense is too absurd to put into words. Collins was also one of the least athletic centers in the league a slow plodder. That poster has absolutely no idea what he's talking about on this particular topic.

And like you showed everywhere Kidd went defense got dramatically better. Him and Nash were two opposite sides of the coin. Nash led #1 offenses with his offensive ability and leadership and Kidd led #1 defenses with his defensive / rebounding ability and leadership. Dude was a menace out there with his anticipation, natural instincts, speed, strength, and communication.

If a big man had a defensive stretch like that, he'd be thought of as a generational, game-changing defender. A "best of his era" defender. But because of the bias against the guard position, many people take Kidd's defense for granted.

Dikembe:

Denver 1991-92: +0.4 rDRtg
Denver 1992-93: -1.7 rDRtg
Denver 1993-94: -4.0 rDRtg
Denver 1994-95: -0.1 rDRtg
Denver 1995-96: +0.5 rDRtg
Atlanta 1996-97: -4.4 rDRtg
Atlanta 1997-98: -0.7 rDRtg
Atlanta 1998-99: -5.1 rDRtg
Atlanta 1999-00: +3.8 rDRtg
Atlanta 2000-01: -1.8 rDRtg (49 games); Philadelphia 2000-01: -1.9 rDRtg (26 games)
Philadelphia 2001-02: -4.2 rDRtg

He was blocking upwards of 4 to 4.5 shots per game and was playing with Kenyon Martin-like Antonio McDyess and one of the best defensive guards of the '90s in Mookie Blaylock. And his team numbers don't quite hang with Kidd's. Still great, but not as good. Only Tim Duncan comfortably surpasses him and he had a great defensive help.

[dankok8]

I know the numbers you're referencing but I just feel like they can't quantify/account for what Kidd brings. Kenyon was there the year before as a 23 y/o doing his thing, playing starter minutes and accumulating blocks and steals. And yet? The defense was terrible: 23rd out of 29; 105.5 DRtg (+2.5 rDRtg).

And Collins was a bench guy getting 18 minutes in that first season. How much was he moving the needle defensively when he wasn't playing 30 minutes of the game?

Prime Kidd had a lengthy run of seemingly elevating teams on defense that shouldn't have been as good as they were. When he joined them, the defense skyrocketed, and when he left, they plummeted.

Hell, Phoenix went from a 98.0 DRtg (-5 rDRtg) in 2001 to a 104.0 DRtg (-0.5 rDRtg) in 2002. The defense got 6 points per 100 possessions worse; a decrease of -4.5 rDRtg. Went from the 2nd-ranked defense to the 12th. The only changes were Kidd and Clifford Robinson for Marbury and Joe Johnson I think.

Kidd's ON-OFF DRtg doesn't paint him as an impactful defender remotely comparable to big men. Now, admittedly, it's a noisy stat but defensive bigs still show a consistent signal. Kidd doesn't show any consistent signal.

The Phoenix situation is unique because they replaced Kidd with Marbury who is one of the most negative defenders ever according to metrics. Also worth a mention that the Suns actually got better on offense without Kidd going from 100.3 ORtg (-2.7 rORtg) in 2001 to 103.3 (-1.2 rORtg) in 2002. By the way, prime Kidd leading a -2.7 rORtg offense with decent offensive help pretty much disqualifies him from any Nash comparisons. Not to mention in Jersey, with Carter, Jefferson and good role players from 2005 to 2007, their offenses were -4.7, -2.3 and -0.8 rORtg, respectively. That's an abysmal record.

This comparison is actually insulting to Nash.

[Im Still Ballin]

Kidd's ON-OFF DRtg doesn't paint him as an impactful defender remotely comparable to big men. Now, admittedly, it's a noisy stat but defensive bigs still show a consistent signal. Kidd doesn't show any consistent signal.

The Phoenix situation is unique because they replaced Kidd with Marbury who is one of the most negative defenders ever according to metrics. Also worth a mention that the Suns actually got better on offense without Kidd going from 100.3 ORtg (-2.7 rORtg) in 2001 to 103.3 (-1.2 rORtg) in 2002. By the way, prime Kidd leading a -2.7 rORtg offense with decent offensive help pretty much disqualifies him from any Nash comparisons. Not to mention in Jersey, with Carter, Jefferson and good role players from 2005 to 2007, their offenses were -4.7, -2.3 and -0.8 rORtg, respectively. That's an abysmal record.

This comparison is actually insulting to Nash.

The consistent signal is that when he joined teams in his prime, they got better - and largely because of defense. And when he left the opposite happened. And these teams weren't trading him for scraps, either. They gave up win-now pieces. As I said before, there's impact that the numbers can't quantify. And for no player is this more true than Jason Kidd.

[ImKobe]

A big like AD can guard 1-5 and impact the D in a lot more ways than the smaller guard ever would. The perimeter is also a lot wider of an area than the paint.

[tpols]

A big like AD can guard 1-5 and impact the D in a lot more ways than the smaller guard ever would. The perimeter is also a lot wider of an area than the paint.

AD is an awesome defender but you're discounting communication and leadership. AD is an amazing athlete and can dominate on that alone. He isn't a a great vocal leader though.

Kidd was quarterbacking the defense and rebounding schemes his team had @ an elite level. #1 ranked defense multiple years in a row. After being bottom ranked when he got there.

The Lakers OTOH are the 16th ranked defense right now. Big trash. AD is only a solitary great defender. Like a tiger. Jason Kidd was like a male lion in that he ruled a pride. That's the big difference.

[ImKobe]

AD is an awesome defender but you're discounting communication and leadership. AD is an amazing athlete and can dominate on that alone. He isn't a a great vocal leader though.

Kidd was quarterbacking the defense and rebounding schemes his team had @ an elite level. #1 ranked defense multiple years in a row.

The Lakers OTOH are the 16th ranked defense right now. Big trash. AD is only a solitary great defender. Like a tiger. Jason Kidd was like a male lion in that he ruled a pride. That's the big difference.

You know that the league is so much different now, right? You can't be that physical on D, and teams spread you out a lot more and just pick on the weakest link over & over again, even if you try to help out, they move the ball and find the open man. AD led the Lakers to a top 3 defense in B2B years in 2020 (3rd) & 2021 (1st).

At least AD can take away the paint, but no great defensive PG can individually take away those 3s. Defense is more of a team effort than it's ever been, and if you got multiple weak links (Reaves, Dlo, Bran to an extent because he's slow to contest 3s to save energy) you're going to be easier to exploit. We've seen AD completely change Playoff games just off his individual defensive ability alone just last year.

[Im Still Ballin]

This 6'1" point guard is the best defender in NCAA D1 college ball according to DBPM. +6.9 points per 100 possessions on defense. Ranked higher than rim protectors and versatile forwards.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EVCOxFALglM&ab_channel=840Sports

Caruso is ranked as high as Rudy and Wemby in one-number metrics like D-EPM, D-DRIP, and D-LEBRON. There are absolutely exceptions to the rule and historically Kidd was one of the biggest.

[tpols]

You know that the league is so much different now, right? You can't be that physical on D, and teams spread you out a lot more and just pick on the weakest link over & over again, even if you try to help out, they move the ball and find the open man. AD led the Lakers to a top 3 defense in B2B years in 2020 (3rd) & 2021 (1st).

At least AD can take away the paint, but no great defensive PG can individually take away those 3s. [B】Defense is more of a team effort[/B] than it's ever been, and if you got multiple weak links (Reaves, Dlo, Bran to an extent because he's slow to contest 3s to save energy) you're going to be easier to exploit. We've seen AD completely change Playoff games just off his individual defensive ability alone just last year.


Yes.

And that's what we've trying to tell you guys about leadership and communication and motivation being so important. Kidd had his crew putting in overtime effort. He was a tremendous floor general and leader. AD? And you know I rep Davis... he's simply not a great leader or communicator. Plus he's kind of soft. Kidd on the flipside was an iron man and tremendous at putting everybody on the same page.

Again the Lakers are the 16th ranked defense. They were largely top ranked in the years you mentioned because of Frank Vogel who is a thibs level defensive coach. Nets were #1. And Jason Collins wasn't the difference. :roll:

[Trollsmasher]

No

No guard has ever been even a top 15 defender in the league impact wise

[Im Still Ballin]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3l5BqVuDst4&ab_channel=thegrandkenyon

:bowdown:

[ImKobe]

Yes.

And that's what we've trying to tell you guys about leadership and communication and motivation being so important. Kidd had his crew putting in overtime effort. He was a tremendous floor general and leader. AD? And you know I rep Davis... he's simply not a great leader or communicator. Plus he's kind of soft. Kidd on the flipside was an iron man and tremendous at putting everybody on the same page.

Again the Lakers are the 16th ranked defense. They were largely top ranked in the years you mentioned because of Frank Vogel who is a thibs level defensive coach. Nets were #1. And Jason Collins wasn't the difference. :roll:

No, they were ranked top 3 in those years because of coaching and talent both. Who are the back-up bigs now? Who are the guards? How many good defensive players do the Lakers have besides AD and Vando (who's been injured all year)?

Kidd is the coach of the Mavs. Why did their defense fall off so hard from 6th in 2022 when he's their leader? Did he stop doing his job? No, the talent on the defensive side got worse. Why are the Warriors terrible on defense, when they have the same coach, and the same QB (Dray) live-coaching & anchoring their defense?

[Axe]

Doubtful. But if an undersized pg can block guys over 7-feet tall on a regular basis based on athletic ability and skill, then a good case can be made on this.

[Duffy Pratt]

A big like AD can guard 1-5 and impact the D in a lot more ways than the smaller guard ever would. The perimeter is also a lot wider of an area than the paint.

He has a lot of trouble with big, strong 5s who are effective in the post, and with quick perimeter players. He is fantastic in his role on defense, but Bam has been better against Joker or Embiid, and is also better on the quicker guards. Remember, the Lakers had to pull AD off of Joker.

[ImKobe]

He has a lot of trouble with big, strong 5s who are effective in the post, and with quick perimeter players. He is fantastic in his role on defense, but Bam has been better against Joker or Embiid, and is also better on the quicker guards. Remember, the Lakers had to pull AD off of Joker.

They had to do that because Jokic would pull AD out of paint, leaving the offensive glass open for Denver and also giving Aaron Gordon and others a chance to get to the basket more, because the Lakers had weak links on defense (Dlo being the main problem where he hurt them on D and did nothing on O). Once they pulled AD off Jokic and had him sag off AG on the weak side, the Lakers did a lot better defensively in spurts, but then Jamal Murray absolutely grilled them on the perimeter when it mattered.

No one's stopping Jokic 1 on 1. Look at what he did to Bam & the Heat in the Finals. He went from 27.8 ppg on ~60%TS in the WCF to 30.2 ppg on 67%TS in the Finals.

[dankok8]

The consistent signal is that when he joined teams in his prime, they got better - and largely because of defense. And when he left the opposite happened. And these teams weren't trading him for scraps, either. They gave up win-now pieces. As I said before, there's impact that the numbers can't quantify. And for no player is this more true than Jason Kidd.

Offense vs defense splits are unreliable. They did get better but some of that can still be offense. When lineups change, sometimes they get more defensively slanted. So Kidd doesn't make a defense with Kenyon Martin much better but makes Kenyon better on offense so he can play more minutes. But the team is still defensively minded.

Basically when assessing impact, we should look at Net Rating change and then try to figure out the offense-defense split but it can be tricky.