Defensive rating (DRtg) How you calculate it and use it

[Micku]

There isn't evidence of both sides. There is evidence of a Nash Suns team being efficient and fast and you holding on to it while ignoring literally hundreds of mediocre high paced teams and efficient slow paced teams.

They don't take as many "good shots" nowdays because every team doesn't have a red carpet in the lane anymore. You still don't appear to grasp to direct inverse relationship between offense and defense.

Just because you are going fast pace, doesn't mean the defense is necessary bad. Everyone acknowledge that the Lakers of the 80s were a good defensive team. It's all about hustle. And, the 80s team used to run all the freaking time, even when they had full court pressure on them. If you watch an 80s game, then you would see that they used to run. While the 00s slow the pace down all the time. It was a different style. It doesn't mean that the 80s defense was bad, as shown by all the examples I put out on this thread.

That's silly. Higher FG% could mean better shots. Plus, there were hardly any 80s teams shooting 3s. They all shot their shots in the close-mid range. Those were better shot selection. And they were pretty good in the half court offense. And they did contest.

[Yao Ming's Foot]

Its not a flaw in the system so much as the flaw is you trying to say kobe faced better defenses and use that defense rating system SOLELY as your reason. And numerous time people have showed why it doesn't work that way and yet you continue to support it as gospel.

Does defensive rating work for other players? Or is it just Kobe who it doesn't apply to? Jordan?

Two players have an identical all star level statistical profile. Player A played in a league where the average defensive rating was 100.0. Player B played in a league where the average defensive rating was 200.0. Which player had the better season?

[Micku]

Does defensive rating work for other players? Or is it just Kobe who it doesn't apply to? Jordan?

Defensive rating works. Not saying it's a stupid stat, and it gives you indication of which team/player probably has the best defensive efficient. But like many other stats, it's not the end of all discussion. But my point is that you shouldn't compare eras. Other than that, you can go right ahead.

I posted quotes in why that other eras have different stats, which could inflate certain statistics. I wasn't the only person who thought of this. And there are people who take into consideration of the era difference when it comes to the advance stats, and comparing stats between eras you would have to take consideration of the era.

Two players have an identical all star level statistical profile. Player A played in a league where the average defensive rating was 100.0. Player B played in a league where the average defensive rating was 200.0. Which player had the better season?

Probably player A, if you assume everything is the same rules and other stuff in the league.

But this isn't the case of what happened in each decade of the NBA. Not only did the rules changed, but the shot selection changed. The way teams play changed as well.

[97 bulls]

Does defensive rating work for other players? Or is it just Kobe who it doesn't apply to? Jordan?

Two players have an identical all star level statistical profile. Player A played in a league where the average defensive rating was 100.0. Player B played in a league where the average defensive rating was 200.0. Which player had the better season?

Ok, how bout this. What if a division 3 college team has a higher rating than a D1? Does that make the D3 team better defensively? No cuz the competition isn't the same. And im not calling kobe competition D3 level. Im trying to show you that its not an apples to apples comparison.

[Yao Ming's Foot]

Ok, how bout this. What if a division 3 college team has a higher rating than a D1? Does that make the D3 team better defensively? No cuz the competition isn't the same. And im not calling kobe competition D3 level. Im trying to show you that its not an apples to apples comparison.

Are you suggesting that the level of offensive talent in the NBA was SIGNIFICANTLY better in 80-90s compared to 00-10+?

[Yao Ming's Foot]

Defensive rating works. Not saying it's a stupid stat, and it gives you indication of which team/player probably has the best defensive efficient. But like many other stats, it's not the end of all discussion. But my point is that you shouldn't compare eras. Other than that, you can go right ahead.

I posted quotes in why that other eras have different stats, which could inflate certain statistics. I wasn't the only person who thought of this. And there are people who take into consideration of the era difference when it comes to the advance stats, and comparing stats between eras you would have to take consideration of the era.



Probably player A, if you assume everything is the same rules and other stuff in the league.

But this isn't the case of what happened in each decade of the NBA. Not only did the rules changed, but the shot selection changed. The way teams play changed as well.

What makes you believe that the change in shot selection was not a direct measured response to improved defenses?

[97 bulls]

Are you suggesting that the level of offensive talent in the NBA was SIGNIFICANTLY better in 80-90s compared to 00-10+?

No off course not. Im just saying its a different era. Maybe it was a bad example. You just can't compare results from different time periods. That's all im saying.

[Yao Ming's Foot]

No off course not. Im just saying its a different era. Maybe it was a bad example. You just can't compare results from different time periods. That's all im saying.

Shame. At least that would have been a logical premise. It doesn't hold water but at least its better than current theory being promoted that the entire NBA suddenly had amnesia when it comes to shot selection and their coaches looked the other way.

[97 bulls]

Shame. At least that would have been a logical premise. It doesn't hold water but at least its better than current theory being promoted that the entire NBA suddenly had amnesia when it comes to shot selection and their coaches looked the other way.

Wait a minute, who says the nba as whole has a problem with shot selection? People say kobes shot selection is bad. Not the nba as a whole.

[Micku]

What makes you believe that the change in shot selection was not a direct measured response to improved defenses?

It was mentality more than defense. Look:

NBA teams have fallen in love with 3-pointers, but is it smart basketball?

The 3-pointer was introduced during the 1979-80 season on a trial basis and approved as an official rule at the start of the 1980-81 season. It was still considered an experiment by coaches, who watched their players clang their way to an anemic 24.5 percent from the new distance, though 3-pointers were rarely attempted. The shot accounted for just 2.3 percent of the league's overall field-goal attempts, and teams averaged just two 3-point attempts per game.

...

"I mean, you'd get snatched out of the game for standing out there shooting 3s," said Hollins, a career 14.9-percent shooter from 3-point range (13-of-87). "We were always taught to get a layup first and a midrange shot second. I can remember guys I'd play with, they'd take a long-range shot and our coach would get on them. 'Coach, I was open.' He'd say, 'Well, there's a reason you're always open.'"

...

It took a long time for the mentality to change. Five years later, teams were still attempting just 3.3 3-pointers per game -- an almost negligible statistic. But by the end of the decade, the popularity of the 3-pointer ballooned. Players had become more adept from beyond the arc, and coaches could see value in a shot that was once considered a novelty. During the 1990-91 season, teams averaged 7.1 attempts at a 32-percent clip. The number of attempts more than doubled by 1995-96, to 16 per game, and players were shooting 36.7 percent.

...

But something unexpected was playing out. As the number of 3-point attempts continued to increase, league-wide scoring was decreasing -- from 110.2 points per game in 1980-81, to 99.5 ppg in 1995-96, to 94.8 ppg in 2000-01. Scoring has rebounded slightly in recent years (teams this season were averaging 100.1 ppg through Wednesday's games), but there are some in league circles who hold the 3-point line partly responsible.

....

In 2004, aware of some of the issues at hand, the NBA considered instituting a rule in the Development League that would have banned 3-point shots until the final five minutes of games. It took a mere matter of days for the concept to be ridiculed, though perhaps it deserved more attention.

...

Asked what would happen if the NBA were to abolish the 3-pointer, Hollins said: "Scoring would go up."

- http://www.commercialappeal.com/news.../13/trey-chic/

[Yao Ming's Foot]

Your proof of superior shot selection is the testimony from a 14.9% 3 pt shooter during an era of 24.5% 3 pt shooting?

Do the simple math. 35.9% = AVG 2011 3pt shooting = 107.7 pts per 100 possessions

24.5% 3 pt shooting = AVG 1980 3pt shooting = 73.5 per 100 possessions

[Micku]

Your proof of superior shot selection is the testimony from a 14.9% 3 pt shooter during an era of 24.5% 3 pt shooting?

Do the simple math. 35.9% = AVG 2011 3pt shooting = 107.7 pts per 100 possessions

24.5% 3 pt shooting = AVG 1980 3pt shooting = 73.5 per 100 possessions

There was more than just him. Read the article.

---

Not only did I show you the different people certain stats could be inflated, and that some wouldn't compare Drtg in different eras. And I showed you the amount of 3s, and the mentality of the players and coaches change, some players on the 3 pt shot, and how the 3pt increase, the league scoring world wide decrease. Also, you have the lower pacing and lower possessions.

Current coaches and players as well as former commented in that article. It is a very good article.

[Yao Ming's Foot]

There was more than just him. Read the article.

---

Not only did I show you the different people certain stats could be inflated, and that some wouldn't compare Drtg in different eras. And I showed you the amount of 3s, and the mentality of the players and coaches change, some players on the 3 pt shot, and how the 3pt increase, the league scoring world wide decrease. Also, you have the lower pacing and lower possessions.

Current coaches and players as well as former commented in that article. It is a very good article.

Its a fine article. it just has little to do with defensive rating.

[Micku]

Its a fine article. it just has little to do with defensive rating.

It was a response over what you said:

What makes you believe that the change in shot selection was not a direct measured response to improved defenses?

And the article basically said that shot selection was basically the mentality of the players and coaches getting accustom to it, not so much as a "direct response to improved defense". And you have another coach who believe if you take out the 3 pt line, you would increase in scoring.

[Da_Realist]