More stats that might surprise you

[Guest]

The interesting thing is that we were

23-18 at home....but we were 10-31 on the

road.This is usally because on the road you

have to grind out games alittle more and

without Theo and before Newble can along

we were unable to do this.

Look at stats....Combined with little defense

you can see the big difference between wins

and losses...

Wins:

47.4%FG

42%3ptFG

41.5RPG

101PPG

Losses:

41.6%FG

30.7%FG

41.3RPG

89.3PPG

This tells me more often than not we lacked

a 3rd option scorer.The rebounding didn't make

any difference in wins and losses.But look at

that scoring difference.

When you score only 89.3PPG in games it's

REALLY hard to win them.

We were 22-7 when we scored 100 points.

We are built to be a offensive team.With the

addition of Big Dog and Theo it should help.

We were 12-1 when we scored 100 points in

the second half of the season.We were nearly

unbeatable when we scored 100 points in the

second half of the season

We scored 108.2PPG and gave up 96PPG in

those 12 wins.

[Diesel]

This is what I have been saying all yr.

We don't lose because we couldn't stop other teams from scoring...per se.

We lose because we don't score enough.

Also, I have preached that Theo won't make that much of a difference. Because actually, I believe Nazr is probably a better scorer than Theo.

The Good NEWS is..

That we got Big dog. Big Dog is that other scorer. Now we are in the mode of other teams that OUTSCORE their opponents (Dallas, Sacramento). Yes we have Newble and Theo, but I still don't believe we have enough defensive components to be a good defensive team. I mean Sactown has Christie, Bibby, and Webber and they are not a defensive powerhouse by any means. We will have to adopt the philosophy that we will outscore the other teams. That means that we will have an offensive free for all all the time.

Do we need to trade... Probably not. However, if a good trade presented itself, I would do it. This whole let's not tinker idea is bogus. If tinkering can get us better players, why not! Just a thought. If tinkering giving up Nazr, Dion, and someone else can get us Wells and Davis... let's do it.

[Guest]

But you need to get able to get stops in

important parts of the game.I am shocked

that there was no difference between winning

and losing with our rebounding.That is the

surprising stat.

[Guest Walter]

We were second worse in the NBA in terms of PPG allowed prior to Newble being inserted into the starting lineup (which coincided with our having a winning record for the last 30 or so games). SECOND WORSE!!!

This statement of yours, Diesel, the one cited in the heading of this post, was about as bright as your today's "Kobe is all wrong for this team" clown act.

The difference in this year's team IS another scorer but it is TWO, count'em TWO defenders, one of which is a premier interior defender, the other a super capable perimeter defender, both are team defensive leaders. We are two top notch defenders better than last year!!! We are one offensive player better. How hard is it to do the math?

If we are significantly better this year than we were for the majority of last season that will be TWICE as much a result of our defense improving as our offense as we have 2 defensive impact players being added to the roster and only 1 offensive one.

W

[Guest]

Actually Walter since we have Ham now we

have 3 defenders.Some count Email also.The

key for us will be getting stops in the close

games.This is what the Kings/Lakers can do

that teams like Mavs is unable to do.

[Diesel]

You still hating Walter?

The man showed evidence that clearly showed that our loses were do to our lack of scoring and NOT our defense. Yet you want to argue with me because I have said that that was the problem all along?

Why do you go do this for me.

Get a clue, Get a life, Get a brain... Then come back and see me. Until then.... Stop hating?

[Teeareess]

Where did he mention anything about opponents fg%? Opponents rebounding? How about fast break points, caused by good defense? Anything that would have anything to do with defense?

[Traceman]

offensively and defensively. We should be better at both this year and that should translate into more wins. We weren't going to get a lot better simply by improving our offense or our defense, we needed to improve both and we did.

[Diesel]

Actually, Defense is something that can be mastered with Better chemistry. That's what happened at the end of last season. Our Chemistry started to come together. I mean, last time I looked, Nazr was still the C and the C position is the most important defensive position on any team. Yet... Our defense improved.

However, we loss games because we couldn't score enough. Teams knew that all they really had to do was Double SAR and keep a man on JT and they could shut us down. Well, not this yr. Now we have an offensive threat in Big Dog that will translate into WINS.

Also, I would like to see somebody compile what I like to call 3rd option stats. I am willing to bet that in our wins the third option (Toni or Glover or DJ or Ira) scored over 15 ppg and in our losses they didn't. If that is the case. If there is a line of demorcation with the 3rd option, it would suggest that our wins were based more on our ability to score than on our ability to defend.

[thecampster]

Who's LA's third option?

Thought so....a committee.

Defense is not any one player but chemistry....playing on the floor together over time and trusting the other guy to watch your back. But let's not be silly.

Ratliff/Nazr at Center is one hell of alot better than

Nazr/anyone we trotted out last year (leon/hanno/Cal). Defensively the swap is this

Ratliff for Nazr 30 minutes a game.

Nazr for Hanno 18 minutes a game.

That is a serious upgrade allowing defeders to go after the ball in the front court more often and cheat to the passing lanes a couple of times a game.

Also, we also trade a healthy Henderson for Hanno or Strickland 15 minutes a game at the backup power forward spot. Though over paid, I'd take Hendu defensively over Hanno....he just has more defensive court sense and rebounds better. Defense isn't just blocked shots and steals but denying the entry pass and denying the offensive rebound to the opposition...stopping the fast break and not letting the other guy behind you. A healthy hendu is a vast improvement over Hanno as is Ratliff. IF those two play 65 healthy games a piece this year, I'd say it's worth 5 points on the defensive end and 3 on the offensive end in transition or 15 wins.

That doesn't count GROB's offense.

Which brings me to my next point. GDAwg on the floor creates space to operate on the offensive end which means better looks, a higher shooting percentage and less defensive possessions defending the transition game...GDawg helping the offense is paramount to our defense...Making the other team work defensively allways slows them on the offensive end.

[chillzatl]

[Diesel]

Well you're right LA has a committee...

However, SAR/JT is not the same as Shaq/Kobe. Right? I mean you are comparing the one with the other as if they are interchangable.

So where Shaq and Kobe doesn't need a consistent 3rd option to win, we do.

In reply to:

---

Ratliff/Nazr at Center is one hell of alot better than

Nazr/anyone we trotted out last year (leon/hanno/Cal). Defensively the swap is this

Ratliff for Nazr 30 minutes a game.

Nazr for Hanno 18 minutes a game.

---

Sure is better to have Theo. He is a good Shot blocker. And that is something that we lacked on defense. BUT, his presence doesn't propell us into the top 10 defensively. There is a difference with Theo on Defense but not the great difference that most of you expect. Theo is not a great positional defensive player and I doubt that he can be (too Light) but what he does, he will do well. Block shots. Will he be a deterant? For some people. However, there will be many others that will try him. Like Etan Thomas did last yr.

So all in all, I expect us to be better but not much on defense. The difference will come with our winning. I suspect that we will outscore teams. NOt because of defense but just like Sac-Town because we just put up so many points.

[chillzatl]

it's going to be hard for me to just assume who our 3rd option was. I could probably pull the top 3 scores from our games and then filter out the two highest. yeah, lemme give that a try. yeah yeah ok brb.

[Traceman]

"Wins:

47.4%FG

42%3ptFG

41.5RPG

101PPG

Losses:

41.6%FG

30.7%FG

41.3RPG

89.3PPG"

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that if you shoot over 47% for the game and over 42% from 3 point land for the game you are going to win more than you lose. Conversely, if you shoot less than 42% for the game and less than 31% from 3 point land, you are going to lose more than you win. The fact that we scored 101 ppg when we shot well and 89 ppg when we shot poorly also makes sense.

The reason that improving our D is so important is that it will allow us to be competitive when we have an off shooting night. Before Ira became a starter last year, we had virtually no chance to win unless we shot the ball well. After Ira came along, we were competitive even when we didn't shoot well. Adding Theo to the mix will make us even better defensively and should translate into us being more competitive on off shooting nights. Adding Big Dog should decrease the number of poor shooting nights because we will have at least 3 big time scorers in the starting lineup. Combining the two should make us a significantly better team and both are important.

[Guest]

We won 33 games with shooting 47%

This is not based on a few games.This is

based on all the games we won.This stat

tells you that when we shot a high % and

scored points that is when we won games.

When you only score 89.3PPG in 49 losses

and score 101PPG in 33 wins that is a big

margin in the difference between wins and

losses.

[Diesel]

In reply to:

---

The fact that we scored 101 ppg when we shot well and 89 ppg when we shot poorly also makes sense.

---

More simple... We won when we scored MORE. We loss when we scored LESS.

Again, that's simple right? Well then why is it that when I say that the reason we won most of our games is because we scored more there's a problem? YOU Guys complicate something very simple.

NO Where on this list do you see defense, however, Defense really doesn't matter as much. IN OUR WINS, we scored 12 points MORE than when we LOSS. That's the bottom line. NOt the 2 or 3 points our defense saved... They 12 points more our offense scored.

Therefore.... Having a better scoring team would seem to be more fruitful than to try to put Ira, Bowen, and Theo out there. Defense can always be taught... Look at the Showtime Lakers.

[Diesel]

Yeah like I said, Dion, DJ, IRa, or Toni were all subject to be the third option. What I suspect is that there is a 3rd option Scoring line that equates to wins.

[Traceman]

How do you know that good defense didn't translate into easy buckets, which in turn led to a higher FG% which in turn led to winning more? This is particularly true in light of the fact that we won MORE with defensive specialist Ira in the starting lineup than we did before he became a starter. The fact is that when Ira came along, we gave up fewer ppg and we won more. Defense CLEARLY was a factor.

As far as your statement goes with regard to us winning when we scored more and losing when we scored less, I would suspect that is the case with EVERY team! Duh! I'm sure we are not unique in that stat. Seeing that the team with the most points wins the game, I think this is a very safe assumption!

[Guest]

My objective was mostly to point out that

scoring 89.3PPG is very alarming.That isn't

that much better than the Bulls?And they

only won 20 games?We were a horrible

offensive team last year when you score

89.3PPG you aren't going to win now.Miami

only won 35 games because of this reason

also.Us and Miami was probably two of the

three worse offensive teams in the league

last season...You see where we all four

finished.....

11th 12th 13th 15th.......Makes sense doesn't it?

Miami/Us/Knicks/Bulls

But I am most amazed that rebounding didn't

make a difference between wins and losses.

Miami/Knicks are good defensive teams but

are as bad on offense as us.

[Guest Walter]

And offensively we were middle of the road.

What moron would think we need to improve the NBA's 15th ranked offense MORE THAN the league's 2nd worst defense?

W