Worst Defense Ever

[exodus]

It wasn't supposed to be like this in Seattle. Coming off a 52-win season that saw the SuperSonics give the eventual champion Spurs all the Texans could handle in the second round, the Sonics were looking forward to continuing their winning ways in 2005-06.

Yes, they were a poor defensive team, but they could score in bunches. Thanks to their potent 3-point shooting and ferocious offensive rebounding, the 2004-05 Sonics had the NBA's third-most efficient offense. Thus, even with a defense that ranked a mere 25th out of the league's 30 teams in defensive efficiency (my measure of a team's points allowed per 100 opponent possessions), the Sonics scored enough to win on most nights.

This year, that equation changed in a major way. The Sonics still had the great offense. Through Wednesday's games, the Sonics ranked fourth in the NBA in offensive efficiency and were just a hair behind Detroit for third, which would be a repeat of last year's performance.

Defensively, however, things went from bad to worse. Or worst, I should say. Not as in "worst in the NBA," although that certainly applies. No, I mean worst as in worst defense ever.

You heard me.

Worst.

Defense.

Ever.

In the 33 years since the NBA has been tracking turnovers (thus making it possible to track teams on a per-possession basis), none has ever been as bad, relative to the league, as this year's Sonics. Nobody has even been close to this bad. Seattle's 112.4 defensive efficiency mark is more than nine points worse than the league average of 103.2.

The nearest any team has come to the Sonics' defensive ineptitude came in the 1998-99 season, when both the Clippers and Nuggets set new standards of ineptitude. The Clips were 7.8 points worse than the league norm, while the Nuggets were 7.6 worse.

Defensive Efficiency, All-Time Worst Teams, 1973-74 to 2005-06 (Thru March 30, 2006)

TEAM SEASON DEFENSIVE EFFICIENCY LEAGUE AVERAGE DIFFERENCE

Seattle 2005-06 112.4 103.2 -9.2

L.A. Clippers 1998-99 107.0 99.2 -7.8

Denver 1998-99 106.8 99.2 -7.6

Dallas 1992-93 106.8 99.2 -7.5

Orlando 2003-04 108.3 100.8 -7.5

But the Clippers' mark was set in a 50-game season, thanks to the 1998-99 lockout. In an 82-game NBA season, the all-time worst belongs to the 1992-93 Dallas Mavericks, who were 7.5 points worse than the league norm. So the Sonics aren't just breaking the 82-game record here, they're destroying it by more than 20 percent. Basically, they're the Wilt Chamberlains of bad defense.

Not only are the Sonics the worst ever, they've managed to be the worst under two different coaches. Taking top honors is Bob Weiss, who took the reins for the first 30 games and presided over a traveshamockery of a defense. Through 30 games, Seattle's defensive efficiency mark stood at 112.7, while the league average was 102.4 -- putting the Sonics a whopping 10.3 points worse than the league.

As the next chart shows, Seattle was awful under Weiss in three very important categories.

First and foremost was field-goal percentage defense, with opponents hitting at nearly a 50 percent clip. But looking at only field-goal percentage actually minimized Seattle's problems. The Sonics also fouled with wild abandon and gave up a ton of 3-pointers, so their opponents' true shooting percentage (what their percentage would be if we adjusted for free throws and 3-pointers) was an exorbitant 59.0 percent, six points worse than the league average.

In fact, the difference between Seattle and the next-worst team in that stretch (Toronto) was nearly as great as the difference between Toronto and the league average. In plain English, that means they were twice as bad as even the next-worst team.

Sonics' Defense Under Weiss and Hill (Thru March 30, 2006)

CATEGORY UNDER WEISS UNDER HILL

Defensive Efficiency 112.7 112.2

League Average 102.4 103.8

Sonics vs. League Average -10.3 -8.4

Opponent FG Percentage 49.8 48.7

League Average FG Percentage 44.9 45.6

Sonics vs. League Average -4.9 -3.1

Opponent True Shooting Percentage 59.0 56.4

League Average True Shooting Percentage 53.0 53.7

Sonics vs. League Average -6.0 -2.7

Opponent FTA/FGA .385 .326

Win-Loss Record 13-17 16-25

Under new coach Bob Hill, things have improved a bit.

Under Hill, the numbers show Seattle still would be the worst defense ever, but not far and away the worst. While scoring around the league has gone up over the past 40 games to an average efficiency of 103.8, Seattle's mark improved to 112.2 in 40 games under Hill. So the difference of only 8.4 points, while still terrible, is a two-point improvement over Weiss. (If you're wondering, it's perfectly normal for the league average in offensive/defensive efficiency -- i.e. scoring -- to rise as the season goes on.)

Looking at some of the other metrics (see chart), it's easy to see how the Sonics have improved. First, they've stopped fouling so much. Seattle's ratio of opponent free-throw attempts to field-goal attempts was the worst in the league under Weiss, but is slightly below the league average in the Hill era. Mad hackers such as Reggie Evans and Danny Fortson have played very little under Hill, creating much of the drop. Seattle also has tightened up its field-goal defense. Its opponents are hitting at only a 48.7 percent clip under Hill, even though percentages around the league rose during that time.

As a result, look at what's happened to their opponents' TS percentage -- it's almost respectable now. The Sonics have cut the distance between themselves and the league average in half under Hill, the main reason for the team's overall two-point improvement in defensive efficiency relative to the league.

There's reason to think those numbers will improve further. At the trade deadline, Seattle traded two of its worst defensive players, forward Vladimir Radmanovic and guard Ronald Murray, as well as Evans, and got a major upgrade in Earl Watson. He's one of the best defensive guards in basketball, and in the few minutes he's played thus far as a Sonic, Seattle's defensive numbers have improved sharply. Additionally, rookie center Johan Petro and soph Robert Swift (a rookie in terms of experience, if not technically) will never be worse than they were at the start of this season.

That said, those numbers aren't going to improve enough for Seattle to avoid an infamous spot in history. Over its final 12 games, Seattle would have to defend at or better than the league average in order to surpass the Clippers and be only the second-worst defensive team. To avoid being the worst in an 82-game season, they'd have to be about 2.4 points better than the average -- on par with a team like New Jersey or Chicago. That's a serious stretch considering it requires a heroic effort from this team just to hold opponents under 95 points -- something they've done only once since the All-Star break.

The Sonics are so good offensively that if the defense is merely bad, as in 2004-05, they're a playoff team. And it's easy to say they can't get any worse than they were this year. But looking ahead, one wonders if the defense can pass muster next season even with Watson, because it appears Seattle will be depending on most of the same players. Since Seattle's key offensive players -- Ray Allen, Rashard Lewis, Chris Wilcox and Luke Ridnour -- are also among its worst defensive players, it's hard to see how they can improve the defense substantially without negating the offensive part of the equation.

Regardless of Seattle's next steps, the book already has been written on this season. Everybody knows this is a poor defensive team, but what many did not know was the scale of the problem. So even though it was a forgettable year in Seattle, tip your hat to these Sonics and keep them in your fond memories. Because when it comes to bad defense, nobody's ever done it better.

[y2kenta]

Wow the Hawks aren't in that group of the 5 worst defensive teams this year. That's a little comforting to know.

[Jdawgflow]

I know this is kind of off subject, but are any of you guys watching the Pistons-Suns game? It is halftime and the Suns are having their way with the Pistons. Watching this really makes me want a PG that can break down a defense. Boris Diaw already has 11 pts. The Suns are shooting ~69% as a team. Nash only has one point, but everyone else is scoring at will b/c he ALWAYS sets them up. And he never turns it over.

Oh, and by the way, Delk is playing good for the Pistons, too. Maybe one day we will have some kind of system where we get the most out of our players.

[exodus]

I watched the first half and then went to the gym. I get back and see that Detroit won. What happened?

[chillzatl]

That's about it. Detroit tightened up at both ends, Chauncy got hot and Phoenix doesn't play good D. That's why they are pretenders.

[exodus]

I would assume that you realize that 3 of the Suns bigs, KT, Grant, and Amare, have been out a long time. That would hurt any teams defense.

I think this was Grant's first game back but I am not sure.

[chillzatl]

Kurt Thomas is a good defender. He does not make them a good defensive team. His 20 games missed aren't the difference between them being good or bad. He's not that much of an impact player on defense, not a stopper. Grant is a similar player. He used to be a high energy player and rebounder. But he's not going to give you much by himself. Even less at this stage in his career.

As it stands today, they are not a good defensive team. Even with those guys I wouldn't expect them to be good. Only better than they were. It's unfortunate for them that they have to play San Antonio to get to the finals. They are a fun team to watch offensively.

[exodus]

Teams are shooting 45.3% against the Suns, which is right at the league average.

The Suns are 3rd in the league in defensive rebounding.

Their defense certainly has suffered without KT (out since Feb) and Grant (out 3 1/2 months). Take away a teams starting center and his backup from any team and the defense will take a hit. They had to start Diaw at center out of desparation.

But saying the Suns don't play defense is just ignorant. At worst they are average on the season. Early in the season they were actually very good defensively.

[chillzatl]

no, they are NOT average and have never been good. They are a below average defensive team. They play good enough defense to allow their offense to succeed. Their "hot defensive start" is smoke and mirrors. You're likely saying that becuase of their +10 differential early in the season. They were scoring like 120 per game and just lapping the competition. They had a definite edge on everyone from a cohesion standpoint to start the season, see also, Steve Nash. It wasn't because of any good defense.

And to make you happy and keep you from throwing more meaningless stats at me. I will not say that the Suns play no defense. They play defense, just not good defense. They play enough D to allow their offense to succeed.

[exodus]

Why is Phoenix getting 4 more defensive rebounds per game than Detroit?

Why are teams shooting the same percentage against Detroit that they are shooting against Phoenix?

[Plainview1981]

Quote:

---

Why is Phoenix getting 4 more defensive rebounds per game than Detroit?

Why are teams shooting the same percentage against Detroit that they are shooting against Phoenix?

---

Maybe because there are more shots during Suns games and that increases rebounding numbers.

[exodus]

Quote:

---

Maybe because there are more shots during Suns games and that increases rebounding numbers.

---

Yeah but according to chillzatl pace of play doesn't matter. That is why he can't answer the question.

To anyone else the answer is obvious.

[chillzatl]

You have your stats lexicon at hand I'm sure.

rebounds = more shots by less talented teams.

fg% = See above

You cannot pin down great defense by looking at a stat sheet. It is more than rebounds + turnovers * minutes / ppg.

[exodus]

But I thought more posessions didn't matter? That is the argument you used before when you were trying to downplay the Suns defense.

Don't tell me you have forgotten already.

And what does this mean?

Quote:

---

rebounds = more shots by

less talented

teams.

fg% = See above

---

Are you saying that Suns have had an easier schedule than Detroit?

[chillzatl]

more posessions might get them more points and more rebounds. It might allow lesser teams to score 105 on them and they still win by 10. But it doesn't mean they are a good defensive team. All it takes is watching them play and having a basic knowledge about defense in basketball.

[exodus]

In your fantasy world Detroit is a great defensive team and Phoenix is a lousy defensive team. In reality...

Opposing teams shoot 45% against both teams.

Their defensive rebounding (as a percentage) is nearly identical with a slight edge to Phoenix.

Detroit allows it's opponents the fewest free throw attempts in the league. Phoenix allows the second fewest.

Detroit gets slightly more blocks and steals than Phoenix.

So overall the only real reason that Detroit gives up so many fewer points than the Suns is that the Suns average 9 more posessions per game.

Now if you want to say that Detroit has been coasting on defense for much of the season then that could be a legit argument.

But saying that the Suns are a poor defensive team, or even below average, is nonsense.

[Plainview1981]

Quote:

---

In your fantasy world Detroit is a great defensive team and Phoenix is a lousy defensive team. In reality...

Opposing teams shoot 45% against both teams.

Their defensive rebounding (as a percentage) is nearly identical with a slight edge to Phoenix.

Detroit allows it's opponents the fewest free throw attempts in the league. Phoenix allows the second fewest.

Detroit gets slightly more blocks and steals than Phoenix.

So overall the only real reason that Detroit gives up so many fewer points than the Suns is that the Suns average 9 more posessions per game.

Now if you want to say that Detroit has been coasting on defense for much of the season then that could be a legit argument.

But saying that the Suns are a poor defensive team, or even below average, is nonsense.

---

The Suns could do nothing to contain Detroit when it really mattered today. However, Detroit stopped PHX cold in the 2nd half.

[chillzatl]

Do you just troll around looking to misquote what someone says so you can argue or make some smart ass comment? I never said they were a lousy defensive team. I said they weren't a good defensive team.

I don't need a bunch of stats to tell me what I know. Detroit is a good defensive team becuase they can shut you down. They can make your team score 10 points below your average every night. That ability doesn't show up as some consistant stat. Sometimes it's rebounding, sometimes it's turnovers and sometimes it's from lowering your fg%. It's never any one thing. But that ability as a whole is what makes them a great defensive team. The same goes for the Spurs and practically any other good defensive team in the history of the game.

Phoenix, on the other hand, will let you score 10 points above your average EVERY NIGHT. You will have more rebounds, more assists, more steals, more turnovers, more EVERYTHING. But their offense is so well tuned they will still outscore you and win. I don't care what stat you throw up, there is no way to consider that GOOD defense. They don't have the ability to stop anyone.

Before this year would ANYONE other than a rabid Dallas fan try to say that the Mavs played "good" defense? NO. Anyone who suggested that would be laughed at. Prior to last year (the last 3-4 years) they were generally considered a horrible defensive team. But if you look at their stats, they were basically identical to Phoenix's stats. Actually, Dallas typically held opponents to a lower fg% than Phoenix does. But you would not try to suggest they were a good defensive team. I'm sure you could find lots of drummed up stats to convince the naive otherwise. But you would not find many knowledgable people who would agree.

There isn't a stat for everything Exodus. You need to understand that. Especially for this thing called defense. Blocks and rebounds weren't what made Dikembe and Hakeem "great" defenders. They were just the stats that validated it. What made them great defenders was their ability to get to your spot first, to hold you back, to make you give up the ball, to make you worry about them more than the basket when trying to take a shot. There are no stats for those things. Team defense is exactly the same.

[exodus]

I didn't see the second half but i do think they will regret getting Tim Thomas. There is a reason Chicago sent him home. He is one of the laziest defenders in the league.

They were just desparate for a big.

And it goes without saying that Detroit is better than the Suns right now. Next year with a healthy Amare it could be a different story.

[Plainview1981]

Quote:

---

I didn't see the second half but i do think they will regret getting Tim Thomas. There is a reason Chicago sent him home. He is one of the laziest defenders in the league.

They were just desparate for a big.

And it goes without saying that Detroit is better than the Suns right now. Next year with a healthy Amare it could be a different story.

---

It won't be a different story. Because the Suns don't play defense. The Suns are little more than a stat padding 2nd round team.