Next person who calls De'Andre Hunter a PF gets my foot in their back side.

[Peoriabird]

11 hours ago, AHF said:

First, that wasn’t the 60 win roster.  I’m sure it was confusing but you’ll see that if you look at Bud’s history with the team.  I posted his first team.
 

Second, you are comparing the team Bud built and not the team he started with.  Not sure how that makes sense.

But let’s play along:

This list of the top 10 players by minutes played is dominated by veterans that were handpicked by Bud for his system and played for him for multiple years.  The only ones who don’t fit that profile are John Collins (who was the only one 22 or younger in the bunch and contributed from day 1), Taylor (who was still older than any of the top 5 from last year’s team of Hawks) and Dedmon (a 28 year old vet who learned under Pops and was ready to step right in).
 

Other than JC, every guy is a 23–31 year old vet.  Not a 20 year old rookie or 42 year old coach in training.  These guys are the vets that Bud chose.  The team had enough to win 43 games due to veteran presence, fit for Buds system and continuity.  
 

None of those things apply to the vets that LP has coached.  So, again, I don’t expect a bunch of near rookies and rejects filling the roster to match Bud’s hand picked veterans even if I think Bud did a **** job as a GM.  Veterans (even role playing vets) will do more for your D than most 20-22 year olds.

So let me understand what you are claiming...Your claim is that vets are better defenders than rookies so young teams are the worst defensive teams while the veteran teams are better just because of age differences. So every year, you should be able to predict the best defensive and the worst defensive team just by the average age of the team or most utilized player's age.  Right?

[Peoriabird]

I can't seem to find the same association between age and bad team defensive ratings.  Only 1 team falls in this category and that is Golden state

Youngest rosters by average age:

1. Phoenix Suns (24.49)
2. Chicago Bulls (24.83)
3. Golden State Warriors (24.87)
4. Minnesota Timberwolves (24.91)
5. New York Knicks (24.98)

Least experienced rosters by average seasons of NBA experience:

1. Boston Celtics (2.73)
2. Phoenix Suns (2.80)
3. Chicago Bulls (3.07)
4. Minnesota Timberwolves (3.40)
5. Indiana Pacers (3.53)

Bottom 5 team with the worse defensive ratings

25	Golden State	1.103	1.208	1.318	1.111	1.094	1.066
26	San Antonio	1.103	1.034	1.152	1.072	1.126	1.083
27	Atlanta	1.111	1.163	1.150	1.089	1.133	1.102
28	Portland	1.112	1.182	1.161	1.096	1.122	1.071
29	Washington	1.118	1.088	0.900	1.089	1.140	1.105
30	Cleveland	1.121	1.078	1.091	1.127	1.114	1.14

[Peoriabird]

As far as oldest rosters vs top defensive teams is concerned.  2 teams makes both list.  But here is the thing that totally put a wrench in your logic. San Antonio and Portland also appear of 2 list also.  Top 5 oldest team and bottom 5 worst defensive team while Boston is one of the youngest teams but one of the best defensive team. Plus they have a small starting point guard to boot.   Can you explain this?

 

Oldest rosters by average age:

1. Houston Rockets (30.24)
2. Los Angeles Lakers (29.07)
3. Milwaukee Bucks (28.73)
4. Dallas Mavericks (27.40)
5. Utah Jazz (27.08)

Most experienced rosters by average seasons of NBA experience:

1. Houston Rockets (8.93)
2. Los Angeles Lakers (8.07)
3. Milwaukee Bucks (7.07)
4. San Antonio Spurs (5.67)
5. Portland Trail Blazers (5.57)

Teams with the best team defensive ratings

1	Milwaukee	1.007	1.083	1.016	0.989	1.018	1.019
2	Toronto	1.016	1.055	0.949	1.022	1.013	1.033
3	Boston	1.034	1.117	1.217	1.034	1.034	1.042
4	LA Lakers	1.036	1.044	0.963	1.009	1.050	1.063
5	LA Clippers	1.048	1.128	1.099	1.028	1.060	1.086

[Peoriabird]

Reference

https://www.teamrankings.com/nba/stat/defensive-efficiency

https://www.hoopsrumors.com/2019/11/youngest-oldest-nba-rosters-for-201920.html

[AHF]

33 minutes ago, Peoriabird said:

So let me understand what you are claiming...Your claim is that vets are better defenders than rookies so young teams are the worst defensive teams while the veteran teams are better just because of age differences. So every year, you should be able to predict the best defensive and the worst defensive team just by the average age of the team or most utilized player's age.  Right?

Absolutely not.  I am saying that teams that are extremely young generally suck at defense and the vets LP did have were not at the level of Paul Millsap or anything.

[Peoriabird]

2 minutes ago, AHF said:

Absolutely not.  I am saying that teams that are extremely young generally suck at defense and the vets LP did have were not at the level of Paul Millsap or anything.

Paul Millsap wasn't on the 2017 team so why do you continue to bring him up?

[AHF]

4 minutes ago, Peoriabird said:

Paul Millsap wasn't on the 2017 team so why do you continue to bring him up?

I shouldn't have brought him up in that post.  The point is that extremely young teams virtually always suck on defense.  I thought that was widely accepted.

[Peoriabird]

Just now, AHF said:

I shouldn't have brought him up in that post.  The point is that extremely young teams virtually always suck on defense.  I thought that was widely accepted.

I just disproved your theory with stats and you still maintain that relationship?  Kinda Trump like I would say.  San Antonio had an old roster and sucked at defense.  Boston and Miami had a young roster and were great on defense...And there are numerous other examples like Dallas/Portland being old and bad while Memphis being very young but good on defense.

[Peoriabird]

8 minutes ago, AHF said:

I shouldn't have brought him up in that post.  The point is that extremely young teams virtually always suck on defense.  I thought that was widely accepted.

Plus Atlanta wasn't in the top 5 youngest roster either year anyway so I don't know why this is still a talking point.

Youngest teams 2018/19 season

• New York Knicks, 24.57 years old
• Denver Nuggets, 24.72 years old
• Portland Trail Blazers, 24.78 years old
• Chicago Bulls, 24.89 years old
• Phoenix Suns, 25.10 years old

[AHF]

15 minutes ago, Peoriabird said:

I just disproved your theory with stats and you still maintain that relationship?  Kinda Trump like I would say.  San Antonio had an old roster and sucked at defense.  Boston and Miami had a young roster and were great on defense...And there are numerous other examples like Dallas/Portland being old and bad while Memphis being very young but good on defense.

You are the most frustrating person on the site for me to discuss statistics with.  I NEVER CLAIMED BEING OLD MAKES YOU A GREAT DEFENSE.  NEVER.  YOU MADE THAT UP.  PLEASE DON'T MAKE STUFF UP.

You really think I'm arguing that a 28 year old is going to generally be a worse defender than the same player at age 38?  Give me a break.

I'm not claiming that a veteran team can't stink at defense either.  It is possible but anyone at 27 is going to be a better defender than they were at 20 unless they have suffered a major injury.

I assume you can figure out why you have to weight rosters by minutes when calculating their effective age right?  Please tell me I don't have to explain that.  (Just for illustration, you shouldn't weight a 40 year old who plays 200 minutes the same as a 22 year old who plays 2000 minutes.  In this example, the effective age for those 2200 minutes is 23.6.)

Using DRtg, the top defenses by minutes weight average age last year were:

#1 Milwaukee - Minutes Weighted Avg Age:  29.2

#2 LA Clippers - Minutes Weighted Avg Age:  27.4

#3 LA Lakers - Minutes Weighted Avg Age:  29.5

The worst defenses were typically notably younger:

#1 Washington - MWAA:  25.1

#2 Cleveland - MWAA:  24.97

#4 Atlanta - MWAA:  24.1

#5 Golden State - MWAA:  24.4

 

The age gap is not a coincidence.

 

If you think any team with a lower minutes weighted average age than the 2019-20 Atlanta Hawks have ever put together a great defense then I encourage you to name that team and we can explore their circumstances.

[Peoriabird]

4 minutes ago, AHF said:

You are the most frustrating person in the world to discuss statistics because you approach them without any sophistication.  I NEVER CLAIMED BEING OLD MAKES YOU A GREAT DEFENSE.  NEVER.  YOU MADE THAT UP.  PLEASE DON'T MAKE STUFF UP.

You really think I'm arguing that a 28 year old is going to generally be a worse defender than the same player at age 38?  Give me a break.

I'm not claiming that a veteran team can't stink at defense either.  It is possible but anyone at 27 is going to be a better defender than they were at 20 unless they have suffered a major injury.

I assume you can figure out why you have to weight rosters by minutes when calculating their effective age right?  Please tell me I don't have to explain that.

Using DRtg, the top defenses by minutes weight average age last year were:

#1 Milwaukee - Minutes Weighted Avg Age:  29.2

#2 LA Clippers - Minutes Weighted Avg Age:  27.4

#3 LA Lakers - Minutes Weighted Avg Age:  29.5

The worst defenses were typically notably younger:

#1 Washington - MWAA:  25.1

#2 Cleveland - MWAA:  24.97

#4 Atlanta - MWAA:  24.1

#5 Golden State - MWAA:  24.4

 

The age gap is not a coincidence.

 

If you think any team with a lower minutes weighted average age than the 2019-20 Atlanta Hawks have ever put together a great defense then I encourage you to name that team and we can explore their circumstances.

Where are the Rockets?  They were the oldest team.  What about Memphis?  Weren't they the youngest team where it not an injury to JJ?  Why do you continue to slant your stats for the sake of an argument?  Anyway, Like you say, we will have to agree to disagree

[macdaddy]

Not to insert myself in this argument but average team age means nothing when you have a 42 year old sitting on the bench or you have a bunch of 19 year olds playing 2 minutes a game.   You have to look at average age of the players playing which i think is what ahf did right?

[AHF]

15 minutes ago, Peoriabird said:

Where are the Rockets?  They were the oldest team. 

What about the price of tea in China?  My point is the very youngest teams in the league are usually terrible on defense.  For most of the year, we were the youngest team on a minutes weighted basis last year given who played our minutes.  That point has nothing to do with how an old teams performs on defense.  They might be good or bad depending on their circumstances.

Irrelevant. 

Quote

What about Memphis?  Weren't they the youngest team where it not an injury to JJ?  

Memphis is a great example to pull.  They were 15th in DRtg despite a very minutes weighted age.  They definitely standout from the crowd of very young teams.  Likely because most of their heavy minutes players were largely defensive focused:

JJJ

Dillon Brooks

Kyle Anderson

Jae Crowder

Jonas V

All derive a large part of their value from their defense. 

For this year, our only players in our top minutes played who were drafted / signed largely for their defense were rookies:  Cam and Hunter. Both were up and down learning how to defend in the NBA like most rookies. Their expected improved consistency on that end is a reason I'm quite excited about our anticipated defensive improvement this season (along with the vets being added to the roster - I'm not expecting OO to have a big impact as a rookie).

I'm honestly impressed you found a team this young that was even league average by Drtg.  Clearly nowhere near the top teams but that is much better than teams this young generally fall.

[Peoriabird]

15 minutes ago, macdaddy said:

Not to insert myself in this argument but average team age means nothing when you have a 42 year old sitting on the bench or you have a bunch of 19 year olds playing 2 minutes a game.   You have to look at average age of the players playing which i think is what ahf did right?

But the thing is that one could argue that our defense was better with our young players on the court vs Jabari Parker, Crabb, Damien Jones, V. Carter,Jeff Teague etc.  @AHF is making it seem as though our defense was bad because of players like Reddish and Hunter because they were young.  If we played a line up of Teague/Crabb/V. Carter/Parker/Damien Jones.  That defensive team would have been far worse than Young/Cam/Hunter/Collins/Bruno.

[AHF]

Just now, Peoriabird said:

But the thing is that one could argue that our defense was better with our young players on the court vs Jabari Parker, Crabb, Damien Jones, V. Carter,Jeff Teague etc.  @AHF is making it seem as though our defense was bad because of players like Reddish and Hunter because they were young.  If we played a line up of Young/Crabb/V. Carter/Parker/Damien Jones.  That defensive team would have been far worse than Young/Cam/Hunter/Collins/Bruno.

I am saying that we had an exceptionally young team which typically means a bad defense and that our veterans were not much help in this regard.  Parker, Carter, Jones, etc. are all absolute garbage defenders.  Most teams that have a minutes weighted average age as young as ours struggle on defense.  

I'm happy to look at any particular team but I can name you 3 dozen examples of very young teams that have been among the worst in the league in Drtg without blinking.  Your example of Memphis was a good one of a team that ranked as high as 15th.  When we dive into the young players who are standout defenders and vets who are standout defenders on that team who are getting the big minutes, I think it makes sense to see why they were better than we were.  Their rookie struggled on D but the rest of their top minutes guys were all defenders whether newer to the league (ex: Brooks in his 3rd season) or vets (ex: Jonas in his 9th year).

[Peoriabird]

Other than Trae, Our worst defense players were not our young players...They were players like Parker, Teague and Damien Jones etc

2 minutes ago, AHF said:

I am saying that we had an exceptionally young team which typically means a bad defense and that our veterans were not much help in this regard.  Parker, Carter, Jones, etc. are all absolute garbage defenders.  Most teams that have a minutes weighted average age as young as ours struggle on defense.  

I'm happy to look at any particular team but I can name you 3 dozen examples of very young teams that have been among the worst in the league in Drtg without blinking.  Your example of Memphis was a good one of a team that ranked as high as 15th.  When we dive into the young players who are standout defenders and vets who are standout defenders on that team who are getting the big minutes, I think it makes sense to see why they were better than we were.  Their rookie struggled on D but the rest of their top minutes guys were all defenders whether newer to the league (ex: Brooks in his 3rd season) or vets (ex: Jonas in his 9th year).

Boston is another. and so is Miami

[AHF]

20 minutes ago, Peoriabird said:

Other than Trae, Our worst defense players were not our young players...They were players like Parker, Teague and Damien Jones etc

 

That just isn't true.  Our young players all struggled on defense to various degrees.  

The worst DRtg we had on the team was a 117.  The best was Dedmon's 107. 

Here are our young guys:
Trae 117

Hunter 117

Huerter 116

Cam 115

Bruno 114

Our total team Drtg was a 114.8.  Doesn't take a genius to do the math and figure out that the rest of the team was better than those 5 guys combined by a significant margin.

Among out top 8 Drtgs only one of them was age 22 or younger:  John Collins.

Quote

Boston is another. and so is Miami

Neither of them qualify.  Miami's MWAA was almost 26 years old and Boston's was 25.3.  Boston's top 6 players by minutes were Jason Tatum and guys with 4-10 years experience in the league.  Only one of them was age 22 or lower.  Boston's MWAA was also more than a year older than the Hawks.  

Again, very inexperienced players are going to struggle more than guys who have been in the league for years.  Boston's team was not inexperienced.  They had no one in their their top 7 by minutes played who had less than 3 years in the league by last season.  Atlanta had 4 of their top 5 in their first or second season.

Not comparable.

[Diesel]

19 hours ago, MaceCase said:

If you just allow yourselves to think beyond

PG-SG-SF-PF-C

towards the current 

G, G/F, F, F/C, C

alignments,

 I guarantee more than a few of you will sleep a lot better at night or day or dusk or whenever people sleep during these COVID days.

The problem BK is that you have to have some skillsets to make these things work.  Basketball is really about the right mesh of skillsets and I agree that it doesn't matter where they come from as long as they are represented.  IMHO you need:

Rim Protector.

Rebounder

Shooter

Distributor

Slasher

 

These are the 5 skillsets that you need for a championship. 

Rim Protector - You need somebody who is going to be able to stop the opposing team from coming in and owning the paint.  Some of our best seasons was with Deke.   Deke wasn't a high scorer but he could stop other teams from scoring at the rim. 

Rebounder - Not that you need one.. but several.   You got to limit possessions to win this game.    The lack of a rebounder will kill any scheme you have.

Shooter - You have to have somebody who will make the defense honest.   Somebody that can make the defense move.  IF a defense can sit back and camp in the lane and not be intimidated by what's going on outside the lane, they will win most games.   Hello Milwaukee...   Last season, in the playoffs, Milwaukee was introduced to playoff basketball coaching.  Coaching that said... I'm going to camp in the middle until you make me respect your outside shooting.  Oh, you have one guy who can cook... OK, we will cover him and still camp in the middle.   You have seen teams like GS overload defensives schemes with guys that can shoot from anywhere.    A shooter doesn't have to be a three point shooter.  Midrange magic is just as good.   The key is to move the defense.

Distributor - Getting Guys their shot when they are in their spot is important.   Jason Kidd took NJ to the championship (2) because he was a great distributor.  My God, he had Kmart and Richardson.   Having a good distributor is a key to winning it all. 

Slasher - Some think that this is not necessary.. but a slasher is as important as a shooter.  A good slasher can kill defensive schemes. I consider Kobe a slashing SG.  He could shoot from distance but his main game was getting to the rim.   Jordan also until his first retirement.   Watch Jordan vs. the Celtics when they had Bird.  Boston had a really good defense but Jordan's ability to slash killed that defense. 

Once you got those 5 things, it is time to consider defense.  The Sacramento Kings had all these things but couldn't make it to the finals.  It's because they were content trying to outscore their opponents. 

When you look at our roster... we have to see. 

[Peoriabird]

22 minutes ago, AHF said:

That just isn't true.  Our young players all struggled on defense to various degrees.  

The worst DRtg we had on the team was a 117.  The best was Dedmon's 107. 

Here are our young guys:
Trae 117

Hunter 117

Huerter 116

Cam 115

Bruno 114

 

In Fairness to Hunter, He did play out of position a lot.  But you conveniently left out

Vince Carter Drtg 116

Teague 117

Crabbe 117

Treveon Graham 117

Evan Turner 115 

D. Jones  113

J Parker  113

to try to prove your point but hey, I guess that is what you do.

[High5]

10 minutes ago, Peoriabird said:

In Fairness to Hunter, He did play out of position a lot.  But you conveniently left out

Vince Carter Drtg 116

Teague 117

Crabbe 117

Treveon Graham 117

Evan Turner 115 

to try to prove your point but hey, I guess that is what you do.

I like how in your attempt to blame LP for all of our defensive issues you ended arguing that our entire roster was made up of bad defensive players. You're a special talent, Peo.