Hollinger: Boston's D vs. Laker's O

[Hoops]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/playoffs2008/columns/story?columnist=hollinger_john&page=OffenseDefense-080604

While Hollinger's analysis isn't entirely conclusive, it certainly adds fuel to the fire for those believing in the "Defense Wins Championships" mantra.

The most interesting thing I saw was that injuries always derail great offenses. It goes along with my thinking that offensive firepower comes and goes. A reliable shooter/scorer can go cold and throw a major kink into a team's offense - we've seen it firsthand with Ray. Defenses, on the other hand, aren't nearly so fickle. I believe it's the predictability and the consistency of defense that makes it the mantra of champions.

[TheReaLPuba]

I've always said Defense wins in the playoffs because you play the same team so much and so often that you basically know their offensive schemes.

The team that plays with the highest defensive intensity clearly will change the other team's offensive will.

Another reason is that shooting comes and goes but if you keep playing great hard-nosed defense it allows your offense to "come back" or "catch up" because you limit the opposition from scoring so you don't need to score as much.

I also want to point out that the C's aren't a bad offensive team. They're not like the Pistons or the Cavs who can't score. They're a team that thrives on defense and passing on the offensive end.

As long as the team doesn't turn the ball over they are going to get high quality shots against any defense!

Just a matter of knocking them down and getting back to get another stop.

[Hoops]

I totally agree that people are overlooking Boston's offense. Boston is so dangerous because of their balance and adaptability.

[Jon]

I also think the effect of Boston's defense is being overlooked by most of the media.  On top of them forgetting that most of the time the team with the best defense wins, they're also forgetting the relative strength of the defensive matchups.  Yes, Kobe is a better scorer than Ray, Paul, and KG.  However, will much will that be narrowed by potential defensive matchups?

Kobe is going to be guarded by strong defenders like Pierce and Posey.  Either Pierce or Allen is going to be guarded by Radmanovic and Garnett is going to be guarded by Odom or Gasol.  Won't Kobe be slowed by that matchup?  Won't Pierce/Allen and Garnett look like Kobe against those defensive matchups?

[LarBrd33]

I also think the effect of Boston's defense is being overlooked by most of the media.  On top of them forgetting that most of the time the team with the best defense wins, they're also forgetting the relative strength of the defensive matchups.  Yes, Kobe is a better scorer than Ray, Paul, and KG.  However, will much will that be narrowed by potential defensive matchups?

Kobe is going to be guarded by strong defenders like Pierce and Posey.  Either Pierce or Allen is going to be guarded by Radmanovic and Garnett is going to be guarded by Odom or Gasol.  Won't Kobe be slowed by that matchup?  Won't Pierce/Allen and Garnett look like Kobe against those defensive matchups?

Yeah but if you read that Truehoop post a few days ago it basically said that during the regular season we were effective against Kobe by basically clogging the lane, leaving him on the perimeter with single coverage from Ray Allen and daring Kobe to shoot.  Unfortunately for Kobe he shot terribly and the Celtics won.  The article then went on to say that the Spurs tried this same strategy in the WCF with a much better defender (Bruce Bowen), but Kobe shot 54% and tore them apart. 

[Roy Hobbs]

I wanted to put this somewhere, so this thread is as good as any.  One way to look at the respective defenses of the two team's is by looking at their "Defensive PER" or "Opponent's PER".

Here are the numbers for the respective starting lineups.  Keep in mind that a PER of 15.0 is the league average, so holding an opponent below that number is very good.

Opponent's PER / eFG% allowed:

Fisher: 15.5 / 50.6 eFG% / 20.4 pts per 48
Kobe: (SG) 14.4 / 46.6 eFG% / 20.8 pts per 48
VladRad: (SF) 17.0 / 51.1 eFG% / 22.0 pts per 48
Odom: 16.9 / 48.9 eFG% / 19.6 pts per 48
Gasol: 17.5 / 52.3 eFG% / 19.6 pts per 48

Initial thoughts?  Their starters don't play very good defense.  At four of the five positions, their opponent out-produced the league average, and three of the five starters allowed an eFG% of 50.0 eFG% or better.  That's not very good at all.

Now, the Celtics.

Opponent's PER / eFG% allowed / Points allowed per 48 minutes:

Rondo: 17.6 / 48.0 eFG% / 19.3 pts per 48
Ray: 12.4 / 48.5 eFG% / 18.1 pts per 48
Pierce: 11.0 / 44.6 eFG% / 18.2 pts per 48
KG: 13.9 / 42.1 eFG% / 17.1 pts per 48
Perk: 14.2 / 46.7 eFG% / 16.7 pts per 48

Not surprisingly, our defensive starters are clearly better than theirs.  Not only do four of our five starters keep their man to a PER of under the league average, but no starter on our team allows the man he's guarding to put up an eFG% of over 50.0.  The only surprising aspect of those numbers is that it shows we do poorest at defending opposing point guards.  However, even then, we give up fewer points at our *worst* position than the Lakers do at their *best* defensive position.

Anyway, it's an interesting look.  One thing this suggests to me is that if the two teams shorten their respective benches, we've got a very good chance.

[Jon]

That's what I think people are underestimating.  Yes, Kobe is going to get his, but the Celtics Big Three should have their easiest defensive matchup since the regular season ended. 

Yes, Kobe will put the clamps on Ray or Paul, but whoever Radmonavic is guarding is going to blow by him and not face a lot of resistance on his way to the hoop. 

[youcanthandlethetruth113]

IMHO this is the best pre-finals article out there (do date).

He's objective, well-spoken, well-researched, very informative, and although John himself hasn't voiced his opinion (i don't think???) he's clearly laying it out there that defense wins championships (with few minor exceptions).

[seccom]

It is a well written article that does not really say anything.

Team A, 1st in offense, maybe 5th in defense vs
Team B, 30th in offense, 1st in defense.

Which team will you pick to win?

It is always the best combination of both offense or defense.

[Roy Hobbs]

It is a well written article that does not really say anything.

Team A, 1st in offense, maybe 5th in defense vs
Team B, 30th in offense, 1st in defense.

Which team will you pick to win?

It is always the best combination of both offense or defense.

I'll agree that that was the part of Hollinger's analysis that was lacking.  For instance, Hollinger classifies the '92 and '93 Bulls as offensive teams, but they ranked 7th and 4th in defense, respectively.

[drza44]

Agreed.  It was an interesting premise to look at great Ds vs. great Os, but as a tool for this playoffs it is extremely limited because you have to account for the other end as well.

Oh, and Hollinger has predicted that the Lakers win in 6.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/playoffs

[tanner]

Agreed.  It was an interesting premise to look at great Ds vs. great Os, but as a tool for this playoffs it is extremely limited because you have to account for the other end as well.

Oh, and Hollinger has predicted that the Lakers win in 6.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/playoffs

With his LA pick, clearly he thinks great O beats great D in this case.  Would have wanted he put a paragraph or two explaining his choice.

[galen]

It is a well written article that does not really say anything.

Team A, 1st in offense, maybe 5th in defense vs
Team B, 30th in offense, 1st in defense.

Which team will you pick to win?

It is always the best combination of both offense or defense.

I'll agree that that was the part of Hollinger's analysis that was lacking.  For instance, Hollinger classifies the '92 and '93 Bulls as offensive teams, but they ranked 7th and 4th in defense, respectively.

In his final "edge" decisions though, he based them on just the offensive vs. defense, not on the actual win/loss result of the series.

[BballTim]

I also think the effect of Boston's defense is being overlooked by most of the media.  On top of them forgetting that most of the time the team with the best defense wins, they're also forgetting the relative strength of the defensive matchups.  Yes, Kobe is a better scorer than Ray, Paul, and KG.  However, will much will that be narrowed by potential defensive matchups?

Kobe is going to be guarded by strong defenders like Pierce and Posey.  Either Pierce or Allen is going to be guarded by Radmanovic and Garnett is going to be guarded by Odom or Gasol.  Won't Kobe be slowed by that matchup?  Won't Pierce/Allen and Garnett look like Kobe against those defensive matchups?

Yeah but if you read that Truehoop post a few days ago it basically said that during the regular season we were effective against Kobe by basically clogging the lane, leaving him on the perimeter with single coverage from Ray Allen and daring Kobe to shoot.  Unfortunately for Kobe he shot terribly and the Celtics won.  The article then went on to say that the Spurs tried this same strategy in the WCF with a much better defender (Bruce Bowen), but Kobe shot 54% and tore them apart. 

  Bowen gave up about a 54% shooting percentage for the season. Pierce and Allen were both much better.