Author Topic: Interior Defense  (Read 15854 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Interior Defense
« Reply #30 on: March 03, 2011, 09:55:18 AM »

Offline BudweiserCeltic

  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19003
  • Tommy Points: 1833

Tell Rondo to defend his man.

This is nothing new.

  Yes, just like it's nothing new that Nash had to call for a pick almost every time he wanted to get into the lane.

Problem was Brooks who Rondo couldn't keep up with. Had no problem with Nash really.

But really, who can keep up with him?

Re: Interior Defense
« Reply #31 on: March 03, 2011, 10:12:50 AM »

Offline BballTim

  • Dave Cowens
  • ***********************
  • Posts: 23724
  • Tommy Points: 1123

Tell Rondo to defend his man.

This is nothing new.

  Yes, just like it's nothing new that Nash had to call for a pick almost every time he wanted to get into the lane.

Problem was Brooks who Rondo couldn't keep up with. Had no problem with Nash really.

But really, who can keep up with him?

  Brooks is a handful, just like Lawson was for Denver. He still does a good job though.

Re: Interior Defense
« Reply #32 on: March 03, 2011, 10:18:05 AM »

Offline BudweiserCeltic

  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19003
  • Tommy Points: 1833

Tell Rondo to defend his man.

This is nothing new.

  Yes, just like it's nothing new that Nash had to call for a pick almost every time he wanted to get into the lane.

Problem was Brooks who Rondo couldn't keep up with. Had no problem with Nash really.

But really, who can keep up with him?

  Brooks is a handful, just like Lawson was for Denver. He still does a good job though.

Of course, point wasn't about complaining about Rondo. It was just a way to say that the issue was more in the perimeter defense than an interior defense issue.

But that said, as good as Rondo is defensively his biggest weakness is stopping penetration. It has always been and it has more to do with discipline than with ability.

Re: Interior Defense
« Reply #33 on: March 03, 2011, 10:21:24 AM »

Offline ballin

  • Jaylen Brown
  • Posts: 651
  • Tommy Points: 105
I agree that our interior D is not a problem. Yet another reason why I hated the Perkins trade. People always love to blame the guards for people getting into the lane and making layups, but the fact of the matter is, the NBA's rules make it impossible to legitimately STOP any decent offensive player. You need to funnel them towards a help defender/shot blocker.

Again, if Shaq is healthy for the playoffs, nobody will complain about this trade. If not, we're in trouble

Re: Interior Defense
« Reply #34 on: March 03, 2011, 10:30:17 AM »

Offline arctic 3.0

  • NCE
  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2554
  • Tommy Points: 406
kristic is picking up our defensive system pretty quickly. he's already showed me more on D then I thought he was capable of. of course my perception was formed almost entirely by reading the "experts" here on the blog.


Re: Interior Defense
« Reply #35 on: March 03, 2011, 10:32:18 AM »

Offline ballin

  • Jaylen Brown
  • Posts: 651
  • Tommy Points: 105
kristic is picking up our defensive system pretty quickly. he's already showed me more on D then I thought he was capable of. of course my perception was formed almost entirely by reading the "experts" here on the blog.



Well actually if you listened to SOME of us, you would've heard that Krstic is actually a pretty good 1v1 post defender. So I'm not a total hater. But he's not a shot blocker, and that's a problem

Re: Interior Defense
« Reply #36 on: March 03, 2011, 10:32:23 AM »

Offline BudweiserCeltic

  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19003
  • Tommy Points: 1833
They took out Baby to bring Krstic to the floor. Then they took him out, what happened? I kinda missed those few possessions.

Re: Interior Defense
« Reply #37 on: March 03, 2011, 10:35:10 AM »

Offline Fafnir

  • Bill Russell
  • ******************************
  • Posts: 30863
  • Tommy Points: 1330

Tell Rondo to defend his man.

This is nothing new.

  Yes, just like it's nothing new that Nash had to call for a pick almost every time he wanted to get into the lane.

Problem was Brooks who Rondo couldn't keep up with. Had no problem with Nash really.

But really, who can keep up with him?
Wall probably can, but I'm not sure about anyone else. Brook has some serious warts to his game, his speed is what allows him to be an effective player.

Re: Interior Defense
« Reply #38 on: March 03, 2011, 10:38:42 AM »

Offline arctic 3.0

  • NCE
  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2554
  • Tommy Points: 406
kristic is picking up our defensive system pretty quickly. he's already showed me more on D then I thought he was capable of. of course my perception was formed almost entirely by reading the "experts" here on the blog.



Well actually if you listened to SOME of us, you would've heard that Krstic is actually a pretty good 1v1 post defender. So I'm not a total hater. But he's not a shot blocker, and that's a problem

ok, the preponderance of "experts".
tp

Re: Interior Defense
« Reply #39 on: March 03, 2011, 12:37:36 PM »

Offline Chris

  • Global Moderator
  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18008
  • Tommy Points: 642
Quote
Interior defense
Quote
solution: Eddie Curry

Is this sarcasm or are you serious?

unfortunately not. He's the only the guy out there with the bulk to really stuff up the middle. Even with KG playing great tonight, PHO in the second half was cruising through the lane like someone left the windows open...

  According to the espn box scores Phoenix scored 26 points in the paint compared to our 52. Out of all the games concluded Phoenix is the only team with less than 30 points in the paint, and 5 of those teams who scored more points in the paint than Phoenix scored in the 80s for the game while Phoenix broke 100.

Exactly.  Which is why the interior defense was not the problem, the problem was that they were allowing penetration, which broke down the defense, and led to open shots, whether they were layups, or jump shots. 

It is always nice to have a guy who can cover up mistakes by blocking shots, but the C's defensive success has always been from their ability to cut off guys before they get into the paint, since penetration means you are going to leave someone open for a high percentage shot, if the ballhandler is good enough to get it to that person.

Re: Interior Defense
« Reply #40 on: March 03, 2011, 12:39:27 PM »

Offline BudweiserCeltic

  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19003
  • Tommy Points: 1833
Quote
Interior defense
Quote
solution: Eddie Curry

Is this sarcasm or are you serious?

unfortunately not. He's the only the guy out there with the bulk to really stuff up the middle. Even with KG playing great tonight, PHO in the second half was cruising through the lane like someone left the windows open...

  According to the espn box scores Phoenix scored 26 points in the paint compared to our 52. Out of all the games concluded Phoenix is the only team with less than 30 points in the paint, and 5 of those teams who scored more points in the paint than Phoenix scored in the 80s for the game while Phoenix broke 100.

Exactly.  Which is why the interior defense was not the problem, the problem was that they were allowing penetration, which broke down the defense, and led to open shots, whether they were layups, or jump shots. 

It is always nice to have a guy who can cover up mistakes by blocking shots, but the C's defensive success has always been from their ability to cut off guys before they get into the paint, since penetration means you are going to leave someone open for a high percentage shot, if the ballhandler is good enough to get it to that person.

It's what killed us against Orlando 2 years ago. Poor job stopping penetration on the guards, Perk/Centers stepping up to stop it, and leaving Howard alone for an easy Supergirl Dunk.

Re: Interior Defense
« Reply #41 on: March 03, 2011, 12:52:02 PM »

Offline GreenEnvy

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4673
  • Tommy Points: 1043
Krstic and Murphy are no defensive studs, but once they learn the system and KG gets to them, they will look significantly better than they have.

By the time they are ready, they should only be facing backups anyway, and there aren't too many skilled backup bigs.

We won't be as good as we were with Perk (unless JO returns to near full strength - because I think he could actually be better than Perk on both ends), but our offense should make up for it. Krstic looks like he will get those open FT-line jumpers all day. Murphy will get looks and once he shakes the rust he will knock them down.

As long as the team is healthy, we are a better team than we were in January.
CELTICS 2024

Re: Interior Defense
« Reply #42 on: March 03, 2011, 12:56:20 PM »

Offline BballTim

  • Dave Cowens
  • ***********************
  • Posts: 23724
  • Tommy Points: 1123
Quote
Interior defense
Quote
solution: Eddie Curry

Is this sarcasm or are you serious?

unfortunately not. He's the only the guy out there with the bulk to really stuff up the middle. Even with KG playing great tonight, PHO in the second half was cruising through the lane like someone left the windows open...

  According to the espn box scores Phoenix scored 26 points in the paint compared to our 52. Out of all the games concluded Phoenix is the only team with less than 30 points in the paint, and 5 of those teams who scored more points in the paint than Phoenix scored in the 80s for the game while Phoenix broke 100.

Exactly.  Which is why the interior defense was not the problem, the problem was that they were allowing penetration, which broke down the defense, and led to open shots, whether they were layups, or jump shots. 

It is always nice to have a guy who can cover up mistakes by blocking shots, but the C's defensive success has always been from their ability to cut off guys before they get into the paint, since penetration means you are going to leave someone open for a high percentage shot, if the ballhandler is good enough to get it to that person.

It's what killed us against Orlando 2 years ago. Poor job stopping penetration on the guards, Perk/Centers stepping up to stop it, and leaving Howard alone for an easy Supergirl Dunk.

  This was also one of the reasons Danny gave for the Celts rebounding issues vs the Lakers. Someone penetrates, a big goes to defend them and nobody boxes out Gasol or Bynum, leading to easy putbacks.

Re: Interior Defense
« Reply #43 on: March 03, 2011, 12:56:38 PM »

Offline Marcus13

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2578
  • Tommy Points: 119
While the concern of the thread is valid and accurate...the solution is off

Re: Interior Defense
« Reply #44 on: March 03, 2011, 03:04:36 PM »

Offline droponov

  • Jrue Holiday
  • Posts: 378
  • Tommy Points: 16
It's what killed us against Orlando 2 years ago. Poor job stopping penetration on the guards, Perk/Centers stepping up to stop it, and leaving Howard alone for an easy Supergirl Dunk.

  This was also one of the reasons Danny gave for the Celts rebounding issues vs the Lakers. Someone penetrates, a big goes to defend them and nobody boxes out Gasol or Bynum, leading to easy putbacks.

That's how defense is played. Perimeter players can try and should be able to steer their man to the baseline or the middle or wherever the help is supposed to be, but they can't be expected to deny penetration by themselves, especially if a pick is involved, but also in isolations.

What Ainge really meant was that Boston rebounders were so bad that the only way they could have prevented LA from killing them on the boards would be by not playing defense.