Quantifying how bad Kyrie's defense was last season

[knuckleballer]

To add to jpotter33, P Pierce was considered a poor defender prior to adding Garnett.  Defense is largely about mentality and effort. 

Cleveland has had poor coaching and has been led by Lebron who doesn't care much about defense during the regular season.  It's exhausting and they had bigger things to worry about, the playoffs. 

Look at GS in 15/16, they wore themselves out in regular season chasing the best record and were worn out in the playoffs.  Not just in the finals, but they struggled in other playoff series as well because, I suspect, they were worn out.

[Rosco917]

I don't know how many times we're going to go through this.

Kyrie has the tools to properly defend. With a bit of foot work improvement, and increased desire, he will be at least a fair defender, or even less than a fair defender, at times. But he will be able to defend his assignment one on one... if only at times.

IT was a total loss defensively, every defensive stand he needed the help that would suddenly appear, while he'd then scurry to the player least likely to be a scoring option. At times when the opposition found where IT ran to on D, the switch would have to begin all over again. This switching helped hide the futility of IT's overall defense for sure. And caused the undue drain of energy by the C's. That may be why some of our losses were so huge during the playoffs, and the reason teams always trade IT after a few seasons.

There is a big difference between not very good, and totally useless.

[knuckleballer]

He doesn't play good defense during the regular season because he's pacing himself just like the rest of his team.  He has played very well defensively in the playoffs including the finals.  I don't see that as something to be worried about.

I've read this a few times, and I don't think it's true. How do you define "very good defensively"?

Sorry, but I'm not going to be able to define it using advanced stats.  I define it by my eyes in the series against the Celts and the Warriors.  I thought he played very well defensively in those games.  Just my opinion. 

[Roy H.]

However, unlike IT, Kyrie has all of the tools necessary to be an average or even a slightly above average defender, and we've actually seen him play high-level defense in the playoffs in their championship year, which is much more than you can say about IT.

Have we?

Against the Dubs, for instance, Kyrie allowed his man to shoot 8%* better than their typical average. That was by far the worst percentage differential of any regular on either team.

For those saying Kyrie has the necessary tools, did he just not care enough to play defense?

*8% meaning add, rather than multiply, 8% to the opponents' regular FG%. Kyrie's man went from averaging 48.4% on average to 56.4% against Kyrie. I believe that's a raw FG% rather than eFG%.

[knuckleballer]

However, unlike IT, Kyrie has all of the tools necessary to be an average or even a slightly above average defender, and we've actually seen him play high-level defense in the playoffs in their championship year, which is much more than you can say about IT.

Have we?

Against the Dubs, for instance, Kyrie allowed his man to shoot 8%* better than their typical average. That was by far the worst percentage differential of any regular on either team.

For those saying Kyrie has the necessary tools, did he just not care enough to play defense?

*8% meaning add, rather than multiply, 8% to the opponents' regular FG%. Kyrie's man went from averaging 48.4% on average to 56.4% against Kyrie. I believe that's a raw FG% rather than eFG%.

Do you think physical tools are important when it comes to playing defense?  Do you think coaching and effort are important factors?  Do you think players coast on that side of the ball to reserve their energy for their offensive games as well as reserving their energy for the course of the season?  I'm sure you do.  So do you honestly think he can significantly improve that area of his game for the Celtics this season?  I do and I think most people you are arguing with do as well.  We all saw Pierce improve on that end of the court starting in 2007/2008 for obvious reasons.

[Celtics18]

Agree with Roy.  There's absolutely no reason to expect Kyrie Irving to be an improvement over Isaiah defensively.

He's been a poor defender his entire career.  A lot of folks are making the argument that Kyrie has the "tools" to be a good defender, but I don't think this is true.  He doesn't move his feet well laterally and he doesn't get in a good guarding stance.  Considering that he doesn't do those things, the fact that he's got decent height for his position is irrevelant.

Staying in front of opposing guards is the key to playing good defense at the point guard position.  It takes a lot of skill and energy to be good at.  Being a on-ball perimeter defender has very little to do with height.  I would argue that Isaiah's physical strength and ability to move laterally actually make him more of a candidate to be a better defender than Irving.  That said, I would agree that they've both been poor defenders thus far in their careers.  Just don't expect Irving to be an improvement on Thomas.

[green_bballers13]

I think people know that Kyrie is not a good defender, but neither was Thomas and theoretically, Kyrie can get better under Stevens. I think that's what Danny is hoping for.

Last season, Kyrie wasn't just "not a good defender". According to the folks over at 538, he was "historically bad".

I'm hopeful he'll get better, but last season he was worse than IT at defense. The thing that worries me is that the Cavs had to dumb things down for their guys, replacing switches with straight man to man because players - namely Kyrie and Love - struggled.

Would you say you're hopeful?

I've read a lot of your posts about Kyrie, and hopeful doesn't seem consistent with what I have read.

[jpotter33]

However, unlike IT, Kyrie has all of the tools necessary to be an average or even a slightly above average defender, and we've actually seen him play high-level defense in the playoffs in their championship year, which is much more than you can say about IT.

Have we?

Against the Dubs, for instance, Kyrie allowed his man to shoot 8%* better than their typical average. That was by far the worst percentage differential of any regular on either team.

For those saying Kyrie has the necessary tools, did he just not care enough to play defense?

*8% meaning add, rather than multiply, 8% to the opponents' regular FG%. Kyrie's man went from averaging 48.4% on average to 56.4% against Kyrie. I believe that's a raw FG% rather than eFG%.

Absolutely. I'm specifically referring to their title run in 2016. I distinctly remember being impressed by Kyrie's D and how well he played Curry. Last year that entire Cavs team was hot garbage defensively, which I think is largely attributable to both the "championship hangover" and them just not focusing on their D due to over-reliance on their offense.

EDIT: Granted, I literally just went through the entire 2015-2016 Finals thread and couldn't find where I posted about Kyrie's D impressing me, but I definitely remember it.

[jpotter33]

Agree with Roy.  There's absolutely no reason to expect Kyrie Irving to be an improvement over Isaiah defensively.

He's been a poor defender his entire career.  A lot of folks are making the argument that Kyrie has the "tools" to be a good defender, but I don't think this is true.  He doesn't move his feet well laterally and he doesn't get in a good guarding stance.  Considering that he doesn't do those things, the fact that he's got decent height for his position is irrevelant.

Staying in front of opposing guards is the key to playing good defense at the point guard position.  It takes a lot of skill and energy to be good at.  Being a on-ball perimeter defender has very little to do with height.  I would argue that Isaiah's physical strength and ability to move laterally actually make him more of a candidate to be a better defender than Irving.  That said, I would agree that they've both been poor defenders thus far in their careers.  Just don't expect Irving to be an improvement on Thomas.

IT being 5'9" compared to Kyrie being 6'3.5" is a pretty solid reason suggesting Kyrie will be an improvement over IT defensively.

It wasn't just that IT was a poor defender; it was that IT was a poor defender AND a major liability due to his size. He's so small that people can just shoot right over him or post him up, which isn't true with Kyrie.

Are people really forgetting how bad IT was exposed in the playoffs defensively? That was only like four months ago lol

[green_bballers13]

Agree with Roy.  There's absolutely no reason to expect Kyrie Irving to be an improvement over Isaiah defensively.

He's been a poor defender his entire career.  A lot of folks are making the argument that Kyrie has the "tools" to be a good defender, but I don't think this is true.  He doesn't move his feet well laterally and he doesn't get in a good guarding stance.  Considering that he doesn't do those things, the fact that he's got decent height for his position is irrevelant.

Staying in front of opposing guards is the key to playing good defense at the point guard position.  It takes a lot of skill and energy to be good at.  Being a on-ball perimeter defender has very little to do with height.  I would argue that Isaiah's physical strength and ability to move laterally actually make him more of a candidate to be a better defender than Irving.  That said, I would agree that they've both been poor defenders thus far in their careers.  Just don't expect Irving to be an improvement on Thomas.

IT being 5'9" compared to Kyrie being 6'3.5" is a pretty solid reason suggesting Kyrie will be an improvement over IT defensively.

It wasn't just that IT was a poor defender; it was that IT was a poor defender AND a major liability due to his size. He's so small that people can just shoot right over him or post him up, which isn't true with Kyrie.

Are people really forgetting how bad IT was exposed in the playoffs defensively? That was only like four months ago lol

Yes, yes they are.

Danny Ainge believes that Kyrie Irving is better at basketball than Thomas. This might be the only thing that actually matters- everything else is less relevant.

[Roy H.]

However, unlike IT, Kyrie has all of the tools necessary to be an average or even a slightly above average defender, and we've actually seen him play high-level defense in the playoffs in their championship year, which is much more than you can say about IT.

Have we?

Against the Dubs, for instance, Kyrie allowed his man to shoot 8%* better than their typical average. That was by far the worst percentage differential of any regular on either team.

For those saying Kyrie has the necessary tools, did he just not care enough to play defense?

*8% meaning add, rather than multiply, 8% to the opponents' regular FG%. Kyrie's man went from averaging 48.4% on average to 56.4% against Kyrie. I believe that's a raw FG% rather than eFG%.

Absolutely. I'm specifically referring to their title run in 2016. I distinctly remember being impressed by Kyrie's D and how well he played Curry. Last year that entire Cavs team was hot garbage defensively, which I think is largely attributable to both the "championship hangover" and them just not focusing on their D due to over-reliance on their offense.

EDIT: Granted, I literally just went through the entire 2015-2016 Finals thread and couldn't find where I posted about Kyrie's D impressing me, but I definitely remember it.

Those numbers are specifically from that Finals series.

I remember Shaun Livingston killing the Cavs, and I believe Kyrie was covering him.

Hat tip for the research, though. Wading through old game threads is dangerous business, especially those involving Lebron.

[Roy H.]

I think people know that Kyrie is not a good defender, but neither was Thomas and theoretically, Kyrie can get better under Stevens. I think that's what Danny is hoping for.

Last season, Kyrie wasn't just "not a good defender". According to the folks over at 538, he was "historically bad".

I'm hopeful he'll get better, but last season he was worse than IT at defense. The thing that worries me is that the Cavs had to dumb things down for their guys, replacing switches with straight man to man because players - namely Kyrie and Love - struggled.

Would you say you're hopeful?

I've read a lot of your posts about Kyrie, and hopeful doesn't seem consistent with what I have read.

What does this add to the conversation, exactly?

Weren't you the one suggesting we heighten the level of discourse (while calling out somebody for something they didn't say)? Try to add something to the topic or move on please.

[green_bballers13]

I think people know that Kyrie is not a good defender, but neither was Thomas and theoretically, Kyrie can get better under Stevens. I think that's what Danny is hoping for.

Last season, Kyrie wasn't just "not a good defender". According to the folks over at 538, he was "historically bad".

I'm hopeful he'll get better, but last season he was worse than IT at defense. The thing that worries me is that the Cavs had to dumb things down for their guys, replacing switches with straight man to man because players - namely Kyrie and Love - struggled.

Would you say you're hopeful?

I've read a lot of your posts about Kyrie, and hopeful doesn't seem consistent with what I have read.

What does this add to the conversation, exactly?

No need to get sensitive.

You're upset about this trade, so you're cherry picking points to show that Kyrie does not make this team better. In other threads, you brought up his lack of leadership and competitive spirit. In this thread, you are discussing his lack of defense. I think that it is fine to not like a certain player.

What I don't get is how you are portraying that you are hopeful when you clearly are not. I was honestly trying to see how you can admit that you are hopeful about Kyrie. What supporting evidence (specifically related to the subject of Kyrie's defense last year) gives you hope?

[Roy H.]

I think people know that Kyrie is not a good defender, but neither was Thomas and theoretically, Kyrie can get better under Stevens. I think that's what Danny is hoping for.

Last season, Kyrie wasn't just "not a good defender". According to the folks over at 538, he was "historically bad".

I'm hopeful he'll get better, but last season he was worse than IT at defense. The thing that worries me is that the Cavs had to dumb things down for their guys, replacing switches with straight man to man because players - namely Kyrie and Love - struggled.

Would you say you're hopeful?

I've read a lot of your posts about Kyrie, and hopeful doesn't seem consistent with what I have read.

What does this add to the conversation, exactly?

You're upset about this trade, so you're cherry picking points to show that Kyrie does not make this team better. In other threads, you brought up his lack of leadership and competitive spirit. In this thread, you are discussing his lack of defense. I think that is fine to not like a certain player.

What I don't get is how you are portraying that you are hopeful when you clearly are not. I was honestly trying to see how you can admit that you are hopeful about Kyrie. What supporting evidence (specifically related to the subject of Kyrie's defense last year) gives you hope?

I'm not sure you know what "hopeful" means.

I am hopeful that my powerball numbers come up. I'm skeptical that they will.

As for "being sensitive", you're repeatedly taking threads off-topic with personally directed remarks. Stick to discussing basketball.

If you'd like to start a topic discussing Kyrie's strengths, please do so. If you don't want to discuss his defense, find a new thread. But seriously, start adding something to the conversation.

[green_bballers13]

I think people know that Kyrie is not a good defender, but neither was Thomas and theoretically, Kyrie can get better under Stevens. I think that's what Danny is hoping for.

Last season, Kyrie wasn't just "not a good defender". According to the folks over at 538, he was "historically bad".

I'm hopeful he'll get better, but last season he was worse than IT at defense. The thing that worries me is that the Cavs had to dumb things down for their guys, replacing switches with straight man to man because players - namely Kyrie and Love - struggled.

Would you say you're hopeful?

I've read a lot of your posts about Kyrie, and hopeful doesn't seem consistent with what I have read.

What does this add to the conversation, exactly?

You're upset about this trade, so you're cherry picking points to show that Kyrie does not make this team better. In other threads, you brought up his lack of leadership and competitive spirit. In this thread, you are discussing his lack of defense. I think that is fine to not like a certain player.

What I don't get is how you are portraying that you are hopeful when you clearly are not. I was honestly trying to see how you can admit that you are hopeful about Kyrie. What supporting evidence (specifically related to the subject of Kyrie's defense last year) gives you hope?

I'm not sure you know what "hopeful" means.

I am hopeful that my powerball numbers come up. I'm skeptical that they will.

As for "being sensitive", you're repeatedly taking threads off-topic with personally directed remarks. Stick to discussing basketball.

If you'd like to start a topic discussing Kyrie's strengths, please do so. If you don't want to discuss his defense, find a new thread. But seriously, start adding something to the conversation.

Ok- just looked it up. Hopeful (adj) means feeling or inspiring optimism about a future event. So you are optimistic about his future defense. So am I.

I'm hopeful that Brad/Danny will be able to get Kyrie on a path of average defense. I think that Brad is a good coach, and will be able to inspire Kyrie to improve. As the potential leader of the Celtics, Kyrie will need to take on more responsibilities. Defense (and passing) are two areas of needed improvement. I am hopeful that Kyrie has not played his best basketball, and I believe that he will improve. I would bet that Danny has spoken with Kyrie, and believes that he will improve as well. Given that he traded a top BNK pick away, I imagine Danny isn't worried about Kyrie's defense last year.

That is not to say that looking at last year is not relevant. It is. Kyrie didn't play good defense last year with the Cleveland Cavaliers.

The point that has been repeatedly brought up (that I haven't seen a response from you or other anti-Kyrie guys) is that Kyrie has more potential to play good defense, relative to IT (last year's PG for the Celtics). You can talk about last year's stats all day, but the question remains: is Kyrie going to play better or worse D than IT in 2017-18. This analysis seems relevant for Kyrie's time with the Celtics, not when he was playing under a different system for CLE.

I understand that you just want to talk about Kyrie's time in CLE last year in this thread, but I would think that many readers would be interested in how he will do with the Celtics. Last year's performance might not be the only influencing factor for this year's performance.