# The biggest fallacy about Jalen Rose is that he can't play defense



## FJ_of _Rockaway (May 28, 2002)

Total BS

_When he is of a mind _ to play defense he is actually very good 

If anyone watched ( or remembers ) our last game against the Knicks last season ( which I watched again last night ) he played Allan Houston superbly.... and Houston is no easy cover

He was banging him all night, disrupting perimeter passes - and just flat out refusing to let Houston get into any kind of rythym 

The thing is is when you are a scorer ( or have been a scorer ) you tend to make allowances and gimmes because you want to keep yourself fresh for the stretch and you want to make sure you are not racking up the foul count which will make you more reserved down the stretch

When Jalen emerged as a scorer in Indiana I think this rep about him started to develop .. but prior to under Larry Brown when he first came across from Denver I recall him being a pretty decent defender who used his length well

OK so mayne he has not put himself out there on the line defensively night in and night out because we have needed other things from him such as consistent scoring when no one else has really been capable of providing that 

But its interesting that as Eddy and Jamal emerged as genuine consistent scoring threats in the last few months of the season ... little by little Jalen slowly began to refocus on defense and did a decent job.

Look he is never going to be All first team D but he is a lot better than given credit for ... and everyone may well find that as Eddy, Marcus and Jamal emerge - Jalen will always be there for vet scoring support and will still be a primary scorer for the foreseeable future but I see him directing a lot more of his energies toward making sure the perimeter remains tight and really putting in big efforts more consistently like he did on Houston in the last Knicks game I refer to 

He is about winning - don't count his defense out if that's what it takes

The Pippen factor will also keep him honest and provide motivation of "proving" himself worthy in this facet of his game

Keep your eye on his defense this season - y'all may be pleasantly surprised


----------



## MichaelOFAZ (Jul 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>FJ_of _Rockaway</b>!
> Total BS
> 
> _When he is of a mind _ to play defense he is actually very good
> ...


I agree with everything you've said, with one exception ... I would never claim that Jalen is a good defender whether he's focusing on D or not. I might say that he can play respectable/decent D against most SFs and a few SGs, but all and all, he doesn't have the lateral foot speed to be a good man-to-man defender. I really like Jalen and think that he'll put up very solid numbers this year even though his ppg average will go down. I also agree that he'll do better on D when he's not expected to carry the load on O for 48 mins a night. If ERob, Pippen, Rose, and Hassell can all share minutes at SF and SG and play strong, intense D while they're on the court and leave the scoring to JC, Eddy, Marcus, Tyson, and Yell, the Bulls will be a force to reckon with. If the Bulls try to force the triangle offense and expect Pippen to play any more than 25 mins a night, it's going to be another disappointing season.


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1 (Jul 31, 2002)

Post a single picture of Jalen diving after a loose ball and I'll never criticize his D ever again. 


There. The challenge is out there.


----------



## jimmy (Aug 20, 2002)

All I want Jalen to be is a decent defender maybe even a little worse than decent, because he does so much on the offensive end.

However, Jalen might be hard to turn into a good defender since he's been in the league a whil, but Crawford and Curry aren't.


I want Crawford and Curry to become good defenders before I start worrying about Jalen becoming a good defender.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>TomBoerwinkle#1</b>!
> Post a single picture of Jalen diving after a loose ball and I'll never criticize his D ever again.
> 
> 
> There. The challenge is out there.


<IMG SRC=http://www.nba.com/media/pacers/rose_gallery_020217.jpg>


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

<IMG SRC=http://www.nba.com/media/pacers/rose_jordan.jpg>


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

BTW,

I could not find a photo of any of the Bulls' players diving for a loose ball, taking a charge, etc.


----------



## allenive21 (Jul 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>DaBullz</b>!
> taking a charge


----------



## TMOD (Oct 12, 2002)

Isn't that Chandler?

On Rose: I've witnessed countless occasions where his disruptive man to man defense has fact been noticeable...as mentioned, Allan Houston is the kind that Jalen defends best. After all, he is quicker than he gets credit for, has long arms, and is clever...just what the doctor ordered on an Allan Houston cover. The problem is, he doesn't consistent play defense, unless it is a challenge, or a big game. That is when he is at his best. The thing that separates his defense, and many players in the NBA, from being very good, is consistency...you can't drop 45 when you want to, and be a great player if the rest of the time you're good for only 15 points.


----------



## Future (Jul 24, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>TomBoerwinkle#1</b>!
> Post a single picture of Jalen diving after a loose ball and I'll never criticize his D ever again.
> 
> 
> There. The challenge is out there.













He made a crazy dive on this one... it was like hell freezing over!


----------



## jimmy (Aug 20, 2002)

Fizer, Hassell, and Hoiberg are the only three players last year that consistently took charges. Chandler took one or two but they were the most hideous things i've ever seen.

Taking charges is a big part of being able to play defense. It's just as good as a steal, if not better. You get possesion and a foul on an opposing player.

The Bulls have a lot to learn before this season in terms of defense. Hopefully the coaches will teach and preach the importance of taking charges. Not flop like Vlade. But don't get out of the way of someone running out of control on a fast break.


----------



## jimmy (Aug 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Future</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


:laugh: :laugh:


----------



## King Joseus (May 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>JAF311</b>!
> Fizer, Hassell, and Hoiberg are the only three players last year that consistently took charges. Chandler took one or two but they were the most hideous things i've ever seen.
> 
> Taking charges is a big part of being able to play defense. It's just as good as a steal, if not better. You get possesion and a foul on an opposing player.
> ...


i seem to remember Baxter taking a nice amount of charges (when he played)...did I imagine it?


----------



## Kismet (Mar 1, 2003)

I seem to recall Paxson describing Jalen as someone who "...is a solid defender when he wants to be." Also, within the context of that statement, JP actually remarked that it's difficult to expect a player to stand out defensively when he's also asked to be the team's leading scorer and play 40+ minutes per night (he averaged 40.9mpg last season).

When I read those quotes I immediately concluded that John and Bill fully intend to cut back on his minutes per game as well as the team's reliance on Rose as their one and only "go to guy" so that he can direct more energy to his performance at the defensive end of the court. 

With Pippen taking minutes at SF and Jalen spending much more time playing SG, I'd expect his mpg average to slip back into the 35 minutes or less category. Since Crawford and Curry have stepped up as scoring threats and with Scottie on board, Jalen won't be asked to perform miracles at the end of quarters so often. And a four guard rotation of Crawford, Rose, Hinrich and Hassell should make things easier for him all the way around.

At 33 to 35mpg I expect Rose's shooting percentages to skyrocket above 45% from last year's 40%. I also expect we'll see him make life hell for opponents' shooting guards with a stronger, more consistent defensive effort. As an all-around performer, this could be his best season as a pro.
:greatjob:


----------



## giusd (Apr 17, 2003)

Ok,

Lets get one thing stright. Rose plays terrible D period. Now when it does try he plays just awfull D. Now if we are playing him at sg then his D is better because he has a big hieght advantage and there are not that many good sg in the game as sf and having scotty at sf will also help this year. But come on JR game is mostly about JR and playing d is not a real big deal to him.

david


----------



## Sham (Dec 2, 2002)

Well, I thiiiiiiiiiiiink he's going for the loose ball.........:worship:


----------



## Showtyme (Jun 24, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>giusd</b>!
> Ok,
> 
> Lets get one thing stright. Rose plays terrible D period. Now when it does try he plays just awfull D. Now if we are playing him at sg then his D is better because he has a big hieght advantage and there are not that many good sg in the game as sf and having scotty at sf will also help this year. But come on JR game is mostly about JR and playing d is not a real big deal to him.
> ...


I think you are what we call... wrong.

Jalen's D is, I'd say, above average. He is better than the average starting SG/SF as far as defensive capability (even if it's not shown through intensity).

Actually, I thought he had a GOOD reputation for defense under Larry Bird... even emerging as a killer scorer, Bird (like BC) played a lot of his guys because of their defensive ability. In that 99-00 campaign, I remember hearing good things about Rose's defense even from sports commentators watching the game.

That's why I was pretty confused when he got to Chicago and after a few months, people were knocking his defense. I can see why, now, but like FJ pointed out: he was definitely saving himself for the offensive end. When you are both the first and second options on offense, it takes a lot out of you.

I don't know how much better Rose's defense is going to get, though. Someone mentioned lateral quickness and foot speed... those are certainly weaknesses of Jalen. Rose has always been a great player to me because he is supremely non-athletic as far as quickness or strength, but he manages to get the job done night in and night out, with very little history of injury or sitting out.

On defense, I will expect similar results: non-athletic defense played as intelligently as possible within a system. To be honest, if Jalen is guarding a slasher like Tony Parker or AI, then that's Cartwright's bad on the defensive assignments. But almost every roster in the league has a jump-shooting scoring option type (Peja, Ginobili, Rick Fox, Aaron McKie, Kerry Kittles). And that should automatically fall to Jalen's assignment, where he can do an effective job with basketball IQ (in following the guys off the ball), and his lengthy arms (hand in the face).

When Jalen's role on offense changes, his role on defense will not, but his intensity may elevate.


----------



## Showtyme (Jun 24, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ShamBulls</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Look at Spree in the background. He's not even looking at the play.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

FJ you may be on to something. We should be able to tell more this season because with the improved play of Eddy and Tyson and Jamal and adding Scottie to the mix, Jalens offense is not needed near as much as in the past. So he can concentrate on other parts of his game.


----------



## Sham (Dec 2, 2002)

Ah, so Spree's the one who plays bad defense then....


----------



## Future (Jul 24, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ShamBulls</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


No, I think he's complaining about a foul there.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>FJ_of _Rockaway</b>!
> Total BS
> 
> _When he is of a mind _ to play defense he is actually very good
> ...


FJ i agree with everything you said 

how soon people forget Jalen was the guy the pacers put into the game while bird was coach when they needed more defense (and mckey those rare occasions when he was healthy)

Jalen was the guy they put on a team's best sg/sf scorer 

and i think his lateral quickness and althletic ability is underrated to say the least


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

I agree with the sentiment that Jalen was focusing so much on offense last year that he was slacking on defense. I think he's actually an above average defender...I agree with Showtyme, he had a very good reputation on defense in indiana. I think he poor defense was a product of him being given too big of a role on offense, combined with the rest of the bulls being poor defenders. Jalen is pretty good at team defense, but it's had to force your man into help when that help is Eddy Curry. I think once Tyson and Eddy get more consistent underneath on defense, you'll see a lot of the Bulls perimeter defenders get better(or at least look better).

Adding Pippen is going to help a lot of these problems tremendosly. As will adding Bach.


----------



## Kneepad (Jun 24, 2002)

Excuses, excuses.

I don't know what's more damning-- saying Jalen can't play defense or saying he's has the ability to do so and yet didn't.

Poor Jalen was focusing too much on the offensive end. The great players in the league find a way to be the main focus on offense _and_at least hold their own on defense if not excel on both ends of the court.

I will believe Jalen Rose is a good defensive player when he does any of the following on a regular basis:

a) gets down in a defensive stance and stops his man from getting to the basket,

b) takes a charge,

c) dives for a loose ball,

d) comes from the weak side and either takes a charge, blocks a shot, or gives a hard foul,

e) sticks his nose in under the boards and hauls down some rebounds in traffic.


----------



## TheRifleman (May 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>FJ_of _Rockaway</b>!
> Total BS
> 
> _When he is of a mind _ to play defense he is actually very good
> ...



I love this post! Jalen is a good defender and really - anybody who has watched this game as long as I have knows that most NBA players are capable defenders. 

Most try to compare guards to Mike(NOT fair) and centers to Russell(not fair).

Jalen is a very good team defender and being the scorer he is - that is enough for this fan.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Kneepad</b>!
> Excuses, excuses.
> 
> I don't know what's more damning-- saying Jalen can't play defense or saying he's has the ability to do so and yet didn't.
> ...


:yes:


----------



## Bulls96 (Jun 25, 2003)

Who cares, if Jalen have the skills and talent to play a defense. The problem is that , he never sacrificed his body on the defensive or offensive ends. He likes an idea that there are several young players on the team, as a perfect excuse to justify
his passive defense. I hope it will change with Scotty presence.


----------



## Dan Rosenbaum (Jun 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Kneepad</b>!
> Excuses, excuses.
> 
> I don't know what's more damning-- saying Jalen can't play defense or saying he's has the ability to do so and yet didn't.
> ...


Yes, Jalen is a max player, but he is not one of the "great players in this league." He is very good player, but not one of the great players. 

The last year and a half, we have asked him to shoulder a bigger load offensively than many of the great players are asked to shoulder in terms of minutes played, shots, and the creation of shots.

Yes, there are a handful of players with limitless amounts of energy who could play 40 minutes plus (as Jalen did in practially all of the non-blowouts), create 25-30 shots a game for himself and others, and still play hardnose defense during all of those minutes. (And watching Jalen, have you ever seen a player have to expend more energy to get a shot than he does?) But Jalen is not one of those players.

Except when Fizer was hot and at the end of the season, there were so many times when nobody, except for Jalen, seemed to want to try to create a shot. During those times Jalen became the #1 option, the #2 option, and the #3 option.

Knowing how desperate we were at times for his offense, can you blame him for trying to catch his breath on defense? Jordan certainly did this the last two years, and even did it from time to time after his first retirement. (And in his second run with the Bulls, he had a far better supporting cast than Jalen did last year.)

This year with the maturation of our young players and the addition of Pippen, we will be able to play Rose a reasonable number of minutes and during those minutes we will not be asking to carry us on the offensive end. I will be shocked if he is not a better defender this year.

Also, for all of the talk about how poor a defender he was last year, has anyone ever tried to present statistical evidence of this? He clearly was not the Ron Artest/Scottie Pippen kind of defender we have grown accustomed to seeing at SF, but was he really that bad?


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>NCBullsFan</b>!
> 
> Also, for all of the talk about how poor a defender he was last year, has anyone ever tried to present statistical evidence of this? He clearly was not the Ron Artest/Scottie Pippen kind of defender we have grown accustomed to seeing at SF, but was he really that bad?


http://www.basketballboards.net/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=40473&highlight=Roses+defense

82 games
3009 minutes
36.7 minutes/game (Rose did play more)
436-1023 FG (.426 FG% against)
480 rebounds (5.9/game)
281 assists (3.4/game)
1217 points (14.8/game)

The comparison between Rose and who he guarded (consolidated) is not perfect, but useful anyhow:

Rose .406 FG% vs opponents .426 FG%
Rose 4.3 reb vs opponents 5.9
Rose 4.8 ast vs opponents 3.4
Rose 22.1 ppg vs opponents 14.8

Considering Rose played 40.9 min/game, his opponents probably scored about 16.5 PPG.


----------



## Kneepad (Jun 24, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>NCBullsFan</b>!
> The last year and a half, we have asked him to shoulder a bigger load offensively than many of the great players are asked to shoulder in terms of minutes played, shots, and the creation of shots.


If you are going to excuse Jalen from playing defense because he plays 40 mpg, then I believe Bill Cartwright must shoulder some of the blame. There is absolutely no reason for Jalen to have had to play such heavy minutes with as deep a roster as the Bulls had last season.

Problem is, I don't believe Jalen would have played any better defense had he played, say, 35 mpg vs. 40. It's just simply not a priority with him.

As for "having" to shoulder the scoring burden, again, I don't buy it. I've watched enough NBA games in my life to know one thing about the league: it's not hard to find players who want to take shots and score a lot of points. To suggest that no other Bulls players wanted to shoot, or were afraid to shoot, is just... well, I just don't buy it for a minute.

The only time I've ever seen it appear that players are unwilling to shoot is when they're not in any kind of offense and are just standing around wondering what they're supposed to be doing, which generally results in them waiting for one of the five players to make a one-on-one move. Again, if this is the defense for Jalen's play, then I have to put some of the blame on B.C. and the on-court leader for not getting the team into it's offense.

But I watched enough Bulls games to see Jalen come down and put up an ill-advised 3-pointer early in the shot clock, or to drive in one-on-one and try to draw a foul (putting up a garbage shot in the process). Or, as Pax so often pointed out on the radio, to get away from the Bulls inside game after it had already been established early in the game.



> Knowing how desperate we were at times for his offense, can you blame him for trying to catch his breath on defense?


Absolutely I can. The place to catch one's breath is on the bench, not on defense.



> This year with the maturation of our young players and the addition of Pippen, we will be able to play Rose a reasonable number of minutes and during those minutes we will not be asking to carry us on the offensive end. I will be shocked if he is not a better defender this year.


I guess we'll see. I certainly agree it's possible for Jalen to play better defense, but if he does I think it will be more a result of Pippen embarrassing Jalen into playing harder on the defensive end rather than any slight reduction in Jalen's minutes. John Bach, I suspect, will also not be so tolerant of players coasting on defense.



> Also, for all of the talk about how poor a defender he was last year, has anyone ever tried to present statistical evidence of this? He clearly was not the Ron Artest/Scottie Pippen kind of defender we have grown accustomed to seeing at SF, but was he really that bad?


As you know, defense is the hardest aspect of the game to quantify statistically. The league doesn't keep track of things like charges taken, passes deflected, turnovers caused, etc.

The best I can offer up is the plus/minus statistic which I kept all through last season. I realize it takes into account much more than defense. But I think it can be used, along with other methods of evaluation, to measure a player's contribution to his team's success (or lack thereof).

For what it's worth then, here are the final plus/minus numbers for last season:

<table border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2"> <tr> <td><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="-1">Rank</font></td> <td><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="-1">Player</font></td> <td><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="-1">+/- Per 48 Min.</font></td> </tr> <tr> <td><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="-1">1</font></td> <td><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="-1">Brunson</font></td> <td><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="-1">+1.7</font></td> </tr> <tr> <td><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="-1">2</font></td> <td><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="-1">Bagaric</font></td> <td><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="-1">+1.3</font></td> </tr> <tr> <td><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="-1">3</font></td> <td><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="-1">Hoiberg</font></td> <td><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="-1">+1.2</font></td> </tr> <tr> <td><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="-1">4</font></td> <td><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="-1">Crawford</font></td> <td><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="-1">-0.7</font></td> </tr> <tr> <td><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="-1">5</font></td> <td><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="-1">Blount</font></td> <td><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="-1">-0.9</font></td> </tr> <tr> <td><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="-1">6</font></td> <td><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="-1">Robinson</font></td> <td><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="-1">-2.9</font></td> </tr> <tr> <td><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="-1">7</font></td> <td><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="-1">Fizer</font></td> <td><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="-1">-3.7</font></td> </tr> <tr> <td><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="-1">8</font></td> <td><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="-1">Marshall</font></td> <td><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="-1">-4.3</font></td> </tr> <tr> <td><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="-1">9</font></td> <td><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="-1">Curry</font></td> <td><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="-1">-4.7</font></td> </tr> <tr> <td><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="-1">10</font></td> <td><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="-1">Mason</font></td> <td><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="-1">-5.1</font></td> </tr> <tr> <td><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="-1">11</font></td> <td><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="-1">Baxter</font></td> <td><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="-1">-5.3</font></td> </tr> <tr> <td><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="-1">12</font></td> <td><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="-1">Rose</font></td> <td><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="-1">-5.7</font></td> </tr> <tr> <td><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="-1">13</font></td> <td><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="-1">Chandler</font></td> <td><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="-1">-7.1</font></td> </tr> <tr> <td><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="-1">14</font></td> <td><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="-1">Williams</font></td> <td><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="-1">-8.9</font></td> </tr> <tr> <td><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="-1">15</font></td> <td><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="-1">Hassell</font></td> <td><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="-1">-9.7</font></td> </tr></table>

I think it's a bad sign when a team's supposed best player ranks as low as Rose does in this type of statistic.

Further evidence is that the Bulls as a team actually played better, from a plus/minus standpoint, with Jalen on the bench. With Jalen in the game, the Bulls were -396 total for the season. With him on the bench, they were -12.

Again, I realize this is an imperfect measure. This coming season I am going to attempt some additional statistical measures that hopefully will shed some more light on issues such as this.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Kneepad</b>!
> 
> 
> The only time I've ever seen it appear that players are unwilling to shoot is when they're not in any kind of offense and are just standing around wondering what they're supposed to be doing, which generally results in them waiting for one of the five players to make a one-on-one move. Again, if this is the defense for Jalen's play, then I have to put some of the blame on B.C. and the on-court leader for not getting the team into it's offense.


I don't know what games you watch, but when a really good/great player is on a team with scrubs, those scrubs like to stand and watch the good/great guy score. It was a big issue with Jordan on the Wizards, and it is a big issue for the Bulls with Jalen, too. It KILLs all motion off the ball.



> I think it's a bad sign when a team's supposed best player ranks as low as Rose does in this type of statistic.
> 
> Further evidence is that the Bulls as a team actually played better, from a plus/minus standpoint, with Jalen on the bench. With Jalen in the game, the Bulls were -396 total for the season. With him on the bench, they were -12.
> 
> Again, I realize this is an imperfect measure. This coming season I am going to attempt some additional statistical measures that hopefully will shed some more light on issues such as this.


Good thing you said it's an imperfect measure. In fact, it's no measure at all, other than of two things: the bulls stunk and Jalen played lots of minutes. 

For the ~8 minutes per game that Jalen rested, the opponents' best defender also rested, and your +/- figures merely indicate how much better our 2nd string was than opponents'.

The Bulls as a team averaged 95 PPG. They gave up 100.7. What do you know? Bulls team is -5.7, so is Jalen (simply because he played almost all of every game).


----------



## Dan Rosenbaum (Jun 3, 2002)

This isn't anything that you haven't already thought about, but the Bulls last year had starters that were quite horrible relative to other teams' starters, but bench players who were about average or maybe a bit above average.

Our starters were better than our bench players, but probably only by a little bit. For most teams, the difference was much, much larger.

So what this means is that our starters will have horrible plus/minus statistics, while our bench players will tend to have relatively good statistics. Without accounting for the relative quality of the other nine players on the floor (as the Winston/Sagarin method does), plus/minus statistics just don't tell us a lot with a team like the Bulls.

At the beginning of the season when Rose was starting with Curry, Chandler, Hassell, and Williams, that may have been the worst starting five in the entire League. Curry was a turnover/foul machine. Chandler often was the same. And Hassell and Williams couldn't hit a shot and seemed very reluctant to even take one. Perhaps Rose was part of the reason for this, but to me he looked like a guy who wanted to give his team a chance to win and given that they desperately needed somebody to step up and create shots, that is what he did.

And yes, maybe part of the problem was Cartwright, but with Fizer not being ready to play and Crawford shooting less than 40 percent, Marshall was the only other offensive threat on the Bulls. Riding Rose was the only way for much of the season for the Bulls to be competitive.

Our most effective stretch of the season last year was the December/January stretch where we went 13-12 and Cartwright rode Rose into the ground. Fizer was a big part of that success, but during those 25 games, *Rose averaged 44.6 minutes per game.* During that stretch, Rose led us in scoring in all but 3 of the 25 games and in all but 1 of the 13 wins. I suspect there is not another player in the League with a 25 game stretch where he averaged more than 44 minutes per game and led the team in scoring in all but 3 games.

To me, that says a lot about just how much Rose carried us last year until late in the season when the relatively fresh Curry, Chandler, and Crawford took the reins.

Rose could have asked for more bench time so he could play more effective defense, but when he played more minutes, we won more, so I can't blame him for conserving energy on the defensive end. It seemed to me that last year that was the best way he could help the team. This year is different, and I hope to see him playing better defense.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

Kneepad:

I didn't mean for my post to read as harsh as it comes across. I enjoy your statistical work.

I think NCB said pretty much the same thing about the +/- stats, which are not very useful as interpreted.

Peace!


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

FYI

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/nba0203.htm

Bulls ranked 24th or 25th in the NBA by all Sagarin's measures.

They ranked 25th through June 25th, especially taking into account (see RECENT data) the Bulls' late season performance.

Peace!


----------



## Dan Rosenbaum (Jun 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>DaBullz</b>!
> FYI
> 
> http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/nba0203.htm
> ...


Just to clear, those are just his team power rankings (which I have pretty much replicated in the past), not the Winston/Sagarin plus/minus statistics (which I cannot replicate because putting together the data would be a bear).


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>DaBullz</b>!
> FYI
> 
> http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/nba0203.htm
> ...


The Bulls finished with the 23rd best record and Sagrin ranks them 2 places lower b/c their analysis says that the Clipps and Griz played a tougher schedule.

What does this tell us about Rose? Or how the Bulls ended the season?


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>NCBullsFan</b>!
> 
> 
> Just to clear, those are just his team power rankings (which I have pretty much replicated in the past), not the Winston/Sagarin plus/minus statistics (which I cannot replicate because putting together the data would be a bear).


If he publishes his player ratings, it's in book form only. Or he only sells them directly to NBA teams. At least that's as best as I can tell.


----------



## Kneepad (Jun 24, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>DaBullz</b>!
> Kneepad:
> 
> I didn't mean for my post to read as harsh as it comes across. I enjoy your statistical work.
> ...


Thanks for posting that, DaBullz. I admit I had written a somewhat harsh reply to your first post, and then decided it wasn't worth getting into a fight about and cancelled it. I then came back here and read your follow up and was glad to see you had softened a bit as well.

I recognize, as I know you do, that trying to quantify defensive effectiveness is a very difficult if not impossible task. NCBullsFan asked for any statistical evidence, and I offered what I have. I don't think it's quite as irrelevant as the two of you do-- for example I don't think the first unit is always matched up against the first unit and likewise with the reserves. But that's fine-- we already had that thread.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>johnston797</b>!
> 
> 
> The Bulls finished with the 23rd best record and Sagrin ranks them 2 places lower b/c their analysis says that the Clipps and Griz played a tougher schedule.
> ...


It says little about Rose, other than he played on a pretty bad team.

This scholarly statistical analysis of the NBA statistics by Sagarin lends credence to Showtyme's power rankings based upon W/L home vs. away, which ranks the Bulls near the bottom, too.

It would be interesting to see what/how the Bulls ranked just after that 25 game stretch that NCB talked about.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Kneepad</b>!
> 
> I recognize, as I know you do, that trying to quantify defensive effectiveness is a very difficult if not impossible task. NCBullsFan asked for any statistical evidence, and I offered what I have. I don't think it's quite as irrelevant as the two of you do-- for example I don't think the first unit is always matched up against the first unit and likewise with the reserves. But that's fine-- we already had that thread.


I think my work going back through all the box scores and seeing how Rose did vs. the man he guarded is a much better indicator. Rose was a plus ~7.5. Considering the team gave up 5.7 more PPG than it scored and how much time Rose played, he did his part, and then some.

I do not believe that you can statistically derive an effective system for measuring the comparitive defensive abilities of players. What I do believe is that any defensive rating is a subjective thing - in the eye of the beholder. The most effective measure is something like the voting for the all-nba defensive teams.


----------



## Wynn (Jun 3, 2002)

I always feel like a dwarf among giants trying to contribute to one of these threads once you guys get rolling, and rolling you are! Great thread, as usual.

As far as rating defense, you guys are correct, it's one of the most difficult measures to quantify. I do know, though, from playing myself, that each player is highly aware of how his opposing number is doing. If Jalen is getting more points than his opposite, then he is not as much of the problem as we may think.

This, of course, devalues any work toward team defense, and is even harder to gauge with zones. You can bet that Jalen knows these numbers, though. I would.


----------



## FJ_of _Rockaway (May 28, 2002)

A few things ....

Like I said at the start of this thread , Jalen had a role to play last year and that role necessitated a responsibility to stay in games and stay healthy 

Stay healthy ?

Yes stay healthy

I remember reading this SLAM feature on him last year before the season started and in response as to why he doesn't go for flash plays such as emphatic dunks , launching himself like an exocet etc etc ..... he reasoned that those plays are generally reckless and where your risk of injury is far greater . Maybe not there and then but he felt as though they were contributory to a greater tax on your body over the season - and down the road in later seasons and his view was was that he still wanted to be a player - an effective contributing player well into his 30's

To me that is the attitude of a responsible pro that knows this team needs him now and down the road and he wants to lessen the incidence of this not happening

Sure there is the thearte and rah rah of showing off your floorburns as the resident speedbump of any NBA court you set foot on so everyone loves your blue collar a55 - whether it be throwing yourself vertically into the passing lanes or putting yourself in the path of a stud on a 3 on 1 breakaway when you know you are never going to get that call 

And everyone automatically thinks that weakside swats these days are the hallmarks of modern day legendary defensive prowess.. again because they look spectacular and if you don't swat from the weak then you are a crappy defender - but if you do then you get some props ( Special shout out to Raif the Waif LaFrentz ) 

Offense.. defense .. whatever

You play your role as to what your team needs at any given time and be a pro about it 

And if that role requires you to shoulder the scoring load on a young team coming together then you are careful with your foul count and you take care of your body by playing smart so that you are around to at least give your team a chance

My point was - was at the end of the season when Eddy and Jamal were scoring more consistently , Jalen's defensive style definately picked up some notches in a more confronting harrassing style - not necessarily physical , flashy or spectacular , but effective nonetheless in a spoiling type of style

I won't say expect Jalen to play better defense but I will say expect him to play more consistent and effective defense if Eddy, Jamal and Marcus can shoulder a fir lump of the scoring load


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>FJ_of _Rockaway</b>!
> A few things ....
> 
> Like I said at the start of this thread , Jalen had a role to play last year and that role necessitated a responsibility to stay in games and stay healthy
> ...


Especially on a team coming off a 20 win season and you're the only marquee player. I'm sure the guy wants to be a big part of the team when the young guys eventually figure out how to win.

As good a defensive team as the championship Bulls were, I do remember guys like Jordan and Pippen and Harper sitting on the bench with ice on their knees, ankles, and hands. They used to stick their fingers in ice cold cups of gatorade... That kind of wear and tear may shorten a guy's career or certainly reduce the guy's effectiveness (and quality of life) towards the end of a guy's career.

Plus, it's waaaaay cheaper to spend $512K on a Hassell who'll get the floor burns than it is to pay upwards of $10M for your one and only star to do it (for a losing team).


----------



## Bulls96 (Jun 25, 2003)

*Plus, it's waaaaay cheaper to spend $512K on a Hassell who'll get the floor burns tha*

It is not just only pure healthy issue. 

Jalen need to show and establish the level of "sacrificing" to the rest of the team. This is why MJ and Scottie were leaders , and we are demanding the same, from Jalen.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

There is no (young) pippen or jordan on this team, nor is the rest of the team quality NBA defenders.

The Mavs have one really fine defender, Finley, and he doesn't do a thing for their team defense (stats).

It'd be an entirely different thing if the Bulls were actually winning games and contending and the rest of the guys on the floor with Jalen were playing good D and diving for balls, taking charges, etc.


----------



## Showtyme (Jun 24, 2002)

See what I don't get is this:

A team should be a well-oiled machine. There are your superstars, who have defined roles, and then there are your role players, who also have defined roles. Maybe a team can have more than one mode, like if the star is having a crappy shooting night, there's a contingency flow of the game on both ends of the floor. 

But for the most part, even those contingency modes are pretty well practiced, if it's a well-coached team.

Basketball is a game of trends. It is the most consistent game there is, within a season. That's why we condemn inconsistent players in the NBA much more than in the NFL (where basically everyone is pretty inconsistent; with such few games, there's bound to be more variation) or in the MLB (for some reason, something about the sport of baseball has a personality that causes 310 hitters to bat 190 for months, or for a career 2.5 ERA pitcher to have an entire season at 6). 

The original assertion of this thread by FJ can be divided into TWO parts: 

1. The TREND. He projects Rose to put more energy into defense and less into offense because of the trends and directions the team is headed. I think I see it the same way, and I think Pax sees it the same way.

2. The CAPACITY. He asserted that Rose was actually EFFECTIVE; he CAN play defense if he wants to. I also agreed here; in Indiana, one of his better contributions to the floor was gritty defense. 

Wait, I forgot what point I was making. CRAP.

Anyway. Rose can play defense, but more importantly, I think he has to. One of the threads brought up somewhere this past winter was about how Cartwright doesn't really hold Rose to the same standard as the youngsters. He forces them to earn their minutes, benching them after bad outings and leaving them in for big minutes if they produce well. But with Rose, the veteran status made him a default. I don't know if it's because they had the best chance of winning with Rose in or not, but Rose's veteran status kept him in games. Many of us agree that we've seen our share of Rose's bullfighter impression in some of the 4th quarters of long games, and you can't totally blame him.

But if good defense is a requirement for BC's players to be on the floor, the same standard needs to apply to Rose. So this thread is not only just noticing a trend and observing that Rose is capable upping his D...

We must acknowledge that Rose MUST play good defense. He MUST play to meet Cartwright's standards, otherwise he's being treated with bias, and he MUST simply because we need that defensive prowess at that position. EVERYONE must, in that sense.

(and I think the next guy after Rose we need to look at isn't really Curry as much as it is Crawford...)

That having been said, I also expect some level of more effective D from Rose, but he'll never be a defensive-MINDED player. For him, stopping the ball is only the initiation of the next offensive play. Some players come on the floor with the idea that the sport's primary focus isn't really in shooting or dribbling or even passing, but rather that the primary focus of the game is to stop the other team from scoring. If they could have their way, the score would be 2-0 every single game, and not 105-99 or whatever.

Rose will never be that defensive minded. I just hope he can be effective ENOUGH to make the difference.


----------

