Proof positive that the Sixers problem is offense and not defense.

[rickortreat]

In order to prove my point, I went back through every loss that the Sixers have had since the regular season started.  In order to prove that the problem is with scoring, all did was look at the by quarter score for each game. If I found that in each loss that the Sixers underperformed that would prove my point.

What I mean by underperformance is relative, since each game is different and has a different pace. On average an NBA team scores 100 points, some score higher and others score less but the mean is 100. Therefore, 25 points for quarter is considered to be an average score. Underperformance means a significantly lower score than 25.  When I looked at the data, I found that in every game the Sixers lost they had at least one underperforming quarter. In the case of the Sixers every loss included one quarter where they managed no better than 22 points.  3 points off doesn't seem like a lot but that turns out to be a 12 point loss over a full game. If you score 25, 25, 25, 22 your total is 97, if your opponent scores 25, 25, 25, 25 then your team scored 3 less. In that instance you should blame offense for the loss, not the ability to hold the other team down to your inferior production!

Conversely I also looked for any outlier scores above 25 for the other team, which would provide evidence of a defensive let down. While some teams did score more than 25, so did the Sixers, and the scores ended up over 100 for both teams. There was very little evidence to suggest that the Sixers defense is so bad that this is the reason for their losses.

Another thing that the data suggested was that the Sixers were a competitive team. Many times they were ahead at the half and is some instances by large margins. This was not completely consistent- although most of the losses were a result of a second half meltdown in some instances the team got off to a bad start.  My conclusion is that the coaches player decisions have to be responsible, since in most instances the Sixers were able to score competitively at some point in the game.

Below is the data, gathered from NBA.com,  I provided the score and noted which was the Sixers worst scoring quarter and when it occurred.

10-28      Orlando   120  106   2nd Quarter 41 to 20. In 4th Quarter Phila. 37 Orlando 20

11-03      Boston   105   74   All quarters were below 21 pts. All of Boston's were above except

the 1st.
11-08      Detroit  88   81   All quarters 22 points or less, Detroit won 3 of 4 quarters.

11-09      Phoenix 119  115   In spite of it being a high scoring game the Sixers managed 20

points in the 3rd, surenduring all but 2 of their 12 point lead.
11-13      Utah    112   90   Won the 1st Quarter. 18 and 19 and 21 scored in final 3q's.

11-14      Chicago  94   88   2nd & 3rd, 18, 18. lost 3rd by 5, and 4th by 2 nd half failure.

11-20      Memphis 102   97   Ahead 50-49 at half. 21-29 in the 3rd, Phila. regained a bucket in

4th. 2nd half failure.
11-21      Cleveland 97  91   Ahead 81 to 75 at end of third, score 10 points to 22 in the 4th.

4th Q. failure.
11-24      Washingtn 108 107   Close game, outscored 40-29 in the 3rd. Came back 9 in the 4th.

Very bad pshycholigcal loss since a win was expected, set up by failure in 3rd.
11-25      Boston   113  110   Sixers were in this one all the way, outscored by 9 in the 4th to

lose by 3.
11-27      Atlanta 100   86   2 poor quarters, 2nd and 4th. 18, 20. Outscored in 3rd and 4th by 4

and 5.
11-29      San Ant. 97   89   19 in the 4th but ouscored SA by 1. Wrst quarter was 2nd, 29-22.

SA.
11-30       Dallas  104  102   20-29 in 2nd quarter. Phila. won 2nd half 59-47. 43 points in the

first half to 57 for Dallas was just enough. Atypical.
12-02      OKC   117  106   Sixers worst offensive quarter was 2nd, 22-25 worst defensive was

34-27 in the third.  Ahead 55-54 at half.

12-05      Charlott106  105   Behind by 1 end of the half. 19-28 in the 4th.

12-07      Denver   93   83   Only decent quarter was the first, 26. Worst output was the 4th 18

pts, against Dever's best 30. 4th quarter failure.

12-09      Detroit  90   86   16 point first quarter. They lost the 3rd. 25-21, the difference in

the game.

12-11      Houston  91   96   13 pts. to 28 for Houston in the third.

Losing streak ends.

12-16      Cleveland108 101   21-25 in the 4th quarter. Sixers won the 2nd by 1. Trailed by 6 at

the half.

12-19      LAC      112 107   18-30 Clippers in the first. Never looked back.

12-22      Wash     105  98   19-33 in the 4th.

12-26      Utah      97  76   12-25 in the 4th. Sixers scored 39 pts. in the first half. And got

worse!
12-31      LAC    104  88   14-29 in the 3rd. Ahead by 2 at the half.

01-05      Wash    104  97   17-26 in the 4th. Ahead by 14 at the half.

01-08      Toronto  108 106   21-25 in the 4th. In spite of being in it the whole game, they got

outscored in the end. Ahead 60-40 at the half.
   
01-13      NY     93  92   24-25 in the 4th. Same failure, just a smaller advantage because

the Knicks are a bad team.
01-18      Minn.    108 103   18-33 in the 3rd. 57-40 Sixers at the half.

01-20      Portland  98  90   Portland won every quarter, xcept the 3rd. 22-27 in the 4th.

[RickyPryor]

Thank you.

For proving exactly the opposite.  A small taste, in your own (edited) words is provided below. 

Now remember - it was YOU who just said a team should only score 25 in a quarter:

10-28      Orlando: we gave up 41 in one quarter.
11-08      Detroit: Detroit won 3 of 4 quarters.
11-20      Memphis scored 29 in the 3rd
11-24      Washington scored 40 in the 3rd
11-25      Boston  outscored us by 9 in the 4th
11-29      San Ant. scored 29 in the second.
11-30       Dallas  57 in the first half
12-02      OKC   scored 34 in the third
12-05      Charlott scored 28 in the 4th.
12-07      Denver    30 in the fourth
12-11      Houston  28 for Houston in the third.
12-19      LAC     30 for the Clippers in the first.
12-22      Wash  33 in the 4th.
12-31      LAC   29 in the 3rd.
01-08      Toronto  scored 68 in the second half
01-18      Minn.    33 in the 3rd.
01-20      Portland  98  90   Portland won every quarter


Further - I've found that the average is 99, not 100.  The Sixers score 98 (one below the average), yet give up 101 (TWO above the average).

Back to you.

[rickortreat]

Look again. While it is true that in some of the losses, the Sixers allowed too many points, in every loss the Sixers scored less than 23 in one quarter. That's right, 22 or less in each and every loss this season, 100 percent of the time. Refute that fact and you can win the argument!  Parsing out the ones that fit your view doesn't alter the Sixers inability to score at least 25 in one quarter in every loss.

I got 100 as a baseline by looking at what each team in the NBA scores. #16, halfway shoots slightly above 100.

Offense and Defense are both necessary, but some teams are naturally better at one than the other. My view is that both could be improved with different line-ups, and a different philosophy. But I think it is more likely for the Sixers to be able to improve their offense, and that would make a big difference. The reason I say this, is that they have had quarters, often against the same teams who later shut them down, where they scored more than enough.  Once you have a lead, all you need to do is trade baskets, but the Sixers don't seem to be able to do that!

Based on who their players are and their talents, this team is built for scoring in the half-court. Right now, they are terrible at it and it has been their problem for years. They have two post up players, that Eddie Jordan doesn't use in the starting line-up.  He wants a running team, but they still don't run, even though they don't start Brand or Speights!  There is a real disconnect here, Eddie is spending all his time working on defense thinking that that is the problem, ignoring the continual failure to generate enough points.

He thinks the problem is defense, but he's an idiot.

[RickyPryor]

Look again. While it is true that in some of the losses, the Sixers allowed too many points, in every loss the Sixers scored less than 23 in one quarter. That's right, 22 or less in each and every loss this season, 100 percent of the time. Refute that fact and you can win the argument! 

I won't refute it because the argument is...well, not a good one.

This is the NBA.  Games are not played as you outline - by quarters.  They are played as a whole.  And the NBA, as everyone knows, is made-up of runs.  Even teams which are blown out demonstrate runs at some point in every game.  Some smaller than others is all.

And so it simply comes down to this:  Go back and indicate for me the average points scored and the average points allowed in our losses.  Total game points in losses.  Then we can meet back here to pick up this discussion.

While you're gone...I invite you to also investigate the defenses of the Celtics, Pistons and Spurs.  Recently successful teams, which placed an ENORMOUS emphasis on defense.


Defense.  Wins.

Everyone knows that.

Based on who their players are and their talents, this team is built for scoring in the half-court.

No they're not.  They are built for transition.  Well...at least they WERE when they had another monster rebounder.  But, still.  They are a fastbreak team.

[Derek Bodner]

There were 13 games wednesday.  Know how many teams scored 25+ points in all of the 4 quarters?

0.  0 out of 26.

By Rick's logic, none of the 26 teams are good offensive teams.

[Derek Bodner]

In fact, nobody's accomplished that feet at all this week.  0-58.

[RickyPryor]

In fact, nobody's accomplished that feet at all this week.  0-58.

small sample size.
 

[Lurker]

In fact, nobody's accomplished that feet at all this week.  0-58.

small sample size.
 

actually it would be 0-232.   

[rickortreat]

So what? These teams are still averaging over 100 points a game- half the teams in the NBA. I broke it down by quarter to show when in the game that they lost. There is also a strong correlation with an offensive failure in the 2nd half.  25 points is still a good rule of thumb even if no team actually does it in a game. Consistency over 48 minutes is still the ideal and while the target is arbitrary, I think this team has the potential to score on average 100 points a game. I really think it is somewhat higher than that, but not at their current rate of development.


"And so it simply comes down to this:  Go back and indicate for me the average points scored and the average points allowed in our losses.  Total game points in losses.  Then we can meet back here to pick up this discussion."


Ricky, What would you expect that to prove?  It's obvious from the scores that there is a huge variance in Sixers defense and offense from game to game, what would this statistic show that helps either argument?

[RickyPryor]

Ricky, What would you expect that to prove?  It's obvious from the scores that there is a huge variance in Sixers defense and offense from game to game, what would this statistic show that helps either argument?

Like Joan Rivers, you really are going down swingin', aren't ya.

I mean, it was YOU who started with this criteria; and it's a blatantly faulty one.  Very hard to argue using this irrelevant data.

If you check our losses and disparity in points scored, I believe you will find that it was our defensive lapses...not offensive ones...which were the culprit.  Now - I need t get off this topic.  It's giving me a headache.

[rickortreat]

Ricky, What would you expect that to prove?  It's obvious from the scores that there is a huge variance in Sixers defense and offense from game to game, what would this statistic show that helps either argument?

Like Joan Rivers, you really are going down swingin', aren't ya.

I mean, it was YOU who started with this criteria; and it's a blatantly faulty one.  Very hard to argue using this irrelevant data.

If you check our losses and disparity in points scored, I believe you will find that it was our defensive lapses...not offensive ones...which were the culprit.  Now - I need t get off this topic.  It's giving me a headache.

You're absolutely right, I'm guilty of trying the equivalent of teaching a pig to dance! I defined the average score for all teams in the NBA- both defensive and offensive from the raw data to establish a baseline or what is normal for an NBA team. I also ranked the Sixers according to offense and defense against their peers and learned that there ranking for offense is lower than their defense.  Now, it is clear from this that the Sixers are relatively deficient in both, but find that their offense is lagging their defense relative to the mean, where would you think the problem was? If that simple logic escapes you, then you are beyond help.

I even broke it down by quarter to show you when the Sixers failed to score. It showed a high number of occurrences where the Sixers failure occurred at the end. This is simply to prove that the Sixers have the potential to score, but for some reason stop doing it. From observation during the game I saw that what happens is the same thing almost everytime, but you have to see the game because they don't tell you in the play by play when the other team changes their defense. The opposing team uses a zone and the Sixers offense settles for quick outside shots or one on one play because they don't have a plan of attack. They invariably miss and set off some good scoring opportunities for the other team, and in general undermine the defense. 

That is how I concluded Eddie Jordan was an idiot. He kept losing the same way game after game. He really has no offense installed here. Apart from the pick and roll, almost every play is one on one, there are passes here and there, but no pace or pattern. So why anyone would think that the defense was the problem is beyond me, when it is so obvious that the offense sucks. Every game the Sixers get outscored, and make it impossible for them to set up to defend and then you conclude the problem is defense.

Go ahead defend your logic!

[RickyPryor]

You're absolutely right, I'm guilty of trying the equivalent of teaching a pig to dance! I defined the average score for all teams in the NBA- both defensive and offensive from the raw data to establish a baseline or what is normal for an NBA team. I also ranked the Sixers according to offense and defense against their peers and learned that there ranking for offense is lower than their defense.  Now, it is clear from this that the Sixers are relatively deficient in both, but find that their offense is lagging their defense relative to the mean, where would you think the problem was? If that simple logic escapes you, then you are beyond help.

This was as far as I read; I refuse to read the rest of your post.  Frankly, you crossed the line; you're being rude.

I only say this to plant a seed in your head that you just might be wrong.  I happen to have been a successful boys' basketball coach at a very competitive high school in New York city.  In three years time we compiled a record of 73-11.

I've coached two eventual NBA players and countless D1 kids.  The most recent was Jessie Sapp, last year's starting PG for Georgetown.  Fine school, big basketball program.  Perhaps you've heard of it.

In my opinion - you DON'T know more than me.  But, hey, ya never know.  Stranger things have happened.

I would suggest this - stop all the formulating and defining and ranking and go buy a good basketball book.  I can recommend a few; starting with one written by my close friend Morgan Wootten (formerly) of DeMatha High in MD.  OR, just listen (rather than yack on and on and on) to others who know more than you about the game.  Doesn't have to be me; and, yes, you will find such people out there, believe it or not.


Anyway - I have no plans to hold any further dialog with you.  And I'll soon be deciding whether or not to ignore you.  You'd be my first ever.

[rickortreat]

You're absolutely right, I'm guilty of trying the equivalent of teaching a pig to dance! I defined the average score for all teams in the NBA- both defensive and offensive from the raw data to establish a baseline or what is normal for an NBA team. I also ranked the Sixers according to offense and defense against their peers and learned that there ranking for offense is lower than their defense.  Now, it is clear from this that the Sixers are relatively deficient in both, but find that their offense is lagging their defense relative to the mean, where would you think the problem was? If that simple logic escapes you, then you are beyond help.

This was as far as I read; I refuse to read the rest of your post.  Frankly, you crossed the line; you're being rude.

I only say this to plant a seed in your head that you just might be wrong.  I happen to have been a successful boys' basketball coach at a very competitive high school in New York city.  In three years time we compiled a record of 73-11.

I've coached two eventual NBA players and countless D1 kids.  The most recent was Jessie Sapp, last year's starting PG for Georgetown.  Fine school, big basketball program.  Perhaps you've heard of it.

In my opinion - you DON'T know more than me.  But, hey, ya never know.  Stranger things have happened.

I would suggest this - stop all the formulating and defining and ranking and go buy a good basketball book.  I can recommend a few; starting with one written by my close friend Morgan Wootten (formerly) of DeMatha High in MD.  OR, just listen (rather than yack on and on and on) to others who know more than you about the game.  Doesn't have to be me; and, yes, you will find such people out there, believe it or not.


Anyway - I have no plans to hold any further dialog with you.  And I'll soon be deciding whether or not to ignore you.  You'd be my first ever.

What's rude is not responding to even one aspect of my argument with anything more than lip-service, while steadfastly maintaining your position.  Then you cry about me being rude, and then proudly announce what you have accomplished in the past, which has nothing to do with the discussion.  What you're actually doing is quitting an argument that you can't win, because you just want to worship at the mantra of defense, which is only one side of the game, and not the part where the Sixers have their greatest problems.

Never mind logic, facts, or direct observation. Just obfuscate ignore or disparage the other man's information without providing reason, merely because you can't answer any other way and his facts are inconvenient. Maybe not rude, merely intellectually dishonest.  But I'm glad you're done, I've done what I could to prove my point, and maybe someone who could come up with something to refute my position would have forced me to do better.  Why should I care? I did what I could to help you to see what the Sixers problems were. And I'm confident in my perspective. 

[ziggy]

From basketball-reference.com
http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/PHI/2010.html

Pace Factor: 91.3 (24th of 30)
Pace Factor (available since the 1973-74 season in the NBA); the formula is 48 * ((Tm Poss + Opp Poss) / (2 * (Tm MP / 5))). Pace factor is an estimate of the number of possessions per 48 minutes by a team.

Offensive Rating: 106.3 (18th of 30)
Offensive Rating (available since the 1977-78 season in the NBA); for players it is points produced per 100 possessions, while for teams it is points scored per 100 possessions. This rating was developed by Dean Oliver, author of Basketball on Paper.

Defensive Rating: 109.3 (22nd of 30)
Defensive Rating (available since the 1977-78 season in the NBA); for players and teams it is points allowed per 100 possessions. This rating was developed by Dean Oliver, author of Basketball on Paper.


From this the Sixers are not very good offensively or defensively, but are worse defensively.

[rickortreat]

From basketball-reference.com
http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/PHI/2010.html

Pace Factor: 91.3 (24th of 30)
Pace Factor (available since the 1973-74 season in the NBA); the formula is 48 * ((Tm Poss + Opp Poss) / (2 * (Tm MP / 5))). Pace factor is an estimate of the number of possessions per 48 minutes by a team.

Offensive Rating: 106.3 (18th of 30)
Offensive Rating (available since the 1977-78 season in the NBA); for players it is points produced per 100 possessions, while for teams it is points scored per 100 possessions. This rating was developed by Dean Oliver, author of Basketball on Paper.

Defensive Rating: 109.3 (22nd of 30)
Defensive Rating (available since the 1977-78 season in the NBA); for players and teams it is points allowed per 100 possessions. This rating was developed by Dean Oliver, author of Basketball on Paper.


From this the Sixers are not very good offensively or defensively, but are worse defensively.

Why do you value these ratings more that you do the actual scoring? The outcome is determined by the score, and it doesn't matter how efficient they are at it as long as they score the points! Besides, Ziggy you know enough about basketball to know that a bad offense feeds the other teams offense and therefore harms your defense.  If the Sixers improved offensively, there would be fewer easy baskets for the other team and curiously enough, their defensive stats will improve!

You have to watch the Sixers play to see where the breakdowns are! When you see them taking and missing bad shot after bad shot, while the other team keeps getting layups off your misses, you recognize the problem ain't defense, the defense isn't being given a chance. You can't know this looking at the numbers.

That's why using stats in isolation is useless. Sure they're ranked lower in defense, the way they play offense they'd have to be!