Something I thought was interesting concerning our D...

[Buzzard]

Just went out to 82 games to take a look at some stats and found this concerning our opponents per game pers against us....

C : 15.7

PG: 15.4

PF: 14.4

SG: 13.5

SF: 11.4

I found the SF rating to be the biggest surprise but the Center, PG, and PF to be exactly what I expected. We get abused down low because of our lack of size and overall defensive skill set and pg is still one of our weakest positions.

I am sure Horford being out has a lot to do with this but I and a lot of others here have been saying for years, we need to one fix our lack of size or two fix our PG in order to get to the next level. Our team will never be a threat for a championship so long as those two things are our most glaring weaknesses....at least one or the other has to be fixed.

link:

http://www.82games.c...12/1112ATL5.HTM

Edited March 10, 2012 by Buzzard

[Jody23]

The lack of size up front has to be fixed if this team is ever going to reach contender status. Defense and rebounding are the keys to winning in the playoffs. You'll never be able to do that with an undersized front line.

[thecampster]

Just went out to 82 games to take a look at some stats and found this concerning our opponents per game pers against us....

C : 15.7

PG: 15.4

PF: 14.4

SG: 13.5

SF: 11.4

I found the SF rating to be the biggest surprise but the Center, PG, and PF to be exactly what I expected. We get abused down low because of our lack of size and overall defensive skill set and pg is still one of our weakest positions.

I am sure Horford being out has a lot to do with this but I and a lot of others here have been saying for years, we need to one fix our lack of size or two fix our PG in order to get to the next level. Our team will never be a threat for a championship so long as those two things are our most glaring weaknesses....at least one or the other has to be fixed.

link:

http://www.82games.c...12/1112ATL5.HTM

PER is always inflated at the C and PF due to Rebounds......Inflated at the PG due to Assists. that is all. SG/SF score....but are lower in those 2 stats.

[Buzzard]

PER is always inflated at the C and PF due to Rebounds......Inflated at the PG due to Assists. that is all. SG/SF score....but are lower in those 2 stats.

I would almost agree with you except for this:

#1 WORSE PG PPG against 20.8

#2 WORSE PF PPG against 19.1

Edited March 10, 2012 by Buzzard

[Joker]

inflated or not, Josh tends to give up more boards then he gets and Teague is just not a starting PG with this personnel.

[Buzzard]

inflated or not, Josh tends to give up more boards then he gets and Teague is just not a starting PG with this personnel.

I don't think its inflated.

Celtics:

PG PPG Against 19.6

PF PPG Against 18.0

Heat

PG PPG Against 18.3

PF PPG Against 20.3

Bulls

PG PPG Against 17.6

PF PPG Against 20.5

I imagine you could look at every team that has chased a ring over the last five seasons and find they are defensively stronger than us at a minimum one of the three critical positions. PG, PF, or Center. I chose these eastern conference teams simply because they play the same teams and players we do.

And if you look at pers its even worse due to the better scorers these three teams have. EXA: Bosh in Miami is weak defensively but he off sets things really well with his scoring, rebounding, and shot shot blocking....

Edited March 10, 2012 by Buzzard

[thecampster]

Interesting when you use stats to support your position only.

Net stats -

PG -1.3

SG +0.1

SF +3.8

PF +2.5

C -1.1

Net stats PER - Guess who splits time at SF/PF.

[thecampster]

More Stats -

Josh PER NET (own vs opp) on floor stats. 82games.com

SF +24.6

PF +2.3

C +5.5

Teague

PG -1.2

Joe Johnson

PG -16.8

SG +6.2

SF -4.3

Marvin

SG -46.3

SF + 4.5

PF -4.6

C +1.9

Zaza

PF .0

C -2.3

Again...justify the Josh hate without opinion. Stats can be misleading guys but these are way too strong to argue with.

[Buzzard]

Interesting when you use stats to support your position only.

Net stats -

PG -1.3

SG +0.1

SF +3.8

PF +2.5

C -1.1

Net stats PER - Guess who splits time at SF/PF.

The net stats support my same aurgument.

PG, PF, C are our three weakest postions. We need to get better at the point or bigger down low. Whats your point exactly?

[thecampster]

More Stats -

Josh PER NET (own vs opp) on floor stats. 82games.com

SF +24.6

PF +2.3

C +5.5

Teague

PG -1.2

Joe Johnson

PG -16.8

SG +6.2

SF -4.3

Marvin

SG -46.3

SF + 4.5

PF -4.6

C +1.9

Zaza

PF .0

C -2.3

Again...justify the Josh hate without opinion. Stats can be misleading guys but these are way too strong to argue with.

So what does this mean? The Offense struggles when Joe is the PG. His best position is SG.

Teague is a little below average but not terrible. Marvin's numbers are due to inactivity (opinion only).

Josh's opponent is mismatched most nights. Josh's best position is SF per the sample.

The net stats support my same aurgument.

PG, PF, C are our three weakest postions. We need to get better at the point or bigger down low. Whats your point exactly?

Can you not read?....SG is lower that PF by 2+ per

[Buzzard]

Its not about Josh but with Horford out I would not think it would take a brain surgeon to know we are hurting at the center. I said that with him out, it is hard to guage the 5 spot...

[thecampster]

Its not about Josh but with Horford out I would not think it would take a brain surgeon to know we are hurting at the center. I said that with him out, it is hard to guage the 5 spot...

I agree that we are weak at the 5 but considering his 5 million dollar salary, Zaza is holding his own. But Joe at SG, our 19 million dollar man next year, no real backup with a net of .1 is unacceptable.

[Buzzard]

So what does this mean? The Offense struggles when Joe is the PG. His best position is SG.

Teague is a little below average but not terrible. Marvin's numbers are due to inactivity (opinion only).

Josh's opponent is mismatched most nights. Josh's best position is SF per the sample.

Can you not read?....SG is lower that PF by 2+ per

And I went to ppg against to show the defensive side which is what the thread is about ( read the title ) because you said pers were inflated. Now you say they are good. Which is it?

Edited March 11, 2012 by Buzzard