Re: Thoughts on the disappointing Celtics

[Kestutis.Kveraga@Dartmouth.EDU (Kestutis Kveraga)]

--- You wrote:

> mobility for the big man). If the trap isn't great and the rotations
> aren't great, the opposing team will rotate the ball for an open shot.
> This happens to Miami too - just not as often as it happens to the 
> Celtics, because their defensive execution is superior. 
 
> Most people seem to have the opinion, "Just play straight up
> man-to-man defense, no traps and rotations, no fronting. Big man
> defenders play behind their man and defend them with no help." I think
> that under the new rules disallowing the dislodging of the man (which
> Potapenko was skilled at), this is often suicidal. I would guess that
> most decent low post players, including Antoine, score at a 55% or
> better rate when given good low post position, with the man beneath
> them and no help coming. 
<...>
> It's just not optimal to
> allow any decent low-post player operate without harassment one-on-one.
--- end of quote ---

I think what people have in mind (I _know_ it's what I have in mind) when  they clamor for straight-up defense by the Celtics is not that the trapping-rotating-fronting defense should be abandoned because it is inherently flawed. Rather, it is because it's so poorly executed by our players that simple man-to-man defense affords a higher degree of "protection" in our situation.  Not only is the former type of defense executed poorly, it's also indiscriminately applied: often people who could barely score in an empty gym are doubled or fronted while their offensively gifted teammates are  given wide-open shots. It's comes down to percentages: if, as you say, a decent post player converts 55% of his attempts when guarded one-on-one in the low post, but our poorly executed fronting/trapping/rotation results in an uncontested layup or jumper (which are likely converted at a much higher %)  most of the time, then the former option is preferable. While a perfectly executed, appropriately "staffed" trapping defense can really shut down an offense, man-to-man defense enjoys the advantages of being much simpler (and thus less prone to break down) , demanding less energy of players, and placing more accountability on each individual. You have go with what works better in a particular situation, not what works better in theory.