Smash Williams
New member
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2009
- Messages
- 1,753
- Reaction score
- 0
I'm not a Kendrick Perkins apologist. I think he's a selectively useful player that Brooks overuses. He's a terrible offensive player whose defensive effectiveness is highly dependent upon matchups. Brooks usually plays him too many minutes, without proper consideration for matchups. I completely agree with the argument that Perkins' offense is such a handicap that he should be playing significantly fewer minutes in the majority of games.
With that said, the argument that Perkins isn't even a good defender is completely off-base. He's neither versatile nor an elite all-around defender, but he defends post-ups very well and is a plus defender overall.
In the 2011 playoffs, Dwight Howard averaged 27 PPG on .630 FG% and 15 RPG (regular season averages: 22.9 PPG, .625 FG%, 14.1 RPG). If you take out Game 5 (which Orlando actually won), in which Howard only played 29 minutes due to foul trouble, he averaged 30.8 PPG, .649 FG% 17 RPG in the other five games of the series (Orlando lost four of them). By your logic, Jason Collins and Zaza Pachulia--the Atlanta centers given the task of defending Howard--had a bad series defensively because Howard obliterated his regular season averages.
The problem with that logic is that it completely ignores the larger context. Orlando's 4-out/1-in offense was predicated upon Howard's ability to force double-teams, thereby creating open looks for Orlando's 3-point shooters. Orlando led the league in 3-point attempts (25.6 per game), which they converted at a 36.6% clip. In their playoff series with the Hawks, the Magic not only shot fewer 3s per game (23.5), but they only converted 26.2%. It wasn't bad luck. Orlando didn't just go cold for an entire series. Instead, Larry Drew entrusted Collins and Pachulia with guarding Howard one-on-one. That meant the Hawks' other defenders could stay at home on Orlando's shooters, resulting in the Magic getting fewer clean looks from the 3-point line. The objective was not to shut down Dwight Howard, but to minimize the overall effectiveness of the offense. Collins and Pachulia were essential in executing Atlanta's defensive game plan to perfection in that huge upset.
Perkins' ability to defend Bynum in the low post with minimal help was a critical component of the Thunder's success against the Lakers in last year's playoffs. Bynum and the Lakers' offense were terrible when Perkins was also on the floor (97.1 offensive rating) and outstanding when Bynum was on the floor without Perkins (110.2 offensive rating) (link). Bynum's individual numbers (which weren't as good with Perkins on the floor, but that's besides the point) don't fully reflect things such as the Lakers' difficulty in even getting the ball to Bynum in situations in which OKC elected to have Perkins front Bynum. That was one of the major reasons Kobe had to play hero ball in some of those fourth quarters (Kobe doesn't really need a reason to play hero ball, but you get the point).
I have a ton of respect for Lowe. His analysis is outstanding; however, I don't recall him classifying Kendrick Perkins as a subpar defender (BTW, there is a huge difference between having a subpar defensive performance or being bad in certain matchups and actually being a subpar defender overall). There are a lot of teams versus which Perkins doesn't have a good matchup, and he sometimes has poor performances in what should be good matchups. However, on average, the Thunder's defense has consistently been better with him on the floor.
Simple on/off stats indicate that the Thunder perform better defensively when Perkins is on the floor; the problem with that stat is that the teammates with whom he shares the floor are confounding variables. However, if you look at advanced metrics that attempt to control for that, such as ASPM (DsMok1 has a terrific site), on a yearly basis Perkins grades out with a positive defensive impact.
Perkins is terrible offensively. I don't think anyone would reasonably argue otherwise.
With that said, the argument that Perkins isn't even a good defender is completely off-base. He's neither versatile nor an elite all-around defender, but he defends post-ups very well and is a plus defender overall.
This is a poor method of evaluating defensive impact. Defense is much more than just a bunch of one-on-one matchups. The objective is to minimize the effectiveness of the entire offense, not to shut down one player.
In the 2011 playoffs, Dwight Howard averaged 27 PPG on .630 FG% and 15 RPG (regular season averages: 22.9 PPG, .625 FG%, 14.1 RPG). If you take out Game 5 (which Orlando actually won), in which Howard only played 29 minutes due to foul trouble, he averaged 30.8 PPG, .649 FG% 17 RPG in the other five games of the series (Orlando lost four of them). By your logic, Jason Collins and Zaza Pachulia--the Atlanta centers given the task of defending Howard--had a bad series defensively because Howard obliterated his regular season averages.
The problem with that logic is that it completely ignores the larger context. Orlando's 4-out/1-in offense was predicated upon Howard's ability to force double-teams, thereby creating open looks for Orlando's 3-point shooters. Orlando led the league in 3-point attempts (25.6 per game), which they converted at a 36.6% clip. In their playoff series with the Hawks, the Magic not only shot fewer 3s per game (23.5), but they only converted 26.2%. It wasn't bad luck. Orlando didn't just go cold for an entire series. Instead, Larry Drew entrusted Collins and Pachulia with guarding Howard one-on-one. That meant the Hawks' other defenders could stay at home on Orlando's shooters, resulting in the Magic getting fewer clean looks from the 3-point line. The objective was not to shut down Dwight Howard, but to minimize the overall effectiveness of the offense. Collins and Pachulia were essential in executing Atlanta's defensive game plan to perfection in that huge upset.
Perkins' ability to defend Bynum in the low post with minimal help was a critical component of the Thunder's success against the Lakers in last year's playoffs. Bynum and the Lakers' offense were terrible when Perkins was also on the floor (97.1 offensive rating) and outstanding when Bynum was on the floor without Perkins (110.2 offensive rating) (link). Bynum's individual numbers (which weren't as good with Perkins on the floor, but that's besides the point) don't fully reflect things such as the Lakers' difficulty in even getting the ball to Bynum in situations in which OKC elected to have Perkins front Bynum. That was one of the major reasons Kobe had to play hero ball in some of those fourth quarters (Kobe doesn't really need a reason to play hero ball, but you get the point).
Zach Lowe is a credible analyst, but Ernie Johnson is just a studio host, and the others are entertainers. Shaq?! Really? Shaq's "analysis" is horrible. He recites numbers from the box score, assigns an arbitrary statistical baseline for a player (*mumble* Duhwhite Howuhd with 19 poyns, 9 rebowns gotta do betta then at. He should be getting 37 poyns, 18 rebowns against dis team), and criticizes players' rehabilitation efforts. The guy who once delayed surgery for an entire summer, instead electing to have it done in the preseason, on the grounds of, ""I got hurt on company time, so I’ll rehab on company time," probably shouldn't be so adamantly critical of a player for not returning from surgery as soon as expected.
I have a ton of respect for Lowe. His analysis is outstanding; however, I don't recall him classifying Kendrick Perkins as a subpar defender (BTW, there is a huge difference between having a subpar defensive performance or being bad in certain matchups and actually being a subpar defender overall). There are a lot of teams versus which Perkins doesn't have a good matchup, and he sometimes has poor performances in what should be good matchups. However, on average, the Thunder's defense has consistently been better with him on the floor.
PER is mostly an offensive stat (one with limitations, but that's besides the point); the defensive stats included in the formula aren't even good indicators of defense. Hollinger himself, the inventor of PER, argues that it isn't a good evaluator of defensive specialists.
Simple on/off stats indicate that the Thunder perform better defensively when Perkins is on the floor; the problem with that stat is that the teammates with whom he shares the floor are confounding variables. However, if you look at advanced metrics that attempt to control for that, such as ASPM (DsMok1 has a terrific site), on a yearly basis Perkins grades out with a positive defensive impact.
Perkins is terrible offensively. I don't think anyone would reasonably argue otherwise.
What does Anderson Varejao's (I'm assuming that's what you meant) injury have to with J.J. Hickson? Hickson started for Portland the entire season. He hasn't played for Cleveland in two years.
Last edited:
