Bonn1997 wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:I think Chicago's back court shoots worse than the Knicks but they play D.

You're exactly right. I just looked at the #s on 82games.com. Our effective FG% from the backcourt is about .020 higher than theirs but their net PER is far better (or far less bad) than ours.

I think that points to coaching more than anything. Thibs actually gets results from his players as a defensive coach.

That's a possible hypothesis but I've never seen evidence supporting the idea that coaches have the kind of impact on player production that many here think they have. You're a numbers guy, right? All the data I've seen point to the opposite conclusion. It seems even more improbable to say that the same coach caused the same players (at least Felton, Prigs, and JR) to put up good production last year and poor production this year. Maybe we just have ****ty old players in the backcourt.
I mean, if people think Woodson's impact on players flips on annual basis, why not keep him through next year when he's "due" to have a great impact again? Maybe get rid of him after that season when he's due for a bad impact again?!

Well there isn't any numbers to really quantify defensive impact but when you see a coach shuffle players in and out his system and the team still put up "good defensive numbers" I think coaching is a part of it.

But even if what you're saying was right, we've already made it through most of this year and next year is an odd numbered year. So Woodson would be due for outstanding player shuffling anyway!

When has a Mike Woodson team ever excelled at Defense? I think his teams have been avg or below on D but better than people think on O. (I'm going off memory, not in research mode yet.)

yellowboy90 wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:I think Chicago's back court shoots worse than the Knicks but they play D.

You're exactly right. I just looked at the #s on 82games.com. Our effective FG% from the backcourt is about .020 higher than theirs but their net PER is far better (or far less bad) than ours.

I think that points to coaching more than anything. Thibs actually gets results from his players as a defensive coach.

That's a possible hypothesis but I've never seen evidence supporting the idea that coaches have the kind of impact on player production that many here think they have. You're a numbers guy, right? All the data I've seen point to the opposite conclusion. It seems even more improbable to say that the same coach caused the same players (at least Felton, Prigs, and JR) to put up good production last year and poor production this year. Maybe we just have ****ty old players in the backcourt.
I mean, if people think Woodson's impact on players flips on annual basis, why not keep him through next year when he's "due" to have a great impact again? Maybe get rid of him after that season when he's due for a bad impact again?!

Well there isn't any numbers to really quantify defensive impact but when you see a coach shuffle players in and out his system and the team still put up "good defensive numbers" I think coaching is a part of it.

Or maybe just having good players to shuffle is part of it.
Actually, there have been many attempts to quantify coach impact.
Here is one but you can find many just through Google.
I'm not aware of studies finding any consistent impact of coaching - and it's not for lack of trying. Researchers keep trying to find such evidence.
http://freakonomics.com/2013/05/30/a-former-nba-coach-argues-that-coaches-are-not-responsible-for-outcomes/

Korver, Dunleavy, Robinson, Watson, Belineli, Augustin & etc were not known as defensive players but all played well for Chi.

I could look into each of those players' histories but you can't make this kind of evaluation on a handful of players. Just by chance, in a league with almost 400 players, occasionally a group of a few players who make an unexpected improvement will cluster together. (I'm not saying that improvement even did happen, though. I haven't looked into it.) The article I just cited looked at all long-term coaches from the past 30 years! You can't override its conclusions by citing a few players on one team.