APBRmetrics

In 2014, Khris Middleton had the 419th (out of 437) worst DRPM in the league at 103.5 points allowed per 100 possessions. In 2015, he had the 8th best DRPM in the league at 95.89 points allowed per 100 posessions.

The Bucks as a whole improved their D rating by 9.6 points this season. Because of the youth on the team and the rapid change they've made, the advanced defensive stats on these players are pretty strange.

So for those who have watched a lot of Bucks games, or want to share their thoughts on the defensive stats on these players, I'd love to hear not only which player you think is the better defender, but your overall thoughts on their defensive performance.

I don't know if 419th lowest is better or worse than 8th highest.
Depends on whether there are more than 427 players?

Mike G wrote:I don't know if 419th lowest is better or worse than 8th highest.
Depends on whether there are more than 427 players?

I edited the original post but simply
2014: awful
2015: amazing

middleton was an excellent man defender this season...

but henson blocked shots this year at 6.4% BS (135 blocks in 1228 min). for perspective anthony davis this season lead the league in total blocks but blocked shots at just 4.7% BS (200 blocks in 2455 min). only a half dozen players the last decade played at least 1000 minutes in a season blocking shots at a per minute rate better than henson did this season...

this year when henson played milwaukee allowed on defense a 41.4% FG%. when he sat they allowed a 44.7% FG%...

a player playing about 2750 minutes blocking shots at 6.2% BS blocks about 300 shots, and that's a huge impact on a team's defense. the only players to block 300+ shots in a season are players like bol, eaton, mutombo, olajuwon, drob, tree rollins, jabbar, and a few others - all great defenders...

jason kidd played henson just 18 min/g in the regular season, but in the playoffs he played him more minutes than either starters zaza pachulia or ersan ilyasova...

I was really high on Henson out of college. I was very vocal (on twitter) about wanting the Warriors to pick him over Barnes. Seems like Henson his first couple years put up a lot of stats but had a negative effect according to the +/- metrics, but now that is turning around I guess. Good for him. He has such length and I think pretty good offensive instincts. If he could only develop more of a mid-range shot and put on some more weight, he could be a legit starting center.

For the season overall (offense and defense) 5 of the top 10 most used Bucks player pairs were positive. All had Henson. Middleton's only positive in the set was with Henson.

The player pair data is not enough though. Regular season playoffs Henson had some of the best most used lineups and some of the worst. Kidd only tested 1 lineup in the regular over 100 minutes (or 1.25 minutes per game for season). Just 1. It had Henson and Middleton and was great but a 100 minute test is not near enough and only 1 such test is not near enough. (The second most used lineup also had the pair and was also great but received only about 75 minutes test.) You can have a system and be good tactically but if you don't actually have good data on what your best 5 man lineups are, you didn't learn as much from the regular season as you might have with a more disciplined, strategic lineup usage plan. There is almost always time to test a handful or two of lineups over 250 minutes and at least 1 or 2 of the best over 500 minutes. But some teams don't.

For 4 man lineups over 100 minutes for regular season, Henson-Middleton is in the best team lineup for defensive efg% allowed. Middleton in 6 of top 8, Henson 5.

FWIW, this season's RPM is single-season and last year's was multi-year.

Middleton's year-to-year might not be crazy different though I am not sure.

ampersand5 wrote:

Mike G wrote:I don't know if 419th lowest is better or worse than 8th highest.
Depends on whether there are more than 427 players?

I edited the original post but simply
2014: awful
2015: amazing

So, I was kind of joking but also trying to make a couple of general points regarding communication with stats:

1) With defensive stats, oftentimes lower = better. Your edit changed "lowest" to "worst". And now we can't be confused.

2) Even though a ranking of 419th may be "bad", it's not logically consistent to say that a player who is 419th from the best is "419th worst". They're the opposite, in fact.
If a player is the 2nd worst FT shooter in the league, you don't say they're "436th worst". That would make them "2nd best".

I make these points because it seems that people should be more stat friendly. For this to happen, the stats have to be more people friendly. Consistency is essential.