The Clippers resorted to zone for a good part of the second half last night against Minnesota, and the results weren’t favorable. The decision prompted me to pose the following:
Someone smart needs to look at the data, but my best guess is that any advantage in defensive efficiency that’s derived from zoning up is negated by the additional possessions/attempts generated by the offensive glass.
Sure enough, statistical guru, Haralabos Voulgaris, who’s doing some of the best work in the basketball analytics field, ran some numbers from the 2007-2008 season, and came up with this:
Clippers Not Playing Zone: Allowed 0.9523 points per possession
Clippers Playing Zone: Allowed 1.0404 points per possession.
Mike Dunleavy predilection is toward man-to-man, and the Clips played zone for only 99 possession.
The league as a whole gave up 0.9377 points/possession not playing zone, while yielding 0.9708 points/possession in the zone.
So far as the league-wide numbers, one might conclude that aside from some notable exceptions [Flip Saunders' Detroit teams], weaker defensive teams are more apt to zone up. This could explain a small degree of the margin.
24 Responses
I think that last point makes a lot of sense. Good defensive teams like San Antonio and Boston don’t ever need to go zone since their man to man is so strong.
I personally think that zone is largely ineffective on the NBA level. Ever watch an NBA team warmup? Guards rarely ever miss, and even the bigs can hit with regularity from 18ft or so. If you give guys open shots at the NBA level, the chance they are gonna shoot over 50% is pretty high.
I think zone defenses can be effective in the NBA, but only in short spurts as a change of pace. Playing in a zone for more than 2 or 3 minutes at a time is asking for trouble.
That being said, I like that the Clippers gave it a shot last night. Now is the perfect time to experiment with things like that.
eastie Rich Reply:
April 8th, 2009 at 8:25 pm
I agree. I’m not a fan of the zone at all. Man to man is the way to go. D up, play tough, run! (and I need to emphasize that because I’m sure Baron has set some kind of record bringing the ball up so slowly), and there’s no reason we couldn’t have at least added another ten wins this year.
It’s really amazing watching Dunleavy coach every year. Instead of gaining respect for the skill it must take to coach on an NBA level, he just diminishes it.
Make Defense #1 Priority Reply:
April 9th, 2009 at 8:30 am
Before signing any player, Clippers should make sure the player in question knows & enjoys being a good defender. And they need to check his past performance as well. Clippers should make ‘D’ as their culture. If you build a team with players who likes to shoot & play to boost their stats, such team is bound to dwell in the CELLAR.
Posted on April 8th, 2009 at 7:34 pm
As for stats lookup. I wonder if there is a coach with less wins than Dunleavy over this 2 year span?
FireDunleavy .com Reply:
April 8th, 2009 at 10:15 pm
Over any 2 year span? Dunleavy comes close with the Bucks with 20 and 28 wins.
eastie Rich Reply:
April 8th, 2009 at 10:39 pm
Had a little fun looking this up. Here’s what we’re left with.
Least amount of wins for the 07-08 & present season:
Clippers: 41
Seattle/OKC: 41
Memphis: 44
Minn.: 45
Seattle/OKC, had P.J. Carlesimo as coach in Seattle and lost his job this year to Scott Brooks.
Clippers: Dunleavy of course.
Memphis: Mark Iavaroni as coach 07/08, this year Iavaroni, Johnny Davis and now Lionel Hollins. Iavaroni was fired after a 11-30 start which is better record than Dunleavys.
Minn: Randy Wittman as coach 07/08, Wittman coached this year and was replaced by Kevin McHale. Wittman’s record this year was a dismal 4-15 (I can’t figure this out without a calculator, but I think it’s the same as Dunleavy’s record this year).
Teams that almost made the cut.
Sacramento: 51 wins, they won 38 in 07/08.
Knicks: 53 wins – and to think Dunleavy makes Isiah’s 23 wins look good.
Miami: 56 wins, only 15 wins in 07/08 with Wade out.
Washington: 61 wins, 43 wins in 07/08, took a nosedive this year.
While there’s no way we’re as good as Miami, it’s hard to believe the Clippers are worse than Sacramento and the KNICKS! (you are kidding right?)
The Clippers are bottom dwellers. Who wants to bet OKC doesn’t have a better record than the Clippers next year?
Posted on April 8th, 2009 at 10:06 pm
Run this stat, clippers give up 4.01 points per possession. Sure, mathematically impossible but Dunleavy will find a way.
Posted on April 8th, 2009 at 10:37 pm
Nice research Eastie Rich. Out of the 9 teams with the worst compiled records over a two year span(LAC, OKC, MEM, MIN, SAC, NYK, MIA, WAS, MIL) the Clippers are the only team who have had the same head coach for the entire time period. Like Eastie Rich noted, some teams have had multiple head coaches.
eastie Rich Reply:
April 9th, 2009 at 7:31 am
Nothing like a little praise to keep one going.
Actuallly, reading your post I thought what the team records were for the time Dunleavy was coach. O.k. I have some time, but not enough to do every team. I limited it to the ones listed above.
Knicks 181 – 308
Clippers 193 – 295
Memphis 210 – 272
Minn. 213 – 276
Washington 214 – 285
Miami 253 – 295
Only the woefull Knicks had a worse record. By sticking with Dunleavy the Clippers have averaged 2 wins more per year than the Knicks. Yeah!
It’s too early in the morning to draw any conclusions from this. Posting numbers is about the best I can do. Any comments, please fill in.
Sacramento on the other hand got rid of Adelman after years of 55, 50 then 44 wins. A 50 win average. Let’s see how’s Sac now, how’s Houston?
Interesting to note, Minn. had 5 coaching changes in this span, McHale filled in twice. The Knicks have had 7 coaching changes.
Posted on April 9th, 2009 at 12:31 am
I’m pretty ure that Dunleavy will be head coach again next season because Sterling ain’t going to pay him all that money to sit on his hands…and since we can’t sucker anybody into taking Baron or Zach or Kaman’s contract off our hands, we will have all three of them in our lineup as well. Since Ricky has a players option on his contract, he will exercise it because he knows nobody in the right mind would pick him up, so we’ll have Ricky back too. Novak is a free agent, and with luxury suites and STH renewals plummeting, it will be interesting to see if Donald will open up the purse strings, if there’s a market for him.
My gut feeling is that with the same coaching staff and basically the same lineup, we will finish with the worst record in the league next year and have it by a wide margin.
D.J. Foster Reply:
April 9th, 2009 at 3:21 am
As the eternal optimist, I’ll point out that we do have a great trading chip in Marcus Camby and this year’s top draft pick to add to the mix.
Our hands aren’t completely tied. There will always be teams wanting to move up in the draft, and there will always be those contenders out there looking to add a player like Camby.
We have a lot of options, but we need to set a plan. Good GM’s analyze their teams, and make plans accordingly. Sam Presti, the Thunder’s GM, made a plan for his team. He decided to blow it up and trade old talent for draft picks and young players. Donnie Walsh, the Knicks GM, decided to get rid of as many of the malcontents as he could, and free himself up enough cap space for the phenomenal 2010 free agent class. Danny Ainge, the Celtics GM, decided to try and win championships now by adding Ray and KG.
What is Dunleavy’s plan? What direction is he taking this team? Based on the moves he made this year I’d say it’s safe to assume Dunleavy wants to win now, even if he has to sacrifice the future of the team. His contract is up 2(?)years from now, so his window to succeed and get a renewal is closing.
So much depends on what pick in the draft we get, so I’ll put my speculation in regards to that on hold. I will say though that I would be SHOCKED if we move Camby for draft picks or prospects. It’s more likely that we move Camby for a player who can help right away. The only way that makes sense for our trading partner is if the player we acquire has a long term deal they want to get off the books.
So we do have options…but can we trust Dunleavy to do what’s best for the team in the long term?
GM’s that don’t have job security are reluctant to blow it up and start over. They want Wins, first and foremost, and they’ll do anything to get them. The Zach Randolph trade serves as a perfect example.
Basically, if it’s not a good “basketball” trade that won’t help us RIGHT NOW, it’s not getting done under Dunleavy.
Sam Mays Reply:
April 9th, 2009 at 8:28 am
You’re exactly right… Dunleavy the coach is desperate to win now and Dunleavy the GM is going to help him at best he thinks he can. Our only hope is to get the 1 or 2 pick… Blake Griffin means Randolf must go (or go to the bench) and Rubio means the same for Baron… Any other rookie will be a non factor.
The bigger problem is Dunleavy himself. It’s been proven that these guys won’t play hard for him.
eastie Rich Reply:
April 9th, 2009 at 6:59 am
I’m going to totally blow my credibiltiy and tell you how I felt about BD and RD when they first signed. Baron, I was totally unimpressed, I didn’t like his flash. In my opinion to much luck and not enough skill. I’m not sure I like this move at all, it didn’t make me like this team even a little better. I was right on the money on that one.
Now get this. When they signed Ricky, I was impressed. I thought for sure someone who had plenty of skill (and a poor attitude) would put it together for what would likely be his last chance to play in the NBA. I actually thought he’d be good off the bench for 12, 4 & 4. He’s got the skill for that, but as it turns out, no heart whatsoever.
Here’s one thing that would get me to renew. No Dunleavy (and I’d love a new owner), keep the three rookies and Novak and bring the rest of the team up from the NBADL. All of those guys would play like their careers depended on it, and sterling would save some money.
Posted on April 9th, 2009 at 1:35 am
That’s supposed to say:
Basically, if it’s not a good “basketball” trade that WILL help us right now, it’s not getting done under Dunleavy.
I was trying to say that the future does not matter much to Dunleavy, and that only wins matter at this point.
Posting sentences with triple negatives at 4am…it’s what I do.
Posted on April 9th, 2009 at 4:01 am
What if Dunleavy wants to retire but waiting impatiently for Sterling to fire him? That’s the only way he can get paid. I’m just guessing. Dunleavy seems like going thru the motions just like Baron.
Let’s hope I’m wrong. Atleast he can stay as GM.
eastie Rich Reply:
April 9th, 2009 at 9:17 am
You mean he’s trying to pull a Nelson?
Posted on April 9th, 2009 at 8:39 am
Great stats Rich, but I was also wondering, is there any other coach in history that has coached a full 2 years and compiled more losses.
eastie Rich Reply:
April 9th, 2009 at 9:57 am
That one’s too hard to figure. But from what I’ve looked at the answer is no.
JM Reply:
April 9th, 2009 at 10:22 am
Tim Floyd with the Chicago Bulls.
1999-2000: 17-65
2000-2001: 15-67
eastie Rich Reply:
April 9th, 2009 at 10:57 am
Wow, hard to believe, but true. Is that the all time worst coaching performance?
FireDunleavy .com Reply:
April 9th, 2009 at 11:34 am
Wow, good work.
Posted on April 9th, 2009 at 9:27 am
I bet Dunleavy holds his own against the Washington Generals head coach. That poor dude never wins.
Posted on April 9th, 2009 at 9:46 am
More stats.
I’ve posted some amazing Dunleavy stats today, here’s more. Only three other teams in the history of the NBA kept a coach with such a horrible winning percentage for six full seasons. Others may have been worse (I didn’t go there) over a shorter period of time.
The point was for a coach this bad, how has he been able to keep his job so long, and have there been any historical comparisons. Here goes,
The Philadelphia Warriors, 1949/50 – 1954/55, total wins 173, coach: Ed Gottlieb. He finished his eight year career 43 games under 500. Much Better than Dunleavy.
The Cleveland Cavaliers, 1970/71 – 75/76, total wins 188, coach: Bill Fitch. But Fitch increased his win totals almost every year as follows: 15, 23, 32, 29, 40 and 49.
The Washington Bullets, 1988/89 – 1993/94, total wins 172, coach Wes Unseld.
The Los Angeles Clippers, 2003/04 – present, total wins 193, coach: Mike Dunleavy.
For his six years as coach the Clippers have finished 102 games under 500.
It looks like Ed Gottlieb wasn’t that bad (in comparison). Fitch actually brought a new team to respectability, so that only leaves Wes Unseld as a worse coach in the History of the League.
Posted on April 9th, 2009 at 5:31 pm
Wow. Those are some amazing numbers. I knew that we’ve been bad under Dunleavy, but I didn’t realize that we’ve been historically bad. That’s some really great research.
Posted on April 10th, 2009 at 12:28 am
Trackbacks