Russell Westbrook under the microscope
The dog days of Summer are upon us, and the excitement of the draft and free agency are moving into our short term memory. For the next two and a half months we’ll have nothing to tide us over in round ball except an occasional news blurb about some team interested in Rasho Nesterovic to bolster their front line, or another article about whether Lebron is better than M.J…
Maybe it’s time for some to look to other things to help pass the time between now and training camp. Royce made a few quality suggestions last week. For me, I decided to fire up the DVR. I have about 20 Thunder games saved, just waiting for me to watch or do something with. I thought maybe I would re watch all of them over this time and come up with some clever angle to write about, but it hit me the other day what I wanted to do: to give a real in-depth analysis of Russell Westbrook.
If you’ve been reading DailyThunder for awhile, or any of a number of the forums or blogs that deal with the Thunder on a regular basis than you are familiar with one of the recurring debates: is Russell Westbrook our Point Guard of the future? Many would point to his overall rookie output of 15 points, 5 assists and 5 rebounds as a rookie (give or take) and realize that only a small number of rookies (11) have ever reached each of those benchmarks in their rookie seasons; guys with names like Jordan, Chris Paul, Magic, Grant Hill, Oscar Robinson. That’s great company to be in, but others would point to his 1.6 assist to turnover ratio, or his 17% turnover rate, or his .399 field goal shooting and .277 three point shooting and say we have a combo guard who will never be a point guard.
I don’t plan to definitively answer that question here, but what I thought I would do is watch tape of the Thunder and chart out every offensive and defensive play that RW plays an active role in in a given game and see where he excels and where he is lacking. This is a work in progress, and I plan to make it an ongoing series to help tide over some of us hoop junkies during the off season.
For the first run I chose the April 8th game against the Denver Nuggets at the Pepsi Center. This wasn’t one of those two close match-ups with Denver that ended on the last shot. This was a 10 point loss to Denver in which Russell started and played 33 minutes. It featured our end of season starting lineup of Durant, Green, Krstic, Thabo and RW. It wasn’t Russell’s best or worst game, but it was the second night of a back to back, facing a quality opponent (Denver and Chauncey Billups) with all the regulars on board. Russ shot 6/13 from the field, had 14 points, 11 assists and 5 turns.
I’ve just completed the first quarter of the game and realized I already had a ton of data, so I thought I would share it incrementally by quarters here, and I will start with the defense. In the first quarter of the Denver game there were 18 offensive and defensive possessions. I broke Russ’s defense down into 5 categories and gave him a check mark each time he did something to fall into one of the categories (note, the number of category entries will be greater than the number of possessions because often Russ did multiple categorical things during the same possession; like a blown assignment and a defensive rebound in the same possession)
- On the defensive side the first category was “acceptable defense, or not involved in play”. Russ scored 12 checks in that box out of 18 possessions. I don’t have any idea if that is good or bad, but at least Russ did his job on those 12 defensive possessions. That’s 2/3rds which might indicate some level of proficiency. Many of those 12 were where Billups brought up the ball, Russ defended by getting into a good stance with his arms out and his knees bent ready to defend, and Billups simply made an inlet pass to a Denver player and Russ wasn’t involved further.
- The next category was “slow fighting over screen”. Russ scored twice in that category. This is where Billups had a big man come over and screen Russ and Russ was weak or slow going over the top of it. If coach Brooks defense calls for going over the top of screens, Russ did a poor job on two of these giving Billups tons of freedom to drive, pull up or hit the big man on the roll to the basket. I didn’t notice a single time where Russell was strong fighting over the screen.
- Next is “didn’t pick up his man”. Russ got three checks in this box. Basically it was in transition after a turnover or a Denver defensive rebound where Denver was off running. Russell didn’t find his man, or didn’t catch up to him regardless of whether his man benefitted from being unguarded.
- The next category is “didn’t rotate to help on D in the paint”. Russ had one notable check in this box when Billups was out and Russ was guarding Anthony Carter, who took him down into the right corner. Russ cheated off of him and had his feet in the paint watching Carmelo take it to the rack. Russ stood and watched Carmelo score without rotating to help. This may or may not be according to the defensive scheme since Krstic did rotate but was late. Perhaps Brooks wants his guards to stay home and prevent the drive and dish for the corner three.
- Finally the last category was “defensive rebound”. Russell attacked the boards and got the rebound once in this first quarter and didn’t significantly impact the team D.
Now the offense. The Point Guard is the quarterback of the offense, the catalyst for scoring. How well did he excel? I came up with 7 categories on offense, or 7 areas that I noticed where Russ was either lacking, did well, or had minor or no involvement:
- The first category is “finds the open man”. By that I mean he finds a guy who is in position to make a play. The open guy in the corner, or the guy cutting to the basket, or he hits the roller just right on the screen and roll. Of the 18 possessions in the first quarter Russ hit the open man 7 times. He was credited with 4 assists, the other three were missed shots and he got no credit, but he hit the right man at the right time. One play that the Thunder ran repeatedly was a back pass to the trailer. Usually it was transition where we got a turn or a defensive rebound and Russ got the ball and took off running. It seemed to be Uncle Jeff that was predominantly the trailer in this game, but Russ just seemed to know where he was and penetrated into the paint a bit and then whipped a pass back to Jeff who was heading for the rim. Easy money.
- Next was “gets jammed”. Russ got two checks in that box. This is where he probes the defense with his dribble and gets bottle necked, often picking up his dribble. He gets trapped and has to find someone to pass to in a hurry. Russ needs to learn to not pick up his dribble there so he can get himself out of the trap. Thunder fans saw a lot of this during the season.
- Next is “forces bad shot”. Russ took two of those in the first quarter of the game. One was a 22 footer with 16 seconds on the shot clock, the other was a 21 footer with 19 seconds on the shot clock. These long twos are the least efficient shot on the court and with so much time on the clock compounded with Russ’s poor shooting percentages, it’s as good as giving away the possession.
- Next is “risky or bad pass”. This is regardless of whether or not it resulted in a turn, just an ill advised pass when a better decision could have been made. Russ made two of those, but his teammates saved the possessions and Russ wasn’t charged with a turn.
- Next are two categories that I probably could have meshed into one. “Nominal involvement” and “no involvement”. Nominal involvement is where Russ passed to somebody who may have passed again or created their own offense and Russ’s pass was a very small part. Russ scored 4 times in this category. Russ had 3 checks in the “no involvement” category where usually in transition a rebound and run situation occurred and Russ never handled the ball.
- The final category to me is the most troubling, and the area where in my opinion Russ needs the most work if he is to be our big time Point Guard going forward. The category is “poor use of screen”. Russ only had two checks in this box out of 18 possessions, but they were blatantly bad. What happened both times is Russ was the ball handler out above the three point line just a bit off to one side or the other (the high elbow area). Russ gets a screen from a big (either Krstic or Green). The big comes and plants himself at right angles to Russ intending to impede the progress of Chauncey Billups as Russ moves off the screen, opening up numerous options for Russ. It’s Russ’s job as the ball handler to maneuver himself close to the screening big, ideally almost rubbing shoulders. What this does is seal off the defender and leaves him no room to fight over the screen and continue to defend. Twice Russ didn’t maneuver himself or his defender into the screen. He instead got about 3 feet away from the screener and then moved off. This is just wrong. What that does is allow an avenue or a lane between the big and Russell which Billups can run right through. It’s like a running back hitting a hole in football. This absolutely needs to be corrected. Russ needs to basically rub off the screener and the screener sort of uses his hip all in one motion to seal off the defensive pursuit or else the whole screen and roll breaks down and becomes easy to defend. Check out Deron Williams running the screen and roll:
The Thunder were 29th of 30 teams in offensive efficency last season, and fixing little things like Russ not picking up his dribble and getting jammed, and learning to use his screens correctly are just little tweaks that can pay big dividends in our efficiency next year. Defensively the team can improve when Russ learns to always find his man in transition and gets to work fighting over those screens.
Thanks Joe. I can’t wait to read the rest.
I like that you mentioned a little bit about our inability to know what the coach’s scheme intends. Russell didn’t rotate to Melo there, but it’s possible the defense depended on Krstic being there and Russell defending the three. Because defense has so very much to do with the system being run, it’s hard to judge people individually.
Put Kid Delicious or Uncle Jeff at their same position on the Celtics, and they could look like adequate if not good defenders. Obviously with our hodge-podge lineup last year, it is hard to implement something permanent, especially as an interim coach. I think this next year is as big for Brooks as it is for Russ and the gang. Our players certainly have a lot of room still to grow, but without a strong direction and clear system, their progress will be limited no matter how good they are.
6 notable defensive mistakes in 18 plays seems like kinda a lot to me, but I am guessing. If it was 2 or less I’d say he did very well. 3-4 I’d say that was good to alright.
Say half the plays with mistakes ended in scores and half the mistakes contributed to the score and say it deserved half the blame. By my method that would suggest Russell’s mistakes cost the team about 1.5 points in a quarter.
If 4 mistakes were “normal” then the net impact compared to normal would be 1 point for the quarter. Being a pro-rated -4 on defense per 48 minutes would be moderately bad.
But with more tests lots of these very simple assumptions might change.
It was April. His defensive intensity seemed like it wained.If you do several games from early, mid and last season it will be a small sample but you’d hope to see improvement.
Ah, my mistake.
If 4 mistakes were “normal” then the net impact compared to normal would be .5 point for the quarter. Being a pro-rated -2 on defense per 48 minutes would be justly mildly bad.
But if all 5 guys did about what Russell did per 48 minutes then -2 * 5= 10 point loss.
Was it all on the defense? I’d ask if it was it average night for Thunder offense? If so then it probably was all on the defense. If not and it was less,then my defensive “blame” system might be too tough. If the offense had a good night then this system might not be tough enough. From the boxscore it looks like it was a good night for the offense, so my estimates probably weren’t tough enough and the loss was all on the defense.
@Crow
In this first quarter the offense for the Thunder was pretty good by our standards, and the defense was nothing to write home about, but not awful. The Nuggs missed like 5 shots that were either dunks or right at the basket….
Anyway, thanks for the idea on the taped games Crow.
I was going to say give Denver some credit for being hot to lessen the heat on the Thunder defense but I haven’t seen the tape. I guess they were hotter in the second half.
I could tweak the system I was beginning to develop above (for Westbrook not being in the whole quarter? and other things) but maybe I’ll let it go and just say I get a ratio of somewhere around 8 more “mistakes” than normal = 1 more basket than normal. This speaks to the notions that mistakes are common, often multiple things go wrong on a play to lead to an easy score and that all mistakes don’t get exploited. But an extra made basket here and there, this quarter , that quarter, by one player then another then another and you can quickly lose enough points to turn a close game into a safer / more comfortable lead for the opponent. For a quarter even 1-2 more makes by the opponent is pretty big & bad on average, if repeated. Not awful repeated can add up to awful. The difference between average NBA defense and the very bottom is only about 5 points a game, or 1.25 points per quarter, so even 1 more basket allowed in a quarter can make a difference between average and bad. That it is hard for the eyes & mind to process but in the end the stats add up.
I mentioned Russell among other ideas but you mentioned the taped game review idea first and you selected your own first or main target so no real need to thank me for that Joe. But if I said something worthwhile to you earlier related to tape review, including perhaps just giving the sense that is was a good idea and you’d do a good job with it, great.
Thunder though by end of this season, to be clear, was only about 1.5 points worse per 100 possessions than an average defense, or less than 1 made basket. So that would be less than 8 mistakes more than normal for a game or say about 2 per quarter. So to get to average or better on defense, you could do it if everyone made 1 less “mistake” per half or even 2 guys made 1 less per quarter.
Good breakdown, Joe!
I see RW really focussing on these little tweaks and making a big leap in Asst./Turn ratio and his defensive assignments.(Hopefully his overall B-ball IQ!)
If RW could develope a pick and pop similar to D-Will, especially with KD and Harden there for the kick-out three…look out scoreboards in the league!(Now we just need a little interior Defense, huh?!)
If Presti didn’t take a PG in THIS draft, that tells me that RW has a way to go before reaching his “full” potential, and the coaches/team/managment belives in him, therefore…I will belive in him.
Only 94 more days…
Another issue to look at is that, as Crow has pointed out, we have no real control to measure Westbrook against. While we are looking at missed opportunities or defensive “mistakes,” we don’t have a good look at how many/what kind of mistakes the average starting PG would make. Perhaps just as useful could be comparing Westbrook’s data to whomever he is playing against. Is his man making fewer mistakes than himself? Is the average PG more or less likely to make mistakes against his man?
This could be especially useful now while you are charting him against Chauncey, a player considered good on defense and very savvy.
Man that was an excellent read. Great stuff.
Hey, happy to be back on the Daily Thunder! Man, Joe this is a good read and can’t wait to see what else you got on Russ.
This kind of stuff is what hooked me into Joe’s blog pre-DailyThunder. And then Royce caputured the “feel and flavor” so well. Then you top it off with other fans who break down the info. I would imagine that I’m not the only one who’s worn out their F5 key refreshing the page so often.
@Keith
I was thinking about something along those lines this morning. Like, when Westbrook goes out, how does Livingston do against similar competition. But maybe you are right, maybe it would be better to go head to head separate comparisons with RW at Chauncey and then Chauncey at RW….
Thanks for the kind words everyone.
Another thing I noticed is that if you watch that Deron Williams video, he notices that the big man isn’t showing out. What he means is that the big man (who was guarding Boozer) would step up into the lane that Deron wanted to take. When PJ was the coach and had us playing so much zone the Thunder never “showed” on defense like that, they just sagged back like in the video. But now with Scotty and his program, the Thunder defending big was usually “showing”. Krstic or Nick or Jeff usually take that extra hop step to sort of impede the PG and then quickly retreat and try and guard the roller….when the big shows it hopefully gives the defending little guy a chance to fight through the screen and catch up on D.
But, our little guy RW has to work hard to fight through the screen aggressively….
Great creativity, I really appreciate it. I see other blogs lulling to sleep this time of the year.
Especially if you eventually look at interior D perhaps in the upcoming season it might be interesting to check which players “covered” a mistake that normally would lead to a score or at least a high percentage shot. I would guess Collison was the leader in the past but will it stay that way?
@Keith
We agree next season is big for Brooks.
He’ll have to show command and results, not just give encouraging words and show blue collar humility and work ethic.
Is it you need an above average coach usually or always to be above average? I haven’t studied a long list but I’d say at least usually.
These are the 3 best triplets that played a decent amount of minutes:
N. Krstic N. Collison T. Sefolosha
N. Krstic T. Sefolosha K. Weaver
N. Collison T. Sefolosha K. Weaver
A tight group of 4 guys, all role players.
How would you complete the lineups and would you try to use these more or just chalk it off to small samples?
I might do the following
N. Krstic N. Collison T. Sefolosha and Westbrook Green
N. Krstic T. Sefolosha K. Weaver and Westbrook Durant
N. Collison T. Sefolosha K. Weaver and Westbrook White
And then look at the same lineups with Harden for one of Sefolosha or Weaver.
The first lineup is big, the second small but with a 7 footer anchor, the third small without a 7 foot anchor.
the 3 best triplets, not counting guys gone or probably gone
@Crow
I’m always a bit suspicous of looking at combos like that, mainly because when those rotation players are on the court, they are likely facing the other team’s rotation players as well. Add to that, the fact that those groups are all pretty defense oriented and and that they are likely not playing the other team’s best player (with Durant on the bench), and it is pretty easy to see how the data could tell a false story.
That said, the team does not have the dramatic let-downs that some other teams have when their main guy – like Kobe or Lebron – sits down to rest. I don’t know if this means that Durant is not quite there yet, or if Sefolosha and Weaver just make it up on the other end of the court. Either way, I like that the team’s bench is solid on D, AND that Kirstic was in two of those three triplets.
Also, that Kirstic/Collison combo caused a lot of problems for teams last year while Durant and Green were both out. I believe the team started Kirstic, Collison, Sefolosha, Weaver and Westbrook, with Wilkins and a few others contributing off the bench.
I’d have to look it up to be sure, but I think this was when the guys went on a win streak. Green came back first (and played some at the 3 spot) and the wins kept comming. But, when Durant returned, things went south. Clearly, Durant is our best player and deserves to be on teh court, but having so many scrapy, motivated defenders on the court at once must be really tough for teams to handle. I’d also say that having three, mistake-prone young players on the court all at once (i.e. RW, Green and KD) is probably part of the problem – a problem that will fade next year as they all gain more experience.
It also seems to me that the Collison/Sefolosha/Weaver trio should be substituted in together fairly often to replace Green/Durant/Harden. One set gives the team elevated offense while the other provides nasty defense – a full rotation like that also brings in energy while you work around your rotations at the 1 and 5, where depth is an issue.
Just a thought
I’d love to see a scrimage between Westbrook/Harden/Durant/Green/Kirstic and Livingston/Weaver/Sefolosha/White/Collison just to see what happens. Me thinks the second squad might surprise.
Your cautions early in your remarks are appropriate Bryan.
I wasn’t necessarily saying these lineups would become the top ones but I do think they should be in the mix for trying more vs the more standards ones (hopefully a relative short smart mix- can’t try everything or if you do then you aren’t showing much judgment). 2 young shooter/scorers may or may not be enough offense but 3 as you say can often be too much, for the defense. This may be why they eventually need a vet scorer who can play defense too. It is a lot about good coaching now. And GM player blending skills.
Flip Harden to the second squad I think they might win about as often.
YES, MR WESTBROOK IS OUR POINT GUARD OF THE FUTURE, HOW CAN ANYONE DENY THE CHEMISTRY WITH HIM AND KD?????