Defensive Box Scores: Lakers-Wolves

Patrick has charted all kinds of details for every play of the Lakers-Wolves NBA 2003-04 Western Conference Finals series and assigned defensive responsibility for field goal attempts, free throws, and turnovers. Admittedly many instances require subjective evaluation, and frequently the credit/blame is split between two players or even allocated to the "Team" as a whole.

Explanations: (all stats reflect assigned responsibility to a player).
FGM - Field Goals Made
FGA - Field Goals Attemped
FTM - Free Throws Made
FTA - Free Throws Attempted
T/O - Forced Turnovers (whether actual steals, charges taken, pressed bad passes, travels induced, etc.)
Pts - Points Allowed
RTG - a rough "points per 100 possessions" allowed number for a specific defender.

Please note the RTG is not currently adjusted by the quality of the opposing player guarded, although this is likely to happen in the future!

Lakers player defensive performance

Player	FGM	FGA	FTM	FTA	T/O	Pts	RTG
Cook	0	3	2	2	0.5	2	46
Rush	4	16.5	6	6	2	14	66
George	21.5	51	4	8	10.5	49	75
Team	15.5	32	2	2	13	36	78
Malone	40	94	14	17	16	98	83
Fisher	16	41.5	11	12	7	47.5	89
Payton	25	62	12	15	8.5	70.5	92
Bryant	27.5	57.5	17	17	11.5	77	101
O'Neal	26	60	29	35	3.5	82	105
Medvedenko	16	28.5	6	8	0	39	123
Walton	1	1.5	2	2	0.5	4	142
Fox	7.5	8.5	3	3	3	21	165

82games series defensive MVP: Karl Malone!
Matched up primarily with Garnett, Karl did a fabulous job, limiting the free throws, while leading the team in forced turnovers and holding the T'Wolves to a meek 42.5% FG shooting.

Timberwolves player defensive performance

Player	FGM	FGA	FTM	FTA	T/O	Pts	RTG
Hassell	13.5	37.5	11	16	8.5	39	74
Team	11.5	25.5	1.5	1.5	10	27.5	76
Johnson	14	28.5	10	27	5	38	85
Sprewell	24	62.5	13	14	7.5	67	88
Olowokandi	18.5	38.5	13	29	5.5	50	89
Hoiberg	15.5	36.5	4	7	3.5	39	91
Martin	10.5	24.5	2.5	5.5	2	27	94
Garnett	47.5	96.5	19	25	11.5	116	98
Szczerbiak	18	45	11	19	5.5	58.5	100
Madsen	13.5	25	10	22	4	39	103
Miller	6.5	10.5	8	14	1.5	21	119
Cassell	9	16.5	5	6	1.5	27	132
Trent	1	1	0	0	0	3	300

For the Timberwolves, Hassell played solid defense, but Johnson's good RTG is deceptive -- it came out because Shaq missed so many free throws awarded on Johnson's ticket! Szczerbiak's numbers look okay (40% FG allowed) until you realize he gave up 11 three-pointers!

-- How does the full charting compare to the "Counterpart Defense" statistics?

Here are the counterpart stats for the same series, with the Charted RTG ('cRTG') for comparison purposes:

Lakers player COUNTERPART statistics

Player	FGM	FGA	FTM	FTA	T/O	Pts	RTG	cRTG
Cook	0	3	2	2	0	2	52	46
Rush	7	23	6	6	3	22	77	66
Medvedenko	8	19	6	8	4	22	83	123
George	28	66	4	8	6	65	86	75
Malone	49	101	11	14	21	112	87	83
Bryant	35	74	18	18	17	93	94	101
O'Neal	17	48	30	36	5	64	94	105
Payton	29	68	14	17	5	79	98	92
Fisher	18	40	11	12	9	54	100	89
Walton	2	5	2	2	0	6	103	142
Fox	7	9	3	3	2	20	163	165

Timberwolves player COUNTERPART performance

Player	FGM	FGA	FTM	FTA	T/O	Pts	RTG	cRTG
Szczerbiak	25	73	10	18	8	67	75	100
Martin	10	27	3	6	3	25	77	94
Madsen	11	22	8	20	6	31	86	103
Olowokandi	13	29	13	29	4	39	87	89
Johnson	13	25	10	27	4	36	90	85
Hoiberg	15	32	4	7	4	37	95	91
Hassell	20	44	11	16	8	56	95	74
Garnett	40	81	19	25	11	100	98	98
Sprewell	38	83	15	16	12	104	102	88
Trent	0	0	2	2	0	2	111	300
Miller	6	9	9	15	1	21	131	119
Cassell	12	21	3	4	2	33	134	132

Analysis: the majority of players have similar results for the RTG ratings on the "auto-defense" -- particularly those with substantial defensive possessions to count, but there are several notable exceptions, including Szczerbiak (75 counterpart versus 100 charted), Madsen (86 vs 103), Hassell (95 vs 74) and Sprewell (102 vs 88).

The big differences are likely to come mainly from one type of situation: when an opposing player drives past a perimeter defender to encounter the big men underneath. With the counterpart defense we charge the outcome of that possession (barring a block or foul) to the perimeter defender, whereas with real charting Patrick is often giving 1/2 or even full responsibility on the play to the interior defender(s).

Consequently real charting shows less shots against PG, SG, SF types and more shots against PF, C types. Now many people who have played the game of basketball will argue that this is the right way to do it (Dean Oliver in the excellent Basketball on Paper elaborates on charting individual defense at length).

Still, this leads to an imbalance perhaps in defensive ratings if the interior defenders are facing higher degree of difficulty in stopping a player on help defense versus their own one-on-one play. Likewise the perimeter players may be benefitting from not being charged full value when getting beaten off the dribble.

Unfortunately without a much greater supply of charted games to compare, we are hard pressed to get a good sense of the full effects. Of course in terms of our package of opposing defense numbers, we also like to consider rebounds allowed and per minute averages in creating the PER based ratings.

For now we'll rest with the belief that actual charting is preferable, but the counterpart defensive stats appear to hold their own reasonably well, with presumably better strength over the course of a full season than in a short series.