Can an elite defensive PG impact a defense as much as an elite center?

[Im Still Ballin]

I was reading some older threads about Jason Kidd and came across an interesting discussion about the defensive impact of point guards. Some posters argued that it's not as important as interior defense/paint protection/rim protection from bigs.

Defense isn't that important for a PG...

Great defending PG’s don’t lead top ranked defensive teams. It just doesn’t happen. Of course having a great defending pg is nice but it isn’t a crucial part of a championship team. Athletic defensive big men and wings have a greater impact.

Perimeter defense isn't very impactful.

For big men offense = defense in importance but for guards offense >> defense.

Nash is a way more impactful player than Payton in their primes even though the gap on offense is smaller than the gap on defense.

With as many pick and rolls and willingness to just switch, it's very easy to get a Gary Payton type defender off you in this era and instead attack a weaker defender.

Some posters provided responses:

completely wrong. Nba history is full of guys like Iverson, Lillaird, Hardaway, KJ, etc. that could take over a game offensively. You need to be able to defend those guys. Defense is important at every position.

I love the line "Defense isn't that important at PG." I would say C and PG are the most important positions to have good defense, especially if your PG can get in the passing lanes. That's a hot hot take, tho. It shows up on youtube. I've heard it too much. haha. People forget about Nash and how everyone shit on him because he'd give up career highs to everyone, even when he was MVP leading great teams. Another proof of defense being important at PG is the fact that a guy like Nate Robinson can be pretty darn good, but he is relegated to a 6th man energy guy because he's too small to play D properly.

Big wings get a lot of love on D cuz they can do a lot, but especially in this era, most wings aren't agile enough to switch onto PGs. Thus, PG D is important. They just gave Marcus Smart DPOY, in this trash no-D era. Back when people could actually press, like J Kidd days, it was even more important.

I've never understand that line of reasoning. You want to cut off the head of the snake if you can. Would you rather a lamp-post like Steve Nash who will let you get anything you want, or a Gary Payton who will harass you for 40 minutes and make it harder to make plays?

That doesn't reduce the importance of a point guard defender. Do you want to let Lillaird attack your point guard without even needing to force a switch or have a point guard that the Heat want to force to switch onto Jimmy Butler? The heavy switching of today just makes it important that everyone can defend and the weak link gets picked on.

That's normally true in terms of big men having more defensive impact but Kidd was a special case. He had the Nets ranked #1 in defense in 2002 and 2003. They were ranked 23rd in 2001 before he got there. So kidd literally took a trash defense and made them the best D in the whole NBA. That's absurd defensive impact.

Kidd nets were the top ranked defense. And it certainly wasn't because of their centers unless you think Jason Collins was anchoring it lol. Kmart and Kidd were the only ones locking shit down.

I’m not sure Kidd didn’t lead the top defense himself somewhere along the way. If it wasn’t the top, it was damn near there. When I started reading your post, I thought that’s where you were going with it.

It had to be the Nets, Pistons, Spurs, and pacers in the top spots those years.

My own response was the following:

I'd be cautious to throw out absolutes like PG defense doesn't matter. There are general rules, but there are players who break them.

Tpols' point about the Nets defense getting dramatically better is interesting. It's not even just about the position the defender plays: great communication and instruction can help the whole team.

The scheme matters too. The Big Three Miami Heat leveraged their athleticism on the perimeter/wings to run a high-energy, rotation-heavy, frenzied defensive attack. They were elite and didn't have much if any quality rim protection.

This discussion came back to me while I looked over the numbers of Jason Kidd's effect on New Jersey. The Nets went from 23rd to 1st in defense; besides Kidd, they added Jefferson, Collins, and MacCulloch. And they were healthier.

2000-01 Nets: 100.0 ORtg (-3.0 rORtg); 105.5 DRtg (+2.5 rDRtg); -5.5 net rating; -5.30 SRS; 26-56 W/L
2001-02 Nets: 104.0 ORtg (-0.5 rORtg); 99.5 DRtg (-5.0 rDRtg); +4.5 net rating; +3.67 SRS; 52-30 W/L

Improvement: +4.0 ORtg (+2.5 rORtg); -6.0 DRtg (-7.5 rDRtg); +10.0 net rating; +8.97 SRS; +26 wins

It's not all Kidd, but he seems to be at the center of it all. The defensive ON/OFF numbers don't show it but the core pieces are more or less the same from the season prior. I don't think it was Todd MacCulloch because he was gone the next year and their defense was even better. And RJ and Collins were bench guys in that first season with Kidd.

Teams like Kidd's Nets, LeBron's Heat, Pippen's Bulls, and Payton's Supersonics are good examples of teams that were elite on defense while lacking a strong rim protector. The late '60s and early-to-mid '70s Knicks as well.

The NCAA D1 Houston Cougars are ranked 1st in the country on the latest AP poll and its defense is historically good. And they do it with aggressive trapping, help defense, and rotations. They don't have that classic rim protector but a swath of mobile and long guys who are versatile enough to defend multiple positions and situations.

Here's a great video about them:



There's always going to be elements of the game that the statistics cannot account for. It has a hard enough time trying to separate offense from defense while acknowledging the context of scheme/system, personnel, and lineups/rotations.

[Im Still Ballin]

Big men tend to be the most impactful on defense for two reasons:

1) They're protecting the paint (the most valuable area on the court)
2) They're involved in the most defensive possessions

Defense is reactionary because the offense has a much greater level of control over what happens during a possession. Things usually default to drop coverage and running shooters off the three-point line. Everything funneled to the big protecting the paint.

But there are things that a defense can do to force the issue and gain some degree of control. Ball screen coverage, help defense/doubles, pre-switching off the ball/matchups, etc.

So, to answer the title: Yes, I believe an elite defensive PG can impact a defense as much as an elite center. You just need the right scheme and personnel but most teams at the pro level don't run those types of systems. Most NBA players don't want to run around trapping PnRs hard, pressing up, and having to rotate so much.

[Reggie43]

No easily. Somebody like Gary Payton will never be a more impactful defender than Hakeem.

[iamgine]

Against certain matchups yes. Mutombo would be a lot less useful if your opposing PG and C is Curry and Looney.

[tpols]

There are some centers from the past that couldn't play today, with the best example being DPOY Eaton. Stiff guys could be played off the floor by the long range shooting and switches.

[FireDavidKahn]

Nope. Caveats always apply but for 99% of cases

A dominant defensive big is way more impactful to a defense then a defensive wing

While on the other hand

A dominant offensive wing is way more impactful to an offense then a great offensive big.

[tpols]

Nope. Caveats always apply but for 99% of cases

A dominant defensive big is way more impactful to a defense then a defensive wing

While on the other hand

A dominant offensive wing is way more impactful to an offense then a great offensive big.

Jokic and Kidd are unicorns offensively and defensively respectively.

[FultzNationRISE]

Jokic and Kidd are unicorns offensively and defensively respectively.

Lebron is their hybrid offspring.

[Im Still Ballin]

The one-number advanced metrics point to Caruso as being the best defensive guard in the NBA. I can't believe LA let him go. He's really good.

D-EPM: +3.3 points per 100 possessions impact (5th for players who've played at least 35 games)
D-DRIP: +2.9 points per 100 possessions impact (2nd)
D-LEBRON: +1.99 points per 100 possessions impact (11th)

D-EPM and D-DRIP have him as impactful as Wemby on defense this season.

[dankok8]

Of course not. Defensive bigs have way more impact. They protect the paint where the most valuable shots are and also contest way more shots in an average game than a defensive PG ever can. That's also why defense for a guard is way less important than offense but for a big, they are equally important if not defense being a bit more important actually.

[Duffy Pratt]

Without answering the question, I will just raise a couple of points in favor of the point guard:

1) Blocks, as a statistic, are overrated. A block either goes out of bounds, or to another player. Thus, a block is really nothing more than a glorified deflection. If the defending team recovers the ball, it results in a change of possession. Thus, the block statistic encompasses both deflections and steals. They are slightly more important because shots tend to come later in the shot clock. (Also, when people talk about Bill Russell’s greatness on defense, part of that greatness was his ability to block shots by tipping them to his teammates. His blocks were more frequently steals.)

2) The two main things that a point guard defender should be trying to do are to eat time off the shot clock and to force the pg to start the offense in the direction opposite from where he wants to go. Both of these impacts are subtle and would be nearly impossible to quantify.

Here are the NBA teams that have won two or more championships within a handful of years:

Mikan’s Lakers
Russell’s Celtics
Frazier/Reed’s Knicks
Havlicek/Cowen’s Celtics
Magic/Kareem’s Lakers
Bird’s Celtics
Isiah’s Pistons
Jordan’s Bulls
Hakeem’s Rockets
Shaq/Kobe’s Lakers
Kobe/Pau’s Lakers
Duncan’s Spurs
LeBron’s Heat
Curry’s Warriors

Six of those teams are built around small ball, with no great defensive rim protection (but perhaps still with excellent defensive centers like Cowens and Reed)

Only four have inside presences who dominated the paint on defense (Mikan, Russell, Hakeem and Duncan).

Kareem, Shaq, and Pau are more offensively oriented and were simply good on D (Kareem less and less as he aged). And Bird’s Celtics dominated the paint through sheer size of the three of them, without any great shot blocking.

[Im Still Ballin]

Of course not. Defensive bigs have way more impact. They protect the paint where the most valuable shots are and also contest way more shots in an average game than a defensive PG ever can. That's also why defense for a guard is way less important than offense but for a big, they are equally important if not defense being a bit more important actually.

You don't think there can be exceptions? A player's impact is limited by the players they play with and the system they play in. Nash goes to Phoenix, is surrounded by great finishers, and gets to monopolize possession and run the offense. His offensive impact skyrockets. Goes through the roof.

Can't the same be true for the defensive end of the court?

How many teams are willing to acquire the personnel to run a system that maximizes the impact of a defensive PG? In the NBA, barely any. The 2023-24 Houston Cougars are doing it at the NCAA D1 level. They have the #1 defense in the country and its historically strong, ranking as one of the best of the 21st century. Its ten-man rotation includes the following:

LJ Cryer (6'1" Guard)
Jamal Shead (6'1" Guard)
Emanuel Sharp (6'3" Guard)
J'Wan Roberts (6'7" Forward)
Damian Dunn (6'5" Guard)
Ja'Vier Francis (6'8" Forward)
Mylik Wilson (6'3" Guard)
Joseph Tugler (6'7" Forward)
Terrance Arceneaux (6'5" Guard)
Ramon Walker (6'4" Guard)

They trap/blitz ball screens excessively hard, recover, rotate, close out hard, and force a ridiculous amount of turnovers. Now, according to Basketball Reference's DBPM, Jamal Shead - a 6'1" PG - is the most impactful defender: +6.9 points per 100 possessions.

I know it's college, but it's still interesting.

I don't see why a generational defensive guard couldn't have a defensive impact appreciable to an elite defensive big if he played with the right personnel and in the right system.

[tpols]

You don't think there can be exceptions? A player's impact is limited by the players they play with and the system they play in. Nash goes to Phoenix, is surrounded by great finishers, and gets to monopolize possession and run the offense. His offensive impact skyrockets. Goes through the roof.

Can't the same be true for the defensive end of the court?

How many teams are willing to acquire the personnel to run a system that maximizes the impact of a defensive PG? In the NBA, barely any. The 2023-24 Houston Cougars are doing it at the NCAA D1 level. They have the #1 defense in the country and its historically strong, ranking as one of the best of the 21st century. Its ten-man rotation includes the following:

LJ Cryer (6'1" Guard)
Jamal Shead (6'1" Guard)
Emanuel Sharp (6'3" Guard)
J'Wan Roberts (6'7" Forward)
Damian Dunn (6'5" Guard)
Ja'Vier Francis (6'8" Forward)
Mylik Wilson (6'3" Guard)
Joseph Tugler (6'7" Forward)
Terrance Arceneaux (6'5" Guard)
Ramon Walker (6'4" Guard)

They trap/blitz ball screens excessively hard, recover, rotate, close out hard, and force a ridiculous amount of turnovers. Now, according to Basketball Reference's DBPM, Jamal Shead - a 6'1" PG - is the most impactful defender: +6.9 points per 100 possessions.

I know it's college, but it's still interesting.

I don't see why a generational defensive guard couldn't have a defensive impact appreciable to an elite defensive big if he played with the right personnel and in the right system.

Yea your main point is right. Outliers exist in every aspect of life. Kidd was one of them. Growing up playing ball it wasn't shot blockers that had me shook it was good defensive trapping.

A lot of great defenders stats are heavily impacted by their rebounding totals as well since the two are lumped together. Kidd is by far the best rebounding point guard ever though and that was a huge part of his impact. He wasn't stealing boards from teammates... just had a master nose for the balls trajectory.

It would actually be even crazier today given all the long rebounds from 3pt shots. And perimeter defense being valued at a premium.

[Im Still Ballin]

Without answering the question, I will just raise a couple of points in favor of the point guard:

1) Blocks, as a statistic, are overrated. A block either goes out of bounds, or to another player. Thus, a block is really nothing more than a glorified deflection. If the defending team recovers the ball, it results in a change of possession. Thus, the block statistic encompasses both deflections and steals. They are slightly more important because shots tend to come later in the shot clock. (Also, when people talk about Bill Russell’s greatness on defense, part of that greatness was his ability to block shots by tipping them to his teammates. His blocks were more frequently steals.)

2) The two main things that a point guard defender should be trying to do are to eat time off the shot clock and to force the pg to start the offense in the direction opposite from where he wants to go. Both of these impacts are subtle and would be nearly impossible to quantify.

Here are the NBA teams that have won two or more championships within a handful of years:

Mikan’s Lakers
Russell’s Celtics
Frazier/Reed’s Knicks
Havlicek/Cowen’s Celtics
Magic/Kareem’s Lakers
Bird’s Celtics
Isiah’s Pistons
Jordan’s Bulls
Hakeem’s Rockets
Shaq/Kobe’s Lakers
Kobe/Pau’s Lakers
Duncan’s Spurs
LeBron’s Heat
Curry’s Warriors

Six of those teams are built around small ball, with no great defensive rim protection (but perhaps still with excellent defensive centers like Cowens and Reed)

Only four have inside presences who dominated the paint on defense (Mikan, Russell, Hakeem and Duncan).

Kareem, Shaq, and Pau are more offensively oriented and were simply good on D (Kareem less and less as he aged). And Bird’s Celtics dominated the paint through sheer size of the three of them, without any great shot blocking.

Great post. The 1996-1998 Bull had an -5.1 rDRtg. That has got to be up there for three-year stretches. I believe Phil Jackson took a lot of coaching inspiration from his time playing under Red Holzman in New York. Ball pressure and generating turnovers was a huge part of Chicago's gameplan.

Reminds me of how Lonzo and Caruso had The Bulls 7th in defensive rating despite playing with Vucevic, LaVine, and DeRozan. Just blowing up screening actions, passing lanes, and generating live-ball turnovers for easy transition offense.

[Duffy Pratt]

The other thing off about this discussion is the limitation of C and PG.

Typically, the center will be the main defensive presence in the middle but not always. Parrish and McHale shared it. AD does worse when he actually has to defend a center (Joker and Embid). Then there is Towns/Gobert, Giannis/Lopez.

Even more common is the peripheral defender who is not the PG. Dumars was the best peripheral defender on the Pistons. CCP takes up the role for the Nuggets. The Bulls had three elite defenders on the outside. For the Rockets, it was Mad Max. For the Magic Lakers it was either Cooper or Scott.

I haven’t done an exhaustive list, but I don’t think there are many championship teams whose point guard is also the best perimeter defender (Frazier, West, Oscar, DJ, Holiday immediately come to mind, probably missing a few). But almost all of them had elite D on the perimeter, probably more often than there has been elite rim protection.