No Fouls! No 3s! What Went Wrong With the 2012-13 Jazz Defense

The failure of the Utah Jazz to make the 2012-13 playoffs can be summed up in three colloquial words: Their defense sucked.

They ranked 22nd in the NBA in defensive efficiency, the accepted measure. They allowed 104.3 pts per 100 possessions. No team worse than the Jazz at giving up points made the playoffs, while 12 of the 13 top teams in defensive efficiency did. (The outlier, oddly, were the Wizards, who finished 7th best on defense, behind Indiana, Memphis, San Antonio, Oklahoma City, Chicago, Boston and Miami — the league’s cream of the crop.)

As the Jazz approach the offseason, they must focus hard on a single objective: Improving their defense, Yes, some of their worst defenders (Howdy, Big Al) may leave, but at least half the roster and their head coach remains.

Thus, taking a close look at where the Jazz went wrong — how it is they gave up so many points — is critical for understanding what they need to do next, whether that’s bringing in the right players via the draft or free agency, the current coaching staff changing their focus, or bringing in a new coach or coaches.

However they get there, you can’t fix what went wrong until you know what broke.

Let’s start with some basic data, available on NBA.com. We can look at “zone” data: where the team gave up shots, and how well their opponents fared. It’s fruitful to both look at volume — whether the Jazz give up more shots from certain distances than other teams — and success.

Before we check out the numbers, let’s review what defensive-minded NBA analysts — and the league’s smarter teams — have concluded. Teams that play top defense need to either prevent teams from taking the most efficient shots — free throws, field goals within the restricted circle and corner 3s —  or to force them to shoot poorly from those distances.

Bad defensive teams tend to allow teams to take oodles of the best shots, and/or to hit a high percentage of them. The best defensive teams force teams to the least efficient shots, namely long 2s and midrange jumpers.

To the data:

What can we learn from the data? Where are the Jazz poorest?

• They foul way too much. Only six teams put their opponents on the appropriately-named charity stripe more than the Jazz. As longtime Jazz watchers know, this has been a problem for many years.
• Jazz opponents hit corner 3s — one of the game’s most efficient shots — at a rate higher than any other team’s opponents.
• The Jazz rarely force opponents to settle for long jumpers, the game’s least efficient shot.
• The Jazz allow a fairly high number of shots within the restricted area: dunks, layups and other very short field goal attempts.
• The Jazz gave up a higher than average proportion of offensive rebounds, opportunities which tend to lead to easier shots.

Where did the 2012-13 Jazz tend to do better than average on defense?

• While their opponents took many efficient, close shots, they didn’t shoot all that well from point blank range.
• While the Jazz allowed their opponents to shoot 3s at a very high rate, they didn’t allow them to take all that many such shots, limiting the damage from long-range.

It’s clear what the Jazz need to improve at: They need to foul less and to give up fewer shots from close range. They need to make it tougher for their opponents to hit corner 3s at a high rate. And they need to force opposing shooters into mid-range jumpers.

How? That’s a much trickier question. Clearly, a change in personnel would help: Most Jazz fans would guess that if Derrick Favors plays more minutes, opponents will be more likely to shy away from going to the rim. More minutes for the imposing Enes Kanter would likely also help in the paint, as would the departures of the under-sized and foul-prone Paul Millsap and the slow-footed Al Jefferson. A young point guard might fight off penetration more easily.

But several of those troubling indicators suggest the Jazz problem is also one of scheme — of coaching. Players can clearly be taught to foul less. They can be coached to not leave shooters open for easy corner 3s. They can be told to try and force the other team into 20-foot jumpers. Athleticism and makeup impact these traits, too, but coaching is a huge influence.

Perhaps the most critical national writing on the 2012-13 Jazz and their coaching staff came from Grantland’s Zach Lowe, who covered the team in March and had the following harsh words (even as he called the young, talented and cap-space-rich Jazz “the most interesting franchise in the league right now”):

There's also the fact that Utah's defense plays with a weird lack of discipline and unclear, unproductive rules. That's partly on Corbin…There are no clear, consistent rules to Utah's defense…The Jazz's inability to contain pick-and-roll ball handlers opens up shots everywhere — in the lane, from the corners, and from elsewhere around the arc. Utah opponents get a lot of the highest-value shots in the game. The Jazz have a weird tendency to rotate off shooters in the corners nearest the ball handler — a huge no-no on smarter teams.

Lowe makes clear that those flaws are only partly the coach’s fault. Some of the blame, perhaps even most, lies with their inexperienced youngsters making mistakes and their unathletic vets being simply too slow.

Big problems. Both with the players — and how they’re coached. Problems that must be addressed.

In my next look at defense, I’ll drill down into the data for specific players: Is it only those Jazzmen who are likely on their way out the door who fouled too much and allowed too many layups and open 3s? Which players show the most promise on defense?

To be continued…..