Here's the truth. Adelman's system works on offense. But on defense, it does not. Period. If we could have Adelman run the offense, with Van Gundy's schemes and focus on defense, we would dominate. Which brings me to my point. There used to be a time in football when one coach oversaw both the offense and the defense, as in basketball now. That time has come and gone in football, and that time may have come and gone in basketball as well. Though basketball is a more fluid game than football, with the same players playing on both offense and defense, there is still a need for coaches with unique expertise on each side of the court. I remember a quote by Batier after Van Gundy left, how even with Van Gundy gone, they could still hear the basics that he had drilled into their heads when they were playing defense - don't allow anything in the middle, funnel players to certain points, protect against penetration at all costs. I like Adelman's offensive schemes. On offense, every team should try to get the easiest, most high percentage shots they can. Those are usually acquired by proper movement and spacing. He clearly is a master at teaching that, like Sloan - but without the dirty play and cheating. But we need the ying to the yang. We need Van Gundy's tireless focus on defense fundamentals and team defense. And we need Adelman's offensive system. Even if Van Gundy just came in and worked with the team during pre-season, we need that help. We need both.
Contrary to popular belief Adleman has had teams that were very good in the defensive category :grin: But you can't expect a team to play good defense with when 3 of your starters don't know how.........(Martin/Budinger/Scola) If we had players that were actually good on defense then our problem would be solved.
Hmm really thought this was going to have something to do with eating babies.... Very misleading title.
The reason a two-coach system works in football is because there's two sets of personnel. In football, a defensive coordinator coaches the defensive players and an offensive coordinator coaches the offensive players. A third coach (head coach) is generally required to oversee the direction of the team as a whole. In basketball, if your theory were put into practice, you'd have one person coaching players on one thing and another person coaching the same players on a different thing. In order to properly proportion the amount of focus players would have on each respective coach's teachings, there would probably have to be a third (head) coach (to oversee the direction of the team as a whole). Seems like it would work at first glance, but then you realize that it's basically what teams are doing already - the head coach oversees the team's direction and his assistants coach in more specialized areas. What you're talking about, purely speaking, is more along the lines of hiring two "Head" coaches. The problem with that, in my opinion, would be that two captains can't steer the same ship.
So... when one of them want to, say, go with Kevin Martin for more offense and the other wants to go with Courtney Lee for better D, who wins? .
I'd love to see the two coach together each operating within their field of expertise. They are polar opposites - one a great offensive mind , the other a great defensive mind. But I'd like to point out that this team wasnt as bad defensively as many think - their help defense and rotations were very good from the ASB on. Last night they shot ~30% against one of the best teams in the NBA and took it to OT because of their defense. When Adleman had Yao on the court , they were still an elite defensive team - echo JVG ? Maybe. But they were able to shots to Yao and while he may not have blocked a whole lot - he changed many many more. As good a man to man defender as Chuck Hayes has been all season - If you replace him with a legit shot blocker in the middle , the rest of the team is able to play tighter defensively knowing that they have help in the middle. It makes everyone better. Just think of playing Hayes at the PF spot with a shotblocking 7 footer behind him as an example ....
Not really. The only reason why his team looked good on defense his first 2 season he was here was because he inherited JVG's roster that was ranked top 5 for most of the time he was here. What happened when Rick started to get the guys the run his system? I have no beef with him but I feel Rick got too much credit for the team's defensive performance in his first 2 years.
he didnt get those guys to run his system, he was given different players year in and year out. Also, we have no idea how this team would be if it was built the way it was supposed to play - with a HUGE player clogging the middle, and a good backup coming off of the bench. We would do more half-court sets, which in turn would bring BOTH teams scoring down per game, and although the system going thru Yao would generate less pts, as time went by and the team got used to it, better % shots would ultimately be taken, and ball movement would still be good. Scola would be a better defender where he was stationed, but have less responsibility if a player got by him because help would be at the basket. Now, there is NO good help when it comes to height and defensive athleticism. Hill doesnt defend, Miller doesnt defend, 2Pat still needs good jump timing for blocks, and Hayes defends but has no height so although he is good for back-to-the-basket plays or charges, he's not good for having to catch someone elses man. This team was going to have a hard time defending with its size and personnel, neither of which have to do with Adelman. RA isnt a great defensive coach, but oh well, JVG sucked on offense. Both also have bad personnel for those duties, but I think JVG shouldve done better on offense than RA has with his ppl on defense. I bet you if this team was healthy with Yao in the middle and a few players NOT playing, we'd be looking at scoring right at 99-100 a game, and allowing 94 or so. Thats pretty good defense and offense, and no one would be complaining.
A lot of Van Gundy's defensive sets involved wings, instead of cutting and setting screens, staying back to cut down on transition baskets, for one thing. Also, you'll never be an elite defensive team with a 6'6" center, Brad Miller on your roster, and Kevin Martin and Scola starting, even with Van Gundy coming back.
...for Preventing the Children of Poor People in Ireland From Being a Burden to Their Parents or Country, and for Making Them Beneficial to the Public.
Adelmans Teams DRTG rank by year: Portland 89 - 14th 90 - 4th 91 - 3rd 92 - 2nd 93 - 4th 94 - 12th Golden State 96 - 21th 97 - 28th Sacramento 99 - 18th 00 - 10th 01 - 7th 02 - 6th 03 - 2nd 04 - 21st 05 - 23rd 06 - 12th Houston 08 - 2nd 09 - 4th 10 - 17th 11 - 20th 10/20 seasons with at least a top 10 defense. 7/20 season with a top 5 defense.
exactly, i'd also like to say, if we play chase at the small forward and martin at shooting guard, we wouldn't be good defensively in any system....
There is nothing modest about your proposal, although I Wish it came true. Both of them, together:grin:
Don't bother. This has been stated thousands of times on this board, but when people make up their mind about something, all the stats in the world wouldn't be able to sway them.
it's been brought up a lot before...and the RA sucks defensively is overrated...you gotta have the right players to be good defensively. JVG had them.
