Basically, the question is, who will benefit most from a disciplined coach and system? I'd have to say it'a a tie between Francis and Griffin. Griffin used to jack up shots like crazy in the first Q, just because he was desperate to get "his" while he was in there. That will change. We'll see Francis hopefully improving tremendously on the fastbreak as well as defense, and that will lead him to become a more complete and team-oriented player.
I definately think Eddie. JVG must be licking his chops at the thought of a 6-9 and a half guy with athleticism on defense.
Really? He doesn't look any taller than MoT or Tmo in this picture, and I thought they were both 6-9 or so. Did he grow?
I know what you mean, and this picture is AFTER he was reported to have grown to 6'10, I think by a Rockets assistant, and reported to us through Clutch I believe. Just for the record, MoT and T-Mo are closer to 6'10 than 6'9, and Griffin doesn't have the greatest posture in the world. I am, however, sure that Eddie Griffin is over 6'10. It shows when he's up against the Garnetts and Webbers of the league.
Didn't EG start because the team was allowing too many 1Q points to their opponents? Anyway... I think Mo will have the most improved from last your. Frankly, I have no clue how EG will act this your. I hope he does. I'll be interested in whether our front 2 will be signifantly better. Old habits are not easy to break. When Brown came in, we started seeing the crap that we b!tched about in the previous year.
codell - No argument...no weakside movement is not a characteristic specific ONLY to ISO. However, your definition: A 1on1 clear out with 4 offensive players weakside is incredibly narrow. Just because there is an additional player strong side (usually at the arc for the Rockets) does not mean you can exclude calling this an ISO. But don't take my word for it. Here's one from RT himself prior to the 2001-02 season on what he was expecting from the (then) new NBA zone... "Mostly, what we've seen in exhibition has been when they see one of our good players maybe getting into an isolation play, a shifting, but they don't double-team, they run a guy across the floor and he sort of plays -- sort of zones up our player. It's different than it was before for us...." http://www.nba.com/preview2001/tomjanovich_call_011017.html Or how about a direct quote from RT's assitant Jim Boylen from last season... " The iso will still be the bread and butter but what we've been doing more is running pick and rolls because teams are switching our pick and rolls a lot. So we get an isolation with a not as good defender, usually a bigger defender, on one of our smaller guys. And then we create the situation from there. All we do with the pick and roll usually is create situations...." http://www.nba.com/rockets/fans/boylenanswers_010404.html Even on PnR's they're trying to ISO! That's not me that Coach Boylen. Or how about a Feigen/Chronicle description of a last season loss to the Grizz? "Even in the fourth quarter, the Rockets had to allow Mobley to go back to the old isolation game." Perhaps an April 23, 2003 quote from The Sporting News... "Tomjanovich needs a better system, one that incorporates what Yao Ming can do, and not one that relies so heavily on isolation for Francis." http://www.sportingnews.com/voices/sean_deveney/mailbag/20030423.html And dribbling to setup a defender isn't ISO? Not according to CNNSI... ..."17% of Michael Jordan's offense comes on isolation plays, during which he tends to take two or three dribbles before pulling up for a jumper." http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/features/1998/weekly/980601/cyberscouting.html You can define it however you want, but 1 player dribbling while 4 others stand motionless is ISO in my book. And other than some low post passes, there were no major differences between 2001-02 & 2002-03.
And a pick'n'roll that consists of the ballhandler going by his pick, waiting until the defender catches back up with him, and then shooting over the defender afterwards is not really a pick'n'roll.
Those who are saying E Griffin will be like Camby under JVG...do you mean he will block far less shots than pre-JVG, and not show any improvement in other areas until his 3rd year under Gundy?
Gater, Then your definition of ISO is wrong. Flat out. Mainly because what we did last year was destinctly different from what we did in years past, and that is, we focused more on the two man game. Call it a two man ISO if it makes you feel better (we can then call a triangle a 3 man ISO), but calling it an ISO is not correct. Again, you can say it smelled like an ISO because the end result off the two man game was a broken play or too much dribbling, much like the result of the TRUE ISO we ran in years pass. You can call my defintion narrow, but my defintion is right and yours is wrong (no movement from the 4 other plays on the court does not make the play an ISO; an ISO is about positioning, not what the ball handler does and not based on player movement). That would be like calling a PnR with 2 weakside and 3 strongside a triangle. They are similar in set but no one could ever confuse the two. Look up the definition of an ISO on NBA.com Gater. It will clearly say that an ISO is 4 mean weakside (regardless of movement) and 1 man with the ball strongside. This can not even be argued IMO because this rarely occured last year unless it was due to a broken play, which the coach obviously has little to do with. The season before last, we did indeed run true ISOs. Calling what we ran last year an ISO is flat out incorrect and like I said before, its just another way for the ARC to say that Rudy's offense never changed, which is absolutely incorrect. Again, call it a technicality, but defining what we ran last year as an ISO is wrong. No one, NO ONE, last year called Dallas's offense ISO like, yet (as HP pointed out earlier last season (BTW, I didnt originally believe this to be true until I watched a couple of Mavs games and found it to be accurate)) Dallas' offense is remarkably similary to ours. The only big difference is, Steve is not Nash and Eggie is not Dirk (execution). Last, I can't help it if you can't tell the difference between our offenses the last 2 years. There were very big differences, namely the inclusion of PnRs on almost every play (even the double high pick) and the incorporation of Yao. As far as your quotes: Rudy quote - Was our offens not changed once Yao came into camp and as the season progressed??? The offense we ran in preseaon was very different from what we ran during the regular season. This is obvious so a quote from Rudy in the pre-season doesn't hold alot of water when addressing what actually happened during the season when Yao became a big part of the offense. Boylen quote - Quite frankly, I think Boylen says ISO because the Rockets intent is to get a mismatch off the PnR and to isolate the mismatch, but not by sending 4 players weakside. Feigan quote - Feigen picking out what happened in a narrow time period in one game, does not mean than we ran an ISO offense. I am not saying that our plays didn't get broken and that we ended up with an ISO out of necessity (with the ball handler making this decision and not the coach). To me, this is what happened in that Memphis game. Sportingnews quote - I can't help it if the writer (who btw doesn't cover this team exclusively) doesn't know what an ISO is. Just because a writer misuses basketball terminology, does not make it in an ISO (if we had a dollar for every time a writer stated something about our team that was totally out of whack, then we would be rich). CNNsi quote - I can tell you that CNNsi is totally wrong on that. The triangle offense never bogs down into a true ISO situation, unless it was Jordan time for a last shot/clutch situation. To say that Jordan was in an ISO 17% of the time is flat out wrong. Again, this is coming from a writer though. Here is what I am going by as far as defining an ISO: From NBA.com (http://www.nba.com/canada/Basketball_U_on_Strongside_We-Canada_Generic_Article-18070.html) From NBA.com (http://www.nba.com/canada/Basketball_U_on_Halfcourt_Offe-Canada_Generic_Article-18058.html)
Your argument to define ISO by floor postioning is pure BS. In the NBA, there are BOTH one player and two player PnR ISO's. This is the last paragraph from your own first ink: "The Two-Man Game: With the two-man game, three players stand on the weak side of the floor, bringing their defenders with them. The other two players will be involved in the isolation (usually one in the post, one on the perimeter) where they will play a game of two-on-two on the strong side of the floor." It's a two man ISO...right there in your link Don't believe sportwriters? How about coaches? How about a 2 man ISO from Coaches Corner? http://www.coachesclipboard.net/Isolation2.html How about the website of a former Sonics coach? "In today's offensive minded game, teams are going more often to the well to isolate their best players in one on one clear outs and two man pick and roll games. The SOS Defense can effectively handle these isolation sets through a number of methods such as Baseline Disruption..." http://www.bbhighway.com/Talk/Coaching_Box/Clinics/BKloppenburg/SOSIsolationSets.asp Got that? "These isolation sets. If it ain't a triangle and it ain't ball movement and it ain't player movement...there's not a helluva lot left. The sum total of what you purport was a "new" offensive non-ISO set was Francis taking 1.4 fewer shots per 42 minutes and having the fewest assists per 42 minutes in his career. BTW, I have 70+ 2002-03 games on tape and about 20 or so 2001-02. I'm too busy now, but I will get them if I have to. Dumping the ball into Yao was the only significant change. And even then, the Rox stood around motionless as Yao went 1on1 late in the clock. That's ISO, too. Or did you not see it?
Gater, My arguement to define ISO by floor positioning is not BS. ISO is 4 players weakside and 1 player with the ball strong side. Its where the players are positioned not what they do with the ball or anything else. Its how a set starts, not how it finishes (after all, the player's control how the play finishes with their Bball IQ and not the coach). Execution my friend. As far as pointing out two man ISOs, isn't that exactly what I said in my last post?? Call it a two man ISO or a PnR. But don't call it just an ISO, because that implies that 1 player is strongside with the ball and 4 players are weakside (like we ran prior to last year). I know it sounds like I am being a nerd about it or brining up semantics, but I can't help it. Furthermore, my whole poing in originally brining this up, was to defend Rudy against the "Rudy ran ISO last year just like the year before" and "Rudy is hard headed and never changed his offense". For christ's sake, other teams run "two man ISO" too. Yet, hardly anyone calls it that (this is why I made the remark about calling it a two man ISO if it makes you feel better). IMO, people on this board calling last year's offense ISO is just a cop out for blaming everything on Rudy. As far as Francis goes, please don't blame Francis's limitations as a PG on the offensive sets. He has had bad A/TO rations in three different offensive philosophies that Rudy has implemented or ran. Quit blaming Rudy for Francis' shortcomings. After all, the same philosophy turned Nash into an All-Star. How many different offenses do we have to run before we realize that Francis just can't efficiently execute a system??? Also, re-read your quote from the Sonics, "one on one clear outs". This is what we did 2 years ago. This is not what we did last year. Please don't tell me that you think the PnRs and dumping it into Yao were clear outs. IMO, there is a difference between a clear out and weakside players standing around. Again, I don't automatically associate no weakside movement with an ISO system like you do. When you look at your tapes, look at the double high pick that Rudy implemented, look at the times when Mo was in the game and he was at the elbow with Cat or Steve running a curl or even look at the times when we actually had three players strongside (a 3 man ISO ) before the dump into Yao (be on the look out for cutters too). Afterwards, I hope you will be able to see the difference between the 2001-2002 offense and last year's offense.
So Rudy called a play that wasn't an iso, but the end result was an iso. If you want to go back to the original post in the thread, the point was that there is no evidence that Francis and Mobley would function well in an offense that doesn't run isolation plays extensively. When the Rockets tried other things, the plays were often broken resulting in an iso. ....which you basically agree with.
I got a little confused now. I mean if ISO is just one man on the strong side and 4 men on the weak side, then what would it be if the ballhandler stands on the top of the key, with two teammates stand on the right yet the other two on the left side of the court. What would it be? Not an ISO, not a two man ISO. Would that be a, five man ISO?
