Laimbeer and Garnett were both skilled enough to move outside of the painted area. Not sure if you were old enough to remember Laimbeer, or watched BBall back then, but he was much more skilled than folks in this generation really know. He was dirty on the defensive end, but I'd say he was much more Vlade Divac than Dwight Howard on offense. I take Garnetts lack of offensive skill with the Celtics more of an attribute to his age than to his actual skill. He even played some SF early in his NBA career, and didn't score 20PPG for most of his career by being a non-offensive center. Both the 07-09 Celtics and the later year Bad Boy Pistons also ran very, very slow walk it up style of basketball as well. Very different style than the Rockets would ever fathom wanting to play in this era of the NBA. Probably the best comparison I can think of would be the 96-98 Bulls with Longley & Rodman, but again... they ran the triangle, and Rodman's passing out of the high post is very, very underrated. The Rockets offense is far from the half court sets that any of these teams ran, but to be honest when they ran the TT in the first 9 games, it wasn't pretty, but it could have looked a lot worse. Again, if I'm the coach (and the Rockets are thankful I'm not), my thinking is that I need a ton of practice time and maybe some meaningless minutes to run Howard and Asik through sets and build chemistry first before I ever roll out the TT in a meaningful game. I dont know exactly what type of sets you could run with the TT (Horns is probably the easiest for them to start with, and they run it now when D-Mo & Asik are on the floor), but you need practice and some game time before you throw it out the in a game. You really could be looking at changing the entire philosophy of how the Rockets play on both ends, and I think you and others have been a little too cavalier about how easy you think it is for the coach to implement on the fly.
I am 46 years old. I remember Laimbeer very well. I remember when he was drafted in the 3rd round and what a surprise it was that he could ball since he had zero athletic ability and drafted so late. I think in those days they had like a 7 round draft. It was pretty stupid. The Divac comparable for Laimbeer is interesting. I don't think he was nearly that good offensively. Divac had creative ability that Laimbeer did not have. Yes, Laimbeer did have a line-drive flat-footed jumper from the top of the key. And he hit it at key times. But he made his living being a defensive menace. As is Asik's. But the Longley/Rodman comparison to Dwight/Asik would seem to favor Dwight/Asik. Dwight is 10 times the player Longley was. Agreed. The offense wasn't pretty. But the truth is our half-court offense hasn't been real pretty all season because we don't have the shooters like we had last year. Jones and DMo can't shoot to save their life. Parsons shooting is very streaky. Garcia has disappeared for much of the season. And we don't have Carlos, PPat, and Morris able to knock down shots like we had for much of last season. Our half-court offensive cracks start showing up real bad against the playoff contenders. With that in mind, the TT combination is really a defensive lineup much more than an offensive one obviously. The objective with the TT lineup would be to get Bev scrambling up top and creating hell for the opposing playmaker, then your two wings overplaying for steals and scrambling on the opponent at the 3-point line, forcing the opponents into long-2's or trying to take it to the rim...with Dwight and Asik working in tandem on the bigs and patrolling the paint. We really didn't get to see very much of that at all at the beginning of the season because of: 1. Asik's desire and demand to be traded and subsequent laying an egg to try to force his way out. 2. Bev was dinged and missed several of those games. 3. Mchale cross-matched Dwight and Asik on the wrong guys. If I'm coaching I'm thinking about a high-pressure defense with Bev at the top chasing the playmaker and getting the opponent to hurry and scramble for shots so I can get my break going the other way. I would be emphasizing running off all missed shots and turnovers with the TT and minimizing setting up in the half-court. The sets are the same sets. You've just got to emphasize to Asik to get out of the way. If we run pick and roll, Asik is opposite side baseline, ready to drift in and finish if his man trails into the paint to help on the pick and roll action, or ready to be a safety valve outlet if it gets gommed up and we have to reset. He'd be doing the same thing he's doing now. Asik is not involved in the offensive action other than setting screens and getting out of the way so Harden can bring it. He's a trailer and a safety valve outlet for a reset. Professional coaches and players don't have to spend a lot of time doing stuff like that. Look at it this way. What have we done since Dwight went out of the lineup and we've had to deal with a whole new type of center in the middle? We've had to make adjustments. We don't have the pick and roll anymore like we had with Dwight. We don't have the postup action like we had with Dwight. But guess what...we are still playing well....probably even faster than we were with Dwight. These guys know what to do. And they also know how to play together. It's simply a matter of making it happen. And here's the last thing.....what do you think is going to happen when we are in a playoff series and Lamarcus/Lopez or Blake/DeAndre or Duncan/Splitter are just killing us? We're gonna have to make an adjustment on the fly or go home. That's basketball. You play and adjust, play and adjust, play and adjust. Adjustments at halftime. Adjustments in-between games. Play and adjust.
Maybe if you play a team like Portland and get blown out the first two games at home, then maybe you consider a twin tower lineup. I think I would first try small ball with Garcia at the two and Parsons sliding to the four.
I said name a championship winning team with two big men who are both offensively challenged. The Detroit Bad Boys...??? Both of those dudes could catch the ball and finish. And they played in a different era. Different style. And their conference was watered down. Just the same they don't count because both were better offensively than Asik and Howard isn't good enough offensively to cover for Asik (and you take Howard's offensive limitations out on TJ). I already said don't say Chicago. And I meant during their 2nd triple back championships... You must don't remember Horace Grant during the 1st 3. And did you say KG...??? Bwahahahahaha.... Stop it... Lmao...!!! But seriously. If Howard or Asik was a PF I would be perfectly fine with it. They may work together at moments but they will kill the team on the offensive end. The game slows down in the playoffs and shots at the basket can be hard to get and a team doesn't have to guard Howard or Asik if they are away from the basket and it clogs the lane if they are both in the paint. And plus you have Beverley (if he starts) as your point guard and he can run hot or cold offensively. What you're doing is begging for heavy isolation plays by Harden.
What's wrong with naming Chicago? And what's wrong with naming an aging Garnett with only a 17 footer left? Do you realize he shot like 28% at the rim in the playoffs that year? And what's wrong with naming Laimbeer and the bad boys as offensively challenged? After all, YOU ARE CALLING DWIGHT HOWARD OFFENSIVELY CHALLENGED! Which he is. He is limited in his offensive reportoire. Just like Laimbeer was limited and Garnett was limited in their offensive reportoire. They were offensively challenged. Now if you want to customize the definition to suit your own devices, then go ahead. But don't act like 08 Garnett and 89-90 Laimbeer and the bad boys were smashing world beaters offensively compared to Dwight. Laimbeer and KG couldn't finish at the rim if their life depended on it. Both of those guys got blocked ad nauseum the during the years I named. I'd take today's offensively challenged Dwight on a a post up to win the game before I'd take any of those guys throwing up a get lucky 18 footer or attempting to finish below the rim. LIKE JONES ISN'T OFFENSIVELY CHALLENGED???? He can't hit a shot that's not a dunk or layup.
If any of you are watching the Spurs/Mavs tonight on TNT, Steve Kerr basically described what the Spurs are doing a little while ago...which is what I think the Rockets should be doing when they play double big lineups. Spurs don't have Parker tonight. They started Duncan and Splitter up front with Leonard, Green, and Mills outside. Dallas started Dirk and Dally at the big spots with Marion, Ellis, and Calderon around them. Pretty good matchups. However if you watched closely you saw that what the Spurs did with that lineup was dog the crap out of the perimeter and let Splitter give Dirk hell. Then off the rebounds or turnovers the Spurs run it up and fire away. They don't wait for either big to get down and set up. They force tempo and either get 3 on 3 or a man advantage or even if it's 3 on 4, if they find the open 3-ball they take it. This is what they did to start the game and to start the second half. +8 in each half. with Duncan/Splitter going against Dirk/Dally. After that, they alternated Duncan/Splitter in and out. We'll see what they do at the end of the game. But this is basically what I'm advocating we do with a double big lineup of Asik/Dwight. If you go with it early, you can play D hard, overplay the D, overplay the passing lanes, let Dwight and Asik deal with the mess in the paint and get out and run and shoot. Not only do we have the 2 defensive bigs but we get Bev out top dishing out hell on the perimeter. You get him playing 94 feet, pick everybody up at half-court, force the action uptempo and you run the smalls out off the defense. Do that for a couple stretches....early in the game and early in the second half. Then you alternate Asik and Dwight in the middle. That's better than alternating Duncan and Splitter. Now...you say Jones can do the same thing. Well.....no he can't. Neither he nor DMo can take Dirk and stuff him. Dirk just obliterates everybody we got on the roster (including Dwight)....except for Asik.
Major difference is the Spurs bigs adjust to each other on the fly plus Duncan has a mid range shot so the paint isn't clogged up. If Dwight started posting up Asik would have to get out of the way so D12 could operate, and greatly decrease his effectiveness on the boards. Defensive-wise maybe against other duo-big teams but against a team with a legit stretch 4 that would be terrible.
Lazy shot chart is lazy. It undermines your argument if you post that shot chart when the NBA game is much more than 3 Zones. Here is something more indicative of Jones's shooting.
Just goes to show you how easy it is to modulate arguments. I could very well say "as a 40% three point shooter from the left corner, Terrence Jones can be an excellent floor spacing PF". The modulation of arguments & their stats can go both ways and this is a pretty good explanation of why it is so hard to have an enjoyable conversation with a stubborn, hard headed blogger with access to basketball reference or heaven forbid, synergy.
Ummmmm, I posted a table of Tim Duncan's shooting percentages on that "mid range shot" he takes. Nothing lazy about it. He's basically shooting 37% on all his attempts from 10 feet on out to the end of his range (inside the 3 point line a couple feet).
By the way, if you want the best shot charts, look at vorped.com. They actually break down a player's range by blocks including the 2 low blocks which are layup/dunk shots. If you pull up that shot chart for Jones you will discover that Jones is a 30% shooter from everywhere on the floor but the low blocks where he dunks. He's got a great dunk shot. But he can't hit anything else outside of the dunk shot.
Really? That's not what Duncan's shot chart says. And let me just clarify some things, you bring up some good points in your posts and it is apparent you have good basketball knowledge. But i think it's lazy to make statements such as the one above when we all know grouping shots in restricted zones and saying player "X" is bad from a certain range is just plain lazy. All of us fans know players have hot zones and these hot zones may not be represented correctly in a restrictive shot chart.
platypus, a shooting percentage is a shooting percentage. A guy may go 4 for 5 from one spot on the floor but it may represent only a tiny percentage of the shots he takes. In Duncan's case he takes a number of shots from 10 to about 19 feet. On all those shots he shoots right at 37%. Those numbers ain't lying to you. You can't extrapolate 60% on 5 shots from a certain spot on the floor into anything that makes sense if the player has taken 112 shots from other areas on the floor the same distance from the bucket and has shot crap on them. Timmy Duncan is a 37% midrange shooter this season.
I wonder how many shots Asik has even attempted at "mid range" probably close to zero. I see what you are saying, but Jones and Duncan both somewhat have a jumpshot that they practice and make. I'm not sure either Dwight or Asik even practices jumpshots from those distances let alone attempt them in a game.
Duncan has no mid-range???.... LOL. Maybe its in decline this year and last but some of you folks need to watch some NBA Classics. There is a reason why commentators refer to the "Patented Duncan Bank Shot". Shooting decline or not, Duncan is a threat to shoot from the high post, and teams WILL guard him if only out of respect. Look at where Duncan is getting most of his mid-range shots... The high post, and most of those come from the Parker/Duncan deadly pick and roll/pop. Any NBA junkie should know that the left high post is where Duncan likes to be, and operate. A shooting percentage is a shooting percentage, but with a legend like Duncan where everyone knows his game from almost 2 decades worth of games to watch, a shot chart gives a little more context & validation for what you see on the court.... which is, he's going to get his shots in his comfort zones, and his shooting percentage in those spots he's at on the court should validate what you see in game footage. -With Jones, I dont know why you'd even take a 2nd glance at his mid-range shot chart. There is so few shots taken that there is no point. Its not part of his game, and isn't a part of the Rockets offense. End of story. -With the 3 point shot, I think you can learn alot about where Jones' is trending and where his shots should come within the offense from 3 more and more. He seems to be getting way too many shots from the worst 3 point shot on the floor. That's important to note. Shooting only 17 threes from his best spot on the floor tells me that he needs to be in the corners more in their offense, and needs to stop finding himself floating out to the wings where his shots haven't been falling. Jones' shot chart sectioned off is only not important to folks wanting to make a case either way. I dont see why more validation about where he struggles and where he is successful isn't useful unless you have a motive to make a case.
Are you seriously going off of one game dude. Come on it does not work like that Holic. Also what worked in this game for the Spurs doesn't mean it will work for the Rockets. The Spurs are a well coached team that follows Pop instructions to the T. LOL man stop it, Dirk is a hard cover for damn near everybody not just Jones and Dmo. The Spurs do not always stop or contain him either... Bwhahahaah one freaking game.
