I was saying there are not as many scoring opportunities in soccer which makes parking the bus strategy all so worthwhile. A draw is strategically attractive at times. Or a lucky 0-1 by luck of the hard worker, of the efficient.
and most of the motion offenses are run by teams with a bunch of smart players who also have the dribbling and passing skills to put their IQ to work. there's a reason people usually just mention the spurs and warriors. those teams had incredible offensive talent that is about as easily replicated as having james harden for your iso's. it's not like iso teams don't win. plenty of them have. the rockets two titles are from giving hakeem as many post-ups as he could handle. the bulls can put all the fancy "triangle" labels they want on their offense, but at the end of the day it was mostly jordan scoring an obscene volume of unassisted shots. shaq and kobe weren't running a motion offense. the spurs pre-2014 championship offenses were nothing to write home about. the heatles just went back and forth with wade and lebron. the cavs entire finals offense was just lebron and kyrie iso's. if anything, history would seem to indicate that creating a perfect passing team is even more difficult than just finding great players and giving them the ball.
Hmmm we got rid of a generational talent. Now u want us 2 hopefully believe that a team with no superstar, two former star coming back from massive injuries, dudes who can't shoot, a budding center, a rookie coach and a shtty ass owner is gonna magically win the ring sometime in the near future just because u r a tru fan?
Oh, I'm not saying parking the bus is viable, it only is if you're playing for a draw or yeah, the situation. I'm saying that a team that is more counter focused would rely more on its defense than offense. I think how the Spurs played was more about slowing down the pace and forcing teams to play a half court game which they knew no one could beat them at.
I'm not saying ISO teams can't win. I just don't think it's valuable to think one is better than the other. Obviously, if you have the players to run a certain offense, you should. The best coaches are going to work around the talent they have in the end. That's why the Spurs are still taking mid range shots because they have LMA and Demar Derozan, Popovic is still just playing to the style of his players. With Duncan and the Spurs, you don't want your big man that can play in the post to go running up and down the floor and it doesn't help Timmy if he spends his time watching someone ISO, they played a half-court game that suits a big like that.
Let's just give Stone time to build the team back up. It wont be quick, so we will have to be patient. We have to just hope we can go find versatile players and along the way find one or two top tier players. The days of James carrying us is over, so just let it go. We are officially in rebuild mode, accept it.
Yeah I don’t get it really. The point of ball movement is to get someone an open shot. There are a select group of players that don’t need any help getting open and also can draw attention and pass to players who are open from said players drawing defenders towards them.
I've always gotten the feeling from some of these ball movement proponents is that it's never about if it worked at all or not, it's just really pretty to look at.
Yeah but why not have them do the more complicated thing instead and expend more energy for the same expected FG%?
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/james-hardens-rockets-changed-the-nba-forever/ Should also be noted that this is relative ranking of offenses in their own era - in absolute terms, I think it's the Dynasty Warriors, SHowtime Lakers, Harden Rockets
