Chron: Rockets Install Motion Offense

This sounds really nice n dandy, but what are the disadvantages of a motion offense? HeyP, is there a reason preventing all the etams in the league using this type of offense?

 

There all kinds of disadvantages...

1) Homogenizes the offense to a degree. Rather than your success or failiure rate being predicated on your best players abilities, it is reduced to an effect derived from your overall abilities, hence teams with significant talent differentials might not want to use it...However there are variations of motion offense which still emphasize your best players. I was just addressing the issue as a purist.

2) Players have comfort zones, ie. spots on the floor where they are most effective, and motion offenses can reduce their ability to operate from those zones.

3) Players might just have a hard time adjusting to a new offense ( see Quinn Buckner's Mavericks ) irrespective of their talent level.

4) But the biggest problem with motion offenses are that players HAVE to A) Commit fully, or the whole thing breaks down, and B) Have the ability to read and react on the move, something which a lot of players, even at this level, have some trouble doing, and C) Have to have passing abilities pretty much across the board.


For the Rockets, 1 is adaptable, 2 might be something of a problem, 3...we'll see, but you won't ever know until you try, and 4A) The years of iso might actually help here, as players are very excitied about something new, but crunch time will come when we first struggle...If guys decide it's the offense, even if it isn't, you've got a problem. 4B) Hard to tell, but I don't see any obvious problems aside from Cato among primary players. 4C) Can you say Yao? WHile we may lack exceptionally gifted passing guards, a motion offense can be based on overall passing rather than relying on the playmaking skills of one or two guys, and this may be where this kind of offense suits the Rockets the most, once the Big Fella gets here.

 

One symptom of the motion offense is that you " lose your legs" on your shooting accuracy faster, so your team needs to be deeper because you have to interject knew "legs" into the system to keep the consistency flowing.

We have the deepest team we have ever had on the Rox and, w/ Rice, MoT and Ming added to the mix, the deepest shooting team we have ever had.

The exception would be Cato

 

I like the change, and think this fits the talent much better. I'm all for 6-8 guys getting 10-20 points in any particular order, night in night out. This gives the hot hand a chance no matter who it is.

A hustling moving offense keeps the opposing players working so they can't rest on D and then come down fresh on offense. Many coaches say the best way to slow down a good opposing offensive player is to make them have to hustle and play defense. This could be a step in the right direction for the defense too...

Cato may be the only liability right now, but 7'0" 280 setting picks down low in the motion or getting back door or pick and roll points is a big possibility for him. Besides he said the Rockets coaches worked with him all summer on offense and offensive moves. This is probably why.

This will make a two "4" forward work better for us. We don't have a "dominant" 4 or 3, and we have several tweeners. Blending our forwards and tweeners into a motion offense will really help Rice, KT, Boki, Torres, and EG find some open shots and mismatches.

 

No you didn't! That was both ignorant and offensive.

As HeyP mentioned, you need a deep, talented team to implement a quality motion offense along with the time to get it going. We haven't had <b>anything</b> approaching that in the last few years.

In addition, the ISO was extremely effective 2 years ago, getting a young team with marginal talent at most positions to 45 wins. Rudy did his best to get the most out of bad situations. Saying it was lazy coaching is insulting to his professionalism, and blaming it on a drinking problem he used to have and has probably gone to great lengths to overcome is extremely offensive.

Now why have you been slamming Rudy without justification and without considering the facts? I say, it's lazy posting. That happens when you don't think a lot. Not sorry, I had to say that.

 

Accusing somebody of drinking alot, especially someone recovering from it, that was bush league and unneccessary. It's one thing for people to make a casual joke about Rudy drinking, because it's not serious, but it's obvious that was a personal shot a the guy.

As much as people don't like the ISO, this team didn't have a frontline last year and had to use it. The year before it was the same problem until Mo and Dream heated up and the Rockets had an inside game to compliment that. It's not like Rudy has used ISO for years he just used it the last two years because the Rockets had a backcourt and a banged up, or unbalanced frontline. Now the minute Rudy gets a quality frontline he's using it, trashing the ISO, and using motion offense, etc. So he isn't "wasting" talent. How do you "waste" talent when you win 45 games and almost make the playoffs 2 years ago, and then win 28 games with a horribly banged up team last year. What offense was he supposed to use last year when the line-up was a revolving door?

 

KT said in the Chronicle that he likes playing both the 3 and 4 so far, and that the last 15 games of last year that the 3 was what he played. He also said they ran this offense in practice last year but didn't use it in games, presumably because it requires more than 8 healthy bodies. Now that they are healthy, it appears that is what they will go to.

 

My God, even the coaching is getting better. What's next? Sellouts?

I'm going to get down on my knees now and thank the big guy upstairs for this revelation to Rudy & Co. As many of you have said, we now have a young and very deep team. We can burn you at every position. We've got 7-footers who can shoot and pass better than your 6-footers. Your legs will wear out faster than ours, and when our starters wear out, the guys who replace them are good enough to come in and bust your chops.

Moving to this offense may cost us a rash of turnovers and losses early in the year. But this is the right path. Be patient.

 

Will,

I'm not so sure it will (!) take a while. NJ had new players and a new leader and they switched and won right away. KT said they ran it in practice last year they just didn't (couldn't?) use it games.

Hopefully, these pro players can adapt to this type O. It would seem to me that it would be easier than trying to adapt to ISO and catch and chuck...

 

The NBA made a major defensive rule change to stop the offensive style of a team that hasn't been in the playoffs in years?

 

I'm jazzed (and notice I did not capitalize that word). The use of the word "counter" by Rudy means he isn't just making this up. That is the key to motion...the counter play (read), and also the hardest to teach, because it is all about reading when the defense is taking away one movement versus another. Glad to see mention of Goodrich, too. I'd like Clutch to interview him and ask him about how long he expects such a system to jell with this group.

I think Goodrich is going to get a spot on the team now, as a player/coach type role, while he practices his Bullard 3ptr.

 

I think that this is great idea. The Rockets iso offense didn't work well last season, and I think that a motion offense will be good for us. As long as Steve and Mooch don't run the clock down with dribbling, this will work great.

 

Shssshhhh....be very quiet about this.....we don't want to offend anyone...
...shsssshhh...it's something we just don't talk about...if you don't
talk about it, it will go away....shsshhhhh....

Plueeeeze!!!! I don't have any sympathy for alcoholism. NONE! I dealt
with it for 5 years when I was a kid, and if we took your attitude we'd still
be suffering from it.

Spare me the politically correct views. This is a newsgroup...not a 12-step
program.

 

45 games was milking your two best players. Well, we know that wont work,
because we saw it fail when SF and CM missed their shots. No help.

This wasn't a problem just for the last two years. Rudy has been using the
ISO for his whole carreer. Cylde, and Cassell were able to break
down defenses own their own, but they were also able to make
the pass thus make their team mates better. I know there are some
Cassell haters out there, but he was a excellent player. Most of the time
they just sat on the 3-pt line wating for the pass.

If Rudy gives the ball to his best player, and that player is good enough to score
one-on-one, then Rudy thinks, "Oh! Well...I've found my
offense. I'll give the ball to that player and sit back and watch the show."

That's lazy.

The Celtics of the 80's had the talent to go one-on-one...but they would
not do that if they didn't HAVE to. Their offense was setup to get the most out of
the TEAM as a whole, 1st!

Then, if the offense broke down they would use their natural talent to go
one-on-one. But only as a last resort.

Did you ever wonder why they (Celtics) got shots at the basket that were
wide open layups? It was the highest percentage shot period! Not the most
difficult.

Leave the "difficult shots" for the last 3 minutes of the game.

 

I have to agree with DavidS here about the motion offense. If you haven't seen a Princeton game (or a Kings or Nets game for that matter), you are in for a treat. While at Princeton the talent level wasn't that great, it did maximize the team to its highest.
Some people thought the Princeton teams were a bit boring. I tend to attribute that to a lack of the high flying athletes/scorers you saw at the bigger division I schools. However, if you bring it to the NBA level as the Kings and Nets have to one form or another, I think it can and will be successful.

The question will be if the team buys into the concept. Looks very promising. I do see lots of turnovers the first few games, but once we get into the flow of the offense, could this be the year to turn it around? We shall see.

I too never dreamed of reading Princeton and Rockets mentioned together in terms of offensive schemes, much less Steve Goodrich on the team (even remember him during his college playing years). Sounds like an exciting year all around.

 

Ouch!!

 

Yeah, you're right. A lot of people thought that Princeton was boring
because it was a bunch of average white ivy league players running
around...

But that's the point. They didn't have the talent, nor the athletic ability.

The Rockets can have the best of both worlds. They have the talent.
Now use a system that emphasizes that strength.

 

DavidS and mishii

before you all get too excited. We won't be running the Princeton offense. Feigen mentioned all the low post opportunities we can get. Well, Princeton's offfense under Carril did not use the low post that much, neither did Argentina.

Goodrich will tell you that Princeton does not work in the NBA, due to the shot clock. Hell, Princeton doesn't even run Carril's system anymore, they've expanded it and opened it up...this is from cc.net member "JR" (an ex-Princeton play-by-play man).

Also, Kings and Nets aren't really that close to Princeton's offense either. They are theoretically on the same page, but that page is shared by many systems. The Zipper System, Knight's Passing Game (and by extension Duke), and bad teams like Golden State, and 1st round fodder teams like Minnesota.

NOTE: Clutch also interviewed Rudy, and Rudy said they are not implementing stuff for Yao just yet. imo, we are better suited for the UCLA cut--which is not a motion system, but does share many "movements"--or the King's double post offense. Just because you hear the word "Motion" and Goodrich is on the team, does not mean we are going to run that offense, besides Goodrich can probably help execute any offense.