Running without the ball will be difficult for our backcourt players.Having Ming pass the ball from the high post can help Francis and Mobley and also help Griffin in the low post as he (Ming) would draw out taller players.
I think the whole idea of this scheme will be one in that our guards wont have to create offense in the half court sets. The whole idea I think will be for them to deliver the ball to a high post passer (Mo or Ming) and feed through some screens or what not off the ball and come back around to receive the ball in a more scoring situation. Basically, the decision making of our offense will slowly shift to our big guys imo. This is why I feel Mike Bibby has been very effective with the Kings. He never has the been the pure PG type ie Miller or Kidd that can perform all the decision making tasks on offense. Bibby is a damn good jump shooter that can handle and pass some but is very intelligent at using screens and creating space. Notice that he only averaged about 5 APG for the Kings yet the Sacto offense was smooth. Divac and Webber basically averaged as many assists as Bibby. I honestly think that Francis and Mobley are very effective mid range shooters, and the game will only get easier for them if they dont have to dribble so much against a stacked defense. The whole concept will be to pull the opposing teams big man away from the middle and have more action away from the ball. Im sure this will take time to implement though.
No, I'm not a coach. I have played all my life and love to study the game. I know some coaches from HS, college scouts, and had the benefit of learning in a small town basketball system run by the best HS coach Illinios ever had (I biased), and they were all friends of the family, too. I'm writing this, because I actually finally found a friggin article about him. Looks he finally made the Illinois HOF, posthumously. http://www.beloitdailynews.com/799/hall16.htm Anyone else from Illinois remember Coach Thiel from Galesburg? What's funny for me is that Zach Thiel is mentioned in that article. He wasn't that great at bball, but was like an older brother to me (my brothers best friend). John Thiel is a legend, imo. What made him so great was that he implemented a system all the way down to 7th grade with a cadre of coaches who had long tenures as well. Everyone taught the same thing so we were prepared for Coach Thiel by high school. I'm sure there are football systems like this in small town Texas. Two of the coaches were brothers (the Morgan's), and were very close friends of the family. I had the luxury of being able to learn from these guys outside of the team practices; they let us in the gym on weekends and at night. With that upbringing, you just learn to respect and love the game and keep learning. But the biggest thrill was later learning street ball in the Army and Houston. I love both styles, freelancing and structure. But imo; the game is simple. Soccer and hockey surely have similar principles. What is hard is teaching it to kids. Teaching spacing, cutting, a feel for where to be. Motion is not Xs and Os, motion is like a coordinated dance. It is hard to teach at a level that can't be busted by good defenses. Bad motion can be really bad. Motion is not really meant for 24-second clocks. I agree with leebigez that it doesn't have to be a full-blown college system. And I agree with D-Up that when Cato is on the floor, he really limits the offense, since the opposing center can sag since Cato can't pass or shoot. I suspect Mobley/SF will continue doing PnRs and ISOs when Cato is on the floor, to clear out Cato.
Wasn't it about this time last year, what with the new "anti-iso" rules, and the addition of a "true post player" ( thought at the time to be an accurate desciption of EG) that we were all anxious to see our new team-oriented style of play, and saying good riddance to the old drive and dive style we'd become annoyed with? Weren't there Rudy comments to the effect that he had a whole new offense, centred around team play, motion, and breaking? Sorry, I don't mean to be a wet blanket, but with regards to our becoming a team/motion oriented play where the guards don't dominate the ball, I'll believe it when I see it....
Last season, I complained all year (as did many others) about excessive dribbling, the lack of timely passing (or no passing), limited motion, excessive iso's, etc. I literally hated the style of basketball the Rockets played last season. I thought Rudy's comments were confusing; I hope what we see on the floor this fall, isn't!
I never heard that last summer, beyond building what was already working March and April of the 2001. I certainly never heard anything from Rudy/Feigen about high post play, or speculation that they were planning a new offense around a 19yr old. If you are talking about the "Trapezoid Offense." That was a joke I started, and somehow people remember it as true. TheRocketGuy bought it, but called it the Pentagon Offense...lol! Rudy always been trying to add transition offense and add more to the perimeter offense, mainly on the weakside. We flat out took a step back on all that. What I've been saying for a long time is that there is nothing inherently wrong with Rudy's choice of offense, as it has a lot more it can do. We just sucked, didn't have practice time, stable lineups, and couldn't get any better with floor chemistry (especially on the weakside). Feigen as said this a couple of times towards the end of the season, and so did Rudy. We can choose to say Rudyand his staff don't know how to coach and are making excuses, or we can say the players couldn't do anything fancy and didn't have the practice time or chemistry to learn and get better. To me, it isn't even worth arguing, I know which one I believe.
HP-- If you have infered that I was laying the blame at Rudy's feet, I haven't except insofar as it is his responsibility to make his players follow the path of his choosing...My greater concern is with the guards, their egos, and their demand for the ball... If you will allow me a very free ranging analogy, it's like the flaw with communism, or at least one of it's flaws. Communism, as advocated by Marx, has never and will never be tried on a large scale, due to human nature and the transitional phase. Marx defined The Rule of the Proletariat as the phase when men of ability and good conscience (!) would take over for a while to supervise the transition from capitalism to utopian communism, and then relinquish the reigns of power to the people as a whole..Problem being, those who have the power rarely give it up voluntarily, and as such, you're left with an extended Rule of the Proletariat, which is practically closer to fasicm than communism... Okay, I DID say free-ranging...Well, this here is a bit like the problem I see in our future...Steve and Cuttino have had a taste of what it's like to be THE MEN, they get all the shots, all the PR, soon all the $ ( for SF, anyway), dictate player moves to a degree ( Morris)..and now we are suggesting that these relatively young men will give all of this up...for the good of the team. I'm not saying it won't happen, nor am I saying they'd have to become role players...but any threat to their control of the offense might very well be seen as a threat to all the other factors which have so far accompanied that control, and we all saw how willing they were to include the new kid on the block last year (EG), or how quickly they adpated to the new offense...Their agents are PROBABLY not going to be saying stuff like " Yeah, if you're in the frame when Ming dunks on McCullough, boy the deals will come rolling in!" HOPEFULLY, with Steve max'd out, it will become all about winning, and hopefully they will see that the new guys are going to have to be a big part of that, and hopefully they will adapt to a new team oriented offense wherein they give up the iron grip on the offense they have had for a while.... ....but like I said before, I'll believe it when I see it.
Yes, Rudy did say similar things last year, and failed to deliver. The one thing that bothers me is the "if they can get it" comment, it seems that Rudy has his doubts about some of his players basketball IQs. I am predicting, that if Steve and Cat do not play well with Ming, one of the guards will be traded for a more intelligent basketball player. Something like Miller for Francis.....what is is they say about too many cooks spoiling the broth? Let's hope that Steve and Cat have a massive turnaround and learn how to play a team oriented game, rather then the playground stuff they are known for. DaDakota
i agree with DaDa. should steve &/or cat have a problem adapting to the ming dynasty, i think one or both will be shipped out for a more intelligent and more team-oriented player. in fact, if i had to venture a guess, i would think that cat would have an easier time adjusting to this new dynasty. cat has played second fiddle before. in fact, he has for most of his playing career. at rhode island, he was second to lamar odom and possibly even tyson wheeler. at houston, he has NEVER been "the man". keep in mind also that this is a man that took less money to stay in houston. so i think he understands what it means to sacrifice, what it means to be a "team player" and what it means to support someone elses strong points. as for steve, he has always been "the man". maryland, the pros, jc, wherever. i'm not predicting that he will have a problem with ming. i'm just saying that if someone will (between he and cat) it would be steve. as for the offense...well, i'm just going to wait and see. i have absolutely ZERO respect for rudy's X and O ability, but i can see some signs that rudy could implement a system that utilizes yao's strengths: 1) a full out motion offense, as heypee mentioned, is not really designed for the nba...although there have been teams that have run it (denver in the 80s). that is the "passing offense" that i believe rudy is referring to: the motion offense. 2) at the same time, it won't be a one-on-one oriented offense...at least not with the guards spearheading it when ming is in (and feeling comfortable). this will take time and patience from ALL involved - including us fans, because yao will have to get accustomed to the play of the nba, his teammates, and the pressure of being "the man" on a stage this big. 3) hakeem olajuwon's offense was designed around his one on one play. however, it's not a far stretch to move the post player (in this case yao) up to the high block. that opens up EVERYTHING. the reason the rockets had very off the ball movement back in the dum(b) it in days was that hak was on the low block. in order to cut, you're bringing your man to hakeem, making the pass not necessarily *difficult*, but *difficult* for a man that is not a gifted passer (and hakeem was far from a gifted passer). yao, on the high block allows for cutters (UCLA style among others) to cut around him, under him (baseline), or above him. his passing ability will afford them many opportunities. in essence, he IS the playmaker. 4) the funny thing is that this offense should suit francis especially well. he is definitely a 2 guard, and this allows him to handle the ball a lot less in the half court, and look to get open a lot more from the wings (where he apparently loves to be at ). all in all, i hope this works out for the rockets and rudy. if it doesn't i am 100% behind moving whoever needs to be moved in order to make it work (short of ming and griff). steve for andre? well, i'd have done that last year...you can guess what my opinion on it is right now...ship his ass out. but i'm willing to give him another chance. just don't blow it, or we should blow your ass out to cleveland. ps. thanks for bringing back the smilies, Clutch.
The Rockets' offense has been frustrating not only because it is no-pass (it's not the Texas no-pass, no-play but rather the Houston pass-no-play) but it is also no-motion. There are two key players. (1) There is a single ball-handler (Francis, Mobley or Norris); and (2) There is a post-player (Taylor, Griffin and every once in a while Thomas) who attempts to create a two-man game with the ball-handler. Whether he is high or low is more often a funtion of where he can set up. The non-ball-handling guard might just stand around the arc or might run the baseline to switch sides and perhaps get freed off a pick. But that's about it for the motion. The rest of the players take calculated but nonetheless STATIC positions around the arc. (We could still have Eddie Johnson doing this if he could play one lick of defense). The possible passes are (1) to create said two-man-game with the post; (2) the dreaded dump-off (often a prayer) if the drive by the ball-handler does not produce a shot. Thus we have the Rocket offense which, more often than not, is best represented by a clock-killing "dribble-dribble-dribble" ISO which often ends in a wild shot or wild pass with almost no time left. What open shots we get are generally the sole result of our couple of above-average players who can create their own shots and thereby draw defenders (Francis, Mobley and occasionally Thomas). From my perspective, it's not as complex as some people here want to make out and is extremely boring to watch. As proof, I offer my 9-year old niece who can usually call the play. Next year, if we aren't going to pass the ball (I admit as much as I love that game we still don't have all the necessary pieces [not to mention Mobley wont pass the rock anyway]), I hope the we can at least have away from the ball motion. Yes, like Bobby Knight runs. While this offense does take time to create shots and can be painfully methodically, it is still much more entertaining than watching Moochie Norris dribble out the shot clock. I would rather suffer through the early losing pangs of forcing them to learn a motion offense than win a few more games with the ISO. I'm in it for the long run. My best preference, however, is a passing offense. We know Ming and Nachbar will pass the ball. I believe Thomas and Griffin could become good passers too with the right encouragement. If Mobley and Norris won't pass it, then let's ship them away. Same for Francis although I believe once he sees we can win with a passing offense, he will come around. If not, trade him too. I'd rather have a bunch of Euros and other foreigners who will pass than the current bunch of ball hogs (anyday). In short, I hate our current offense. It keeps me from going to games or even watching on TV. It's boring and much too predictable. Watch a Kings' game. They are much more fun to watch than the Rockets. If, after all the changes (Ming, Nachbar, Griffin), Rudy still has Moochie dribbling out the 4th quarter of games then he has lost me as a supporter. I love the guy but just can't take it anymore.
One thing that I tell people in person, but I've never said on this bbs is that I believe Rudy chose the best path to improving this team in the last 3 yrs. And I am talking about choice of offense. I never say this here, because it is highly debatable, yet I feel it is the truth. If you can appreciate how Bad complicated offenses can execute...I mean, really bad...then you can appreciate my take. The worse thing in basketball is to be passing or moving without a reason. That, more that anything else, will bust up a play. Players who don't make the right decision on passing or moving without the ball, timing their picks...cutting...blah blah blah just screw up the play to the point that you have to reset and you see the PG waving his hands directing traffic. Now consider for a second that 1999-2000 was screwed the moment Barkley goes down; Fall 2000 was a learning experience as we got MoT in the flow, Cato goes down game #2, Dream whines early and we realized Walt had to be benched for Mobley. Then consider that last year was a bust almost from the start. Now what are you going to do in 1999-2000, this year, and parts of 00-01? Many people on the bbs say that we should spend that time trying to implement a more complicated offense with timing plays based recognizing what the defense is doing wrong and anticipation your teamate's decisions with or without the ball. Those who believe that, imso, believe that a coach can just open a can and pour a new offense on top of the heads of team, no matter what their talent/skill level is. I know that is not true. I know it. So, what can a coach do when you team sucks. imo, you concentrate on making your best players better in certain aspects of the game, because running motion with some teams is just flat-out futile. Motion is not for every team. Bad motion is about as bad as you can get. Look at Golden State. I remember them trying to play something beyond their ability. They'd pass just to be passing, like Larry Hughes had a plan or could understand one. They had ball movement, but they damn sure had no purpose. It was like the coach demanded 3 passes before a shot and the players just went through the motions. Memphis was similar, although they were more about no defense. anyhow, I believe what Rudy did in 1999-2000 and this year was say, dammit...all these injuries...I'm at least going to give Francis and Mobley a lot of reps taking it to the all and making decisions against double teams. If nothing else, that improves their go to shots, and shows the freaking league that you cannot play these guys straight up. imo...Kudos the Rudy for giving Francis and Mobley a lot of reps, rather than trying to make Carlos Rogers, Shandon Anderson and Terrence Morris better players. We were going to lose anyhow. I'll take my chances on calling the number for the best players at the risk of making them ball hogs that later comes back to haunt. I do not believe Francis and Mobley would be better players be learning how to run motion with perennial bench players like Carlos Rogers, Matt Bullard, Kelvin Cato, Pig Miller, Bryce Drew, Moochie Norris, and Shandon Anderson. Nor can we expect rookies in those years like Griffin, Francis, Thomas, Collier, Langhi, Morris, Torres and Brown to even have the knowledge to run motion. bottomline: in bad seasons, achieve something that will last. When in doubt about whether you intend to keep your starters, bench and rookies...at least make sure the stars improve on something.
Nice post. I think this team needs stability more than anything. Each of the last three years we have added about five new players. I'm always willing to improve, but short of a rediculous offer, I would keep the hand we have untill it proves it can't do it. Remember our championship team had played together for several years before it started to put on rings. I accept the Drexler argument, but even then we needed time to gel. Veteran joins a vetran team, guick setting gel.
Joe Fan, my thoughts exactly. Surely we won't get a repeat of last year, though. I can't believe that no one from the Rockets has been listening to this board, the press, the fans who stopped coming, and a number of national basketball commentators who panned the 01-02 Rockets style of play. If we have a repeat with all the talent on this team with no new creative offensive schemes then Rudy (and I have always really liked him) will be replaced. I hope that is not the case. If Moochie, Steve, or Cat dribbles out the clock next year on a regular basis, the team will be roundly booed. I don't want to see that.
I agree, bad motion is the worst. Passing just for the sake of passing does nothing. I coach a very small team of kids. And I admit I run a LOT of PnRs, give and go's and yes, ISOs. I myself hate ISOs, but some kids just don't have that "feel" for what heyp call's the "dance". It has to be taught at a young age and endless reps to get it to flow are crucial. But I'd take it one step further, and say that teaching that "feel" to adults may be even more difficult. Especially if the coach is not as versed or as articulate with the philosophy. That's why I always clamor for players who know how to move without the ball, have patient and disciplined ball movement (as a team) and all out hustle on D. Right now that describes the international player moreso than the American. They may not be as gifted physically, but their fundamentals are better and more, they "see" and "feel" the game better. More importantly, basketball is a team game not an individual event. I take the Bostjan Nachbar or Jiri Welsch or even Predrag Savovic over Qyntel Woods/Dajuan Wagner/Kareem Rush/Chris Wilcox. that's why I would take Nene Hilario over Amare Stoudamire.
