you know, for all the talk (type) i hear (read) on this bbs about the rockets "offense" and the "motion" we have and the "double screens" for walt, etc. i stand by my previous Statements: that the rockets are still a isolation based offensive team. i don’t care what your website says, or what rudy says, or what “respected longtime” “expert” posters have to say. Anyone who watched that game, or the preseason, or damn last season can tell you that almost 90% of the time, when we need a basket, we go to isolation. it doesn’t matter if it’s steve or cutmob or motay or dream or mooch or my gramma, it’s going to be iso. really, it has to be at least 60-70% of our total offensive halfcourt sets (next game i'm counting). i'm sure someone will retort with "Yea, but didn't Minnesota go to KG in an iso when they needed the clutch bucket? Just give our guys time..." 1. yes, they went to garnett. But they also had at least one man flashing through the paint. we didn't. and haven't for a while. except for when bark was in the low post. 2. kg made VERY QUICK decisions, usually in less than 3.5 seconds. our men - since last year - will take upwards of 10-15 secs. is it youth? probably. but i AM NOT WILLING TO WATCH THIS 10-15 SEC BS FOR ANOTHER FULL SEASON. rudy and co. had better stifle this playground **** like archie stifled edith. make your move in less than 4 seconds or move the ball. frankly, the only player good enough on our team thus far to CONSISTENTLY beat his man one-on-one and score (read: make at least 50% of his layups and not turn the ball over more than 4X/game) is cutmob. Can francis become that good? Yes. But is he right now? No. until he relaxes and takes what the defense gives him, instead of trying to take what he wants, he will be no more than option #2 when we need a clutch basket. and until we learn to utilize ball movement (even calvin murphy in that HIDEOUS aluminum foil suit he was wearing noticed it), we will only be good enough to beat teams with poor one-on-one and poor team defense. until then, i'm standing by my past statement about the rockets: we are an isolation based team, that doesn't pass the rock. ------------------ Essentially the top two players to come out of college the last couple of years are Duncan, Carter, and Francis. - vince
damn! you are the only smart post I read all day. thank you for seeing what i see ... i thought i must be crazy. really most don't understand the simplicity of the game and how we went and made it slow, boring, ugly, hard, ...I could go on but whats the point, no one is listening. a made bucket well erase any ill feelings ... so when one guy heats up and puts a couple in back to back ... people forget the other 10 tries that looked horrible. these people are just there to look at the scoreboard and highlights and will never understand the beauty and simplicity of the game of basketball. I hope to see the rockets playing this type of game in the near future. ------------------
I agree with you completely regarding Rudy's overuse of 1-on-1 iso plays....even within these iso plays I'd like to see more cuts to the basket or some kind of secondary option or at least the other 4 players getting in position to better anticipate offensive rebounds. Unfortunately, I'm afraid some posters here may shoot down your thread with claims that you are basing your observation on "only one game" and that you're not really a true rocket fan... ------------------
there is such things as defenses corralling you into doing what they want you to do. verse...i'd love you to count. go for it. But always remember that endgame ISOs are a huge part of nearly every team's offense. Also remember that defenses are designed to stop motion. There is such things as denying Walt the ball on the weakside so that the strong side must do something without that option. There is such thing as giving Moochie single coverage and taking away all his options. There is such things as forcing Givens over the middle right into a linebacker's helmet....no matter that the run-n-shoot has a bazillion theoretical options. there is such things as being down 26 pts and scrapping complicated plays and giving the ball to a hot hand. verse you sound like someone who will keep me honest throughout the season. Let's do it. Let's make Rudy knock us down. Note: I used to be a rudy basher, too. And I certainly cannot argue with your assessment of crunch time, including preseason and last season. But I do think that sometimes people don't see the weakside and how defenses are taking options away. Plus, when a play works, sometimes it doesn't get credit as a play. Alley-oops are written off as defensive mistakes, etc. I am going to keep diagramming plays I see, and looking for input from you. Let's keep looking!! cheers
Man, Is the a Faction of the BBS The LOVE OF THE GAMERs? We have the HIGHLIGHTERS? The Rudy Bashers The Rudy Lovers The HOMErs Anywho . .. .I will be watching to see what happens over time. ISO are ok . . .but we need second and third options. Rocket River ------------------
pimp....I'm diagramming a play I've dubbed Two Mo Shakes. It shows you a Two Shakes option, with Mo/KT coming over for a pass in the low or high post. This I started seeing in March last year. Understand though, all ISO options are first dependent on a double team coming over. If there is no double team, the ball-handler is instructed to shoot or drive. If he is not successful over time beating a 1 on 1 at 50%, he doesn't get to ISO anymore. Here's one for both you and verse...Rudy counts the success rate of ISOs. He counts FG, Assist, Rebound Put-backs and Fouls as success. He divides that by the number of times the ISO was run. I started counting Mobley in January last year. Mobley's ISO exhibits over 55% success. By comparison, Rudy consider any play set that does 50% or better to be worthy of crunch time. Please count that. Note that swinging around the horn for a shot is counted as success (though Mobley doesn't get the assist). And put-backs by Mobley or Cato crashing the board because his man left him, count as one ISO set and one success. This is not player stats. This is a team stat thing coaches use to measure team success for given offensive sets. Did the set and all its options produce a score/FTs or not...very simple.
Heypee.... I understand and agree with every point in your last post....I have actually been recording every Rox game I can in the past 7 years and review each of those games 1-4 times each to better understand these plays/situations. Although I have never done any quantitative analysis for each play's success, I agree that Rudy would not go to these plays if they did not have some prerequisite success rate. I agree entirely that the defense very often dictates what plays can be run. It is this reason that I believe Rudy should be more flexible in making in-game adjustments when it becomes obvious that previously successful plays are not currently working. Another point about all these iso plays is that they should definitely be used to some degree at the end of games, but in the course of a game going to iso's time and time again just tires out Francis/Mobley and if the other team does not double leaves the other players out the offense/out of rhythm. One iso play I would definitly like to see more of is Shandon in the low post. I still recall his rookie year in the playoffs when he torched Clyde down there. He has a very high conversion rate down low and would obviously be a good passer out of doubles. I'm assuming your 2 Mo Shakes play is much like what the Jazz have been running for Malone the last 10 years. However, I have reservations about whether it would work against teams with a strong defensive center who could provide helpside D should Mo or KT catch close to the basket or try to drive in from the high post. If Mo can consistently convert 6-10ft jumpers off the dribble and over the defense then it looks like a good play... ------------------
I'd love to see your data. Can you post the results of your counting from Jan somewhere on the web? What %age of Mobley ISOs result in buckets, and what %age in fouls? I've always wanted to figure out the success rates for various plays, but I can't stand taking a legal pad to games with me.
Please someone explain to me WHY the heck Rudy doesn´t use the pick n´roll. The pick n´roll is the bread and butter of any half-court offense. Just look at the Jazz. EVERYONE knows that ******* pick is coming and it STILL can´t be stopped. That has to be the most succesfull play in the entire league. Not that i have any kind of average, mind you. It´s just that this crossover offense dribbling iso play crazed sportcenter highlight reel show can only take one so far! I really HOPE that we haven´t decided that after years of boring (yet effective, when at it´s best) dump it in, kick it out offense, we´re are going to start playing street bball. That looks GREAT on highlights but it sure as hell doesn´t win basketball games. Unless you happen to have someone named Jordan on your team, that is. (yeah, i know it´s a stretch) ------------------ "I have posted so much that what I say must be true"
d man: my fear is that we will ultimately become the sacramento kings. pippendagimp: B-I-N-G-O and rudy was his name-oh. i do expect some intelligent responses from the large majority of the bbs-ers, though. like the next one.... heypartner: you're on. damnit, i'm gonna skip practice on thursday to watch this game. and i'll have my cross pen in hand!!! to make it fair, i'll try to break it down by quarter. also, i'll agree about the end-of-game iso being a major part of most teams offense. however, i'd still like to see more of a concerted effort to break to the basket from the weak side. too many times do i see players not even fighting to get open. they are either spotting up or back tracking. given (pardon the pun), in any good offense, there will be times when the defense forces your hand. they will be - on occasion - able to execute better than you will. that's why givens got laid smooth out by singletary (one of the greatest hits ever). here's the thing though. if your offense is effective, the defense should not be able to force your hand more than say - 40% of the time. if they are, then you are not being very efficient. look at the west coast offense (49ers, packers, etc.). yea, you really won when you forced them to pass short. or look at utah. yea, you really won when you forced them to shoot behind the screen. the "chuck & duck" offense of old UH/Oiler gory days failed because once you took away option #1 (which most defenses are capable of doing) they still dismantled you with option #2. our option #2 never takes form because of our lack of ball movement and lack of motion. the oilers/cougs/falcons' option #2 never took over because of lack of (and misjudgement of) talent. that's actually a fantastic comparison, heypartner. The Rudy ISO offense & The Run and Shoot both offenses are predicated on the idea that you can't stop my players INDIVIDUALLY. and both theories fail because of the individuals inability to accept that it takes a TEAM to win. God, the last thing i want to see is: steve francis turning into warren moon cuttino mobley turning into haywood jeffries shandon anderson - curtis duncan. ------------------ Essentially the top two players to come out of college the last couple of years are Duncan, Carter, and Francis. - vince
YEAH And Rudy = JACK PARTEE. And you know what happen to Mr. Party don't you; HUH? RIGHT. FIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIRED!!!! GET RIDDY OF RUDY! ------------------ A SNEEZE is nature's WAY of saying "ACHOOOOO!!!"
Bah! Thats my new favorite word. Bah! Anyway, I think the Run-and-Shoot was ahead of its time. Four wideouts + no TE + no fullback = bad offense? Heck, the spread offense that everyone loves these days puts 5 players in a pattern, often with an empty backfield. And the Oilers were very successful running back in those days, behind Lo White and even Gary Brown. They just tended to choke (both on offense and defense) when it counted. Back to basketball, I agree that we've got to reduce the ISOs. They are a crutch that we rely on far too often, instead of implementing creative plays in the half court. And they are as boring as the dump-it-down Rockets of 96-98. ------------------
thanos: rudy used to with otis thorpe. then he stopped. i guess it was working too well! seriously, i've asked that question a thousand times. it's not that he doesn't run it. well, actually, what i usually see is a pick and fade. i saw mobley and bullard run one from the top left side of the key last night and bullard was wider open than a w**** in a porno flick. heypartner: how 'bout i count the iso plays ran in comparison with any other half court setup. if the rockets end up with either: a. an open shot b. a foul c. an illegal defense it will be a "+"...and anything else will be a "-" i'll rely on memory for the players/crucial plays etc. fair enough? LHutz: damn, the more i think about it the more these two are similar. both guys are too nice for their own good. wait a minute...nevermind... FIre RUDDEEEEE! B-I-N-G-O and Ruddeeee was his name-oh. i can't help but fault rudy for this. no, he isn't on the court, beating the hardwood with the ball, but he is the coach. anytime i see a pattern which has continued for over a year, with no discernable improvement, i look at the coach. ...and no, i don't think he's ahead of his time. ------------------ Essentially the top two players to come out of college the last couple of years are Duncan, Carter, and Francis. - vince [This message has been edited by verse (edited November 01, 2000).] [This message has been edited by verse (edited November 01, 2000).]
verse, cool, I'll be at the game and tape it too. If Mobley gets doubled, I guarantee you will see the 2 Mo Shakes this time, especially if KT is playing this time. Also, follow Walt and Bullard without the ball...watch them, tell me what you think. pippendagimp...on my made up names for plays. 2 Shakes is an ISO for the 2 guard (Mobley). This has been confirmed by us hearing Rudy call for it. 2 Mo Shakes is my made up name for an 2 Shakes option. Our PF is the closest to Mobley. If his man leaves to double team, Mo goes to the low post wide-open. If it is KT in the game, he tends to go to the elbow, right underneath the double team and then does his drop step into the lane looking to pass or shoot. anyhow, you guys make this fun...keep it up!!
I dont know where Rudy (or claims that rudy claims such a thing) believes the Iso's or any play of his is hitting on 55 percent of the time. I said this last year, and Ill say it again. Any Play that was affective 55 percent of the time would make you an all but unbeatable team. Thats all to be said. Mobley iso's do not work 55 percent of the time. Maybe once in a while, but not all the time. ------------------ "I have amazing, powers of observation"...Pink
bet! shake You just don't agree with how coaches measure it. Come on Dreambaby...look it up. How many times do teams get points-per-possession and you will see you must score a point at a rate above 50% per possession to compete in basketball. What, do you really believe 50-win teams go empty-handed at greater than 50% of each possession....that is NOT true. So if their success average is above 50%, what do you think their BEST play produces. The Barkley ISO was at 52%, according to Rudy. The Mobley ISO is better. Look...Mobley got 3 illegal technicals called while holding the ball...that counts! screamshake...you just need to accept how coaches measure success. You seem to have a problem with it, like I'm making this up or something. How would you measure success as a coach? Surely you aren't going to rely on a fantasy algorithm are you? [This message has been edited by heypartner (edited November 02, 2000).]
just to throw out some easy to measure stats. Mobley alone shot 48% from like mid-january to the end of the season. Now we all know most those are from ISO. Add in his free throws trips, illegal defense call, and all the other scores and fouls from teammates that directly resulted from breaking down the defense with the ISO and subtract turnovers and that play is easily over 50% success rate per set. what do you really believe it is 45% or something? <font size="1"><font color="> [This message has been edited by heypartner (edited November 02, 2000).] [This message has been edited by heypartner (edited November 02, 2000).]
There is nothing wrong with isolating. (In fact, I loved watching isolation plays for Barkley.) Teams have won championship titles with predominantly isolation plays: Detroit Pistons and Houston Rockets. The problem, however, is Francis and Mobley are NOT Thomas, Dumars, and Vinny Johnson. (For that matter, Collier isn't Lambier, Thomas isn't Edwards, Dantley, or Aguirre.) Of course, I'm comparing a seasoned Thomas to a second-year Francis. If Francis intends to be considered an elite player, he needs to learn how to deliver when it counts. The burden of winning is placed entirely on Francis's shoulders. I still contend Houston needs a dominant frontcourt player (because when you look at the competition, Francis will not be able to maintain the load on his own). ------------------ Not only have the Drew bashers crossed the line, but they've sprinted a couple of miles beyond it.
wow. now, i'm not trying to call rudy a liar...but i do find it difficult to believe that "52%" clip. how does he factor in bad shots that the team ends up taking off of a pass. example 1: hoisted shot from the weakside with .34259 seconds on the shot clock example 2: cato with a 18 footer. whether these shots go in or not, i'd have to consider them a bad shot. yes, they'd still be a "+", but they are examples of how stats can be a tad misleading. ------------------ Essentially the top two players to come out of college the last couple of years are Duncan, Carter, and Francis. - vince
rockets iso ... _______ O H d W d d S d d M T ...so what you have is 3 able to guard 2 on strong side ... 1 on 2 one pass away ... and a safety d on weakside. poor spacing creates difficult lanes, walts defender can guard either him or steve, steves defender can now shift into the key holding the power foward, whose defender can show a double on the iso or just clogg the lane. all this time the opposite basline defender drops low to watch both ball and man, cheating toward the paint for weakside rebound. i know this isn't the exact iso play, but i see this alot with the attempt for a high pick, and alot with the clear out. what do you guys think. ------------------
