Sure it is. The comparison is meant to describe that a very simple base system can have complexities...but it requires the PG to make the proper reads, first, and then his teammates to read off of that. The coach can only show you how to expose the defense; he cannot execute it. It is unfair for you to deny me that comparison. No it wasn't. I have tape of this one. This was playground ball with Moochie setting the entries. Very simple. And I'm saying you are talking about last years ISOs. We are not running enough guard ISOs to really even mention them. And I really do not remember this major weakside movement of Utah when Malone is isolated. Are you talking about the pnr when Stockton passes it to him?????? That is not an iso...that is an option on a pnr. I'm talking about when Utah would dribble down and drop it off to Malone. No we had as much movement as Utah dropping it into Barkley, so you cannot say Rudy can't teach that. And now we go full circle back to the chicken and the egg argument. Can we stop now? Let me summarize both sides: You are assuming that all the coaches are too dumb to show them, and I am assuming that the players not only should already know these basics, but that the coaching staff has indeed shown them. I say, at some point, the coach's job sometimes is to take away complexities and go simple in order to win the game, and you say the coaching staff isn't adding enough complexities, because they can't teach it as their own limitation.
"but it requires the PG to make the proper reads, " Its hard for th pg to read much when the only person moving is the man who set the pick. Crispee, u can definitely compare and say that they both are prn. But the way the 2 teams run it is quite different. "No it wasn't. I have tape of this one. This was playground ball with Moochie setting the entries. Very simple." I remember at least twice Walt driving in and giving Willis a no look pass for a dunk. Also, he penetrated and got himself a fingerroll once.
Well, I'm just in disagreement then, if you think there are different goals in how we run the pnr to Utah. And dude, in the Phoenix game, Willis would pick for Moochie and then Walt, completing a weave pick. Walt ran a pick for Moochie or sometimes got a pass, first. The ran about 5 variations of basic 3 on 3 to success. All the sets where initiated by simple playground 3 on 3 picking with Moochie dribbling. You see...all you describe was the finish, if you think Walt started that play. Don't watch the ball; watch the other players without the ball. You will see more attempts at movement and picking, and you will see hesitations and mismovement. I'm not just sitting here making a logical argument that the simplicity of iso works; I am seeing our attempts at more complex movement. I'm seeing weakside hesitations and PG misreads. Now I agree, many times you will see players just watching, but same with many great coaches. Primarily in our system, you have to wait for the PG to make a read, first. also, I've been editing above. We are going full circle on the chicken and the egg argument that I described very early in this thread....see my last comments in that last post.
wouldnt that be a post up. I am talking about when Malone got the ball when he wasnt posting up. He got the ball and then faced the basket. Then, either he takes the shot, passes it to cutters, or then starts to back it in. To me when a player faces the opponent, and then decides to break him down, thats an iso. We still run lots of iso. Granted, not as much with the Cat, but a lot with Steve and Mooch.
you guys should just call each other...it would be easier just kidding..im enjoying reading this little "sports reporters-type exchange"
So now we have a terminology problem. Why is Barkley an ISO and you call Malone a post up. Malone often got it further from the basket as well. If you want to call it a post up, that's fine with me. I never wanted to call Barkley's an ISO anyhow. This is an option off of the pnr. Yes, it is an isolation option, but it is still an option off of the pnr. The reason this is *not* called an iso set is because the entry point was the guard pnr. That means the defense must react differently versus a wing entry for an iso. Further, when Malone gets this "iso" option off of the pnr they don't accomplish all the weakside picks and cutters that you describe, unless there is a double team. He is two swing passes away from anything. I'm telling you, when Kenny Thomas gets this iso option off of the pnr, he has as many options. The difference is only in how the defenses play it. My main point is: We cannot call Francis taking a pick from Kenny and then passing to him fading to the wing an ISO, because it doesn't have the standard ISO entry point. This is a pnr system. We at least have to agree on terminology. WRT Steve running ISO. I'm serious on this one: I do not describe hardly anything he does this year as an ISO set. Moochie, yes. I agree with that. But even that is not standard ISO. Moochie generally has passing outlets to his left and right. He isn't isolated on the wing by himself as much anymore....he most often comes straight down the middle (or slightly to the left of center).
Crispee, I agree that the comparison between the Jazz's pick and roll and the one the rockets are currently using is a valid one. But I think you and I are arguing a different point. I agree with you that it falls upon the players to execute the gameplan, as well as understand the overall offensive scheme. And while I am glad Rudy is trying to simplify the offense enough to get his players, most noticably Francis to make the right reads and understand the offense, it begs a big question. When does the offense become so simple it reduces its effectiveness? What happens if a year or so from now, Steve still isn't making the right decisions off the pnr because he's not capable of doing so? Or because it doesn't fit the player he is, in spite of how he tries? Do we keep simplifying the offense in the hopes that his one day it clicks and we can start building upon it? When do we ask is there a better way to utilize the talent we have? Now I know Rudy and his coaching staff know a whole lot more about basketball than I do, but I can't believe simplification helps us in the short run, although I think it will in the long. "Now Rudy has below average defense and two below average stars WRT making reads. What exactly is a new offensive coordinator going to accomplish. Are you sure we shouldn't get a defensive coordinator and try to take the 76ers approach or NY approach? *puke*" I'd gladly see a defensive coordinator come in and try to get us playing better D. We're a way below average defensive team, and that needs to get better. I couldn't find the stats but how many points off turnovers have we gotten compared to the rest of the teams in the league? I'd love to see this team run the court more and it starts with the defense. "And now we go full circle back to the chicken and the egg argument. Can we stop now? Let me summarize both sides: You are assuming that all the coaches are too dumb to show them, and I am assuming that the players not only should already know these basics, but that the coaching staff has indeed shown them. I say, at some point, the coach's job sometimes is to take away complexities and go simple in order to win the game, and you say the coaching staff isn't adding enough complexities, because they can't teach it as their own limitation." This goes back to my first point, I've never claimed the coaches are too dumbe to show the players the basics. What I think is that going simple in order to both win the game and provide a foundation is a sound plan. Unfortunately you can go too far with that and lose the proper diversity you need in an offense to make it reliable and successful. I think Rudy's slowly walking down that road and I think it will cause problems. I'm not saying he has to add more complex things to the pick and roll, but rather add other wrinkles in the offensive plan that aren't inherently connected to the pnr. Adding things like off ball picks or back cuts, or running someone off a little curl for a quick look doesn't disrupt the offense and gives you something varied and doen't make steve's decisions on the pick and roll any more complex.
crispee, when kenny thomas sets the pnr with steve or mooch and the ball is delivered back to him it sets him up in an isolation situation at the 3 point line with everyone standing around watching. The Rockets offense would be alot more effective if we had motion (picks, backscreens, etc.) to set up open jumpshots. The isolation is fine but when you run the same exact set 10 in a row, the defense makes adjustments.
Crispee, u are right that I think the coaching staff should add some complexities. I am not saying that the simple system does not work ever, just that sometimes u just have to mix it up. Again, if the simple pnr, or the iso that results after the initial pnr, keeps worknig, then great, keep doing it until they can stop it. Also, I dont think that our coaching staff is dumb, or they have limitations. I love Rudy. And I am not saying to change the whole system. Maybe it just needs a little tinkering. But you have to agree there has to be something wrong with our offense if we are shooting like 42% from the field after 13 games.
First off, thanks for registering to talk strategy. I always like seeing people come out with their first post. You are basically saying our offense would be better with more complexity. I agree. But I still think that pnr to Kenny/Mo/Griffin can be a strong foundation. Also, I can't totally agree with you that the pick puts Thomas at the 3 point line. If it does, that is often the inverted pnr that has Francis going to the wing and Thomas rolling to the center. We ran that alot with Bullard. Thomas at the top of the key is not bad at all. imo, that is something we could stand having more reps with. Maybe that is slowly a way to work in Kenny as a high post pivot man. That's what I r.e.a.l.l.y. want. Wouldn't you agree that Kenny (or better yet, Mo) do run picks that gave had them fade almost identically to where Malone does? The big difference when Kenny (or whoever...Griffin anyone) run the pick that leaves them at the arc is this is often due to the difference the defenses are playing our pnr versus Utah. Utah never got trapped aggressively. We are forced to deal with high traps. They don't allow Francis to position like Stockton. Other main point I've been trying to make in this thread is that we cannot grow in our system UNTIL FRANCIS MAKES THE TRAPS GO AWAY. Much of what I am reading is this thread are suggestions that Rudy should just admit defeat against the traps and move on to a different system. Now, how do you give up, when defenses are doing something so simple yet aggressive that can be exposed. If you give up to such simple defensive game plans, then what makes you think the next one is going to work. We have to beat the traps to really make the most use of Francis. Until we do, all suggested changes to the system are equivalent to giving up, imo. That is as dangerous to team confidence as losing with your bread-n-butter that is getting smothered. bottomline for me is that I do not believe in giving up on a system based on 4 out 1 in formations for this group. We have to succeed with our basics before we can grow. Sure we can talk about running double picks to Rice like Reggie (and other singular plays), but we can't base a system on that. <b>Jaybird</b> I agree with everything (I mean, everything) you said in your last post. That is a very fair read of our situation. <b>HeyDude</b> I also agree with a lot of what you say. Sometimes discussions like this get sidetrack on incongruous terminology, yet we are talking fundamentally the same. I don't want to sound like an advocate of simplicity. I'm just trying to be honest in that I see so much funk in this team that I can imagine a coach's frustration to keep it simple.
Anyone else notice Cato is suddenly setting picks for Mooch around the free throw line and then rolling towards the basket a lot more often? This creates either a mismatch for Mooch, or a Cato dunk. I'm hoping the offense does grow in this 4 weeks. Have Steve sit on the bench next to Rudy, and Rudy can talk over what he sees Steve doing, and showing Steve where the open man will be. Our offense is often run with that high pnr because of our big men. We have a collection of shooting big men, from Mo, to KT, to Griffin, and also Rice and Walt occassionally play the 4. I think Francis needs to be more aggressive in the 1st quarter. If Francis gets off, the defense often will clamp down on him, and open up for others, and allows Steve to create for others.
Thx for the compliment crispee, with regard to your last post, Why are the rockets getting trapped so much more effectively than that Jazz ever were. The one assumption I can make from the few games I've watched is that Thomas doesn't set a solid pick on Steve's man. To me it's looked more like a screen that has invited the double to get Kenny the ball. I haven't seen Kenny lay a body into the opposing point guard with any reliability. In your opinion why do we get trapped so much? I agree with you that giving up on an offensive system right now would be a huge mistake and would crush any confidence the team had. The personel we have on the team most definately leads itself to a 2-3 offensive scheme with a spread court, but the high pick and roll isn't the only offensive set you can run out of it. It's effective, and Rudy likes to use it but I don't think Steve has the mentality that effectively uses that pick and roll to it's great benefit. So I'll ask you a theoretical question, supposing the pick and roll ends up not working with Francis at the point, what's the next step? I'll leave you with a couple questions... 1. Do you move Steve to the 2 and get another PG who can run the pick and roll? 2. Assuming no for the first question, what's another offensive system you'd use with the players the Rockets have? 3. With the new plan, who needs to go and what type of player do you look to get through the draft or trades?
jaybird, First, I'm not so sure the Jazz aren't getting trapped as effectively this year. There are two reasons to explain this. One is the trap would have left Malone alone...which is more dangerous than leaving Kenny alone. Now, traps are hard to pass over, but I am sure Stockton would have found a way. The other reason is because with the new rules, the defense can trap with less risk, because they can slide a weakside rotation defender over to cover Kenny on the passive lob out of the trap. Also, I do not subscribe to the theory that the traps are preventable with a better pick. Watch the defenders. They both simply circle around Kenny to corral Steve. You cannot stop a defender who is going to go around the pick. The pick is not allowed to move, right? Going around the pick is dangerous. But when both defenders (Kenny's man and Steve's man) go around the pick on either side, Kenny cannot prevent that...he has to time his release and then it is up to Stevie. I think Stevie has three real options. One, turn that damn corner regardless of the PF leaving Kenny, and then pass weakside or attack. Two, pass weakside the moment you see the trap coming, early in the clock, and let Rice and Mobley take over. Three, get the pass to Kenny some how, some way. This is harder than it looks, especially since the defenders can now have a dude sliding over to the strongside ... for instance, at the same time the trap launches. Jaybird, As far as you speculation stuff goes "if Francis can't run a pnr consistently," I do not like to discuss personnel changes. I don't believe in it...that's not my bag. I restrict myself to the deal like a scout would. I do think we can evolve some high post pivot. We can make an offense run like two SGs, who are playing off a big man passer. btw: what do you mean 2-3 offense. I think you mean 3-2. Also, I do not agree with that. 4-1 is better with our personnel. You pronounce it 4 out 1, or 4 out 1 in. imo, and I very well could be wrong, 4out1 seems to be the most popular formation in the NBA...and this has a lot to do with the East having no centers or power forwards. Even teams with just one big man will run 4 out 1. In fact, it is actually meant for one big man and 3 guards. 3-2 is really for a low post team, like Dream and Thorpe.
The issue I've had with Kenny from what I've seen has been he's had a tendancy to step away from any pick he's setting for Steve, so there is no need for the defender to go around him to maintain the trap. What it does do is give Steve a possible lane for him to get a quick pass to Kenny especially if the defending PF is cheating in. If that passing lane doens't materialize or is ineffective the trap's set with little difficulty and Steve's got very few options: attack, kick it to the wing right away, or pull it back for either a shot or a reset. It's exactly like you said in that the new rules cause problems for this style of offense. Which is in part why the Jazz are doing so poorly themselves. I think that's why you don't see the pick and roll utilized nearly as much on the college level. Without the illegal defense call it's a lot easier to stop because you can cheat on it more. As for what I mean by a 2-3 offense, I'm speaking more of the positioning on the court as opposed to talking about the type of players on the floor. Here's a picture of it. Basically it's a typical offense, similar to what everyone uses on the court. I'm working on drawing up specific instances or plays and such for the way I see certain things. One simple little play I see Maryland run a lot in their offense is a simple off ball cut where the center drifts over to the right just a few feet out of the paint, and run an off ball screen for the 2, Juan Dixon in this case, or the Cat for the Rockets. It gets Dixon some space in the paint so he can take a quick short range jumpshot, or continue off the dribble for a layup if the defending center is slow getting back across. If they bring help from the backside, Dixon pushes it out the the 3 who has a very good look from beyond the arc. If they overcommit on the cut and cover the two, you can swing it to the power forward who can create penetration with no one on the wing to come and double, or you also have a very easy entry pass into the low post for your center. It's something quick and easy to work with, and can be run while appearing to set up the pick and roll with KT and Steve for a different look and a little variety.
cool!!! I like drawrings. The 2-3 is traditionally a center based offense, where the center goes from side to side, no? 1-2-2 is the traditional foundation of the Knight Passing Game (and as an extension, Duke), where the high post and low post are interchangeable, basically, everything is interchangeable, and spacing at the corners is key. This might be more what you really want. imo, it takes a versatile center to run either effectively. Knight always recruited centers who could pass and shoot open shots. If you have a black hole big man who can't shoot well or pass well or pick well...well! That's not us. A lack of a verstatile center often limits your choice of sets. And I presume, this is the main reason Coach K abandoned his traditional motion last year to go to a perimeter, 3-pt shooting team. I'm just talking out loud here. Again, I hope I don't sound preachy. More drawrings please.
Hehe not sounding preachy at all, after seeing what Duke's done with their offensive style, i.e. launching 3's with dribble penetration, I have to confess I dislike Coach K's style. I can't deny it's very effective though. What I've watched of Maryland basketball and their flex offense has impressed me though. And to be honest it's what I'd like to see the Rockets run in my opinion. I think it would be run very effectively with a 3 guard set and Morris and Griffin as the 4 and 5. I say this because I look to the future and the players the rockets have and it looks like it would fit. The terps run the offense with Lonny Baxter at center, a solid low post force and has the ability to pick but not much of a passer or very versatile from the outside. If Griffin can put on a bit more weight he'd be perfect for that spot. I think Coach K changed his sets because of his lack of depth at the PF and C positions. Boozer's a pretty versatile center and Battier is as versatile as they come. But aside from those two they had no one who could come in and do what they did. So he had to become more perimiter oriented. I found this flash link that goes through the flex and while it's not exactly the way I've seen it played for my terps the basics are there. Gary's finally learned how to balance the dribble penetration, feeding the low post and running the flex, which this doesn't go into. Flex Offense I'm kinda answering the questions I've posed to the board but this is what I'm familiar with and also what I think fits in with the players on the Rockets.
2 words....BILL WALTON!! hehe, no way, just kidding... RUDY needs to run a different offense, bottom line. They lose to the Grizz tomorrow, and I'm gonna be pissed. Oh yeah, pick up Eldridge Recasner, an old timer from 96 or 97, one of those years, he's a baller