NBA Playoffs 2007: Up Tempo Offense REIGNS SUPREME

Actually, I am more interested in the Lakers' horrid defense. Can Phil coach defense? Is he a defense-minded coach? If defense wins championships, how come he won so many rings?

 

Phil is notorious for his slow it down defensive championship teams.


They weren't winning all those championships putting up 105 pts a game.

 

did you actually watch the bulls win rings???

 

hey, tonight was a real barn-burner.

 

If the coach is so non-essential to winning, why are you so upset when they fired him?

I used to think that way when they fired Rudy. But when JVG began to shape the roster into what he liked, I realized that perhaps Rudy deserved to be dismissed after many years of no playoffs appearance.

Teams usually get their stars by luck, either hitting jackpot in the draft or having someone like T-Mac fall on your lap. But the choices of role players are deliberate, shaping the team according to the coach's philosophy.

The trading of your beloved Mike James is a great illustration of this fact. When our starting PG went down, they traded away our only other PG for another PG. Why? Because the coach didn't like James as his starting PG. He wanted a low turnover guy to run his offense, even though this player had been proven to be a poor shooter. The coach preferred sure handle over shooting. That's his choice. He lived by it. It didn't produce good result. That's his fault.

Yeah, it's the players league. But the coaches choose their players.

 

I didn't say Jackson didn't coach defense. I said he was not a defense-minded coach like JVG. Jackson's Lakers have never been great defensive teams. I am pretty sure JVG could make those Lakers play a lot better defense.

Phil Jackson may be the biggest opportunist in NBA history. He's got great offensive players everywhere he goes.

Is JVG the most unlucky coach? In 9 full seasons, he never got his hands on good offensive players to play better than mediocre offense for him?

Max, I usually respect your posts. But you seem to be in denial that JVG IS the proof that defense alone can't win championships.

 

I thought it was well-known that Jackson emphasized team defense whenever he coached. From 95-96 to 97-98, the Bulls were 1st, 4th, and 3rd in the league in points per 100 possessions. The first season he started with the Lakers, they were 2nd in the entire league in points per 100 possessions. The team that he took over was 24th in that statistic the season before. Coincidentally, they won the championship the first year he took over.

But you're right, defense doesn't win it alone. You need both.

 

neither me nor JVG ever said defense alone wins championships. what i've said is that it seems to be a more important variable in winning championships than having a barn-burner offense.

i know you're going to tell me points scored really isn't a good offensive determinant (ah, $ball)...but of the 4 remaining teams, only Utah ranked in the top 13 in the league in points scored this season. they were at 6.

i'm sorry...but from what i've seen over the past 20 years in the NBA, you'll have a very difficult time convincing me otherwise.

 

as gater pointed out in the other thread in the garm, some of guys are trying to make this a black and white argument. it isn't defensive coach vs. offensive coach. adleman also coached the trailblazers to the finals and those wever fairly well balanced teams with probably one of the better defensive back courts in drexler and porter and two pretty good defensive forwards in kersey and williams.

the 04-05 rockets were probably at their best when they scored over 100 points. so jvg isn't inflexible offensively or not as stubborn as made out to be. the bottom line is everyone knew jvg had to get out of the first round to keep his job. the argument isn't really about style its about results. according to most people on this site, this is supposed to be a championship contender, most especially thought that when the tmac trade went down. it isn't three years in. time for change. it really is quite simple which i guess is black and white. but results usually are.

 

the question we're arguing is, how much change? if the goal is to bring in a new coach who the owner THINKS is gonna bring an up-tempo style while he's saying things like, "i wanna be more phoenix-like"...well...i think that kind of change is stupid. for more than one reason. and i think with the limitations we have for changing our roster, we're gonna be in for a bit of a rebuilding phase.

 

well I don't buy into the argument that jvg is completely immune from the roster issue. he traded two athletic players for battier, he was in on that move. he didn't attempt to get kirk snyder involved, which I completely don't understand. and i'm definitely not in the play novak and spanoulis crowd.

 

ok. i'll agree with you on some of that. i didn't like the trade for battier, and i was pretty vocal about that last year. i just don't get the sense that JVG was kicked out of town because of his personnel moves. to the contrary, i think he's being kicked out of town because ownership believes he didn't get enough out of the roster he has.

 

It’s a player’s league, but what type of system is best suited for acquiring players?

Up-tempo or half court?

I say up-tempo. It gives you much more flexibility in terms of player personnel moves. Run an up-tempo offense. Inflate your players’ stats. If they don’t fit, you still have the option of trading them away for a better fit. If you run a rigid half court offense and a player doesn’t fit, you’re stuck trading that player for scraps (Swift).

How many trade assets have the Suns and Mavs (when they were more up-tempo) assembled the past few years running an up-tempo offense?

How few trade assets have the Rockets accumulated running their ugly half-court offense?

I’m not saying up-tempo is a permanent solution, but it’s something we have to try to maybe get a little more value out of our players. Once we have enough talent, maybe then we can be a little pickier about what type of offense needs to be run to win a championship. Much like Dallas has done the past couple of seasons.

 

and how many rings have they won again, while teams like miami, detroit and san antonio have been successful?

 

How much closer have they come to winning a ring than the Rockets?

The Rockets have tried building a team that resembles Miami, Detroit and San Antonio and they have failed miserably. Time to try something else.

 

Also, my point was not that up-tempo basketball wins championships.

SamFisher claimed that systems (up-tempo/half-court) and coaches don’t win championships. Players win championship. And I don’t disagree with that. I just think up-tempo basketball makes it easier to acquire enough talent to win championships.

 

you model teams that won it all...not the types of teams that haven't seen an NBA title in 20 years.