Despite the struggles to score, I am overall pleased with the Rockets' offensive system. I like how JVG has instituted screens and player movement into the offense, which opens up open cuts and jump shots. Last year, the offense was horrific, full of isolations and post plays. This year, despite less results, it consists of down and cross screens, post ups, splits and high screen and rolls. There is more variety, which allows more options and allows any player to score. I also like how Yao is more free to shoot further out on the floor. He is taking 10-15 footers with confidence, and is forcing opponents' big men to play further out, which allows open lanes for Cat and SF. This will be a big plus once we face the Lakers. Despite the low scoring, we must focus on the system. And it is a highly effective system that JVG has installed, which enforces player and ball movement. It's only a matter of time before our offense equals up to our stifling defense.
Yes, I have to agree with you even though in some games we looked aweful in the offense. But we have to understand we are in transitional from Rudy to JVG's system. Also, we missed some key players; and with new players adjusting to the team. Everything added together represented adjustment for everybody. The biggest adjustment, of course, is for the guards whereas the role seems to be reversed from the last four years. It does take time. It shows the result in a lot of games. A few stinkers do not pull back the good work. As time goes by, those ugly games become less and less while the good ones will come more often. At least, that is my Christmas wish, looking forward to its unfolding to become truth.
I believe I saw a UCLA-style high post scissors cut several times versus the Clipps. It is the one where Yao handed the ball to Mobley at the FT line and Mobley drove and dunked twice when the Clipps failed to make the correct defensive switch. I do not recall seeing this set before. (It looks like a high PnR, but it is not). My personal (but perhaps minority) opinion from Game 1 was that Van Gundy can coach more offense than the Rockets' players are able to comprehend. IMHO, the next progressive step is to be able to run these plays (cuts, back screens, etc.) against good team defenses like the Spurs.
One thing that history shows us is that a good defense is more integral to championship success than a good offense. We've got the defense down pretty well, and it will only get better. I think the offense is coming along. It will be slower, and certainly some player movement will be necessary to get just the right combination out on the floor, but I am confident that we are moving in the right direction. I, unlike many others on this BBS, am also confident that this team can win with Francis and Mobley complementing Yao...so any changes that need to be made will be of the role player variety. Just give it time.
I hope there is a better explanation than that.... maybe they are being deprogrammed or something, because they seem to have absorbed the defensive coaching quickly. Anyway, I liked the plays you are refering to and hope they become more effective because they worked great yesterday. Let's see what happens against Phoenix!
Dr Robert - I knew when I submitted my post it was lacking but without the edit function I just let pass. I'll try again. And you are correct...defensive rotations and the commitment to do them are more easily incorporated than a new offensive structure. IMHO, under Rudy T a major component of the offense consisted of getting the ball into the hands of the player with the most favorable matchup and allow that player to work 1on1. For example, dumping it into Hakeem (almost always a favorable matchup ), turn him loose, if double or triple teamed, kick out to a perimeter shooter. Not too much thinking...a relatively simple reflex reaction. But usually shot clock consumming. Under Van Gundy, it's different. While admittedly known as a defensive coach, Van Gundy is an intelligent coach easily capable of installing a basic NBA offense. What I propose to you is this. As alluded to prior, Rudy T's base system did not require a lot of decision making. Even a basic NBA offense requires more decision making than one with ISO as a majority component. Now, I'm not going to get into an argument with anybody about comparing RT and JVG...the essence of the subject is polarized by its very nature. And IMO, any NBA offense (RT's , JVG's, Larry Brown's, Dunleavy Sr's, Silas's, Eddie Jordan's or Rick Adelman's), can be broken down into a 1on1 when confronted with good defenses or lack ball and player movement (the latter making mediocre defenses appear good, good ones great, and great ones unsolveable). So, when I see the Rockets under JVG start to play ISO ball, I don't make a connection to JVG's offense being "no better than RT's". I make the connection that the Rockets' players under Van Gundy have been handed a "roadmap" of offensive movements with imbedded decisions. For numerous reasons (new players, inability to adapt to realtime game situations, skills that were never needed/developed previously, lack of confidence in self or system, BBall IQ, etc.), the Rockets' players are not optimally running Van Gundys' system. And it frequently breaks down. And it's hard to add more options when the ones you've installed are being marginally performed. Now I fully expect that given the nature of this board not everyone will agree with me. But I offer these two personnal observations: 1) This season, I have yet to see Steve Francis drive the lane and go 1 on 3 or 1 or 4 as he has been known to do in prior seasons. 2) During pre-season 2002-03, RT expressed the desire to input some motion offense into the Rockets' system. It never materialized. My hunch is that the teams' personnel were unable to make the required good decisons and it was abandoned. I think the teams' offense is on the right track. And I don't think we'll emulate the Kings overnight. Probably never. But on a good night, we resemble Duncans Spurs..and that's not all bad.
I remember hearing Jackson say that it takes about 3 years to fully install the triangle, which seems like an excessively long amount of time, but it does get to one point... it takes a while for a foreign system to become second nature. JVG isn't giving the slightest amount of wiggle room with his "no excuses" philosophy, and the fans have watched bad basketball for 4 years straight so their tolerance is low also. But all that doesn't really make much difference to the reality of the learning curve. Just like you said, there is a huge difference between the decision making requirements of an iso system and all conventional systems in the NBA. If you don't use it, you lose it, and many of the Rockets having needed to use it for four or five years. It's too bad Yao didn't play against Phoenix. It would have made some good practice time, and maybe got us the win. We'll have to wait until Indiana, but I'm not sure we'll be seeing any new plays in that game. Maybe some turnovers instead.
On a side note. I very, very seldom whine about officiating. I think the best officiating is transparent. I noticed the officiating in the Suns game. The last time I noticed a lack of transparency? The home loss to the Spurs. Jack Nies and Leon Woods officiated both of those games.
