haven: 1)good points re: the increased random factor in close games, as determied by defense. That's sort of what I meant when discussing the fact that defensive teams are usually so configured to account for lesser talent. Teams with superior talent usually want to maximize their victory margin. 2) Disagree about why trend is towards defense, though. Think that, as court/key size is limited, and as players increase in size/mobility rato, the physical opportunities will decrease. In other words, while there is something to what you say, I feel a greater factor is that there are better, bigger athletes than ever before, ( although less skill, in general, agree) which translates to defense more easily than offense. DavidS: 1) Agree that, in the short term shifting focus ( or creating some focus) will help...but long term, will prioritizing this be the best answer? 2) Have real problems with this statement: There is a reason they call something a foundation...it's damned close to permanent. Changing our entire focus would not be an easy task, and while having good defensive habits to complement eventual offensive scheme is a nice theory, it takes a lot of work to shift team styles of play. Charvo: I might agree with your premise re: offense being ultimately key factor, but don;t agree with your support. Jordan's Bulls were A) more talented, B) more ref protected than the NY Knicks of the time, who were probably overachieving. Smeg: Yeah, I think that the decision to loosen Yao might be good short term, but possibly less so long term. It depends on whether the coaches felt that keeping him in there until he learned was actually hampering his development, hurting his confidence to an unacceptable degree, etc. I'm not sure that defense had to be the answer because we had none last year. Am sure that we needed to commit to something, and that defense was probably the quickest to teach...so am open to the argument that, even in the long run, having developed an identity with some upside is more important than trying to develop an identity with a longer timeline but higher ceiling. Am less impressed by JVG saying he's not tailoring his talent to fit system, as almost every coach says that, irrespective of what he does. Yeah, he might have observed expolitable alterations in NBA play, but think of this: Was his defense-forst midset in play while makeing those observations? Had he been an offensive minded coach, would he have noticed other things, and come up with different schemes? Posters in geneal: Re: the whole "unstoppable" player idea...is something of a chicken and egg, no? Sane: nice post...but there are layers between defense first/slow it down on offense and the Kings, no? room: As said, I am willing to accept the possibility that JVG's ability to instill any sense of identity and direction is the most important development, irrespective of whether that direction is the best one, long term. That was the reason I prefered him to some of the other coaching possibilities, that I knew he would do this, although I am impressed with how far he has gotten us to come this soon, in the direction of his choice. Sisshir: great post, and that is my hope. My concern is that certain traits, once they become truly 'learned' can hamper development in other areas, as offense and defense are not independant of each other. An example: The Rockets are among the teams who show their defensive priorization by routinely only going for offensive boards with 2 men, almost always sending 3 back. This becomes part of your system, and your success. Should you later decide to put more emphasis on offense, this is an automatic area where adjustment would make sense, but how much of our defensive success is predicsted on getting 3 back to prevent breaks, as opposed to individual defensive habits? And there are several other specific examples...yes, defensive schemes can and often do lead to better individual defensive habits...but they can also mask poor individual defensive abilities, and when you try and adjust... Riley: Obviously the whole thing is predicated on Yao becoming one of those players. If he doesn't, then we've hitched our wagon to a non-star, and it will take a lot more than a scheme to make us a true perennial contender. Excellent post, BTW. Yetti: An interesting perspective..it could be that JVG is just going with what he knows while he assesses the team...Hadn't really considered that, and am not convinced of it's valididty, but it's an interesting thought. Nolan: We are thinking alike. R-Pimp: "Defense wins championships. Period." Can you explain this? I know it's an accepted maxim, but what is the basis? All the teams you mentioned were at least 'good' on D, I agree, but then again they were all at least 'good' on O too. I doubt if too many title teams were less than good in any significant area...but the basis for this idea that, ultimately, defense is THE road to winning eludes me. Gocart: When I'm feeling optimisitc, that is how I look at it...like building a house. But as I;ve pointed out, there will always be choices that come down to " Do I put offense or defense first?", and I rather suspect JVG will always go one way. And, long term, am unsure of that's the best way to go. Also, 60's should have read 80's, ( typo) as never saw 60's teams play. Agree that Celts played halfcourt, but their focus was clearly on O. Their two best players were easily more offenive oriented, and while DJ was a defensive stud, Ainge was erratic, and Chief defended some types well, other types less so. But Bird himself said that, like the Lakers, their focus was on scoring more than stopping the other guys from doing so, and the numbers back it up.
MacBeth, I got pulled into your defintion of *tailor talent to system*, or *tailor system to talent*...(ONE or the OTHER)... I'd say that the NCAA would be the best example of: tailor talent to system. To me, that means, "It's the system or the highway! No showboating!!! Follow the system. I rule with an iron fist!" That's extreme. I would say that while it is true that this type of coaching exist in the NCAA, even those coaches would allow for some exploitation of the natual ablity of the players on the roster. But overall, the "system runs the show." Move to the NBA, and I'd say that: tailor the system to the talent exists. To me, that means, "Who's my "star?" Ok, now lets give the ball to my best player and let him do his thing." That's extreme (Rudy). I would say that while it is true that this type of coaching exist in the NBA, even these coaches would allow for some type of stucture for the players to follow. But overall, the "players run the show." Rudy (the players run the show): He's gave tooooo much freedom to each guy. Too simplistic. Too open. No structure. But he also asked, "Who's my best shooter? Who's my best passer? Who's my best rebounder? etc, etc..." The problem was that after he made that assement, he'd just leave them hangging without any direction after that. Thus, inconsistency followed with young players, but flourished with veterans. JVG (the system runs the show): He's more like an NCAA coach. But, he DOES also look at what players can do. He knows players natural ablities. The problem with the ROCKETS was that they lacked in the *fundamental department* sooo bad, that he had to do a crash course "101 fundamental basketball." That's what he's doing now. I mean JVG even said he hates the word "system." He says all that's required is a basic knowledge of "Passing, cutting, rebounding, defending, shooting!!! What JVG is saying is, "IT'S NOT ROCKET SCIENCE PEOPLE!!! Learn the funadmentals! Geesh!" Now, next year(maybe even later this year). After a solid traninng camp, JVG will start to exploit players natural ablities. I do belive that will happen. So, maybe defense SEEMS like a main focus now, but it WONT SEEM like it later. The players should be able to run plays without thinking. The plays should become second nature. JVG even said that what he's been working on mostly on offense, not defense. It's just that the defense has made more progress (on TV). While in the background (training) they are working on the offense. It just takes longer for progress to be made on offense (due to the Rockets' lack of simple things like passing, cutting, shooting...) when he first arrived. You asked... "If JVG had been an offensive-minded (first) coach, would he have seen other things about players ablities?" Yes. But lets see what happens when the team starts to learn this offense. Maybe JVG is not worring about those small details just yet. As in, he sees them, but feels it's not the most important thing to learn just yet.
ttstk123, I think most people understood that "unstoppable force" wasn't to be taken literally. Shaq has been know to miss shots. Thus, "Unstoppable force" is just a metaphor used to describe a "nearly unstoppable force." Think basketball (abstract). Not physics (literal).
I'm not sure I would agree with this. IMHO Jason Kidd in terms of what he can do has been the best player of recent years. Yet he's been beat three times by teams with more talent. The problem with relying primarily on one player is that basketball is at its essence a team sport. For a great guard like Jordan he has a wide ranging affect on the game because he is both the main scoring option, passing option and ball handling option. Even MJ though needed other players to take pressure off of him, rebound and defend the four other players on the floor in opposing uniforms. For big men they are even more reliant on guards and others to feed them the ball and relieve inside defensive pressure by hitting outside shots. This is where things like defense and fundamental systems work because you can get the most out of having only one good player as long as the rest of the team plays defense and control the ball enough to feed that one great player.
Back at ya Macbeth (or should I say the Scottish Play?) I agree that you have to worry about the Rox getting stuck in bad habits. Also you are right that basketball more than any other major sport offense and defense are more fluid and a great basketball team relies upon good defense to spark great offense. I think fanatic Rox we be will agree the Rox aren't there yet but I think looking at the past few games there is hope that the Rox can meld their great D with better O. I don't necessarily think it is a bad thing that the Rox only send 2 players after offensive rebounds because one of those two is Yao. Yao is still learning the art of NBA rebounding but he is 7'-6" and has exceptional offensive abilities. As Yao gets better at rebounding and putting it back in its not going to hurt the Rox to send wing players out in transition D if they are Yao can be counted on to get the rebound and either put it back in or hold it to reset the offense.
I do agree that Defense should be a priority and also that a defensive foundation is necessary for all teams. Case in point: Dallas. You just can look at the talent they have assembled and note that they do not seem to have what is takes to get over the top. Their high scoring affairs are fun for highlights, but who is going to standup and hustle hard knowing that they may drop their O a bit and not score as much? However, there has to be balance too because there are 2 seasons to play for (regular seeding and playoffs). Right now, having a stopper in the middle is not as much of a hot ticket during the regular season the way zones are played, but having a point who can guard and make stops is a hot ticket. I am not saying that this holds true year to year, but right now zones are allowed and it is easier to play without a defensive center. Let's be real though. There are 2 seasons. Play during the season is different that during the playoffs. Teams change their tone and style a bit and come playoff time, I believe the game goes back tothe advantage is with teams that have a D prescence at the 4/5.
I'll agree that defense is the first and foremost thing to get down as JVG learns his team, and visa versa. Good defense should be counted on at all times, whereas offense can't be. I believe that learning to be a great offensive team will take a lot longer that it would to become a great defensive team. We may not be the best on offense, ever, but we can work with what we got to stop other great offenses. You gotta have defense. Additionally, I'd just like to add that if we tried to run and gun, then Yao would have to carry an oxygen tank with him down the floor.
"Defense wins championships" is part of a longer saying that might begin thus: "A good offense will get you to the playoffs, but..." I think it means that most teams can build a good offense; it's the teams that commit themselves to playing good defense, too, are the ones that win. Obviously, this saying was coined back in the days when most teams could build a good offense. Nowadays, with the zone legal and good shooters a rarity, the saying might be reversed: A good defense will get you to the playoffs, but offense wins championships. Balance and poise win championships. You start with the basics and add that extra touch that makes you better than everyone else. In the old days, you started with offense and added defense.* Now you start with defense and add offense. (Obvious exceptions are Sacramento and Dallas, throwback teams that start with offense. Dallas has yet to add that great defense, and when Sacramento did it, they beat the Lakers ... or should have. They lacked the poise to bounce back from one of the worst officiated games in league history to win game seven at home.) Either way, you need a good defense, and I'm happ[y to see the Rockets near the top of the league in team D. *The saying might have originates with the Russell led Celtics. They practically invented NBA defense.
Kidd has never been the best player in the league. Not even close, really. I don't think there's anyone on this planet that would rather have Kidd over Shaq or Duncan.
I see your point, David, but ultimately whatever you establish as your foundation will remain so unless you go through a significant overhaul. Maybe defense makes the best foundation..I have reached no conclusions. Maybe next year we will see the ground floor built...but the house will still take on the overall shape dictated by the foundation, in this case defense. One of thge great unknowns about JVG before he took this job was how will he work with offensive talent, something he never really had in New York. I was interested, and encouraged by his vows to make us an inside out team. So far it's been much more talk than action, but on the other end we have made huge strides. This is obviously a reflection of his priorities, and while it reaffirms ( in Dolby ) his credentials as a defensive guru, I think that the already exisiting question surrounding his offensive coaching abilities have to be still seen as unanswered...and moreover, it is perhaps going to always remain so if JVG remains as extreme in his priorization towards defense as is currently evident. Many people have offered possible explanations, optimisitic predictions of future progress, and most of them are valid...but I would say that, at this point, JVG has essentially confirmed both the good and the bad of his rep coming in.
My point wasn't to necessarily cast the move as 'good' or 'bad', merely as a limitation. Yes, Yao is 7'6", which will benefit him, but on the other hand he has a propensity for tipping rebounds, which means being outnumbered will compund the negative effect of that habit. Yes, he'll get better...but that would be true were we to send 3 or 4 in, and the offensive/defensive beenfit ratio of same would still apply. Possibly, if he develops as we expect, we would be giving up the chance to be an absolutely dominat offensive rebounding team, who knows...Point being that whatever effect Yao has will still be negatively effected by the same degree by the decision to prioritize defense.
we have the great potential who only knows the fundamentalsand a super athletic player who doesn't . Steve as you remeber had family touble in high school and quit basketball and had to go to junior college before making the maryland squad. So he never learned the fundamentals. It's going to take a year or two for both of them. Let's hope it's one
Sorry, do you mean it's going to take Steve another year or two, or do you mean it'll take them both a year or two to learn JVG's fundamentals? Agree that Steve missed some early development, but he's been in the league half of a decade now...
as an alum of the jr college which you obviously think doesnt teach fundamentals I must object...I used to go watch practices between classes when I was there...and they work hard on the fundamental aspects of the game constantly... You are referring to the jr college that was a powerhouse in its division at the time that Cassell and Francis attended.. the coach of the Ravens preaches fundamentals above all else..but as with all sports and teams...the coach can only teach, it is up to the players to execute. this is his record since he has been coach.. sure, the competition at that level isnt as good as the Div1 colleges...but to assume that they dont teach fundamentals at that level is flatout wrong...
yea maybe so but those coaches were probably just so happy to have somone so athletic he didn't have time to teach fundamentals and rewrite the playbook. And in the league under Rudy T which I love too but he wasn't strict enough fo players like steve.Yea a year or two it takes time to win championships. We'll make the playoffs and hopefully win one this year and next year if and this is a big if as of now steve works with the other players in the summer.In a couple of years hopefully next we can legitimately compete for the title.
