|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
lukewaltonsdad
Star Player
Joined: 09 Jul 2014
Posts: 2983
|
 Posted: Tue Nov 24, 2015 12:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| fiendishoc wrote: | So I stumbled upon this quote by Byron after the Raptors game:
| Quote: | “They went with a small lineup,” Scott said. “I even told our coaches, I said, 'Man, this is a game I wish I could get Roy back in there,' but they had Patterson, James Johnson, and they were pretty small, and they had us pretty much spread out.”
|
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2591895-have-new-nba-trends-rendered-la-lakers-center-roy-hibbert-obsolete
I'm not going to talk about the misguided decision to play Bass at the five spot this time, but rather about keeping Roy off the floor. Basically, Byron played right into the other coach's hands in benching the Laker's only interior defender. It's not like the Lakers were facing the Warrior's doom lineup- none of those guys in the Raptors small lineups outside of Carroll have been shooting well from three point line this season.
Roy didn't play starting from 3:02 left in the 3rd quarter. Instead he had Bass at center from that point until 6:25 left in the 4th when Randle came in to take over as small ball center. In this span the Lakers went from a tie game 65-65 to down 91-75. Our lineup had neither the rebounding to punish the other team on the glass, nor the shooting or guard skills at five positions to match their offense.
This is what I said about small ball in September, before the season started:
| Quote: | This is a mistake a lot of people are making when talking about small ball. It's not a magic bullet that's going to make your team better whenever you use it. You use it to make another team adjust, possibly sacrificing one of their advantages - the obvious one being having to bench their rim protector.
That's why my concern is not about Byron's willingness to go small, which, going by his offseason interview, is going to happen. My concern is whether he understands the why and when of going small. For example, opposing teams are almost definitely going to go small against us to play Hibbert off the floor. If, Scott sees this and says, great, now I can roll out my small ball because the other team is smaller, he's playing right into the other team's hands.
A good coach would find a way to keep Hibbert on the floor. And then versus a Whiteside or Gobert, go small in stretches with Randle at the 5 to keep them off the floor. |
If you're going to go small, go small with Randle and four shooters. If not, then keep Hibbert on the floor and come up with a scheme that can take advantage of his size. |
I remember you said this; I actually thought of this today as I was thinking about the game. This is the 2nd time it's happened this year that I can remember off the top of my head.
Good stuff as always... |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
dood23
Franchise Player
Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Posts: 12084
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 24, 2015 1:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
So what's going on with our transition game? We don't get a lot of fastbreak opportunities and get killed on the other end.
_________________
"There's only 2 dudes better than me, and I'm BOTH OF THEM." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tox
Franchise Player
Joined: 16 Nov 2015
Posts: 17880
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 24, 2015 2:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
| dood23 wrote: | | So what's going on with our transition game? We don't get a lot of fastbreak opportunities and get killed on the other end. |
How much of it falls on Kobe? So many missed long jumper that lead to a long rebound. Compound that with Kobe not getting back in time and you have to have other teams salivating at the prospect of Kobe shooting (and missing) jumpers |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bonkers
Star Player
Joined: 25 Apr 2013
Posts: 6071
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 25, 2015 1:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I can't imagine there's anything left to analyze with how simple and ineffective all of our sets look  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fiendishoc
Star Player
Joined: 23 Jun 2005
Posts: 8488
Location: The (real) short corner
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 25, 2015 7:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| tox wrote: | | dood23 wrote: | | So what's going on with our transition game? We don't get a lot of fastbreak opportunities and get killed on the other end. |
How much of it falls on Kobe? So many missed long jumper that lead to a long rebound. Compound that with Kobe not getting back in time and you have to have other teams salivating at the prospect of Kobe shooting (and missing) jumpers |
The transition defense has actually looked a little better the past few games. Guys are actually starting their move back when the shot goes up. The floor balance of the triangle sets also helps a bit. Of course, there are still problems with guys knowing their assignments and how to cover for each other, and individual things like not getting back after taking a shot, like you mentioned. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fiendishoc
Star Player
Joined: 23 Jun 2005
Posts: 8488
Location: The (real) short corner
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 26, 2015 7:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
Here's a visualization of our offensive tendencies for last season and this season vs the rest of the league, from Nylon Calculus:
Ouch. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tox
Franchise Player
Joined: 16 Nov 2015
Posts: 17880
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 26, 2015 5:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm surprised the "shot selection" category didn't turn the shape concave. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fiendishoc
Star Player
Joined: 23 Jun 2005
Posts: 8488
Location: The (real) short corner
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 27, 2015 5:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
Here's a breakdown of the Lakers offense from FB&G:
http://www.forumblueandgold.com/2015/11/24/an-examination-of-the-lakers-offense/
They mention many of the problems we've talked about here, and go into other issues in detail.
| Quote: | | As long as the Lakers’ offense is not forcing the opposition to scramble and work on defense, the Lakers will have to work harder on defense. Fastbreaks will ensue. The team will be forced to excel on halfcourt defense when no perimeter player can stay in front of his man. And fixing the offense is the coaching staff’s obligation. While some say that once the team is turned around a better coach can be found, I say that having a good coach is essential to start turning things around. Someone the players believe in but someone that can adjust his team accordingly. Player development must happen in four main areas: skill, physical, tactics and emotion control. I’m sure we can develop the first two. Can our coaching staff develop the other two? Can our veterans provide the help the coaching staff needs? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
A Mad Chinaman
Star Player
Joined: 07 Apr 2005
Posts: 6148
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 27, 2015 12:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Being outside of the country (can't see YouTube) but ironically able to see past games with Byron coaching Irving and CP3 (as rookies), it is fascinating to see how much better those offenses were flowing
What is/are the differences?
Irving/CP3 were at that time more physically gifted and mature. Maybe Kenny Smith's comment on Porzingus applies to DLO, they are players with NBS skills in a high school body |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fiendishoc
Star Player
Joined: 23 Jun 2005
Posts: 8488
Location: The (real) short corner
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 27, 2015 6:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| A Mad Chinaman wrote: | Being outside of the country (can't see YouTube) but ironically able to see past games with Byron coaching Irving and CP3 (as rookies), it is fascinating to see how much better those offenses were flowing
What is/are the differences?
Irving/CP3 were at that time more physically gifted and mature. Maybe Kenny Smith's comment on Porzingus applies to DLO, they are players with NBS skills in a high school body |
I haven't seen those games, so I can't comment on that. I have heard that Scott scrapped his offense early on in Kyrie's rookie year. Kyrie has been one of the NBA's most efficient isolation scorers for years now, so lack of structure isn't going to impede his scoring that much. CP3 faced defenses that weren't fully taking advantage of the legal zone rules (which were copied around the league when the Celtics won the title in 2008).
The other difference I think between those teams and this team is the way we're using our bigs who can't really shoot. Randle is the worst shooter on the team, but they have him standing at the three point line where his man is free mess up the team's offensive spacing. Hibbert can shoot, but they don't use him that way. A similar problem as last year, when Jordan Hill, an inefficient outside shooter and below average passer was out there one step inside the three point line, and there were no lanes to get to the basket. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Number 7
Starting Rotation
Joined: 27 Nov 2015
Posts: 953
Location: Greece
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 27, 2015 7:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| dood23 wrote: | | So what's going on with our transition game? We don't get a lot of fastbreak opportunities and get killed on the other end. |
That's not the issue. The issue is that secondary transition, the deadliest phase in basketball, is not utilized because we're not pushing the ball up the court at the change of possession. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
A Mad Chinaman
Star Player
Joined: 07 Apr 2005
Posts: 6148
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 28, 2015 12:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| fiendishoc wrote: | | A Mad Chinaman wrote: | Being outside of the country (can't see YouTube) but ironically able to see past games with Byron coaching Irving and CP3 (as rookies), it is fascinating to see how much better those offenses were flowing
What is/are the differences?
Irving/CP3 were at that time more physically gifted and mature. Maybe Kenny Smith's comment on Porzingus applies to DLO, they are players with NBS skills in a high school body |
I haven't seen those games, so I can't comment on that. I have heard that Scott scrapped his offense early on in Kyrie's rookie year. Kyrie has been one of the NBA's most efficient isolation scorers for years now, so lack of structure isn't going to impede his scoring that much. CP3 faced defenses that weren't fully taking advantage of the legal zone rules (which were copied around the league when the Celtics won the title in 2008).
The other difference I think between those teams and this team is the way we're using our bigs who can't really shoot. Randle is the worst shooter on the team, but they have him standing at the three point line where his man is free mess up the team's offensive spacing. Hibbert can shoot, but they don't use him that way. A similar problem as last year, when Jordan Hill, an inefficient outside shooter and below average passer was out there one step inside the three point line, and there were no lanes to get to the basket. |
Understand that you didn't have the chance to watch many games of Irving during his rookie season.
Seeing Randle at the 3pt line doing nothing was always an interesting sight that has occurred far too many times - especially with Kobe or Hibbert working on the post/low block.
As we have both acknowledged, CP3 and Irving (interesting Irving/Byron tidbit at http://www.fearthesword.com/2014/4/28/5660058/kyrie-irving-los-angeles-lakers-byron-scott-rumors) have far superior physical skills than DLO - who appears and/or have been treated more like players such as Nash, Parker, Stockton and McConnell (Lillard's partner at guard).
The Cav game I saw didn't have a lot of ISOs but a flow that very easily could have been a precursor of the Warriors/Spurs' schemes. Acknowledging that the game I watched was later in the season and the lineup had mostly veterans outside of irving, the flow was much smoother - like the way the plays looked in practice.
If Williams, Swaggy and Bass are not being excellent models of how to WIN in the NBA, one is wondering why they are playing.
If DLO does not have the confidence to lead the team, when is it time for Kobe to control the offense and making good decisions (like not taking 3pt shots when a better shot that is closer is available
Their bigs that year were the following (http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/CLE/2012.html):
Semi Erden (not a shooter)
Luke Harangody (not a great shooter)
Ryan Hollins (not a shooter)
Anton Jamison (obvious shooter but an average passer, but did not see much in the game I watched)
Tristan Thompson (not a shooter)
Anderson Varejao (not a shooter)
Luke Walton (definitely not a shooter though an obvious great passer and he played a lot in the game watched)
Team is playing without any leaders on the court to organized and give focus to the offensive sets. With Kobe allowing DLO to take the reins and DLO not playing with a clear and knowledgeable focus on providing a direction - it is a rudderless ship. Heursta is a definite liability on defense, but he does provide a leader on the court and tells people where they should be.
One hopes that with Curry embarrassing him (though, as DB had described, had good stats), getting numbers on a bad team is easy (see Okafor on the 0-15 76ers team).
As many have stated before, it is a "Player's League" and "Making Baskets" league (as noted by The Black Mamba being one of the best "bad shot" shooters in NBA history). The current rookies do not come close to having the drive, passion, commitment and skills that Kobe has - few do) but they have a chance to be like the Spurs team with many good-to excellent players executing a system flawlessly and Warriors (with one great superstar in Curry surrounded by many good to excellent players). TD is a HofFer, but Manu and Parker are borderline bonafide superstars that could NOT be considered in anybody's GOAT in any poll in any position. These three are impeccable in executing Pop's system
Randle, Clarkson, DLO, Nance and Black have the potential of executing the vaunted UCLA full court press that would challenge the Warriors' version. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
22
Franchise Player
Joined: 05 Apr 2013
Posts: 17063
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 28, 2015 1:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Number 7 wrote: | | dood23 wrote: | | So what's going on with our transition game? We don't get a lot of fastbreak opportunities and get killed on the other end. |
That's not the issue. The issue is that secondary transition, the deadliest phase in basketball, is not utilized because we're not pushing the ball up the court at the change of possession. |
Agreed |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fiendishoc
Star Player
Joined: 23 Jun 2005
Posts: 8488
Location: The (real) short corner
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 29, 2015 9:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | The Cav game I saw didn't have a lot of ISOs but a flow that very easily could have been a precursor of the Warriors/Spurs' schemes. Acknowledging that the game I watched was later in the season and the lineup had mostly veterans outside of irving, the flow was much smoother - like the way the plays looked in practice |
Maybe only when Luke was facilitating out of the high post, considering he was even better at doing that than Bogut or Lee. Otherwise I doubt there was much flow. I've watched the Cavs in 2012/2013. It was a version of what we saw last year and this year on the Lakers with more high pnr, less triangle. Stagnant, with a lot of resets into pnr or isos. Varejao playing the high post facilitator was a bit more mobile than Hill or Hibbert, but still that offense was ugly, and their ratings showed it. I mean you had Alonzo Gee running a lot of PnRs like you saw Wes and Ellington doing last year. But at least Thompson and Varejao rolled to the basket. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fiendishoc
Star Player
Joined: 23 Jun 2005
Posts: 8488
Location: The (real) short corner
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 29, 2015 9:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
Reposting this from the other thread, as I think it's relevant to this one.
| watchME wrote: | | fiendishoc wrote: | All this focal point and 1st option stuff is off base. Good offenses don't have these sort of things, but instead move the ball around where everyone can threaten the defense in their own way. The stats will accumulate for the talented players.
It's about needing an entire offensive overhaul. Sure he can put up bigger numbers if you put him with four role players and ran PnR every possession. But that would limit his potential and the team's potential in the future. Unfortunately, not much can be done either way until Byron's gone. |
So let me ask you a question. In this system where we run set plays, in what % of those plays does kobe end up with the shot in the play vs kobe? |
I think you have a typo in there somewhere, but I get what you're asking. The sets change from game to game. Not all of our plays necessarily call for the first option to shoot it, but Kobe is usually involved in most of them when he's on the floor. Take the start of the Blazers game for example. Here are the halfcourt sets we ran.
1: Horns Elbow Away - Randle the passer from the elbow, Kobe starting from weak corner to get staggered screens. Kobe doesn't get open. They post up/iso Hibbert. Miss.
2: Triangle pinch post - Randle enters it into Kobe at the pinch post and then sets a screen for him to create out of the PnR. The double him, Kobe gets it to Randle who doesn't shoot, and then Randle posts up. Miss.
3: High pick and roll - Russell pnr with Hibbert. Russell makes the right read kicking it to Kobe, who doesn't shoot, and instead isos. Hibbert ducks in for the deep post, gets the pass from Kobe and gets stripped.
4: Horns elbow pindown - Kobe the passer from the elbow, Randle at the strong corner as the 1st option. Kobe gets it to Randle inside who scores.
5: Horns elbow pindown - Same configuration, but instead of cutting inside, Randle comes up and sets the ball screen for Kobe who shoots the airball.
6: High pnr - Clarkson and Hibbert high pnr. Kobe ends up with it and pounds the ball in an iso for 9 seconds and misses the fadeaway jumper.
7: Horns double screen pnr - Hibbert and Randle both set screens for Russell, Lillard goes under so Russell takes the pullup 3 but misses.
8: Triangle pinch post - Clarkson to Randle in pinch post. Randle runs the two man game with Clarkson, who gets it back to him for the jumper at the elbow.
9: Isolation - Kobe is matched up with Lillard, so they decide to isolate him. He misses the short bank.
10: Horns elbow pindown - Hibbert the passer from the elbow. Kobe starts in the strong corner as option one. Russell sets the pindown for him and then pops up for the handoff as option two. Russell misses the mid range jumper after going away from the screen. First sub comes in at 6:24 left in the first.
So, almost the same plays as last year, and its all very Kobe centric, but you can't just slot Clarkson into his spot because he's not going be posting from the elbow or pinch post. Also, the elbow plays seem to be designed for the SF to come off the screens, not the SG. They do try to run a play or two each for Randle, Clarkson (pnr), and Russell (pnr).
Could they replace all those Kobe plays with Clarkson plays? Sure, but with this playbook, it will look like hi pnr, hi pnr, hi pnr, and Clarkson probably is going to be taking most of those shots himself, or throwing it to Randle or Kobe on the perimeter to iso. That may end up being more efficient than what we're doing now, but it's still not good offense, because teams will figure it out.
The best thing that we can do with this crappy playbook would probably be having Russell run the PnR with Randle all the time (and actually make him roll), then have Clarkson be the guy up on the wing on the weak side, so he can get the pass when his man goes to tag Randle. Clarkson can then get the secondary PnR vs a shifting defense. But still, I'd prefer free flowing offense with good spacing, motion, and continuity. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
A Mad Chinaman
Star Player
Joined: 07 Apr 2005
Posts: 6148
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 29, 2015 9:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| fiendishoc wrote: | | Quote: | | The Cav game I saw didn't have a lot of ISOs but a flow that very easily could have been a precursor of the Warriors/Spurs' schemes. Acknowledging that the game I watched was later in the season and the lineup had mostly veterans outside of irving, the flow was much smoother - like the way the plays looked in practice |
Maybe only when Luke was facilitating out of the high post, considering he was even better at doing that than Bogut or Lee. Otherwise I doubt there was much flow. I've watched the Cavs in 2012/2013. It was a version of what we saw last year and this year on the Lakers with more high pnr, less triangle. Stagnant, with a lot of resets into pnr or isos. Varejao playing the high post facilitator was a bit more mobile than Hill or Hibbert, but still that offense was ugly, and their ratings showed it. I mean you had Alonzo Gee running a lot of PnRs like you saw Wes and Ellington doing last year. But at least Thompson and Varejao rolled to the basket. |
Agree about your assessment while pinpointing the reason why Luke was in the game, though he passed on several clean mid-range shots.
The reason why I watched the game for 3 quarters was to see if their offensive flow for that game (perimeter guys were penetrating the paint and kicking out to the shooters - ala Spurs. Strange that I could count the number of times Irving was in an ISO situation and was trying to figure out why (translation: Luke kept the ball moving).
Given Kobe's recent retirement announcement, do you feel (hopefully) that Kobe will take a lessor role and/or be part of a veteran-laden second team that could include Williams, Swaggy, MWP/Bass, Kobe and Huerstas?
This would provide a starting lineup of Hibbert, Randle, Nance, Clarkson and DLO - especially since Byron has mentioned that a lineup change is fast-approaching? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TooMuchMajicBuss
Franchise Player
Joined: 17 Sep 2008
Posts: 21080
Location: In a white room, with black curtains near the station
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 05, 2015 10:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Mad Chinaman - unfortunately I fear we have our answer. If I'm not mistaken it's even more Kobe-centric than before he made it official. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
A Mad Chinaman
Star Player
Joined: 07 Apr 2005
Posts: 6148
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 05, 2015 4:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| TooMuchMajicBuss wrote: | | Mad Chinaman - unfortunately I fear we have our answer. If I'm not mistaken it's even more Kobe-centric than before he made it official. |
Acknowledging the accuracy of your assessment, "HOPEFULLY" the Black Mamba will treat this like his past obstacles/injuries to figure out ways to WIN (as oppose to personal glory).
In the past, when he couldn't score in the playoffs - he helped in other ways. On this team, fulfilling the team's need to have a legitimate post threat and his obvious abilities in the paint seems to be too logical. Hibbert and Randle are not and/or should be but unwilling/inefficient/inexperienced players. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Shaolin's Finest
Star Player
Joined: 08 Jan 2009
Posts: 1430
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 05, 2015 4:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Someone link this thread to Byron |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tox
Franchise Player
Joined: 16 Nov 2015
Posts: 17880
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 07, 2015 11:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| So what's up with Clarkson's defense? Doesn't really seem to be an issue with effort or athleticism, but he routinely gets blown by his defender or otherwise torched. I can't pinpoint why exactly that is. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
najim
Starting Rotation
Joined: 19 Nov 2007
Posts: 337
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 08, 2015 11:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
Just wanted to say that I check this thread daily for any new X's and O's insight. Thanks to fiendishoc and others for their contributions.
For me, breaking down the offensive/defensive problems is very cathartic to dealing with the frustration that has been this entire year. I've already gained a ton from this thread, and always look for more!
_________________
This is what a B. Scott offense looks like: http://i.imgur.com/q2hlUZc.jpg
(everyone standing still, and three guys pointing to each other) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fiendishoc
Star Player
Joined: 23 Jun 2005
Posts: 8488
Location: The (real) short corner
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 09, 2015 9:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| lukewaltonsdad wrote: | | fiendishoc wrote: | So I stumbled upon this quote by Byron after the Raptors game:
| Quote: | “They went with a small lineup,” Scott said. “I even told our coaches, I said, 'Man, this is a game I wish I could get Roy back in there,' but they had Patterson, James Johnson, and they were pretty small, and they had us pretty much spread out.”
|
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2591895-have-new-nba-trends-rendered-la-lakers-center-roy-hibbert-obsolete
I'm not going to talk about the misguided decision to play Bass at the five spot this time, but rather about keeping Roy off the floor. Basically, Byron played right into the other coach's hands in benching the Laker's only interior defender. It's not like the Lakers were facing the Warrior's doom lineup- none of those guys in the Raptors small lineups outside of Carroll have been shooting well from three point line this season.
Roy didn't play starting from 3:02 left in the 3rd quarter. Instead he had Bass at center from that point until 6:25 left in the 4th when Randle came in to take over as small ball center. In this span the Lakers went from a tie game 65-65 to down 91-75. Our lineup had neither the rebounding to punish the other team on the glass, nor the shooting or guard skills at five positions to match their offense.
This is what I said about small ball in September, before the season started:
| Quote: | This is a mistake a lot of people are making when talking about small ball. It's not a magic bullet that's going to make your team better whenever you use it. You use it to make another team adjust, possibly sacrificing one of their advantages - the obvious one being having to bench their rim protector.
That's why my concern is not about Byron's willingness to go small, which, going by his offseason interview, is going to happen. My concern is whether he understands the why and when of going small. For example, opposing teams are almost definitely going to go small against us to play Hibbert off the floor. If, Scott sees this and says, great, now I can roll out my small ball because the other team is smaller, he's playing right into the other team's hands.
A good coach would find a way to keep Hibbert on the floor. And then versus a Whiteside or Gobert, go small in stretches with Randle at the 5 to keep them off the floor. |
If you're going to go small, go small with Randle and four shooters. If not, then keep Hibbert on the floor and come up with a scheme that can take advantage of his size. |
I remember you said this; I actually thought of this today as I was thinking about the game. This is the 2nd time it's happened this year that I can remember off the top of my head.
Good stuff as always... |
And here's the perspective from an opponent:
| Quote: | Like last night [the Laker game Nov. 24] , we left Harrison in because he was playing well and we decided to go small after our first timeout. That’s not normal. Usually we come in with Andre and then have Festus come in for Bogues shortly after.
We left Harrison in. That was the discussion we had. It was in the moment–Harrison’s rolling, what if we just go small for two minutes, then come back with Festus? Yeah, but they’ve got Hibbert. Is Hibbert too big for Draymond? Those are things that happen in that minute discussion. Yeah, but he’s going to have guard Draymond on the other end. What do you think? Let’s keep Harrison in and see what happens, see if we can take this lead up…
But as soon as we made that change, they changed, they went smaller. I’m not saying that’s brilliant, I’m just saying that my role has changed and Jarron, Luke and I share a lot of our gut feelings in those minutes. |
http://blogs.mercurynews.com/kawakami/2015/12/02/warriors-assistant-bruce-fraser-on-luke-walton-andre-iguodala-and-steve-kerrxxx/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
22
Franchise Player
Joined: 05 Apr 2013
Posts: 17063
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 09, 2015 9:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| fiendishoc wrote: |
And here's the perspective from an opponent:
| Quote: | Like last night [the Laker game Nov. 24] , we left Harrison in because he was playing well and we decided to go small after our first timeout. That’s not normal. Usually we come in with Andre and then have Festus come in for Bogues shortly after.
We left Harrison in. That was the discussion we had. It was in the moment–Harrison’s rolling, what if we just go small for two minutes, then come back with Festus? Yeah, but they’ve got Hibbert. Is Hibbert too big for Draymond? Those are things that happen in that minute discussion. Yeah, but he’s going to have guard Draymond on the other end. What do you think? Let’s keep Harrison in and see what happens, see if we can take this lead up…
But as soon as we made that change, they changed, they went smaller. I’m not saying that’s brilliant, I’m just saying that my role has changed and Jarron, Luke and I share a lot of our gut feelings in those minutes. |
http://blogs.mercurynews.com/kawakami/2015/12/02/warriors-assistant-bruce-fraser-on-luke-walton-andre-iguodala-and-steve-kerrxxx/ |
It's been so long since I've seen a coach make an adjustment  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fiendishoc
Star Player
Joined: 23 Jun 2005
Posts: 8488
Location: The (real) short corner
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 17, 2015 10:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
I noticed a interesting set that the Lakers had success with against the Bucks. They ran it for 3 out of 4 possessions from the start of the 3rd quarter to about the ten minute mark, scoring all three times and extending the lead from 55 - 46 to 61 - 48 in those two minutes.
1) Hibbert sets or fakes a screen for Clarkson (who moves to the top of the floor), then goes to set a pindown for Kobe followed by popping out for the shot.
2) Meanwhile, on the weak side, Nance sets a back screen for Lou and then sets up for the two man game.
It looks like it may have been adapted from parts of the triangle offense, either from the solo cut series and/or the blind pig wing entry series.
It stood out for me because the team actually looked like they were going through a progression with multiple options and terminating w/ pnr, something that's been sorely missing over the past two seasons. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fiendishoc
Star Player
Joined: 23 Jun 2005
Posts: 8488
Location: The (real) short corner
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 18, 2015 12:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
And... then the Lakers took a step back the very next game. This was the play they had coming out of the timeout:
So apparently, Randle is supposed to set a cross screen for Kobe for the isolation / post up on Ariza. Russell is supposed to throw the entry pass into Kobe and then cut around him in the post. And for some reason Hibbert is supposed to stand shoulder to shoulder with Clarkson at the weak side three, neutralizing both players, and freeing up Hibbert's defender, Howard, to camp in the lane together with Capela.
Kobe gets called for an offensive foul trying to keep Ariza from fronting him, which he could freely do due to his teammates in the lane. But that play was doomed from the moment it was drawn up. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
