|
Post by cardfan on Apr 17, 2016 10:28:40 GMT -6
"The threat to shoot outside as he handles the ball helps our offense work in a lot of ways" No, he is far harder to defend if he is running through screens than handling the ball. There is zero upside to playing him at point. Exactly. If he were a penetrator the point might make more sense, but he's not. He needs to run off screens for jump shots. He's just not as effective with the ball in his hands or off the dribble.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 17, 2016 10:38:00 GMT -6
"The threat to shoot outside as he handles the ball helps our offense work in a lot of ways" No, he is far harder to defend if he is running through screens than handling the ball. There is zero upside to playing him at point. Exactly. If he were a penetrator the point might make more sense, but he's not. He needs to run off screens for jump shots. He's just not as effective with the ball in his hands or off the dribble. What's really funny is oohmh claims Whitford runs a "sophisticated motion offense", if that's the case putting a guy who can't penetrate and shoots 40%+ from three at the point is the epitome of player misuse.
|
|
|
Post by cardfan on Apr 17, 2016 10:39:23 GMT -6
We have stationary wings. There's not a whole lot of sophisticated motion going on.
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Apr 17, 2016 11:48:16 GMT -6
What's really funny is oohmh claims Whitford runs a "sophisticated motion offense", if that's the case putting a guy who can't penetrate and shoots 40%+ from three at the point is the epitome of player misuse. OK, you have goaded me into talking about motion offense... That statement above you make is just not as true as you think. I agree you don't necessarily recruit a primary ball handler in the motion offense for 3 pt shooting. But. IF he can shoot and can pass that is fine. The first thing is that the PG plays less of a role as trigger man for the offense. Everyone handles the ball a little more except the players who primarily screen. Motion offense features moving the ball by passing not dribbling. In fact, in most cases against man defense penetration is not a big design part of motion offense. The main requirement is good judgment and awareness, but that is true of all the players on the floor when you don't run so many set plays. Our offense depends heavily on screening for our good shooters. It features making space in the middle for our big guys to use, not as much for driving from the top of the key. Ability to drive is of course a good thing if you have the skill, but generally in motion offense you don't play drive and dish very much and actually the reason you want somebody with those skills is when the defense overplays everything and the middle opens up it and it becomes more an opportunity. Before you eliminate the 3 point shooter from that role, you may want to recall that Steve Alford was the "PG" on the Olympic team coached by Bob Knight. Ability shooting is fine. Several Indiana Mr Basketball players who were scorers in HS and good outside shooters became primary ball handlers at IU over the years they played motion offense. Isiah and some other good scorers at IU were primary ball handlers or PG and they did score in the lane, but the offense generally was all about moving and screening and getting jump shots or back cuts or clearing the post. We have some of that in our offense. We do not play a classic motion offense but utilize ideas and screening from motion as do a very large number of basketball teams at all levels. Duke, notably, and other teams often now have good athletes and 1 on 1 players. They spread the floor more, still run motion, but not as dependent on screens. Still. Even there it is not just the "PG" who has to drive the ball.
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Apr 17, 2016 11:57:07 GMT -6
We have stationary wings. There's not a whole lot of sophisticated motion going on. I don't disagree entirely. But the offense is based on screens, a little more using set plays than a pure motion offense, I agree. In fact, you are correct we do use wings to screen a fair amount for Tyler who is our quickest guy and able to do more things off screens. I would not say they are stationary, though. We screen a lot for Weber, and quite a bit for Sellers. We have NO shooters who are simply isolated 1 on 1 shooters. Nor do we rely a lot on feeding the post from the wing and getting the ball back to shoot. Our post play is often not low post, but middle range with Franko or Moses isolated and facing the basket.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 17, 2016 12:21:58 GMT -6
What's really funny is oohmh claims Whitford runs a "sophisticated motion offense", if that's the case putting a guy who can't penetrate and shoots 40%+ from three at the point is the epitome of player misuse. OK, you have goaded me into talking about motion offense... That statement above you make is just not as true as you think. I agree you don't necessarily recruit a primary ball handler in the motion offense for 3 pt shooting. But. IF he can shoot and can pass that is fine. The first thing is that the PG plays less of a role as trigger man for the offense. Everyone handles the ball a little more except the players who primarily screen. Motion offense features moving the ball by passing not dribbling. In fact, in most cases against man defense penetration is not a big design part of motion offense. The main requirement is good judgment and awareness, but that is true of all the players on the floor when you don't run so many set plays. Our offense depends heavily on screening for our good shooters. It features making space in the middle for our big guys to use, not as much for driving from the top of the key. Ability to drive is of course a good thing if you have the skill, but generally in motion offense you don't play drive and dish very much and actually the reason you want somebody with those skills is when the defense overplays everything and the middle opens up it and it becomes more an opportunity. Before you eliminate the 3 point shooter from that role, you may want to recall that Steve Alford was the "PG" on the Olympic team coached by Bob Knight. Ability shooting is fine. Several Indiana Mr Basketball players who were scorers in HS and good outside shooters became primary ball handlers at IU over the years they played motion offense. Isiah and some other good scorers at IU were primary ball handlers or PG and they did score in the lane, but the offense generally was all about moving and screening and getting jump shots or back cuts or clearing the post. We have some of that in our offense. We do not play a classic motion offense but utilize ideas and screening from motion as do a very large number of basketball teams at all levels. Duke, notably, and other teams often now have good athletes and 1 on 1 players. They spread the floor more, still run motion, but not as dependent on screens. Still. Even there it is not just the "PG" who has to drive the ball. It's not about avoiding a point guard who can shoot, it's about the wisdom and effectiveness using your best shooter as stop-gap point guard. Sheesh.................
|
|
|
Post by cardfan on Apr 17, 2016 12:24:04 GMT -6
OK, you have goaded me into talking about motion offense... That statement above you make is just not as true as you think. I agree you don't necessarily recruit a primary ball handler in the motion offense for 3 pt shooting. But. IF he can shoot and can pass that is fine. The first thing is that the PG plays less of a role as trigger man for the offense. Everyone handles the ball a little more except the players who primarily screen. Motion offense features moving the ball by passing not dribbling. In fact, in most cases against man defense penetration is not a big design part of motion offense. The main requirement is good judgment and awareness, but that is true of all the players on the floor when you don't run so many set plays. Our offense depends heavily on screening for our good shooters. It features making space in the middle for our big guys to use, not as much for driving from the top of the key. Ability to drive is of course a good thing if you have the skill, but generally in motion offense you don't play drive and dish very much and actually the reason you want somebody with those skills is when the defense overplays everything and the middle opens up it and it becomes more an opportunity. Before you eliminate the 3 point shooter from that role, you may want to recall that Steve Alford was the "PG" on the Olympic team coached by Bob Knight. Ability shooting is fine. Several Indiana Mr Basketball players who were scorers in HS and good outside shooters became primary ball handlers at IU over the years they played motion offense. Isiah and some other good scorers at IU were primary ball handlers or PG and they did score in the lane, but the offense generally was all about moving and screening and getting jump shots or back cuts or clearing the post. We have some of that in our offense. We do not play a classic motion offense but utilize ideas and screening from motion as do a very large number of basketball teams at all levels. Duke, notably, and other teams often now have good athletes and 1 on 1 players. They spread the floor more, still run motion, but not as dependent on screens. Still. Even there it is not just the "PG" who has to drive the ball. It's not about avoiding a point guard who can shoot, it's about the wisdom using your most effective shooter as a de facto point guard. Sheesh................. This.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 17, 2016 12:28:18 GMT -6
OK, you have goaded me into talking about motion offense... That statement above you make is just not as true as you think. I agree you don't necessarily recruit a primary ball handler in the motion offense for 3 pt shooting. But. IF he can shoot and can pass that is fine. The first thing is that the PG plays less of a role as trigger man for the offense. Everyone handles the ball a little more except the players who primarily screen. Motion offense features moving the ball by passing not dribbling. In fact, in most cases against man defense penetration is not a big design part of motion offense. The main requirement is good judgment and awareness, but that is true of all the players on the floor when you don't run so many set plays. Our offense depends heavily on screening for our good shooters. It features making space in the middle for our big guys to use, not as much for driving from the top of the key. Ability to drive is of course a good thing if you have the skill, but generally in motion offense you don't play drive and dish very much and actually the reason you want somebody with those skills is when the defense overplays everything and the middle opens up it and it becomes more an opportunity. Before you eliminate the 3 point shooter from that role, you may want to recall that Steve Alford was the "PG" on the Olympic team coached by Bob Knight. Ability shooting is fine. Several Indiana Mr Basketball players who were scorers in HS and good outside shooters became primary ball handlers at IU over the years they played motion offense. Isiah and some other good scorers at IU were primary ball handlers or PG and they did score in the lane, but the offense generally was all about moving and screening and getting jump shots or back cuts or clearing the post. We have some of that in our offense. We do not play a classic motion offense but utilize ideas and screening from motion as do a very large number of basketball teams at all levels. Duke, notably, and other teams often now have good athletes and 1 on 1 players. They spread the floor more, still run motion, but not as dependent on screens. Still. Even there it is not just the "PG" who has to drive the ball. np
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Apr 17, 2016 15:17:26 GMT -6
It's not about avoiding a point guard who can shoot, it's about the wisdom using your most effective shooter as a de facto point guard. Sheesh................. This. Francis is a streaky shooter, not at all sure he is the most effective in the offense. He has good stats, but some of that is because he has the ball in his hand as PG and is open (often far from the basket), feels it, and shoots. Fabulous. We have had games where he is the hot hand, and we handle that quite well precisely because all our players are supposed to be able to pass and we can switch to having him use the screens set, and he need not be hogging the ball. But generally he is not as good using screens as Weber. So why play him that way? If he were more effective running around and getting screens to shoot, we would do that more... We usually have at least two good shooters PLUS Francis on the floor. Any and all of them are supposed to be able to play interchangeably if necessary. Where he has to be the "PG" more exclusively is on defense. He had the best luck containing the opposing PG. That's why we need a reserve to help with that. It may also mean that Persons guards a "SG" as often as he guards a "PG." He will have the ball in his hand more often than Kiapway, and there is no problem that I see in our 3 guard rotation on offense, with Francis being a primary ball handler when he is the guy needed to do it. MORE problematic would be Tyler doing that.
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Apr 17, 2016 15:21:30 GMT -6
Notice, by the way, my long comment was mostly in response to halftime making TWO arguments. 3 point shooting (see above) and penetration which Francis has little of no great showing so far, but is not much a part of our offense. I'd have no complaint if we had a different set of guards as long as they had the same talent. We'd play a little differently and be fine. We'll be fine this way too.
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Apr 17, 2016 15:35:39 GMT -6
Exactly. If he were a penetrator the point might make more sense, but he's not. He needs to run off screens for jump shots. He's just not as effective with the ball in his hands or off the dribble. Penetrating ability not critical as PG in our offense. It would be nice to have somebody who could get into the defense when they play zone, but Francis is quite a load against a zone they have to stretch it our to cover him, to cover two more shooters, and that lets us pass the ball in the middle to our post players. Not a bad trade off. We shredded Eastern's zone that way, as well as hitting over it.
|
|
|
Post by proctorp on Apr 17, 2016 20:24:30 GMT -6
One of our weaknesses as an offense is the lack of consistent screens. Ball handling and passing are two fundamentals that we also need serious work on IMO. We did get better this year, but we need a lot of fundamental work if we truly believe we have a "sophisticated motion offense."
Fished this past weekend with a good friend whose son is friends with guys on the basketball team. The Davis mystery according to this source was a serious bad attitude that Whit amputated with no playing time.
|
|
|
Post by realitycheck on Apr 18, 2016 11:29:43 GMT -6
Agree with Proc on the screening issue. If our "sophisticated motion" offense (Did Whit or 00hmh coin that or was it John Wooden?) is predicated on screening we are failing woefully. It is beyond frustrating to watch our lack of being able to hold a screen. It actually may be our second worst Achilles next to not being able to stop quick penetrating guards.
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Apr 18, 2016 12:34:03 GMT -6
It's odd in a way. A player like Franko or Bo should have been quick enough to set the screen and strong enough and smart enough to set it in the right spot and hold it. The good thing is that screening and using the screens does usually improve as players practice the art.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 2, 2016 13:37:42 GMT -6
Naiel Smith is headed back to Texas (Texas Wesleyan University) for his final year of eligibility according to Verbal Commits.
|
|