jbk1234 wrote:All other things being equal, a motion offense is better than ISO or PNR. That said, four out of the six teams ahead of us in the East play a drop-coverage defense anchored by a 7 footer and the Heat employ a lot of zone. Those defenses are designed to limit the efficacy of movement offenses.
What's important is to be offensively versatile. That can mean switching to a motion offense, it can mean Mitchell driving if the officials are calling the game a certain way, it can mean Garland performing surgery against drop-coverage, or it can mean putting one of Allen or Mobley on the bench and shooting over a zone.
What distresses me is not having counters in place for when the defense tilts heavily to one of Garland or Mitchell and I think that starts with less staggering of their minutes. Whether it's overplaying the passing lanes, meeting the ball handler at half court, or doubling the ball handler out of the PNR, the opposing team is taking a risk, and we rarely are able to make them pay for it.
To your first paragraph, great point, Jb even mentioned that in one of his post game interviews about teams switching are what cause the Cavs to go iso.
To your point of being more versatile and in-game adjustments, another good point. The Cavs probably shouldn't try to gear the offense heavily one way or the other but rather be a jack of all trades. A lot of that again, probably falls on Jb to recognize that and know when to switch.