What do you think of Coach Mosley's offensive schemes?

[Knightro]

I don't think things would improve all that much with a different coach. At least not with the roster as presently constructed. The problems are primarily personnel based IMO.

There's only so much scheming you can really do offensively when you have no point guard, no shooting and no playmaking from your guards.

[GameOver25]

I picked average and he's not part of the problem. If we say he's part of the problem we're letting WePark off the hook. Not going to do it. This is typical, we see coaches all the time on TV and the executives get to hide. Nope.

[Last Guardian]

You can't run an effective offensive scheme if you don't have effective offensive players.

And this whole ISO nonsense is just that. Boston, PHX, Bucks, Clippers etc. all do the same. Most of the NBA does. Denver created some notion of beautiful basketball but you need a 280lbs brilliant PG to pull it off.

[MagicMatic]

Pick one.

#1 - Gary Harris, Caleb Houstan, Cole Anthony, Jett Howard, etc. etc. etc. aren't good basketball players. Magic need better talent. They also need a starting point guard.

#2 - Mosely lacks the capability as a coach to create good offense outside of Paolo and Franz. He has the pieces but he isnt a good coach on that side of the ball.

People are claiming what they want between these to points. I watch last nights game and come away thinking its #2. Then I watch other games and its obviously #1. In reality its probably both simultaneously.

[SOUL]

Pick one.

#1 - Gary Harris, Caleb Houstan, Cole Anthony, Jett Howard, etc. etc. etc. aren't good basketball players. Magic need better talent. They also need a starting point guard.

#2 - Mosely lacks the capability as a coach to create good offense outside of Paolo and Franz. He has the pieces but he isnt a good coach on that side of the ball.

People are claiming what they want between these to points. I watch last nights game and come away thinking its #2. Then I watch other games and its obviously #1. In reality its probably both simultaneously.

Those are simplifying it a bit but the issues are numerous:

1. Paolo/Franz are iso players. We can exploit bad switches and stuff but they obviously both feel the most comfortable driving to the rim (Franz) or playing in the mid-range (Paolo). Neither are reliable open shooters. There's a reason why even though Cole shot like ass, the bench offense flowed a bit better and we saw Isaac/Moe open quite a bit from people helping on Cole drives and even Ingles a little bit.

2. We literally cannot break down defenses without a legit guard. Pacers got easy shots because TJ and Hali would easily get into the paint because they're fast and strong with the ball, defense collapses, they kick it out for a three. We have two forwards that aren't that quick with the ball and when they would double, the identification of who was open is either across the court or Paolo/Franz don't see who it is.

3. What people seem to be really honing in on as "not running plays" is us not running Houstan around screens enough but I saw us do it numerous times and the defense was playing him too close or he didn't get enough separation. People keep referring to Ross and I think people don't realize how quick he was and his athleticism made him a GREAT contested shot maker. He also ran give and gos down the baseline for easy dunks but we don't do that anymore because nobody else is capable of those sorts of plays, besides Suggs.

4. Just making open shots to keep the defense honest. They weren't afraid of certain guys shooting threes, which is why Paolo was open for 8 of them. Running complicated actions for them not to bite on certain players getting open makes it insanely hard to get Gary/Caleb open when they know that's the main objective. That play to get them open is harder to guard if you have a Suggs or another three point shooter as other options.

We did get quite a few open shots via movement and/or broken plays and didn't capitalize at all. Just making any sort of shot can make defenses overhelp or scramble, but they contained us pretty much all game. It's no secret that when we dominate the paint, then we start to exploit teams overhelping those easy twos. We couldn't get any good action near the rim.

[Bensational]

Not saying that we don’t need improved guard play, but the conclusion that a PG will revolutionise what we have isn’t really supported by the stats. Our average ortg as a team is 112.6, but looking at our lineup numbers the PGs we have don’t seem to be as big a swing factor as you might imagine.

Fultz most used lineup (with Suggs/Franz/Paolo/WCJ) only has an ortg of 112.1.

Cole’s most used lineup (with Harris, Franz, Isaac and Moe) only has an ortg of 111.2

Black’s most used lineup (with Suggs, Franz, Paolo and Goga) has an ortg of 113.3

Cole has seen a lot more lineup variation throughout the season and he has been part of a couple of potent lineups that averaged an ortg of 124+, which featured Ingles, Isaac and Moe consistently, and a mix of Black, Franz and others.

You’d think that our two strongest ballhandlers and guard scorers (Fultz and Cole) would have a bigger impact on ortg even though neither are great PGs, if our PG situation was as dire as it’s portrayed. But that’s just not the case. Guys like Ingles and rookie Black have contributed to higher than team average ortg lineups without either Fultz or Cole.

Then you can look at teams that have a clearly better PG option than we do and there are still plenty of those guys running offenses with worse ortgs than we currently have.

It’s not as cut and dry as it is being discussed.

[MagicMatic]

Pick one.

#1 - Gary Harris, Caleb Houstan, Cole Anthony, Jett Howard, etc. etc. etc. aren't good basketball players. Magic need better talent. They also need a starting point guard.

#2 - Mosely lacks the capability as a coach to create good offense outside of Paolo and Franz. He has the pieces but he isnt a good coach on that side of the ball.

People are claiming what they want between these to points. I watch last nights game and come away thinking its #2. Then I watch other games and its obviously #1. In reality its probably both simultaneously.

Those are simplifying it a bit but the issues are numerous:

1. Paolo/Franz are iso players. We can exploit bad switches and stuff but they obviously both feel the most comfortable driving to the rim (Franz) or playing in the mid-range (Paolo). Neither are reliable open shooters. There's a reason why even though Cole shot like ass, the bench offense flowed a bit better and we saw Isaac/Moe open quite a bit from people helping on Cole drives and even Ingles a little bit.

2. We literally cannot break down defenses without a legit guard. Pacers got easy shots because TJ and Hali would easily get into the paint because they're fast and strong with the ball, defense collapses, they kick it out for a three. We have two forwards that aren't that quick with the ball and when they would double, the identification of who was open is either across the court or Paolo/Franz don't see who it is.

3. What people seem to be really honing in on as "not running plays" is us not running Houstan around screens enough but I saw us do it numerous times and the defense was playing him too close or he didn't get enough separation. People keep referring to Ross and I think people don't realize how quick he was and his athleticism made him a GREAT contested shot maker. He also ran give and gos down the baseline for easy dunks but we don't do that anymore because nobody else is capable of those sorts of plays, besides Suggs.

4. Just making open shots to keep the defense honest. They weren't afraid of certain guys shooting threes, which is why Paolo was open for 8 of them. Running complicated actions for them not to bite on certain players getting open makes it insanely hard to get Gary/Caleb open when they know that's the main objective. That play to get them open is harder to guard if you have a Suggs or another three point shooter as other options.

We did get quite a few open shots via movement and/or broken plays and didn't capitalize at all. Just making any sort of shot can make defenses overhelp or scramble, but they contained us pretty much all game. It's no secret that when we dominate the paint, then we start to exploit teams overhelping those easy twos. We couldn't get any good action near the rim.

1. Yes, this goes to option #1. IF you are sold on these two "iso guys", then you need another few options that arent entirely empty from the field. Bench is another issue, but Mosely has to be able to figure out an offense with a starting lineup. Thats been the elephant in the room with the bench success saving our asses all season.

2. Again, option #1. I hear all season that these guys lead by committee and then they look bad with a million turnovers in these kinds of games. Yeah, they need a lead guard... Too bad they didnt commit to one last offseason or this trade deadline. Do you believe Weltman solves this?

3.Why? These guys are getting minutes BECAUSE they are shooters. Good shooters dont need an entire roster molded around them to be useful. 1-3 from two guys that do specifically that is not only garbage, but its a red flag on Mosely regardless of the spin. I dont buy for 1 second that either of these guys were incapable of putting up more than 3 shots for an entire game because Paolo/Franz needed to shoot abysmal shots at inopportune times.

4.Paolo's 8 shots from 3 were trash. So many wasted possessions taking 3's in the beginning of shot clocks and in transition with guys in his face. Chalk that up to not having a point guard or not, but it looks a lot like Mosely just saying "Do Whatever You Want" on offense with **** possessions.

I'd prefer to see Paolo and Franz in a well built system in their development years with things like... y'know a point guard... and maybe a Center that doesnt commit bad turnovers while taking possessions away on offense. Maybe a coach that utilizes more than two guys in a system would be cool too. Maybe Orlando's role players are so bad that Paolo/Franz looked way worse on offense without Suggs. Maybe its just that Mosely isn't responsible for drawing anything up.

[SOUL]

It’s not as cut and dry as it is being discussed.

There's a lot of issues IMO - Franz and Paolo still have to grow a lot as offensive hubs, we need better point guard play, we have no real "volume" shooters outside of Suggs. Of course the playcalling can get better as well, but some people here are acting like we have some hidden offensive juggernaut when we don't.

[Knightro]

Not saying that we don’t need improved guard play, but the conclusion that a PG will revolutionise what we have isn’t really supported by the stats. Our average ortg as a team is 112.6, but looking at our lineup numbers the PGs we have don’t seem to be as big a swing factor as you might imagine.

Fultz most used lineup (with Suggs/Franz/Paolo/WCJ) only has an ortg of 112.1.

Cole’s most used lineup (with Harris, Franz, Isaac and Moe) only has an ortg of 111.2

Black’s most used lineup (with Suggs, Franz, Paolo and Goga) has an ortg of 113.3

Cole has seen a lot more lineup variation throughout the season and he has been part of a couple of potent lineups that averaged an ortg of 124+, which featured Ingles, Isaac and Moe consistently, and a mix of Black, Franz and others.

You’d think that our two strongest ballhandlers and guard scorers (Fultz and Cole) would have a bigger impact on ortg even though neither are great PGs, if our PG situation was as dire as it’s portrayed. But that’s just not the case. Guys like Ingles and rookie Black have contributed to higher than team average ortg lineups without either Fultz or Cole.

Then you can look at teams that have a clearly better PG option than we do and there are still plenty of those guys running offenses with worse ortgs than we currently have.

It’s not as cut and dry as it is being discussed.

The problem with this is that Fultz is horrendous and Cole is a point guard in name only. The reason why the offense isn't any better with those guys is because they both suck at being point guards (for different reasons).

Get an actual point guard in here with some talent and watch what happens.

[SOUL]

I feel like it's hard to debate, MM, if you legit think Mose doesn't run plays out there or if these guys aren't practicing lol. It's 90% personnel. The Magic are running sets and actions that most teams do (besides teams with truly elite offensive hubs), we just do it way less efficiently. I watched Will Hardy on a podcast and even he said teams are running the same stuff and for most plays, he trusts his guys to just make the right plays even when he's not calling plays, which is often. It doesn't always work out, which is why/where coaches have to try to reel them in. There was a point early in the season, where people were complaining a bit still, and Mose had the best ATO% in the game but nobody credited him or cared because the overall bad shooting was being put on the coaches.

Basketball isn't like handywork where you mess something up and look up the solution and fix it. You try to fix it. The other team can continue to make it hard for you and exploit your personnel.

We do it to other teams too. We blitzed Mikal and made the Nets panic the last game and they couldn't get anything going. The last few games we really struggled to get inside presence and summarily collapsed once we couldn't get to our bread and butter. Easier said than done to find backup solutions to our backup solutions.

Let me ask you a legit question, do you think Coach Spo is a bad offensive coach and not running plays either? The Heat score less than us with more offensive firepower and shooters. There's also a reason why you can swap pretty much any coach to any other team in this league and you're not going to get crazily different results unless you overhaul systems entirely. And that's what coaching staffs are for. I'm not against bringing in some guys who are known for that side of the ball and have gotten results in the past. Go for it. But at some point, if those guys don't get much out of a similar roster too, there's only so much finger pointing you can do before you have rotten offensive ingredients.

I feel like you think the FO is bad and Mose has good defense and bad offense, but like I've said in the past, that seems like something that's either the ingredients are bad or the chef is bad. But if the main complaint is that the turd salad doesn't have enough Italian dressing on it to mask the scent of a turd salad, then at that point I'm really not too concerned about that part... AS LONG as the entree (defense) is great.

So in my head it's just like.. I'll wait til the next season for better salad ingredients. Now, if we have more quality ingredients for the salad and there's still a turd in there, well, that's on the chef.

[Bergmaniac]

The problem with this is that Fultz is horrendous and Cole is a point guard in name only. The reason why the offense isn't any better with those guys is because they both suck at being point guards (for different reasons).

Get an actual point guard in here with some talent and watch what happens.

Exactly.

Ingles' impact on the offense in his first months here before his legs were gone also shows what a difference a highly competent pick and roll ballhnadler who is a threat from 3 can make to our offense. In his first 20 games we had 120.4 ORTG in the minutes he was on the court compared to 106.5 Ortg when he was on the bench. And that's despite him being way past his prime and one of slowest players in the league.

[Bensational]

The problem with this is that Fultz is horrendous and Cole is a point guard in name only. The reason why the offense isn't any better with those guys is because they both suck at being point guards (for different reasons).

Get an actual point guard in here with some talent and watch what happens.

I mean, you can keep saying it but it doesn’t make it true. Houston did what you wanted and they still have a worse ortg than us. Washington have a guy you wanted - worse ortg. Portland too - worse ortg. Those guys don’t play on teams that lack shooting or scoring options either.

Did they lift the floor of those teams? Probably.

Did they raise the ceiling? No.

Are they running better offenses than what we currently are? Not by the numbers.

[Bensational]

The problem with this is that Fultz is horrendous and Cole is a point guard in name only. The reason why the offense isn't any better with those guys is because they both suck at being point guards (for different reasons).

Get an actual point guard in here with some talent and watch what happens.

Exactly.

Ingles' impact on the offense in his first months here before his legs were gone also shows what a difference a highly competent pick and roll ballhnadler who is a threat from 3 can make to our offense. In his first 20 games we had 120.4 ORTG in the minutes he was on the court compared to 106.5 Ortg when he was on the bench. And that's despite him being way past his prime and one of slowest players in the league.

Ingles is a different beast to most PGs though. He does more playmaking from the perimeter without being a big drive and kick guy. He can feed PnRs from the outside by being able to either pass over defenders or slip gaps. That’s the kind of playmaking we need Paolo and Franz to take up. That’s the kind of playmaking that makes LeBron so dangerous (along with his many other gifts). That’s the kind of playmaking that made Turkoglu more influential on our championship run than Jameer Nelson could have ever hoped to have been.

IMO, Black is on track to become that kind of player in time.

I mean, the Pacers have the best PG in the league and we currently have a better record than them. It’s really not as simple as “PG = better”

[Knightro]

I mean, you can keep saying it but it doesn’t make it true. Houston did what you wanted and they still have a worse ortg than us. Washington have a guy you wanted - worse ortg. Portland too - worse ortg. Those guys don’t play on teams that lack shooting or scoring options either.

Did they lift the floor of those teams? Probably.

Did they raise the ceiling? No.

Are they running better offenses than what we currently are? Not by the numbers.

You keep doing this really silly thing where you take a player who is playing on a completely different team with different teammates and different coaching - teams that are at completely different points of their rebuilding/development/talent acquisition than the Magic are - and still suggesting that because those teams are still bad that those players wouldn't somehow help THIS team that has completely different players on it and is currently emphasizing winning over tanking.

And honestly, it's one of the goofiest things I've ever seen somebody argue on this board with a straight face. And that's saying a lot.

What VanVleet, Jones and Simons are or are not doing with Houston/Washington/Portland isn't any sort of indication on what they would do and how they would impact the Orlando Magic.

Just a truly bizarre thing you keep harping on.

[KillMonger]

Personnel is an issue but.... Bare bones x's and o's? Needs work.... Some good stuff in there though....needs to be optimized.... Some of the dribble hand of stuff is just horrible.... I don't know if it's an execution issue or idk it needs work.... Way too many times caught just holding the ball... Needs improvement but let's not let the players off the hook either, they have to be better as well

Sent from my [Hands] using RealGM mobile app

[JF5]

It's definitely below average... but there are a number of things working against him.

1. The team is young... The guys who are your core players are in their first full year of being the focal points. There is no way around them having to go through a giants learning curb with how defenses play them. Whilst also trying to develop their games offensively. Do you simplify the game as much as possible.

2. Piggy backs off one... The team is purposely force feeding these guys so this helps them further along in their development. People are screaming for a PG right now. But I don't think that helps guys like Paolo, F. Wagner, and even guys like Suggs. That shouldn't be really a point of emphasis until 3 years from now if these guys don't grow their facilitating further along.

3. There just really isn't another option out there that fits this timeline who won't interrupt the others development, doesnt fit the culture, or isn't good enough. I think the Magic are just likely to go for Scorers/Shooters that space the floor and provide secondary offense and decent enough defense at this stage.

[Bensational]

I mean, you can keep saying it but it doesn’t make it true. Houston did what you wanted and they still have a worse ortg than us. Washington have a guy you wanted - worse ortg. Portland too - worse ortg. Those guys don’t play on teams that lack shooting or scoring options either.

Did they lift the floor of those teams? Probably.

Did they raise the ceiling? No.

Are they running better offenses than what we currently are? Not by the numbers.

You keep doing this really silly thing where you take a player who is playing on a completely different team with different teammates and different coaching - teams that are at completely different points of their rebuilding/development/talent acquisition than the Magic are - and still suggesting that because those teams are still bad that those players wouldn't somehow help THIS team that has completely different players on it and is currently emphasizing winning over tanking.

And honestly, it's one of the goofiest things I've ever seen somebody argue on this board with a straight face. And that's saying a lot.

What VanVleet, Jones and Simons are or are not doing with Houston/Washington/Portland isn't any sort of indication on what they would do and how they would impact the Orlando Magic.

Just a truly bizarre thing you keep harping on.

What do you actually expect a different PG to unlock with this team? Cos here’s the thing, you’ve spent god knows how many words advocating for a new PG and all the evidence you’ve provided to support it is “trust me bro”.

I mean, if you think a PG on a team with a different makeup isn’t an accurate representation of what they’d bring to our team, why are you insisting on them being an upgrade? You’re happy to credit FVV with improving Houston but then block your ears when you’re faced with the fact that what he has done for Houston is still worse than what our team is achieving without him. You might want to constantly redraw the boundaries around supporting material but at this stage it’s clear that you went all in on an argument that PG would be the downfall for this team and the reality is that we’re overachieving and performing well beyond expectations. And even then you attempt to paint the results as “fool’s gold” because reality has made your original point look silly.

You’ve made the case previously that even Fultz would be an upgrade at PG over Black - but the numbers don’t support that. What about Cole? Same again, numbers don’t support it. As much as you’d like to disqualify them from consideration because they don’t support your position, they’re both capable of running an offense and setting other players up - but that doesn’t materialise effectively within our team make up.

“But but but Boston! They tried so many different PGs!” Once again, the point backfired on you when the reality hit you in the face that in their most competitive season to date they have the lowest USG PG they’ve had since Tatum arrived there.

“But on OUR team…” so go on, tell us what the PG is going to do that’s such an improvement on what we’re already doing?

[MagicMatic]

To answer you SOUL - it’s a two pronged issue that some here have already seemed to miss the point entirely.

Orlando isn’t Miami. They aren’t being led by savvy veterans that are super efficient with years of playoff and post season experience. Spo knows what his guys can do and Miami acquires players like Rozier to fill in their needs. This is the opposite of Orlando where they have a bunch of young dudes “figuring it out” led by a guy with zero real experience as a head coach in the post season. The offense looks bad and I’m then told a million reasons why other than the obvious.

Back to Orlando… These years are about development and creating good habits. That means allowing Paolo/Franz to take a zillion bad shots and weak drives against defenders probably isn’t a selling point for a coaches offense. Great coaches do more with less. Good coaches do what is expected. Bad coaches fail to deliver with either good or bad talent.

Does Orlando have a good savvy point guard that can get the other guys in better positions on the court? No. But that also doesn’t mean they can’t find a guy in the interim. There isn’t even a bench guy that fills this role.

It’s not ALL on Mosely but I’m also not playing this game where we are comparing other teams coaches and rosters outside of the fact that Orlando’s on court offense looks like **** most nights. You can judge with your eyes pretty accurately without making a ton of excuses.

[Knightro]

What do you actually expect a different PG to unlock with this team? Cos here’s the thing, you’ve spent god knows how many words advocating for a new PG and all the evidence you’ve provided to support it is “trust me bro”.

I mean, if you think a PG on a team with a different makeup isn’t an accurate representation of what they’d bring to our team, why are you insisting on them being an upgrade? You’re happy to credit FVV with improving Houston but then block your ears when you’re faced with the fact that what he has done for Houston is still worse than what our team is achieving without him. You might want to constantly redraw the boundaries around supporting material but at this stage it’s clear that you went all in on an argument that PG would be the downfall for this team and the reality is that we’re overachieving and performing well beyond expectations. And even then you attempt to paint the results as “fool’s gold” because reality has made your original point look silly.

You’ve made the case previously that even Fultz would be an upgrade at PG over Black - but the numbers don’t support that. What about Cole? Same again, numbers don’t support it. As much as you’d like to disqualify them from consideration because they don’t support your position, they’re both capable of running an offense and setting other players up - but that doesn’t materialise effectively within our team make up.

“But but but Boston! They tried so many different PGs!” Once again, the point backfired on you when the reality hit you in the face that in their most competitive season to date they have the lowest USG PG they’ve had since Tatum arrived there.

“But on OUR team…” so go on, tell us what the PG is going to do that’s such an improvement on what we’re already doing?

Respectfully, I'm gonna just have to tap out on engaging with you moving forward.

If you're too ignorant or too willfully disingenuous to understand how an actual point guard with some talent would help this basketball team tremendously, then I really just don't think there's anything left for us to say to each other on the matter.

[Bensational]

Respectfully, I'm gonna just have to tap out on engaging with you moving forward.

If you're too ignorant or too willfully disingenuous to understand how an actual point guard with some talent would help this basketball team tremendously, then I really just don't think there's anything left for us to say to each other on the matter.

Sure, run away the moment you’re challenged and asked to show something substantial beyond just saying “an actual point guard with some talent”. If you want to talk about disingenuous, start with yourself being unable to define what an actual point guard with talent is, let alone define how they’ll help the team.

You’re just talking empty platitudes with nothing concrete to back it up. And if you want to keep pushing this empty narrative, I’ll keep pushing back until you provide something relevant.