Wolfay wrote:Here's an interesting article you should read SacKingZZZ, and it contains a link to a Google spreadsheet of the Synergy stats regarding the pick and roll. I prefer the eye test to using stats, but your eyes are not lining up with what the Kings or the league in general have been doing. Also if you can't run a pick and roll well, then you can't do the motion offense. You also need SHOOTERS, which is what I've saying for freaking years now. The Spurs motion offense works so well because of the Parker/Duncan PnR tandem and their complement of shooters.
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2199 ... todays-nba
Thanks for the link, those stats show me exactly what I wanted to see. My point is about the intent of the Kings pick and roll, I've said many times running pick and roll is almost essential in the NBA because of the shot clock limitations but WHY you are running and in what variation is the key.
One thing though, I'm not sure this article is distinguishing between the "pick and roll" and "pick and pop". The last few years less and less analysts are doing so, why, I have no idea. Many people these days are calling a simple ball screen a pick and roll when it's not. Also those stats are used for plays that END off of a pnr, it doesn't account for reset offense which I'm sure the Kings would be high on the list for number of pick and rolls ran that didn't end in a shot, a foul, or a turnover directly.
The Spurs are indeed good example of what I was talking about and that article you posted, shows it:
"For example, 23 percent of the San Antonio Spurs' offensive plays came within pick-and-rolls last season. About 16.6 percent of those sets ended with the ball-handler, while
6.4 finished with the roll man."
And as I said above previously:
"They themselves run pick and roll but they are at heart a motion/spread team. They'll run pick and roll to set up a variety of options via the pass to get Parker a head start to the rim, not so Duncan and jam it home at the rim."
Nope, these eyes don't lie. The Spurs still finished with a higher big man efficiency too. The problem with the Kings is the intent was clearly most times to get the ball back to the roll man (and it better be because that was usually your franchise player running it) but getting it to the roll man often didn't happen because of a multitude of factors, most important in my mind is that other teams just simply didn't let the screen take them out of their defensive strategy. When the roll man was in the paint they just slid over and packed it.
As I've also stated before, the Vlade/Webber Kings teams ran a lot of screen and roll too, but they also did it mostly to start their motion and/or rely on it more as a guard screen from which to shoot behind or dish back out to the popping big man. These are the type of pick and roll plays I don't have a problem with the Kings running, but running roll man heavy pick and roll is not going to be this teams strength. Sure, you can do it at times but the intent needs to be overall motion, and I think it was with Malone, at least I hope, but he couldn't just fabricate that chemistry right off the bat.
And the most interesting part of the article:
"To succeed in the NBA, teams need to have a pick-and-roll identity, whether it's on offense or defense.
They aren't everything—the Sacramento Kings, a 28-win disaster, ranked in the top 10 of both pick-and-roll defense and offense last year—but they're a start, a foundation."
Very interesting indeed, now, I think there might be a correlation here maybe? Run roll man heavy 2 man game pick and roll as your top option and don't expect that to change anytime soon. This backs up EXACTLY what I'm talking about. Running a singular play into the ground is what happened plenty of times and there is plenty of tape out there that clearly shows it. I guess if you do something enough times you're averages in that area will go up, hahaha. Too bad your wins won't.
There were many times they would run the same screen play 3 or more times in a single possession. That won't work. The only pick and roll that seemed to have teams a little flustered was the pick and roll they ran through Rudy Gay.
The good news is they seem to know the issues and they've spoken about them before, so Malone gets a training camp to make it work. He mentions the Spurs, hopefully he watches how the play develops beyond the first screen in their offense. They run pretty much the same system the Jazz used to under Sloan, which really isn't much different from the Adelman era Kings. It's all based on motion and spreading the ball around. I've heard this brain trust say it many times now, hopefully we see it.
Also just for the record, after reading your post above, WE AGREE. I totally don't disagree with anything your saying. Once and for all I'm primarily talking about Cousins being used as a roll man with the intent being finding him at the rim for high percentage look. He's not a great finisher and he can pretty much create anything at the rim for himself, he's not a great finisher in the pick and roll, no skin off our backs, he can do things at the rim few other big men in the entire league can do on their best day. I say do something with that.
