How Clippers Should Use Blake

[mttwlsn16]

http://basketball.realgm.com/blog/22917 ... ke-Griffin

Was a good read

[Verballer]

http://basketball.realgm.com/blog/229176/How-Clippers-Should-Use-Blake-Griffin

Was a good read

Couple of things wrong with this.
A)Paul is too ball dominant for this and tbh I don't see him changing that
B)Griffins a great passing bigman but the plan to have him around shooters doesn't change the fact that his post game is still not polished enough to take on that kind of role.

Griffin's fine for his age atm,I'm expecting with time to get a consistent mid range jumper and we all know that with time Doc Rivers will be a major influence on his defensive game.I feel DJ and Blake will both have breakout seasons where they establish themselves as one of the best defensive players and top 10 player respectively.
Griffins got the heart and motivation to be top 10 for years to come.
He can only go up from here. That's pretty scary if you're posting 21/10 career numbers

As to how I think we should use him.DJ really ruins this to me as he's a liability on offence,one thing to do is have Paul PnR with DJ and have Blake spot up from midrange but using Griffin as a midrange player would be disastrous if done too much.
Postin him up with DJ on the floor is a terrible idea.PnR isn't all that great either.

I'll be looking to see how Blake plays with shooters around him and BJ,that's just scary IMO

[mike3]

great little read.

I do like where he's coming from, I wouldn't say it'd be the main go to plan but certainly look at it if where struggling offensively.

I'm really hoping to get blown out of the water about how much of a difference a coach who works to his teams strengths actually is, AKA Doc. There's still weakness' in our lineup but it's not like Doc doesn't know that, he's gotta be looking at how to improve things and change things up to make them non weakness'.

Good point Verballer.. there's so much talk always on Griffin's game, especially his weakness'. Everyone seems to forget his career averages of 21 and 10. That is scary considering he still doesn't have the best post game, mid range, defensive capability.

[Verballer]

great little read.

I do like where he's coming from, I wouldn't say it'd be the main go to plan but certainly look at it if where struggling offensively.

I'm really hoping to get blown out of the water about how much of a difference a coach who works to his teams strengths actually is, AKA Doc. There's still weakness' in our lineup but it's not like Doc doesn't know that, he's gotta be looking at how to improve things and change things up to make them non weakness'.

Good point Verballer.. there's so much talk always on Griffin's game, especially his weakness'. Everyone seems to forget his career averages of 21 and 10. That is scary considering he still doesn't have the best post game, mid range, defensive capability.

I don't know too much about Doc Rivers besides the fact that he coaches defence really well but his offence isn't talked about but at anything is better than VDN.
Watching some of those breakdowns on youtube just made me shake my head in disappointment

And also,isn't the staff this year a MASSIVE upgrade???
Is Alvin Gentry a good assistant because he did lead the Suns to a WCF (Nash did but whatever)

[bwgood77]

And also,isn't the staff this year a MASSIVE upgrade???
Is Alvin Gentry a good assistant because he did lead the Suns to a WCF (Nash did but whatever)

Rivers brought in Gentry to run the offense, and with a finisher like Blake, a pg like Paul, and two shooters, they will largely resemble the Suns team that went to the WCF in 2010, with even batter shooting at the wing positions (though Nash was a better shooter than Paul). The question is, will Paul want to run? He typically likes to operate more in the half court.

If Paul buys into Gentry's offensive system (which is basically D'Antoni's), this offense could be unbelievably good and almost unstoppable. I hope the team really buys into it, because it will be a fun brand of basketball to watch.

[Chronz]

This article surmises what is best for Blake's production, not necessarily the team. CP3 already suppresses his game for the sake of Blake (imo), I doubt its a coincidence that his numbers skyrocket when Blake isn't on the court and its clear hes far more aggressive as the sole go to option. Blakes numbers for his CAREER (not just a span of a few games) show very little slippage/improvement regardless of CP3. While I dont doubt that Blake would put up slightly better numbers without CP3 around, its clear that CP3 is the guy whos sacrificing the most in the 2-way relationship. Tho I will admit, this on/off analysis is very new to me. It could be meaningless and could actually represent part of the problem with CP3. Maybe he should learn to be more aggressive when Blake is on the court, seems like he paces himself nowadays, which is fine, but we really need Blake to take that next level. Im conflicted, on 1 hand I dont want Blake or CP3 to go all out given their shaky ability to remain healthy but at the same time, if anyone can go full bore at this point in their careers, its Blake.

Back to the topic tho, I would love for Blake to take that next step, who doesn't want a dominant bigman? But Im not going to blame how hes been played for his inability to take the mantle from CP3. Im surely not going to prioritize the importance of 1 player over the production of the entire team. Until I see a different trend emerge (Clips always play better with CP3 vs with Blake, regardless of the others presence) I wont say a Blake centric offense is whats best for us. I want that to happen more than anyone, which is why I would love if we could trade CP3 for a guy like Curry who so clearly compliments a player like Blake and can grow alongside him, but given this roster, and given that CP3 is by far the superior player, we should stick to what gives us the best chance to win.

Blake+DJ is another dilemma, in theory, Blake having the ball more would make spacing less of an issue because it gives our primary ball handler (Blake) 3 outlet options on the perimeter and 1 lob threat in the paint, as opposed to CP3 having to work with only 2 shooters and 2 bigs who cant really shoot, but Blake is not a better isolation player or floor general than CP3. So its something you have to count on depending on the matchup.



Honestly tho, I was liking how the offensive synergy between Blake+CP3 was rounding out. Its definitely not the perfect fit, Blake's natural instinct is to survey the defense and make the right pass, but having 2 guys who think like PG's instead of 1 thinking like a natural finisher has its problems initially, but Blake is getting better at making quick hitting decisions. He sees that teams are stunting his drives off the PnR and his reads have been more precise/quick. CP3 and Blake running the PnR and then it leading to Blake finding the open shot or a lob for DJ is a beautiful sight.



All that said, what direction would you rather see Blake take? The Malone finishing mindset or the all-purpose Chuck game.

[Chronz]

And also,isn't the staff this year a MASSIVE upgrade???
Is Alvin Gentry a good assistant because he did lead the Suns to a WCF (Nash did but whatever)

Rivers brought in Gentry to run the offense, and with a finisher like Blake, a pg like Paul, and two shooters, they will largely resemble the Suns team that went to the WCF in 2010, with even batter shooting at the wing positions (though Nash was a better shooter than Paul). The question is, will Paul want to run? He typically likes to operate more in the half court.

If Paul buys into Gentry's offensive system (which is basically D'Antoni's), this offense could be unbelievably good and almost unstoppable. I hope the team really buys into it, because it will be a fun brand of basketball to watch.

Minor problem is that Amare was a far better individual offensive player than Blake, or at the very least, he had the skillset (slashing+shooting) that made that offense click. You had Nash as the bonafide playmaker and you had Amare as the bonafide finisher. Blake doesn't have that mindset, but given his progress, he can approximate that. The bigger issue is that Amare+Nash had 4 shooters around him at times, they had Frye having a career year from 3, DJ cant space anyone out at all, so I disagree that we have better shooters.

I think we should take aspects of their game, but given Blakes diverse skillset, we prolly shouldn't replicate them fully.

[azncorruptedo17]

ye... blake needs to polish his midrange... i think by the 2010 team, amare was hitting 3s...

[bwgood77]

And also,isn't the staff this year a MASSIVE upgrade???
Is Alvin Gentry a good assistant because he did lead the Suns to a WCF (Nash did but whatever)

Rivers brought in Gentry to run the offense, and with a finisher like Blake, a pg like Paul, and two shooters, they will largely resemble the Suns team that went to the WCF in 2010, with even better shooting at the wing positions (though Nash was a better shooter than Paul). The question is, will Paul want to run? He typically likes to operate more in the half court.

If Paul buys into Gentry's offensive system (which is basically D'Antoni's), this offense could be unbelievably good and almost unstoppable. I hope the team really buys into it, because it will be a fun brand of basketball to watch.

Minor problem is that Amare was a far better individual offensive player than Blake, or at the very least, he had the skillset (slashing+shooting) that made that offense click. You had Nash as the bonafide playmaker and you had Amare as the bonafide finisher. Blake doesn't have that mindset, but given his progress, he can approximate that. The bigger issue is that Amare+Nash had 4 shooters around him at times, they had Frye having a career year from 3, DJ cant space anyone out at all, so I disagree that we have better shooters.

I think we should take aspects of their game, but given Blakes diverse skillset, we prolly shouldn't replicate them fully.

Well that 2010 year they had Grant Hill at the three, so the only real good shooters in the starting lineup were Nash and JRich, as Lopez was the starting center.

Though part of the reason that team was so good, was that the bench unit was awesome (Dragic, Barbosa, Dudley, Amundson and Frye).

So they could always go small with Nash/JRich/Dudley/Hill and Amare or even put Frye in there instead of HIll and then you would have four guys who could hit the 3.

But the Clips have a few decent shooters on the bench as well. Gentry might like to play Barnes at the 4 at times with Blake at the 5...which would fit the system well, at least offensively.

[Chronz]

Well that 2010 year they had Grant Hill at the three, so the only real good shooters in the starting lineup were Nash and JRich, as Lopez was the starting center.

Yea, they took off when Lopez became the starter, it set up a better lineup distribution but that starting lineup only accounted for 452 minutes ion the year, their Top used lineup was the Frye+Amare setup. It was also more effective statistically and the lineup that accounted for most of their playoff time (tho I believe Lopez was hurt).

Their most effective lineup (based on raw stats and a smaller sample) was the same setup, only with Dudley in place of Hill. That gave them **** of spacing and they took +9 more 3's than the opposition.

So yea we can approximate some of that, but the season Frye had for them (+Blake/Amare not being the same) is the true difference maker between us IMO.

Though part of the reason that team was so good, was that the bench unit was awesome (Dragic, Barbosa, Dudley, Amundson and Frye).

So they could always go small with Nash/JRich/Dudley/Hill and Amare or even put Frye in there instead of HIll and then you would have four guys who could hit the 3.

Yea, that bench was beastly effective. Its weird, I was just reading about them recently, a big part of their success was the incredible chemistry they had, we obviously cant measure chemistry but there are a few odd barometers that suggested they were the most tight knit crew in the league. It explains why guys like Frye and J-Rich (he was HUGE in the playoffs) played well above their prior norms.

But the Clips have a few decent shooters on the bench as well. Gentry might like to play Barnes at the 4 at times with Blake at the 5...which would fit the system well, at least offensively.

We need to find our Frye in order to fully replicate them, I think thats where Mullens fits in but the Suns chucked up 3's at a frenetic pace, which prolly ties into what you said about us playing more high tempo.

[og15]

The problem is that either Blake has to be able to shoot, or he has to play next to someone that can shoot. Bigs who can both shoot and play PF/C and play above average defense aren't really that plentiful and teams want those guys. If Blake was a C, of course this is a lot easier, but he's a PF.

It's an okay overview, but this isn't accurate:

Griffin is not an elite shooter or defensive player. If he doesn’t have the ball in his hands, it’s hard for him to impact the game. As a result, the Clippers need to flip the dynamic on offense. Rather than Paul setting up Griffin, they need Griffin setting up Paul. It’s much easier for Paul to play off Griffin than vice versa. The Clippers' offense would be more explosive if possessions ended with Paul spotting up for a three-point shot instead of Griffin spotting up for a long two.

Blake set screens and moves off screens well enough to score points and impact games. I don't agree that he can't impact games without the ball in his hands.

Also there's a difference between what kind of offense benefits Blake the most and what kind of offense benefits the team the most. Paul is a better offensive player than Blake, that's the reality, so generally if you have to chose between one or the other, you want to maximize your best offensive player. The Clippers don't have to chose, while Blake hasn't been maximized in PPG, he's been maximized in efficiency. Let's not get carried away here, Blake averaged 20 pts/36 on .572 TS% while only hitting 33% of his jumpshots. He was very effective in the offensive role that he was used in, and part of his lower scoring rate was his lower offensive rebound rate.

Hopefully Blake's jumpshot itself improves. Remember, Nash was super ball dominant, yet Amare scored a lot, why? Well Amare hit about 11% better on FT's and about 10% better on jumpshots than Blake, not only does that give him more points, it opens up more opportunities going to the rim for him and more scoring opportunities because he's not tentative on open shots, he's taking them without hesitation.

If Blake hit about 44% on jumpshots and 78% on FT's, this past season he would have averaged 20.2 pts in 32.5 MPG. That's 22.4 pts/36. That's another 2.2 PPG without taking more shots, that would make the Clippers offensive rating 112.8 and the best in the NBA during the regular season.

Now of course for last season it still doesn't solve the horrible playoff defense and Blake getting injured, but still.

[Takingbaconback]

Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought the Clippers looked much better early in the season when they were getting DJ the ball down low in the post. He had some real skill down there, and I was surprised when they started to move away from it. I think Griffin would benefit a lot if DJ was given more touches down low.

As far as how he is used, I don't think it really matters. Of course you dont want to see him mostly taking jump shots, but I thought he was used well enough last year. He has superstar talent to some extent and he needs to bring it; he needs to make those open shots, use the glass more when he can, finish on post moves, etc. it is all up to him imo.

And one more thing I want to ask about the Clippers. Is it just me or did Blake revert back to his old free throw shot later in the season usually near the second half of games? Early in the season, it looked like he was shooting in one smooth motion and his ft shot looked great but by the end, he went back to his lift the ball up, wait half a second at the top, and release. I am surprised that he has had such a hard time with it, seems like an easy mental fix imo...