RealGM

Watching the game yesterday reminded me of the disaster that was Tryonn Lue running Crowder at the 4 and Love at the 5 last year for my Cavs... all game it seemed like the Clippers were undersized. I know they realistically have no chance, but I feel like Doc is setting up them up to fail anyway; like you're going run three PGs against one of the best lineups in league history? As someone on the outside looking in, someone set me straight: I get Lou and Harrell are forces off the bench, so why not run something like Bev-Temple-Gallo-Green-Zu?

Also, what is with the unwritten rule of Zu only being able to play the first 5 minutes of each half? I know that's been a tactic in the past, but I've never seen it applied to a guy where he literally plays nothing outside of that.

Doc has been obsessed with smallball the entire time he's been our coach just because he wants to copy what the Warriors are doing, roster construction be damned.

cavs4872 wrote:Watching the game yesterday reminded me of the disaster that was Tryonn Lue running Crowder at the 4 and Love at the 5 last year for my Cavs... all game it seemed like the Clippers were undersized. I know they realistically have no chance, but I feel like Doc is setting up them up to fail anyway; like you're going run three PGs against one of the best lineups in league history? As someone on the outside looking in, someone set me straight: I get Lou and Harrell are forces off the bench, so why not run something like Bev-Temple-Gallo-Green-Zu?

Also, what is with the unwritten rule of Zu only being able to play the first 5 minutes of each half? I know that's been a tactic in the past, but I've never seen it applied to a guy where he literally plays nothing outside of that.

There is method to the madness if you analyze it methodically.



To point #1: Zubac consistently gets 20 minutes, Harrell 28. Harrell can't play PF and Zubac can't play high post. Can't have 2 guys in the post together because it does the defense's job for them--clogging the paint.

This is why the original Twin Towers [Sampson and Olojuwon] didn't work and why nobody plays Twin Towers, esp in the 21st century, which favors stretch 4s lurking around the 3-point line. [See Blake Griffin's mutation into a jumpshooter.]


As for using three guards, it's because we have no #%^&ing SFs. None. Shai at 6'6" should be the swingman, but he's just not meaty enough to play the league's 3s. So we go with Shamet or Temple. And look who was guarding Durant--Pat Bev! Doc experimented with 6'9" JaMychal Green at the 3 but it just didn't fly. [JaMychal has turned into a reliable backup 4, though, and a stretch 4 at that.]


Some are calling for more Zubac, but he's still very green--technically a 3rd year player but who has played fewer NBA minutes [2059] than true rookie SGA [2174].

Zubac is a fine space-filler in the middle so far--incredibly more useful than Gortat, who was killing us--but he's not gonna win you a game. Trezz can.

The Clippers' finishers are Trezz-Lou-Gallo-Pat-Shai. You work the rotation backwards from there, making sure nobody has to play 38 minutes, because pretty much they can't. Shamet is really our sixth man, and it's a jigsaw puzzle after that.

2 of our 3 best players are bench guys who struggle to play more than 30 minutes. You can't judge Doc's rotations by any normal standard. Everything's backwards.

I'm gonna be honest here, even if it makes me look like a smug dick. Any time a fan from any team criticises his coach's rotations, I just assume they're moaners that don't have a clue. Coaching is a big job with many things to do, and rotations are a small part of it, but are the exact kind of thing that someone without a clue what they're talking about, will think they know better.

If you have detailed constructive criticism about strategy points in specific sets, I might take your criticism seriously. But if you're talking about rotations and broad statements about how good/bad you coach's system is, you're likely just another guy who's idea of rotations are shortsighted preferences and would be a disaster if implemented.

That goes for every team, go to other teams forums and take a look at what fans think of Popovich's rotations, or Carlisle, Spo, even Kerr and Bud. Most fans think their rotations are bad and they'd do better. It happens in every sport, but fan's half baked rotation ideas seldom make any sense, to take that criticism seriously.

So yeah, I'd trust Doc's rotations, or any other professional coach that has spent hundreds of hours weighing them, before pretty much anyone on the internet, unless there's a detailed analysis to go with the idea.

/rant

Agree with the last two posts. You play the cards you’re dealt. If I’m looking at things correctly, we actually had good size in the frontcourt for most of the year at the beginning of games:

Gallo – 68 starts, 2059 minutes
Harris – 55 starts, 1903 minutes
Gortat – 43 starts, 751 minutes
Zubac – 25 starts, 524 minutes
Boban – 9 starts (!), 376 minutes
Trezz – 5 starts, 2158 minutes
Green – 2 starts, 471 minutes
Chandler – 1 start, 226 minutes
Scott – 0 starts, 748 minutes

That’s 208 starts at C, PF, and SF--almost 85%--and close to 80% of the available minutes at those positions. The thing that hurt us in terms of size was injuries and the bench, especially post all-star. We never had more than six of those guys at one time—and six players at actually 3 positions is kind of a lack of depth. In our case, it was almost all at SF. When Gallo missed time, and after we traded/released Harris, Scott, Gortat and Boban and replaced them with Zubac and Green and, in the last games, Chandler, we didn’t have size. Temple played well but was a bit out of position; we ran three guards more often. (If Temple was 6’7-6’8” 220 instead of 6’5”=6’6”’ 195, we wouldn’t be having this discussion.)

QRich3 wrote:If you have detailed constructive criticism about strategy points in specific sets, I might take your criticism seriously. But if you're talking about rotations and broad statements about how good/bad you coach's system is, you're likely just another guy who's idea of rotations are shortsighted preferences and would be a disaster if implemented.

Classic example--Brett Brown immediately installed Bobi as his backup center and the Philly fans were stoked after a couple of flashy performances that took Eastern Conference teams by surprise. But all of Philly soon found out what Doc and Pop already knew--Bobi's easily defused by a smart coach, either by denying him the ball, attacking the ball when he holds it below his shoulders, or by going small, beating him down the court, and running rings around him on the other end.

esqtvd wrote:

QRich3 wrote:If you have detailed constructive criticism about strategy points in specific sets, I might take your criticism seriously. But if you're talking about rotations and broad statements about how good/bad you coach's system is, you're likely just another guy who's idea of rotations are shortsighted preferences and would be a disaster if implemented.

Classic example--Brett Brown immediately installed Bobi as his backup center and the Philly fans were stoked after a couple of flashy performances that took Eastern Conference teams by surprise. But all of Philly soon found out what Doc and Pop already knew--Bobi's easily defused by a smart coach, either by denying him the ball, attacking the ball when he holds it below his shoulders, or by going small, beating him down the court, and running rings around him on the other end.

Meanwhile in reality, Boban is still getting a legit chance to contribute in Philly and was one of the only Sixers players who actually showed up in Game 1 against the Nets.

MartinToVaught wrote:

esqtvd wrote:

QRich3 wrote:If you have detailed constructive criticism about strategy points in specific sets, I might take your criticism seriously. But if you're talking about rotations and broad statements about how good/bad you coach's system is, you're likely just another guy who's idea of rotations are shortsighted preferences and would be a disaster if implemented.

Classic example--Brett Brown immediately installed Bobi as his backup center and the Philly fans were stoked after a couple of flashy performances that took Eastern Conference teams by surprise. But all of Philly soon found out what Doc and Pop already knew--Bobi's easily defused by a smart coach, either by denying him the ball, attacking the ball when he holds it below his shoulders, or by going small, beating him down the court, and running rings around him on the other end.

Meanwhile in reality, Boban is still getting a legit chance to contribute in Philly and was one of the only Sixers players who actually showed up in Game 1 against the Nets.

Thanks for proving QRich's point. I follow the Sixers because it's my hometown so my comments aren't based on watching just one game. The Nets don't have a center to speak of. The pickins aren't so easy against other teams.

Sure, but the Nets went small and couldn't neutralize him that way either. Stop hating on good players to prop up your pro-Doc-at-all-times agenda and give credit where credit is due.

MartinToVaught wrote:Sure, but the Nets went small and couldn't neutralize him that way either. Stop hating on good players to prop up your pro-Doc-at-all-times agenda and give credit where credit is due.

You mean your anti-Doc agenda at all times. But actually I'm not talking about Doc.

I follow Philly. The only alternatives at center are a raw rookie [Bolden] and a guy who didn't even dress yesterday [Amir Johnson]. Hey, I'm a Bobi fan and was encouraged by his first few games in Philly.

But Brett Brown ended up auditioning a G-Leaguer as the backup center at the end of the year.

https://www.philly.com/sixers/sixers-jonah-bolden-film-review-playoffs-boban-marjanovic-joel-embiid-20190403.html

Look, I hope Bobi continues to do well in the playoffs because the job's his now by default. But with the Clippers, he'd still be the gizmo 3rd-string center behind Trezz and now Zubac, and rightfully so. Doc has nothing to do with this---it's more about the type of fan QRich describes, who thinks he's smarter than every coach Boban ever had.

Bobi is a great weapon to have off the bench. If other team's stretch bigs cant shoot him off the court, then he's gonna make 80% of his FGs as he destroys them inside and forces defenses to collapse on him. If their big shooters make their shots at an efficient clip, then Bobi heads back to the bench. Heads PHI wins, tails PHI plays conventional modern ball which theyre also well equipped to do.

Yea, the team has a gaping hole at SF, and GSW is literally THE WORST draw for the Clips cuz they simply have no one to slow KD down. If other teams are strong at guard or big, there's enough skilled bodies the Clips can cycle through.

Honestly, developmental wise, this season has been a rousing success. The team got 2 rookie keepers at PG/SG, developing traditional big man who can be retained for cheap, and potential future sleeper that hasnt shined at all in his rookie season. The vets have for the most part done very very well, with only a coupla stinkers in Gortat and later on Chandler.

This team is VERY well positioned to make big moves in 2019 FA, which is all we fans can ask for.