RealGM

Anyone notice that ball movement is improved for this team when one of it's starting guards is out of the lineup? Ivey and Bell actually try on defense.

I hope that CV and Simmons, heck even Bell playing as of late is due to showcasing for the trade deadline....

This team needs HELP!

Ivey killed us tonight. I don't want to hear about his great defense with the amount that he lost Steve Nash tonight.

I don't fault Ivey for not being able to shut down Nash. What is he, a 2 time MVP and a 3 time 1st team all NBA teamer?

DH34Phan wrote:I don't fault Ivey for not being able to shut down Nash. What is he, a 2 time MVP and a 3 time 1st team all NBA teamer?

Many people were quick to fault Mo for letting Nash go off on him last week. It's only fair

Nobody expected him to shut Nash down. All he has to do is stay with him. Nash should never shoot an open three.

Ivey was horrific.

DH34Phan wrote:I don't fault Ivey for not being able to shut down Nash. What is he, a 2 time MVP and a 3 time 1st team all NBA teamer?

not shutting him down doesn't equal 37 and 10

Theres a reason Nash doesnt average 37 points per game.

Its because in other games he doesnt make two dribbles and then have Bogut, Yi, CV, or Voskuhl gaurding him 25 feet from the basket with Ivey or Bell gaurding Amare, Diaw, Marion on the block.

This switching scheme we play is rediculous. It works at first because teams are so stunned, shocked, astounded, and dumbfounded. But we always stick with the **** for 4 quarters....

Its not a way to play EVERY screen. It neeeds to be mixed up... show and recover. Maybe just maybe try to fight through a screen.

midranger wrote:Ivey was horrific.

Correction, Ivey is horrific. I can't figure out why people like him. He's not only a terrible shooter/scorer, he's a terrible distributor. Has been since day one. I could see it in the preason.

Let's face it. The Bucks just aren't a good team.

smooth 'lil balla wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



Correction, Ivey is horrific. I can't figure out why people like him. He's not only a terrible shooter/scorer, he's a terrible distributor. Has been since day one. I could see it in the preason.

Let's face it. The Bucks just aren't a good team.

I like him, because he plays terrific man to man defense and hustles. I hate the Bucks defensive scheme, and wish they would play a more basic man to man defense. Then, we would all see who the weak links are.

Like I've said before, he is a Rondo/Harris type. If you have guys that can create their own shot, and pass out of double teams (Bogut and Redd, hopefully Yi next year), a pure point guard isn't such a necessity. Yes, nothing beats a pure point who can make the passes, has the vision, can score and shoot and defend, but you can win games with a Rondo/Harris. As long as the ball keeps moving.

Should Ivey be shooting a lot of shots? No. Should he be making back door cuts, and trying to get to the line? Yes. Should the Bucks switch on everything? No. Should the Bucks play a more basic defense, and concentrate on making the offense more complex? Yes.

GHOSTofSIKMA wrote:Theres a reason Nash doesnt average 37 points per game.

Its because in other games he doesnt make two dribbles and then have Bogut, Yi, CV, or Voskuhl gaurding him 25 feet from the basket with Ivey or Bell gaurding Amare, Diaw, Marion on the block.

This switching scheme we play is rediculous. It works at first because teams are so stunned, shocked, astounded, and dumbfounded. But we always stick with the **** for 4 quarters....

Its not a way to play EVERY screen. It neeeds to be mixed up... show and recover. Maybe just maybe try to fight through a screen.

I'm glad someone said something about this. We switched on every screen regardless of the situation. That's larry krystkowiak's fault. He probably tells them to switch on every screen. That's a stupid defensive scheme. Nash figured out that whenever someone set a screen there would be a mismatch every single time, so they would just run a screen at the top of the key, Yi or Bogut would switch on to nash, and then nash owns them. It's quite simple when the defense is that stupid. I would think Larry K is the type of coach that wants his players to fight through screens.

You can't blame Ivey on Nash's game. Blame whoever thought of the scheme to switch every pick the entire game. Nash scored his points on switches that ended up in Bogut, Yi or CV guarding him. I will never, ever understand why people think switching every pick is a good idea.

2ss2ls wrote:You can't blame Ivey on Nash's game. Blame whoever thought of the scheme to switch every pick the entire game. Nash scored his points on switches that ended up in Bogut, Yi or CV guarding him. I will never, ever understand why people think switching every pick is a good idea.

When you play the Suns, you pick your poison. By switching all the time, the Bucks forced Nash to beat them. They minimized the impact of the other Suns this game, especially Amare.

I've watched a number of Suns games this season, this was one of their ugliest games. Have a look at the game thread on their board, they were all complaining how Amare was left out of their offense and they were losing because of it.

Switching on every screen was a conscious choice, putting much of their scoring on Nash. It worked pretty well, but in the end the Suns just are a bettter team.

we do it in every game though

jerrod wrote:we do it in every game though

Exactly.

My problem with "letting Nash beat you" is that he will in fact, beat you. He is an excellent jump shooter and when he isn't shooting a jumper he is driving to the hole. So when we switched every play last night Nash got to pick between jump and drive, everytime and it worked with great succsess. I'd just love to see what happens without switching.

2ss2ls wrote:You can't blame Ivey on Nash's game. Blame whoever thought of the scheme to switch every pick the entire game. Nash scored his points on switches that ended up in Bogut, Yi or CV guarding him.

I only saw the second half, but on switches i didn't see Bogut or Yi/CV guarding Nash, i saw nobody guarding Nash, just him standing by himself wide open to shoot.

El Duderino wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



I only saw the second half, but on switches i didn't see Bogut or Yi/CV guarding Nash, i saw nobody guarding Nash, just him standing by himself wide open to shoot.

That's because there was a switch, Ivey would be fighting with Amare and Yi, Bogut or CV would give Nash of a ton of room to avoid penetration. So therefore Nash elected to take open shots which he hits at a very high rate. Watch the game again. And I am not the only person who saw this, seems like everyone caught it.

Rockmaninoff wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

Should Ivey be shooting a lot of shots? No. Should he be making back door cuts, and trying to get to the line? Yes. Should the Bucks switch on everything? No. Should the Bucks play a more basic defense, and concentrate on making the offense more complex? Yes.

Rockmanioff, I agree with you on most of the points. The defence made be cry last night, the offense made me puke. I am a passonate Bucks fan and it hurts to see them playing this F!#$!# ReT!#$!@. I watch every play twice (I love DVR), the first time for what happened, the second time for how and why it happened.

I agree the Defence cannot switch every pick. This is just not smart basketball. Challenging a 2 time MVP (who is shooting like 55 percent from the floor this year) to "beat you", is not smart basketball.

However, where I disagree with you, Rock, is the offense. I think it needs to be LESS complex, not more. With the Sets that LK has us running, by the time Bogut gets the ball in the post (becuase, he first takes it at the top of the key, passes, pauses, and then gets a side pick through the paint) there is only 6-8 seconds left on the shot clock. That means he pretty much has to make up his mind and commit right away. He can't kick it out and repost, there is not enough time for a good ball swing, etc. That is not smart basketball. The play you are running should get the ball to a person in the area you want with 12-14 seconds left, this way, he gets plenty of time to make a SMART decision, instead of making the only decision available with time left.

How many times did the bucks have to throw up a buzzer beater. If we hadn't made like 4 buzzer beaters and the other 10 low percentage shots, we would have been blown out completely, again.

LK's offensive sets take such a long time to develop it's not even funny. Pass the ball around the key a few times. Then get it to Bogut or Redd with 8-10 seconds left and hope to God something good happens.

1377 wrote:However, where I disagree with you, Rock, is the offense. I think it needs to be LESS complex, not more. With the Sets that LK has us running, by the time Bogut gets the ball in the post (becuase, he first takes it at the top of the key, passes, pauses, and then gets a side pick through the paint) there is only 6-8 seconds left on the shot clock. That means he pretty much has to make up his mind and commit right away. He can't kick it out and repost, there is not enough time for a good ball swing, etc. That is not smart basketball. The play you are running should get the ball to a person in the area you want with 12-14 seconds left, this way, he gets plenty of time to make a SMART decision, instead of making the only decision available with time left.

How many times did the bucks have to throw up a buzzer beater. If we hadn't made like 4 buzzer beaters and the other 10 low percentage shots, we would have been blown out completely, again.

I agree with everything you wrote. That's what I meant by more complex, but I think I used the wrong term.

Like you said, I want to see the ball go to Bogut in the post early. I've always wanted to see him facilitate the offense. The complex part would come after Bogut gets the ball early in the clock, in the form of what the other players do off the ball. The spacing, cuts, double screens, etc. and the options Bogut would have on each set. But you are right, a simple ball swing off a post pass would work well with the talent on this team. We don't see that enough.

I wonder if now is the time for Larry K. to try the triangle again?