ImageImageImageImage

Why aren't we running the offense thru AG?

Moderators: SOUL, Def Swami, UCF, UCFJayBird, ChosenSavior, Howard Mass, Knightro

User avatar
MagicMatic
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,644
And1: 5,468
Joined: May 30, 2016
 

Re: Why aren't we running the offense thru AG? 

Post#101 » by MagicMatic » Mon Apr 29, 2019 3:59 am

fendilim wrote:
MagicMatic wrote:
tiderulz wrote:how long does the development take? we are going into year 6


People need to let it go.

AG is not Kawhi, PG13, Durant, Butler, etc. AG is AG. What that means to me is a 25 year old face up forward that relies on his athleticism first and foremost. He is a situational player depending on who he is surrounded by and the system in which he is taking part.

He has weaknesses to his game, more than a lot of those players I just listed. Is that the end of the world? No. However, the best thing we could hope for is putting him in the best situation to be the best possible version of himself.

AG could possibly become an allstar one day depending on his situation. Slim chance, but possible given his circumstances. This coming from the true and original AG doubter.

Gordon can be an allstar in the right system.


I believe so too.
Bensational
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 22,202
And1: 8,014
Joined: Apr 10, 2001
     

Re: Why aren't we running the offense thru AG? 

Post#102 » by Bensational » Mon Apr 29, 2019 4:36 am

fendilim wrote:
Bensational wrote:
tiderulz wrote:how long does the development take? we are going into year 6


I would say by age 25 Gordon will be what he will be. Over the next 2 seasons he will see if he can take his on-ball game to any further levels, whilst continuing to improve his shooting. Where he ends at that point will indicate what he will be bringing through his prime years.

Just curious, why 25?


Mostly because I consider his handles and playmaking to still be new additions, and he's learning to put all his skills together now. I think the next 2 seasons is when he starts to find the balance of efficiency and craft.
User avatar
fendilim
RealGM
Posts: 26,959
And1: 3,282
Joined: Jun 11, 2002
Location: 孫悟空, 时间太?!

Re: Why aren't we running the offense thru AG? 

Post#103 » by fendilim » Mon Apr 29, 2019 5:29 am

Bensational wrote:
fendilim wrote:
Bensational wrote:
I would say by age 25 Gordon will be what he will be. Over the next 2 seasons he will see if he can take his on-ball game to any further levels, whilst continuing to improve his shooting. Where he ends at that point will indicate what he will be bringing through his prime years.

Just curious, why 25?


Mostly because I consider his handles and playmaking to still be new additions, and he's learning to put all his skills together now. I think the next 2 seasons is when he starts to find the balance of efficiency and craft.

So would you give Vuc two more years because he has shown this year he is a capable facilitator on offense and has added a consistent 3 point shot to his game which is still also new additions to his game?
Image
Bensational
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 22,202
And1: 8,014
Joined: Apr 10, 2001
     

Re: Why aren't we running the offense thru AG? 

Post#104 » by Bensational » Mon Apr 29, 2019 6:51 am

fendilim wrote:
Bensational wrote:
fendilim wrote:Just curious, why 25?


Mostly because I consider his handles and playmaking to still be new additions, and he's learning to put all his skills together now. I think the next 2 seasons is when he starts to find the balance of efficiency and craft.

So would you give Vuc two more years because he has shown this year he is a capable facilitator on offense and has added a consistent 3 point shot to his game which is still also new additions to his game?


I don't have a problem with Vuc. I don't think he needs more time to improve because he's already good. I'd take his current impact as is. I'm not sure why you think I want Vuc gone. I just want the backcourt addressed, and Ive said a few times that I can see avenues to do it with or without him. I don't see Vuc as any kind of hindrance to AG.
zaymon
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,253
And1: 691
Joined: Jul 01, 2015
   

Re: Why aren't we running the offense thru AG? 

Post#105 » by zaymon » Mon Apr 29, 2019 7:40 am

Bensational wrote:
fendilim wrote:
Bensational wrote:
Mostly because I consider his handles and playmaking to still be new additions, and he's learning to put all his skills together now. I think the next 2 seasons is when he starts to find the balance of efficiency and craft.

So would you give Vuc two more years because he has shown this year he is a capable facilitator on offense and has added a consistent 3 point shot to his game which is still also new additions to his game?


I don't have a problem with Vuc. I don't think he needs more time to improve because he's already good. I'd take his current impact as is. I'm not sure why you think I want Vuc gone. I just want the backcourt addressed, and Ive said a few times that I can see avenues to do it with or without him. I don't see Vuc as any kind of hindrance to AG.

I think Vucevic game is still changing becouse he just added deadly 3 point shot to his repertoire. Now he must learn to use his new position on the court and leverage all his strengths. Vuc is one of the 3 best centers in the league to play with AG along with Jokic and AD.
Bold Predictions:
1. Deandre Ayton biggest disappointment of 2018 draft.
2. Nick Nurse becomes Orlando Magic Head Coach. (15.04.2018)
Bensational
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 22,202
And1: 8,014
Joined: Apr 10, 2001
     

Re: Why aren't we running the offense thru AG? 

Post#106 » by Bensational » Mon Apr 29, 2019 7:53 am

pepe1991 wrote:
Bensational wrote:
pepe1991 wrote:When was Leonard 3rd option on great team?
While he was playing his 3rd year he won : championship, was finals MVP and was named on all nba defensive team.

Averaged 17,8 ppg in nba finlals ( behind only Parker, who averaged 0,2 points per game more). So is that your 3rd option?
Or you refering to his SECOND year, where he was same age as Isaac ( 21) and averaged 13,5 ppg in playoffs on 61% TS .



In Kawhi's 3rd year, when the Spurs won the championship, he averaged 9fgas a game behind Parker (13) and Duncan (12), with Manu also averaging 9. In the playoffs, he averaged 10fgas, Parker averaged 15, Duncan 12, and again Many 10.

That seems like a 3rd option on a great team to me.

Why did you have to pick his finals numbers, out of an entire season's worth of data? That would be like me pointing to Gordon being our team's top scorer in the playoffs and claiming him as our #1 option.

Not sure why you say you believe Gordon is a 3rd option on a great team, then when a 12.8ppg 3rd option of Kawhi is referenced you suddenly jump back off the comparison.


Just a fact that you can't compare Gordon's 5th year to Leonard's 5th year makes a great argument-against your argument.
In same time you can't even compare Gordon's age, 23 to Leonard's production at same age, because again, it kills your argument.


I can compare their age 23 numbers.

AG
33.8mpg, 16ppg, 7.4rpg, 3.7apg, 0.7spg, 0.7bpg, 2.1topg, 45%fg, 35% 3fg (on 4.4 3fgas), 73%ft (on 3.2ftas)

Kawhi
31.8mpg, 16.5ppg, 7.2rpg, 2.5apg, 2.3spg, 0.8bpg, 1.5topg, 48%fg, 35% 3g (on 3 3fgas), 80%ft (on 3.9ftas)

Raw numbers are pretty comparable. Kawhi obviously blows AG out of the water in advanced numbers:

AG
15.1 PER, 54%ts, 21.8usg, 5.1 win shares

Kawhi
22 PER, 57%ts, 23usg, 8.6 win shares


pepe1991 wrote:So you have to reach out and make nonsene of comparison using 3rd season of Leonard to compare it to Gordon's 5th season . But even when you reach out, you still can't explain why Leonard was finals MVP and took his game to another level when it mattered the most, where Gordon kept being in playoffs his old 15- ppg self, despite being left wide open whole series.

4 different people called you out on this Leonard crap, just give. Nobody expects you to man up and admit it's wrong , just let it go.


Why didn't you answer my questions? Why cherry pick data? Why pretend Kawhi wasn't a 3rd option on a great team at one point in his career? There's an opportunity for you to say that version of Kawhi is Gordon's ceiling, but for some reason the comparison upsets you this badly that you have to actually make up lies to try to make your case.

And Kawhi was finals MVP, but that's an award for just one series, which he had the benefit of playing in because he played alongside 3 of the most experienced championship players, and playing for the greatest coach in the league. Oh, and the next season - when Kawhi was the #1 option, they were knocked out of the playoffs in the first round.

You see current Kawhi and that's all you know. You seem to have a very limited capacity to recall the past or to attempt to picture the future. The Kawhi of the past 4 seasons isn't what Kawhi has been his entire career. He's grown into that. He went from a 23 year old 16.5ppg #1 option of Kawhi, to this season's 27 year old 26.6ppg #1 option. In the span of that growth, there's a 10 point spectrum in ppg, a 5.6 point PER spectrum, a 0.04 TS% spectrum, a 7 point USG% spectrum and a 5 point Win Share spectrum. There are a lot of different places he could have landed, or any other player could land, on those spectrums. Within those parameters you've got other players, like Millsap, Harris, Butler, Marion, etc.

The point of the Kawhi comp has always been a demonstration that some players come into their games later. It's not to set the standard, or to treat his trajectory as 'the path', but he (and Paul George, and Oladipo, and Butler) establish a precedent that players come into their games at later ages. The reason this point has had to be made is because every single season the same voices continue to say that Gordon is tapped out. That he is what he is and he won't improve. You're a prime culprit for it because you point to someone like Tatum, or Doncic and say "see, they're young and putting up big numbers, so clearly Gordon won't because he's older". Hence, why names like the above are introduced to establish that some players develop later. But then these comps are taken literally, despite I-don't-know-how-many-times it's been stated that it's not a direct comp for standards.

You continue to take the suggestion of Gordon having scope for improvement as an assertion he's destined to be a star. The only time I entertained Gordon possibly blossoming into a star was prior to the start of his 3rd season, and since then it's been clear that he's not that player. I see him as a 3rd option on a great team.

For Gordon to be within range of being "a third option on a great team", he needs to reach a certain level of greatness himself. Prime Draymond, Kevin Love, Young Kawhi, Chris Bosh, James Harden, Andrew Bynum, Ray Allen, - this is the calibre of 3rd options on great teams in that past 10 years. Just think about how good the top 2 options on those teams had to be in order for those teams to make the finals.

You suggest you believe Gordon is a 3rd option on a great team too, but I suspect you feel that concession allows you to draw comps to players like Thad Young and Rudy Gay - but they have never been 3rd options on great teams. Even when making the Millsap comp, which you were the one to put forth, you still go out of your way to downplay the value of Millsap. Why? It's almost like you're pretending to give AG credit to act as if you're not trying to hate on him, when everything you say about him is an attempt to downplay any value or potential he offers, because... why? You consider him a threat to Vuc? I can't begin to imagine how much it upsets you that Gordon was the team's top scorer in the playoffs. Vuc couldn't step up. Fournier couldn't step up. DJ stepped up for one game. Yet, despite all that, you go out of your way to downplay AG's performances and impact, pretending that Toronto gameplanned to have Van Vleet defend him. (Side note, Green and Van Vleet also defended Fournier - and they shut. him. down.).

You realise this whole thread started off the notion that, for the playoffs, someone suggested we run more through AG since he was the only one being effective. I don't believe it was a long term proposal, just something for the benefit of the team in this one series.

So, I guess it's time to fess up - why do you lie, isolate numbers, and focus so much criticism on Gordon when players you've stated are more significant couldn't even match his performance? Why call him a 3rd option and then balk at a comp to a 3rd option? If you hate Gordon, just say it. There's no point pretending otherwise when everything you say suggests otherwise. May as well give up the charade and admit to being a hater.
pepe1991
General Manager
Posts: 9,925
And1: 7,972
Joined: Jan 10, 2016
   

Re: Why aren't we running the offense thru AG? 

Post#107 » by pepe1991 » Mon Apr 29, 2019 8:06 am

Rudy Gay vs Gordon

Third season

Image

Fourth season

Image

Fifth season

Image

Now go ahead and tell me what execlly Aaron Gordon did better in half of decade than Rudy Gay

Also you admited that Kawhi blows AG in advanced stats, so what's there to even argue? Their counting numbers ? It's like comparing Monta Elise or OJ Mayo to Curry around 2013 .
Also third option, in third year, stepping up in nba finals, winning finals mvp, vs being second /third option on 5 games ,first round exit team, where nobody really guards you isn't same. But hey, it's not like i expect anything objective from you anyway...
"A straight path never leads anywhere except to the objective."
Andre Gide
User avatar
fendilim
RealGM
Posts: 26,959
And1: 3,282
Joined: Jun 11, 2002
Location: 孫悟空, 时间太?!

Re: Why aren't we running the offense thru AG? 

Post#108 » by fendilim » Mon Apr 29, 2019 8:16 am

Bensational wrote:
pepe1991 wrote:
Bensational wrote:
In Kawhi's 3rd year, when the Spurs won the championship, he averaged 9fgas a game behind Parker (13) and Duncan (12), with Manu also averaging 9. In the playoffs, he averaged 10fgas, Parker averaged 15, Duncan 12, and again Many 10.

That seems like a 3rd option on a great team to me.

Why did you have to pick his finals numbers, out of an entire season's worth of data? That would be like me pointing to Gordon being our team's top scorer in the playoffs and claiming him as our #1 option.

Not sure why you say you believe Gordon is a 3rd option on a great team, then when a 12.8ppg 3rd option of Kawhi is referenced you suddenly jump back off the comparison.


Just a fact that you can't compare Gordon's 5th year to Leonard's 5th year makes a great argument-against your argument.
In same time you can't even compare Gordon's age, 23 to Leonard's production at same age, because again, it kills your argument.


I can compare their age 23 numbers.

AG
33.8mpg, 16ppg, 7.4rpg, 3.7apg, 0.7spg, 0.7bpg, 2.1topg, 45%fg, 35% 3fg (on 4.4 3fgas), 73%ft (on 3.2ftas)

Kawhi
31.8mpg, 16.5ppg, 7.2rpg, 2.5apg, 2.3spg, 0.8bpg, 1.5topg, 48%fg, 35% 3g (on 3 3fgas), 80%ft (on 3.9ftas)

Raw numbers are pretty comparable. Kawhi obviously blows AG out of the water in advanced numbers:

AG
15.1 PER, 54%ts, 21.8usg, 5.1 win shares

Kawhi
22 PER, 57%ts, 23usg, 8.6 win shares


pepe1991 wrote:So you have to reach out and make nonsene of comparison using 3rd season of Leonard to compare it to Gordon's 5th season . But even when you reach out, you still can't explain why Leonard was finals MVP and took his game to another level when it mattered the most, where Gordon kept being in playoffs his old 15- ppg self, despite being left wide open whole series.

4 different people called you out on this Leonard crap, just give. Nobody expects you to man up and admit it's wrong , just let it go.


Why didn't you answer my questions? Why cherry pick data? Why pretend Kawhi wasn't a 3rd option on a great team at one point in his career? There's an opportunity for you to say that version of Kawhi is Gordon's ceiling, but for some reason the comparison upsets you this badly that you have to actually make up lies to try to make your case.

And Kawhi was finals MVP, but that's an award for just one series, which he had the benefit of playing in because he played alongside 3 of the most experienced championship players, and playing for the greatest coach in the league. Oh, and the next season - when Kawhi was the #1 option, they were knocked out of the playoffs in the first round.

You see current Kawhi and that's all you know. You seem to have a very limited capacity to recall the past or to attempt to picture the future. The Kawhi of the past 4 seasons isn't what Kawhi has been his entire career. He's grown into that. He went from a 23 year old 16.5ppg #1 option of Kawhi, to this season's 27 year old 26.6ppg #1 option. In the span of that growth, there's a 10 point spectrum in ppg, a 5.6 point PER spectrum, a 0.04 TS% spectrum, a 7 point USG% spectrum and a 5 point Win Share spectrum. There are a lot of different places he could have landed, or any other player could land, on those spectrums. Within those parameters you've got other players, like Millsap, Harris, Butler, Marion, etc.

The point of the Kawhi comp has always been a demonstration that some players come into their games later. It's not to set the standard, or to treat his trajectory as 'the path', but he (and Paul George, and Oladipo, and Butler) establish a precedent that players come into their games at later ages. The reason this point has had to be made is because every single season the same voices continue to say that Gordon is tapped out. That he is what he is and he won't improve. You're a prime culprit for it because you point to someone like Tatum, or Doncic and say "see, they're young and putting up big numbers, so clearly Gordon won't because he's older". Hence, why names like the above are introduced to establish that some players develop later. But then these comps are taken literally, despite I-don't-know-how-many-times it's been stated that it's not a direct comp for standards.

You continue to take the suggestion of Gordon having scope for improvement as an assertion he's destined to be a star. The only time I entertained Gordon possibly blossoming into a star was prior to the start of his 3rd season, and since then it's been clear that he's not that player. I see him as a 3rd option on a great team.

For Gordon to be within range of being "a third option on a great team", he needs to reach a certain level of greatness himself. Prime Draymond, Kevin Love, Young Kawhi, Chris Bosh, James Harden, Andrew Bynum, Ray Allen, - this is the calibre of 3rd options on great teams in that past 10 years. Just think about how good the top 2 options on those teams had to be in order for those teams to make the finals.

You suggest you believe Gordon is a 3rd option on a great team too, but I suspect you feel that concession allows you to draw comps to players like Thad Young and Rudy Gay - but they have never been 3rd options on great teams. Even when making the Millsap comp, which you were the one to put forth, you still go out of your way to downplay the value of Millsap. Why? It's almost like you're pretending to give AG credit to act as if you're not trying to hate on him, when everything you say about him is an attempt to downplay any value or potential he offers, because... why? You consider him a threat to Vuc? I can't begin to imagine how much it upsets you that Gordon was the team's top scorer in the playoffs. Vuc couldn't step up. Fournier couldn't step up. DJ stepped up for one game. Yet, despite all that, you go out of your way to downplay AG's performances and impact, pretending that Toronto gameplanned to have Van Vleet defend him. (Side note, Green and Van Vleet also defended Fournier - and they shut. him. down.).

You realise this whole thread started off the notion that, for the playoffs, someone suggested we run more through AG since he was the only one being effective. I don't believe it was a long term proposal, just something for the benefit of the team in this one series.

So, I guess it's time to fess up - why do you lie, isolate numbers, and focus so much criticism on Gordon when players you've stated are more significant couldn't even match his performance? Why call him a 3rd option and then balk at a comp to a 3rd option? If you hate Gordon, just say it. There's no point pretending otherwise when everything you say suggests otherwise. May as well give up the charade and admit to being a hater.
Raw numbers can suggest how a player is comparable to another player, but raw numbers dont tell the whole story. Gordon and Kawhi at the same age, at the same point in their careers, are totally different players. So to say Gordon has a ceiling of Kawhi is simply wrong, IMO.

Its true that Gordon`s game may develop in the later years. But to say he can be in the same potential trajectory of Oladipo, PG, Butler is laughable. All the players you mentioned have the base skills of being a scorer right when they entered the league, or younger than whatever age Gordon is now. There`s a lower ceiling, IMO, for guys like Gordon who have limited shot making abilities.

Gordon is in the same mold as a Thaddeus Young, Clifford Robinson type. He`ll put up numbers here and there, but he still need to have the right players and system to put up those numbers.
Image
Xatticus
Analyst
Posts: 3,644
And1: 3,410
Joined: Feb 18, 2016
         

Re: Why aren't we running the offense thru AG? 

Post#109 » by Xatticus » Sat May 4, 2019 3:30 am

Because Clifford is stubborn or unimaginative? We punished the lazy pick-and-roll defense for one game and Nurse immediately adjusted by pushing the point of attack above the three-point line and bringing the help defender over early. This killed our offense because none of our pick-and-roll ball handlers can make this pass:



Toronto has long defenders that bother passing lanes and make entry passes difficult, but we have seen that our pick-and-roll game is essentially nothing but a two-man game as our pick-and-roll initiators see nothing but Vucevic. A four-game sweep followed and Clifford's response never came. Nothing we could have tried could've worked any worse than what we were doing.

Phrasing it as running the offense through Gordon is going to rankle his detractors, but it really just comes down to how you initiate the offense.
User avatar
fendilim
RealGM
Posts: 26,959
And1: 3,282
Joined: Jun 11, 2002
Location: 孫悟空, 时间太?!

Re: Why aren't we running the offense thru AG? 

Post#110 » by fendilim » Sat May 4, 2019 5:28 pm

Xatticus wrote:Because Clifford is stubborn or unimaginative? We punished the lazy pick-and-roll defense for one game and Nurse immediately adjusted by pushing the point of attack above the three-point line and bringing the help defender over early. This killed our offense because none of our pick-and-roll ball handlers can make this pass:



Toronto has long defenders that bother passing lanes and make entry passes difficult, but we have seen that our pick-and-roll game is essentially nothing but a two-man game as our pick-and-roll initiators see nothing but Vucevic. A four-game sweep followed and Clifford's response never came. Nothing we could have tried could've worked any worse than what we were doing.

Phrasing it as running the offense through Gordon is going to rankle his detractors, but it really just comes down to how you initiate the offense.

I wouldnt say Clifford’s adjustments never came. In fact, we had more offense with Gordon being the ballhandler during games 2-5 hence the 7% increase in usage and less usage for DJ, who, clearly, was game planned against after his miraculous game 1 performance. The problem is the fact that Toronto had, top to bottom a good individual defensive team. Guys like Gasol, Danny Green, Kawhi Leonard are elite defensive players. In fact, out of their starting lineup, only Siakam may have never been part of the all NBA defensive team. Add that the fact that they also had a good defensive scheme that pushed Vuc out of the paint (just like what Gasol is doing to Embiid) and lack of spacing due to our nonshooters, our offense was doomed for playoffs basketball no matter what adjustments you make. Especially because the team is built with limited scorers.

The Raptors were really outstanding with going against the screens and delaying guys like ross from touching the ball which obviously gets the play out of rhythm. No matter what offensive scheme you run, if opponents dont respect every player on the court, they’ll simply cheat on screens and just focus on who they really have to defend.
Image
J the Drafter
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,978
And1: 201
Joined: Sep 17, 2009

Re: Why aren't we running the offense thru AG? 

Post#111 » by J the Drafter » Sun May 5, 2019 5:02 am

fendilim wrote:
Xatticus wrote:Because Clifford is stubborn or unimaginative? We punished the lazy pick-and-roll defense for one game and Nurse immediately adjusted by pushing the point of attack above the three-point line and bringing the help defender over early. This killed our offense because none of our pick-and-roll ball handlers can make this pass:



Toronto has long defenders that bother passing lanes and make entry passes difficult, but we have seen that our pick-and-roll game is essentially nothing but a two-man game as our pick-and-roll initiators see nothing but Vucevic. A four-game sweep followed and Clifford's response never came. Nothing we could have tried could've worked any worse than what we were doing.

Phrasing it as running the offense through Gordon is going to rankle his detractors, but it really just comes down to how you initiate the offense.

I wouldnt say Clifford’s adjustments never came. In fact, we had more offense with Gordon being the ballhandler during games 2-5 hence the 7% increase in usage and less usage for DJ, who, clearly, was game planned against after his miraculous game 1 performance. The problem is the fact that Toronto had, top to bottom a good individual defensive team. Guys like Gasol, Danny Green, Kawhi Leonard are elite defensive players. In fact, out of their starting lineup, only Siakam may have never been part of the all NBA defensive team. Add that the fact that they also had a good defensive scheme that pushed Vuc out of the paint (just like what Gasol is doing to Embiid) and lack of spacing due to our nonshooters, our offense was doomed for playoffs basketball no matter what adjustments you make. Especially because the team is built with limited scorers.

The Raptors were really outstanding with going against the screens and delaying guys like ross from touching the ball which obviously gets the play out of rhythm. No matter what offensive scheme you run, if opponents dont respect every player on the court, they’ll simply cheat on screens and just focus on who they really have to defend.

There are ways to force teams to respect non-shooters. Having them cut and set screens forces defenses to think twice about leaving them alone. Putting a nonshooter close to the hoop like an old-time power forward, at the dunker’s spot, can also make him a scoring threat that must be respected.

That said, it looked like the Magic figured something out by game four, but that plan couldn’t survive Isaac barely playing the first half and only getting fourteen minutes. And it obviously didn’t hold up for game five.
Remember when Kobe elbowed Jameer in the chin so hard Jameer was knocked down and sent skidding across the floor?
Pepperidge Farm remembers.*

*Futurama
User avatar
JF5
General Manager
Posts: 9,366
And1: 2,943
Joined: Jul 23, 2010
Location: Disney World, Florida

Re: Why aren't we running the offense thru AG? 

Post#112 » by JF5 » Sun May 5, 2019 1:31 pm

J the Drafter wrote:
fendilim wrote:
Xatticus wrote:Because Clifford is stubborn or unimaginative? We punished the lazy pick-and-roll defense for one game and Nurse immediately adjusted by pushing the point of attack above the three-point line and bringing the help defender over early. This killed our offense because none of our pick-and-roll ball handlers can make this pass:



Toronto has long defenders that bother passing lanes and make entry passes difficult, but we have seen that our pick-and-roll game is essentially nothing but a two-man game as our pick-and-roll initiators see nothing but Vucevic. A four-game sweep followed and Clifford's response never came. Nothing we could have tried could've worked any worse than what we were doing.

Phrasing it as running the offense through Gordon is going to rankle his detractors, but it really just comes down to how you initiate the offense.

I wouldnt say Clifford’s adjustments never came. In fact, we had more offense with Gordon being the ballhandler during games 2-5 hence the 7% increase in usage and less usage for DJ, who, clearly, was game planned against after his miraculous game 1 performance. The problem is the fact that Toronto had, top to bottom a good individual defensive team. Guys like Gasol, Danny Green, Kawhi Leonard are elite defensive players. In fact, out of their starting lineup, only Siakam may have never been part of the all NBA defensive team. Add that the fact that they also had a good defensive scheme that pushed Vuc out of the paint (just like what Gasol is doing to Embiid) and lack of spacing due to our nonshooters, our offense was doomed for playoffs basketball no matter what adjustments you make. Especially because the team is built with limited scorers.

The Raptors were really outstanding with going against the screens and delaying guys like ross from touching the ball which obviously gets the play out of rhythm. No matter what offensive scheme you run, if opponents dont respect every player on the court, they’ll simply cheat on screens and just focus on who they really have to defend.

There are ways to force teams to respect non-shooters. Having them cut and set screens forces defenses to think twice about leaving them alone. Putting a nonshooter close to the hoop like an old-time power forward, at the dunker’s spot, can also make him a scoring threat that must be respected.

That said, it looked like the Magic figured something out by game four, but that plan couldn’t survive Isaac barely playing the first half and only getting fourteen minutes. And it obviously didn’t hold up for game five.



Totally disagree with this. They tried moving the ball but since this team individually aren't the greatest passers the Raptors were able to interrupt the offense rather easily because of it. Most of the time when they would try to make a pass to a cutter it would be deflected/impeded by a Raptor defender.
pepe1991
General Manager
Posts: 9,925
And1: 7,972
Joined: Jan 10, 2016
   

Re: Why aren't we running the offense thru AG? 

Post#113 » by pepe1991 » Sun May 5, 2019 6:25 pm

Teams go in semi zone vs non shooters. They don't contest their shots outside 3 point line, but they stay around pain, cutting driving and cutting space for them.

Image

In this image you can see how much Raptors cared about Martin spotting up, or MCW anywhere outside 3 feet.


Image
Lowry going under screen against MCW ,not even caring what he is going to do . Siakam in restricted area because he doesn't care about isaac's ability to shoot, yet Ross and Evan glued with their defenders.

There was one play in game 2 where Raptors chased Ross with 3 players all the way to half court :lol: :


You simply need space and shooters to operate funcinal offense nowdays.
"A straight path never leads anywhere except to the objective."
Andre Gide
User avatar
fendilim
RealGM
Posts: 26,959
And1: 3,282
Joined: Jun 11, 2002
Location: 孫悟空, 时间太?!

Re: Why aren't we running the offense thru AG? 

Post#114 » by fendilim » Mon May 6, 2019 4:11 am

pepe1991 wrote:Teams go in semi zone vs non shooters. They don't contest their shots outside 3 point line, but they stay around pain, cutting driving and cutting space for them.

Image

In this image you can see how much Raptors cared about Martin spotting up, or MCW anywhere outside 3 feet.


Image
Lowry going under screen against MCW ,not even caring what he is going to do . Siakam in restricted area because he doesn't care about isaac's ability to shoot, yet Ross and Evan glued with their defenders.

There was one play in game 2 where Raptors chased Ross with 3 players all the way to half court :lol: :


You simply need space and shooters to operate funcinal offense nowdays.

Lol yeah, but apparently someone here thinks its easy to set screens for cutters with this type of defense. haha
Image
pepe1991
General Manager
Posts: 9,925
And1: 7,972
Joined: Jan 10, 2016
   

Re: Why aren't we running the offense thru AG? 

Post#115 » by pepe1991 » Mon May 6, 2019 6:56 am

fendilim wrote:
pepe1991 wrote:Teams go in semi zone vs non shooters. They don't contest their shots outside 3 point line, but they stay around pain, cutting driving and cutting space for them.

Image

In this image you can see how much Raptors cared about Martin spotting up, or MCW anywhere outside 3 feet.


Image
Lowry going under screen against MCW ,not even caring what he is going to do . Siakam in restricted area because he doesn't care about isaac's ability to shoot, yet Ross and Evan glued with their defenders.

There was one play in game 2 where Raptors chased Ross with 3 players all the way to half court :lol: :


You simply need space and shooters to operate funcinal offense nowdays.

Lol yeah, but apparently someone here thinks its easy to set screens for cutters with this type of defense. haha


It's hard to score on any set defense ,let alone one where teams can play zone. I mean through years nba banned zone because teams would just clog around paint and made it impossible for opponents to score.
With 3 sec rule it's hard to play traditional zone , but against non shooters, just drifting around restricted area- toward 3 point line is enough to cut down driving lines.
"A straight path never leads anywhere except to the objective."
Andre Gide
J the Drafter
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,978
And1: 201
Joined: Sep 17, 2009

Re: Why aren't we running the offense thru AG? 

Post#116 » by J the Drafter » Mon May 6, 2019 11:27 pm

fendilim wrote:
pepe1991 wrote:Teams go in semi zone vs non shooters. They don't contest their shots outside 3 point line, but they stay around pain, cutting driving and cutting space for them.

Image

In this image you can see how much Raptors cared about Martin spotting up, or MCW anywhere outside 3 feet.


Image
Lowry going under screen against MCW ,not even caring what he is going to do . Siakam in restricted area because he doesn't care about isaac's ability to shoot, yet Ross and Evan glued with their defenders.

There was one play in game 2 where Raptors chased Ross with 3 players all the way to half court :lol: :


You simply need space and shooters to operate funcinal offense nowdays.

Lol yeah, but apparently someone here thinks its easy to set screens for cutters with this type of defense. haha


The entire point of having non-shooters cut and screen is that it allows them to be threats without needing to create spacing. e.g. regarding your screenshots: instead of putting Isaac in the corner, maybe use him to set a screen for Ross or Evan. How can the Raptors defend the screen if Siakam is helping in the paint?
Remember when Kobe elbowed Jameer in the chin so hard Jameer was knocked down and sent skidding across the floor?
Pepperidge Farm remembers.*

*Futurama

Return to Orlando Magic