RealGM

Eddie Jordan with Eric Snow and Ernie Johnson discussed the Basic Principles of the Princeton Offense on NBA TV.

EJ had about 4 or 5 minutes and all he was given time to do was to run through a couple sets, and discussed that Pete Carill got the offense from the Celtics of the 60s and the Knicks of the 70s. As he was running through the plays, E Snow gave EJ props and seemed to really respect what EJ had to say.

EJ to me sounded like a college professor. Looked sharp, as always. In great shape. Seemed very technical, maybe a bit nervous, but definitely like a guy who knew a whole lot about the offense. I am glad to see him doing these kind of spots. Obviously seems to be auditioning for his next coaching gig.

The other day I watched Sam Mitchell in the studio of NBA TV. Totally different, relaxed kind of dude, compared to EJ tonight (probably because he was given time). It will be interesting to see if/when either gets their next coaching gig.

Just found the link, if anybody is curious.

http://www.nba.com/video/channels/nba_t ... mierenight

Eddie Jordan is a nice guy but his offense is a fraud. He's the Bernie Madoff of the NBA.

JWizmentality wrote:Eddie Jordan is a nice guy but his offense is a fraud. He's the Bernie Madoff of the NBA.

JWizmentality wrote:Eddie Jordan is a nice guy but his offense is a fraud. He's the Bernie Madoff of the NBA.

Untrue. He couldn't coach defense worth a lick, but his Eddie coached effective O. All you have to do is listen to Eric snow talk about how hard it was to defend against them.

Yeah, it's almost like, we should have kept him to run the offense, and get Tibbs to run the D. Like Co-Head Coaches. Or just make Tibbs the head coach and keep EJ as an assistant to run the O.

I know this would never happen, but we were always a high scoring taam when healthy. His defensive philosophy was just to outscore the other team.

fishercob wrote:

JWizmentality wrote:Eddie Jordan is a nice guy but his offense is a fraud. He's the Bernie Madoff of the NBA.

Untrue. He couldn't coach defense worth a lick, but his Eddie coached effective O. All you have to do is listen to Eric snow talk about how hard it was to defend against them.

Nuh-uh. All Eric Snow remembers is getting his arse lit up by Gil. Just like a ponzi scheme, all the warning signs were there. Of all the teams scoring over 100pts, we had the worst FG%. A negative differential going into the playoffs, and the lowest assist count. EJ took all of us for a ride. You just haven't noticed that your pockets are empty or you're in denial.

FG% or eFG%? Because with Gil in we probably took a high percentage of threes, so FG% would be meaningless.

ZonkertheBrainless wrote:FG% or eFG%? Because with Gil in we probably took a high percentage of threes, so FG% would be meaningless.

Meh, so did Kobe Bryant, but the Lakers never shot nearly as poorly as we did. Right now we are seeing the ill effects of EJ's fraudulent offense. A system that relies solely on superstars and one on one garbage. A weave and heave travesty against basketball fundamentals. I shat on the Princeton offense. How many titles has Princeton won?!?!? FRAUD!!!!

JWiz, I find your comments so amusing in light of your "location."

fishercob wrote:JWiz, I find your comments so amusing in light of your "location."

Aha!! Excellent observation my good man. I too thought Eddie was an top notch coach with an impeccable offensive system. However, as I began to educate myself, and truly see the flaws and disadvantages I was devasted to find out just how bad Eddie really was. Knowledge is Power, but as myself and fellow wizboard 5 cohorts found out...POWER IS THE USE OF KNOWLEDGE.

Let's not twist words. I never said Eddie was a top notch coach. I implied that he was good offensive coach.

Please enlighten the rest of us as to the depths of your research about the Princeton offense. What didn't you like about it? Which offensive systems do you prefer and why? Which teams run those offense?

While you're at it, why don't you tell us all a little about your credentials in evaluating different offensive systems? Have you played? Coached? Who have you worked with? You have to break things down for us lay-people that may not understand things on the level that you do.

I'm happy to be convinced here if you have some well thought-out reason on your side.

fishercob wrote:Let's not twist words. I never said Eddie was a top notch coach. I implied that he was good offensive coach.

Please enlighten the rest of us as to the depths of your research about the Princeton offense. What didn't you like about it? Which offensive systems do you prefer and why? Which teams run those offense?

While you're at it, why don't you tell us all a little about your credentials in evaluating different offensive systems? Have you played? Coached? Who have you worked with? You have to break things down for us lay-people that may not understand things on the level that you do.

I'm happy to be convinced here if you have some well thought-out reason on your side.

Oh boy here we go again. "The Eddie Jordan is so much more qualified than me that I should shut up since I couldn't hope to do a better job arguement." C'mon Fishy, lets not rehash the endless debates long buried in the Fire EJ thread. I think Eddie's offense had serious flaws and drawbacks, you think otherwise. Eddie's been let go, so let's move on. Then again, I was the one who started this so I'll take the blame on that one. Shouldn't kick a man while he's down.

regardless of FG%, it can't be that bad an offense if you're dropping 110+ a game. I can't claim to know its pros and cons, but pretty much every reputable coach I've talked to about offensive schemes respects the Princeton O mightily, and I put some value in that. It stresses a ton of communication, teamwork and constant movement, so there's not the stand and watch baloney you see all too often in the NBA. Unless Gil is doing his thing, but that's neither here nor there.

I agree with Soup and used to think the same thing, if it were football and we could have two coordinators I'da kept EJ on as OC. I still think he'll make a GREAT assistant coach much like his days in NJ when they ran the Princeton O and went to the Finals.

JWizmentality wrote:

fishercob wrote:Let's not twist words. I never said Eddie was a top notch coach. I implied that he was good offensive coach.

Please enlighten the rest of us as to the depths of your research about the Princeton offense. What didn't you like about it? Which offensive systems do you prefer and why? Which teams run those offense?

While you're at it, why don't you tell us all a little about your credentials in evaluating different offensive systems? Have you played? Coached? Who have you worked with? You have to break things down for us lay-people that may not understand things on the level that you do.

I'm happy to be convinced here if you have some well thought-out reason on your side.

Oh boy here we go again. "The Eddie Jordan is so much more qualified than me that I should shut up since I couldn't hope to do a better job arguement." C'mon Fishy, lets not rehash the endless debates long buried in the Fire EJ thread. I think Eddie's offense had serious flaws and drawbacks, you think otherwise. Eddie's been let go, so let's move on. Then again, I was the one who started this so I'll take the blame on that one. Shouldn't kick a man while he's down.

I'm not arguing that EJ is more qualified than you. Heck, I can't even argue that Eric Snow is more qualified than you to opine on the effectiveness of Eddie's offense -- because I don't know your qualifications.

You say that Eddie's offense "had serious flaws and drawbacks." Tell us what they are and give us some data to back up your assertion. This is Argument 101 stuff here.

You are correct that you started this part of the discussion. That, and your "location," prompted my response. If indeed you haven't studied a lot of basketball X's and O's over the years, if you haven't coached or learned much basketball theory, then I ask you to at least consider the possibility that you are ignorant as to the efficacy of the Princeton O.

Ah, this thread reminds me of the good old days.

I never had a problem with EJ's offensive system, even though Dat calling it the "weave and heave" was pretty hilarious.

We had and still have a team full of perimeter scorers and little interior offense. The offense EJ implemented suited our strengths and put our best offensive players in the best situations to score and use their talents. It was predicated on isolation sets that yielded few assists but was still effective. Yes, it was a perimeter system and yes, if we weren't "feeling it", it was going to be tough for us to win games, but that's what you get when you lack consistent interior scoring.

I'm with fishercob, it was EJ's defensive scheme (or lack thereof) that was my biggest complaint of his and the man's demise as coach of the Washington Wizards.

I think he had a scheme. He just didn't know how to teach it...

fishercob wrote:You are correct that you started this part of the discussion. That, and your "location," prompted my response. If indeed you haven't studied a lot of basketball X's and O's over the years, if you haven't coached or learned much basketball theory, then I ask you to at least consider the possibility that you are ignorant as to the efficacy of the Princeton O.

Never have I asserted that I'm some basketball genius, or studied the delicate intricacies of the "famed" Princeton offense. Again, you are trying to assert that my ignorance on the system disqualifies me from making constructive criticism. You know, I couldn't tell you what a credit default swap is nor do I know the in's and out's of the economy, but from my layperson's observation I could tell you both stinks.

Hell, I sat down with a client of mine the other day who had issue with her monthly premiums she was paying and the modified whole life policy I signed her up for. This is my area of expertise, I studied long and hard, I'm certified by the State. How dare she question me and tell me I don't know best? She didn't know a lick about how life insurance works, but she wasn't stupid and had legitimate concerns based on her observations.

I've already gone over what aspects of the Princeton offense I didn't like, which have been echoed by many on this board. So while I certainly couldn't tell you how the system works, from my observation over the years, I think it has failed in my humble opinion. So let's not make this into a fresh debate. I'm sorry that my "location" set you off, but more think it's the Madoff analogy and fraud remarks that did it. If it helps, I don't really think he's the Bernie Madoff of the NBA.....more like the George Bush, don't ya think. We all hated him while he was in power, but kinda feel bad now that he's gone and kinda miss him.

ZonkertheBrainless wrote:I think he had a scheme. He just didn't know how to teach it...

If you're referring to offense, the facts beg to differ.

Wizards' ranks in offensive rating:

07-08 (sans GA): 12th
06-07: 3rd
05-06: 6th
04-05: 10th


If you're referring to defense, that's another story. Whatever EJ tried to do, it didn't work.

Wizards' ranks in defensive rating:
07-08: 24th
06-07: 28th
05-06: 22nd
04-05: 19th

No matter what reason you assign , the facts are that under EJ the Wizards were a very good -- often elite -- offensive team, while they were bad -- often horrific -- defensively.