RealGM

not sure if you guys caught this comment from dunlap, but he said he changed the offense to a motion offense.

With his team losing those 18 games by a 13.3-point average, coach Mike Dunlap gave up on the offense he’d been running.

“I put the playbook in the freezer,” said Dunlap, who switched to a motion offense that is less predictable, more free-flowing.

Dunlap said his offense went static, and that sure wasn’t the case Monday: The Bobcats shot 47 percent from the field, 58 percent in the fourth quarter after the Bulls had come back to tie the game at 65-65. The only flaw offensively Monday was the foul shooting, a dreadful 21-of-38 (55 percent).

Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2012/1 ... rylink=cpy

what are everyone's thoughts? the offense didnt seem to be the problem (at least not compared to the defense), but anything that adds more ball movement and movement in general to our offense, that many time turns into 4 players watching kemba or sessions go 1 v 3, is a good thing.

the motion offense is my favorite offense as i have stated many times on this board. its the base for what the nuggets ran in the 80s, the base for some of what larry brown used in the 70s with the cougars and many other teams. if you can get 5 guys moving, cutting, passing in sync its really fun to watch.

something to keep an eye on as we watch this team over the next few games.

i am watching the bulls game now on dvr, but honestly, i dont see too much of a difference.

without a true post presence, it sounds like an excellent idea.

I love the motion. Loved it when we ran in in high school, love it in college, and love it in the pros. Beautiful offense to watch when it's done correctly.

Would be difficult for a guy like Bis to be effective in the motion, but he's not really effective in ANY offense. Guys like MKG, Kemba, Hendo, and even Mully would really do well in a well-run motion scheme. The personnel is there and it's fun for guys because everybody usually gets a chance to get their hands on the ball.

SWedd523 wrote:I love the motion. Loved it when we ran in in high school, love it in college, and love it in the pros. Beautiful offense to watch when it's done correctly.

Would be difficult for a guy like Bis to be effective in the motion, but he's not really effective in ANY offense. Guys like MKG, Kemba, Hendo, and even Mully would really do well in a well-run motion scheme. The personnel is there and it's fun for guys because everybody usually gets a chance to get their hands on the ball.

Only bad thing I can see with the motion offense is guys like Session and Gordon who enjoy holding on to the ball far too much (although more Sessions than anyone on this team).

definitely a fan of this move as someone who's played a lot of motion offense. a good offense for a team that has problems with scoring as my team had.

and our bigs don't like posting up much, so the drawbacks affect us less than many others

That offense is good for the majority of our personnel. Someone like Biz will struggle though. Every player gets a chance to touch the ball and Biz is neither a great scorer or passer.

freakon0mics wrote:That offense is good for the majority of our personnel. Someone like Biz will struggle though. Every player gets a chance to touch the ball and Biz is neither a great scorer or passer.

only one way to get good at passing. hopefully he gets a lot of touches in practice and really builds up his passing ability. Passing isn't really difficult, and he has really long arms to make difficult passes with. He could be dangerous.

Motion Offense means something different for different people. It's not the same everywhere.

I will say a Motion Offense is a better idea. It isn't predicated on people being in certain spots at certain times. It's free flowing and it's more of an offensive "set" than an offensive "play." I have always been a proponent of a Motion-type offense because it teachers players to move without the ball. "Plays" aren't nearly as effective in my view and are very situation-based.

Not sure if we have enough shooters to spread the D out enough to really have Motion work as well as it could but it's a much better offense to watch than what we were using.

BrotherDave wrote:Not sure if we have enough shooters to spread the D out enough to really have Motion work as well as it could but it's a much better offense to watch than what we were using.

I'd imagine shooting percentages will improve. We've got 6 guys with the potential to shoot 37% or better from 3. Henderson, Williams, Taylor, Gordon, Mullens, and Kemba. The last two haven't gotten close but they also have been shooting inefficiently just due to the load they carry, and a motion offense could get them better looks, I think.

This makes sense to better utilize one of the highest scoring backcourts in the league. Also, maybe it will keep Mullens from camping out at the top of the key. I am concerned about Sessions, who appeared to take the new offense to mean he could hang on to the ball and refuse to pass.

One note: I'm still high on Mike Dunlap. I have liked his demeanor through the losing streak, never once a glimmer of the hang-dog Paul Silas look. He took an appropriate technical in the N.O. game, when the refs were abusing our guys. It seems obvious after the last two games that he's been told to prioritize young player development and that when the losing mounts, he will play the veterans to win games. And I like that he's changing the offense. At least he's trying a new approach, looking to tailor the system to the player's strengths rather than staying with a system that isn't working.

JT2006 wrote:

BrotherDave wrote:Not sure if we have enough shooters to spread the D out enough to really have Motion work as well as it could but it's a much better offense to watch than what we were using.

I'd imagine shooting percentages will improve. We've got 6 guys with the potential to shoot 37% or better from 3. Henderson, Williams, Taylor, Gordon, Mullens, and Kemba. The last two haven't gotten close but they also have been shooting inefficiently just due to the load they carry, and a motion offense could get them better looks, I think.

Perhaps. It should at least get them better looks more often in the flow of the offense. But if those shots don't go down we're looking at a lot of long rebounds that lead to fastbreaks the other way.

I'm not entirely convinced that this will be bad for Biz either. Once he figures out how to move w/o the ball correctly, and the shooters shoot well enough to keep the D spaced out, it might open up opportunities for him to play his man one on one instead of forcing something in traffic. Biz is long and athletic, he might be able to get easy buckets flashing into the high post and making a quick move to get to the basket in one step. But he'll probably travel the first 6 times he tries to do anything, as usual.