RealGM

Charlotte Hornets PR
@HornetsPR
·
48m
INJURY REPORT:
@hornets
at ORL 11/12

Bridges (R Knee), Jeffries (R Hand), Richards (R Rib) and M Williams (L Foot) are out

Mann (Low Back Soreness) is questionable

Lol at that image

Get ready for lots of pull ups, step backs, and 30 footers because we sure as **** aren’t breaking down this defense 2v5

Did anyone notice how HC Lee subbed Melo out when we needed a stop to force overtime?

This was after Melo got the steal and we won the challenge. I like the fact that he's preaching defense and holding Melo accountable on that end. I think he knows we got away with one winning that challenge. Clearly Melo fouled him after the rip he made contact with his back trying to get around to the ball. I saw the look on Lee's face and he was definitely disappointed Melo even tried to make that steal.

Accountability that's the thing I notice most about our new HC. The culture is slowly changing and I feel good about this dude. The players seem to respect him as well. Melo never had any bad body language after that benching.

We just gotta get healthy and see the full product. I'm excited about this team and the future.

KembaWalker wrote:Get ready for lots of pull ups, step backs, and 30 footers because we sure as **** aren’t breaking down this defense 2v5

A more structured offense would help with this. That's literally what we're saying.

yosemiteben wrote:Lol at that image

the prompt was ridiculous in the best way


A humorous illustration in the style of Walt Disney where a menacing, evil, teal and purple giant hornet is about to battle Mickey Mouse, who looks terrified. The battle is taking place in a scary underworld fighting pit with wooden barriers that enclose the fighting pit, surrounded by torches. The scene is reminiscent of an extra deleted scene from the movie Fantasia. In the background, several iconic Disney characters like Goofy, Minnie, Donald Duck, and Pluto watch with horror from the stands.

yosemiteben wrote:

KembaWalker wrote:Get ready for lots of pull ups, step backs, and 30 footers because we sure as **** aren’t breaking down this defense 2v5

A more structured offense would help with this. That's literally what we're saying.

Bro there is no structured offense on this planet that is going to let Josh Green or Tidjane Salaun do anything against Suggs or Isaac on a consistent basis. It’s actually the complete opposite

“Though D’Antoni was not an “advanced stat” guy, the Rockets’ study of Jeff Van Gundy’s set plays provided “pace and space” with much-needed empirical proof. The reason the Rockets scored more efficiently on “Random” than any of their set plays was simple: no opponent can scout chaos. The primary purpose of “pace and space” is to induce chaos as often as possible.

Putting those two findings together eventually convinced number-crunching idealists and pragmatic old heads alike that early three-pointers were powerful drivers of efficient offense. In this respect, D’Antoni, unlike McLendon, was in the right place at the right time.”

This was literally the consensus 5+ years ago. There’s no system, there’s talent, and lack of talent. We have lack of talent. Yall all yearning for the days of Larry Brown 360 spin moves and Gerald Henderson floppy 15 footers

KembaWalker wrote:

yosemiteben wrote:

KembaWalker wrote:Get ready for lots of pull ups, step backs, and 30 footers because we sure as **** aren’t breaking down this defense 2v5

A more structured offense would help with this. That's literally what we're saying.

Bro there is no structured offense on this planet that is going to let Josh Green or Tidjane Salaun do anything against Suggs or Isaac on a consistent basis. It’s actually the complete opposite

“Though D’Antoni was not an “advanced stat” guy, the Rockets’ study of Jeff Van Gundy’s set plays provided “pace and space” with much-needed empirical proof. The reason the Rockets scored more efficiently on “Random” than any of their set plays was simple: no opponent can scout chaos. The primary purpose of “pace and space” is to induce chaos as often as possible.

Putting those two findings together eventually convinced number-crunching idealists and pragmatic old heads alike that early three-pointers were powerful drivers of efficient offense. In this respect, D’Antoni, unlike McLendon, was in the right place at the right time.”

This was literally the consensus 5+ years ago. There’s no system, there’s talent, and lack of talent. We have lack of talent.

Hate to spoil things for you, but that is in fact a system. If that's the system you're pointing to for success, we are not implementing it well. We are not chaotic, we are extremely predictable offensively. We do not have high pace, we are bottom 10 in the league in pace.

KembaWalker wrote:Yall all yearning for the days of Larry Brown 360 spin moves and Gerald Henderson floppy 15 footers

What a bizarre thing to say. Any offensive system at all =/= the worst offensive system you can come up with

yosemiteben wrote:

KembaWalker wrote:

yosemiteben wrote:A more structured offense would help with this. That's literally what we're saying.

Bro there is no structured offense on this planet that is going to let Josh Green or Tidjane Salaun do anything against Suggs or Isaac on a consistent basis. It’s actually the complete opposite

“Though D’Antoni was not an “advanced stat” guy, the Rockets’ study of Jeff Van Gundy’s set plays provided “pace and space” with much-needed empirical proof. The reason the Rockets scored more efficiently on “Random” than any of their set plays was simple: no opponent can scout chaos. The primary purpose of “pace and space” is to induce chaos as often as possible.

Putting those two findings together eventually convinced number-crunching idealists and pragmatic old heads alike that early three-pointers were powerful drivers of efficient offense. In this respect, D’Antoni, unlike McLendon, was in the right place at the right time.”

This was literally the consensus 5+ years ago. There’s no system, there’s talent, and lack of talent. We have lack of talent.

Hate to spoil things for you, but that is in fact a system. If that's the system you're pointing to for success, we are not implementing it well. We are not chaotic, we are extremely predictable offensively. We do not have high pace, we are bottom 10 in the league in pace.

KembaWalker wrote:Yall all yearning for the days of Larry Brown 360 spin moves and Gerald Henderson floppy 15 footers

What a bizarre thing to say. Any offensive system at all =/= the worst offensive system you can come up with

id love to see the structured offense you think we are capable of running. please describe some of the sets and how they lead us to better shots. start with the current starting lineup, Ball/Miller/Green/Salaun/Gibson.

KembaWalker wrote:

yosemiteben wrote:

KembaWalker wrote:
Bro there is no structured offense on this planet that is going to let Josh Green or Tidjane Salaun do anything against Suggs or Isaac on a consistent basis. It’s actually the complete opposite



This was literally the consensus 5+ years ago. There’s no system, there’s talent, and lack of talent. We have lack of talent.

Hate to spoil things for you, but that is in fact a system. If that's the system you're pointing to for success, we are not implementing it well. We are not chaotic, we are extremely predictable offensively. We do not have high pace, we are bottom 10 in the league in pace.

KembaWalker wrote:Yall all yearning for the days of Larry Brown 360 spin moves and Gerald Henderson floppy 15 footers

What a bizarre thing to say. Any offensive system at all =/= the worst offensive system you can come up with

id love to see the structured offense you think we are capable of running. please describe some of the sets and how they lead us to better shots. start with the current starting lineup, Ball/Miller/Green/Salaun/Gibson.

I don't see the point. I'm not going to get into specifics of how to design a system when you are saying systems don't matter at all.

KembaWalker wrote:

yosemiteben wrote:

KembaWalker wrote:
Bro there is no structured offense on this planet that is going to let Josh Green or Tidjane Salaun do anything against Suggs or Isaac on a consistent basis. It’s actually the complete opposite



This was literally the consensus 5+ years ago. There’s no system, there’s talent, and lack of talent. We have lack of talent.

Hate to spoil things for you, but that is in fact a system. If that's the system you're pointing to for success, we are not implementing it well. We are not chaotic, we are extremely predictable offensively. We do not have high pace, we are bottom 10 in the league in pace.

KembaWalker wrote:Yall all yearning for the days of Larry Brown 360 spin moves and Gerald Henderson floppy 15 footers

What a bizarre thing to say. Any offensive system at all =/= the worst offensive system you can come up with

id love to see the structured offense you think we are capable of running. please describe some of the sets and how they lead us to better shots. start with the current starting lineup, Ball/Miller/Green/Salaun/Gibson.

Contrary to what you are saying typically teams with less talent tend to rely on offensive sets to create points compared to teams with superior talent can rely on isos, simple pick and roll offenses where talent will simply win out.

I am not asking for a complete overhaul overnight, but LaMelo shooting 36 threes the last 2 games probably isn't something that will work longterm. He is 11/36 or 30.5%.

yosemiteben wrote:

KembaWalker wrote:Get ready for lots of pull ups, step backs, and 30 footers because we sure as **** aren’t breaking down this defense 2v5

A more structured offense would help with this. That's literally what we're saying.

You build any structure using any material with 5 blocks at the top and just 2 blocks on the bottom...

Good thing you're not an architect.

You haven't built a mountain, you've built a heavy kite.

MasterIchiro wrote:

yosemiteben wrote:

KembaWalker wrote:Get ready for lots of pull ups, step backs, and 30 footers because we sure as **** aren’t breaking down this defense 2v5

A more structured offense would help with this. That's literally what we're saying.

You build any structure using any material with 5 blocks at the top and just 2 blocks on the bottom...

Good thing you're not an architect.

This is one of those times when it feels like you make a random statement that doesn't make sense and then act like I'm supposed to understand what you mean.

Is your point that it is literally impossible to have a system if you have injuries?

JMAC3 wrote:

KembaWalker wrote:

yosemiteben wrote:Hate to spoil things for you, but that is in fact a system. If that's the system you're pointing to for success, we are not implementing it well. We are not chaotic, we are extremely predictable offensively. We do not have high pace, we are bottom 10 in the league in pace.


What a bizarre thing to say. Any offensive system at all =/= the worst offensive system you can come up with

id love to see the structured offense you think we are capable of running. please describe some of the sets and how they lead us to better shots. start with the current starting lineup, Ball/Miller/Green/Salaun/Gibson.

Contrary to what you are saying typically teams with less talent tend to rely on offensive sets to create points compared to teams with superior talent can rely on isos, simple pick and roll offenses where talent will simply win out.

I am not asking for a complete overhaul overnight, but LaMelo shooting 36 threes the last 2 games probably isn't something that will work longterm. He is 11/36 or 30.5%.

source?

I would take anyone listing me a single drawn up play utilizing our starting lineup that they think would lead to anything but wasted shotclock and mistakes. Or define "structured offense" for me. A play is just some drawing on a board, its not a magical recipe or path to better offense. You have to actually have good offensive players that can use the play to break down defenders and make reads. You play 2v5 offense running Salaun/Gibson/Green through a set play that gains you nothing tangible and it takes the bare minimum effort to blow it up and all you did was waste a bunch of shot clock and energy doing cardio

i think there is a misunderstanding here about how little passing talent this roster has. We have LaMelo and thats it. Grant is...okay...considering its a responsibility he never really had besides with us. Miller is getting a handful of assists because him and LaMelo are playing 2 man game but he's not out here passing guys open and creating anything good (inb4 but its cuz muh system! No, its not in his skillset). We don't even have a backup point guard. Its a major problem.LaMelo/Terry/Hayward/Plum and the stable of actual point guards we always kept around were much better if ball movement is what you are fiending for

KembaWalker wrote:

JMAC3 wrote:

KembaWalker wrote:
id love to see the structured offense you think we are capable of running. please describe some of the sets and how they lead us to better shots. start with the current starting lineup, Ball/Miller/Green/Salaun/Gibson.

Contrary to what you are saying typically teams with less talent tend to rely on offensive sets to create points compared to teams with superior talent can rely on isos, simple pick and roll offenses where talent will simply win out.

I am not asking for a complete overhaul overnight, but LaMelo shooting 36 threes the last 2 games probably isn't something that will work longterm. He is 11/36 or 30.5%.

source?

I would take anyone listing me a single drawn up play utilizing our starting lineup that they think would lead to anything but wasted shotclock and mistakes. Or define "structured offense" for me. A play is just some drawing on a board, its not a magical recipe or path to better offense. You have to actually have good offensive players that can use the play to break down defenders and make reads. You play 2v5 offense running Salaun/Gibson/Green through a set play that gains you nothing tangible and it takes the bare minimum effort to blow it up and all you did was waste a bunch of shot clock and energy doing cardio

Seems like you have a pretty big knowledge gap here, I would recommend you do some independent study on the x and o's of basketball.

For example. Have you heard of the Princeton offense?

The offense that had Princeton as the 14th best offense in college basketball in 2024.
https://www.teamrankings.com/ncaa-basketball/stat/offensive-efficiency?date=2024-04-09

and 11th best in 2022
https://www.teamrankings.com/ncaa-basketball/stat/offensive-efficiency?date=2022-04-05

Are you going to tell me they were only good on offense because of talent? Nothing to do with scheme?

There is a reason that Dan Hurley is praised as one of the best offensive coaches in college basketball. Teams are stealing plays he was running last year and inputting it into their NBA playbooks.

JMAC3 wrote:

KembaWalker wrote:

JMAC3 wrote:
Contrary to what you are saying typically teams with less talent tend to rely on offensive sets to create points compared to teams with superior talent can rely on isos, simple pick and roll offenses where talent will simply win out.

I am not asking for a complete overhaul overnight, but LaMelo shooting 36 threes the last 2 games probably isn't something that will work longterm. He is 11/36 or 30.5%.

source?

I would take anyone listing me a single drawn up play utilizing our starting lineup that they think would lead to anything but wasted shotclock and mistakes. Or define "structured offense" for me. A play is just some drawing on a board, its not a magical recipe or path to better offense. You have to actually have good offensive players that can use the play to break down defenders and make reads. You play 2v5 offense running Salaun/Gibson/Green through a set play that gains you nothing tangible and it takes the bare minimum effort to blow it up and all you did was waste a bunch of shot clock and energy doing cardio

Seems like you have a pretty big knowledge gap here, I would recommend you do some independent study on the x and o's of basketball.

For example. Have you heard of the Princeton offense?

The offense that had Princeton as the 14th best offense in college basketball in 2024.
https://www.teamrankings.com/ncaa-basketball/stat/offensive-efficiency?date=2024-04-09

and 11th best in 2022
https://www.teamrankings.com/ncaa-basketball/stat/offensive-efficiency?date=2022-04-05

Are you going to tell me they were only good on offense because of talent? Nothing to do with scheme?

There is a reason that Dan Hurley is praised as one of the best offensive coaches in college basketball. Teams are stealing plays he was running last year and inputting it into their NBA playbooks.

I knew it was going to be a college basketball reply irrelevant to the NBA. yall can have Mike Dunlap back if you want he could draw up a heckuva college basketball system

KembaWalker wrote:

JMAC3 wrote:

KembaWalker wrote:
source?

I would take anyone listing me a single drawn up play utilizing our starting lineup that they think would lead to anything but wasted shotclock and mistakes. Or define "structured offense" for me. A play is just some drawing on a board, its not a magical recipe or path to better offense. You have to actually have good offensive players that can use the play to break down defenders and make reads. You play 2v5 offense running Salaun/Gibson/Green through a set play that gains you nothing tangible and it takes the bare minimum effort to blow it up and all you did was waste a bunch of shot clock and energy doing cardio

Seems like you have a pretty big knowledge gap here, I would recommend you do some independent study on the x and o's of basketball.

For example. Have you heard of the Princeton offense?

The offense that had Princeton as the 14th best offense in college basketball in 2024.
https://www.teamrankings.com/ncaa-basketball/stat/offensive-efficiency?date=2024-04-09

and 11th best in 2022
https://www.teamrankings.com/ncaa-basketball/stat/offensive-efficiency?date=2022-04-05

Are you going to tell me they were only good on offense because of talent? Nothing to do with scheme?

There is a reason that Dan Hurley is praised as one of the best offensive coaches in college basketball. Teams are stealing plays he was running last year and inputting it into their NBA playbooks.

I knew it was going to be a college basketball reply irrelevant to the NBA. yall can have Mike Dunlap back if you want he could draw up a heckuva college basketball system

You are too far gone to have a real conversation with at this point. We can move on if you really don't think Josh Green is capable of making passes that 90% of college basketball players are capable of making.