Ferry Avenue wrote:76ciology wrote:Ferry Avenue wrote:The game used to be organized around the paint and it no longer is -- it's organized around the perimeter and the three-point shot. This is common knowledge and it fundamentally alters the role of the center in the present day game. Consequently the tall kids running around in middle school and high school gyms are practicing three-pointers, not post-up moves. And the tall players in the NBA are doing the same thing.
If the referees do not allow physicality, the game opens up and scoring becomes easier for everyone. Perimeter players, in particular, can score more efficiently because their speed often leaves defenders out of position, leading to more free throws. Additionally, smaller players are naturally better shooters, benefiting further from a less physical game.
Conversely, when referees permit physicality, scoring becomes more difficult for everyone. The best way to score under these conditions is by getting into the paint through post-ups. In this scenario, having size becomes crucial, as it is often the only way to get a shot off in that congested area.
I believe a balance of both is necessary due to shooting variance and the fact that referees officiate games differently from the start of the regular season to Game 7 of the finals, and from the first second of the game to the last. This variability in officiating highlights the importance of adapting to different levels of physicality and maintaining versatility in both offensive and defensive strategies.
The Celtics have a balanced approach, combining strong three-point shooting with the ability to exploit weak defenders. Players like Doncic and Kyrie can be targeted defensively, and smaller defenders are vulnerable to Porzingis' post-up game. This dual-threat strategy makes the Celtics a versatile and formidable team on offense.
All that may be true, but does that mean you pay someone like Embiid what the Sixers do and make him the centerpiece of your team, or do you target someone like Porzingis and pay him roughly $20M fewer a year than Embiid so you can allocate greater salary cap money to your perimeter/dribble-drive players?
We can go back to another football analogy -- in winter bad weather games late in the season the run game becomes more important than it usually is, and the team with the better run game very often wins those kinds of games. But does that mean you pay a running back an exorbitant amount and target run blocking offensive linemen, at the expense of being able to pay a QB big and adequately pass blocking for him? Does it also mean you revolve your offense around the run game in anticipation of such games?
Building a team revolves around making the best of the hand you're dealt. You can't simply switch strategies each time a different team wins the championship. For example, when the Nuggets won, you might be tempted to build like the Nuggets, and when the Celtics are the flavor of the year, you might want to build like the Celtics. However, if you examine the Celtics and Nuggets, you'll see that both teams are built around the centerpiece players they have. Jokic, who initially was a poor defender, is supported by Aaron Gordon. Since Jokic can create plays and distribute the ball, he is surrounded by scorers. On the other hand, Tatum is not always reliable as the main star, so the Celtics built a team that doesn't need to rely solely on him as the alpha.
The key is to have a realistic understanding of what Embiid brings to the team. He can't anchor both ends of the court and lacks durability, which has consistently been our issue. We can't keep hoping that Embiid just needs one healthy playoff run.
Given the choice, I wouldn't build around Embiid. In fact, I don't think Maxey is that exceptional either. However, both players are very talented and they are what we have to work with. Our strategy should focus on masking their weaknesses and creating an environment where they can excel.
There’s never been a time in history when we look back and say that the people who were censoring free speech were the good guys.
Think a 1st in a weak draft getting you an elite scorer?
