Bucks/Suns - 1-22

[paul]

-= original quote snipped =-



Or perhaps on the gm who gave LK players who can not fight through or go over screens. The goal of pick and rolls is to create mismatches. Everyone knows that and thus know that not allowing the screen to create the mismatch takes away the efficacy of the offensive tactic. However, some offensive talent make that very difficult and some defensive talent make it impossible. Put the two together and you will have effective pick and rolls. I am sure that LK would prefer not to switch or show and recover, but those options are really not available with the defensive talent he has been given. He did not chose that defensive talent.

Agreed. The emphasis on putting together a team of streaky offensive players over strong bodied defensive guys has been ludicrous, there's only so much D you can play (or coach) when 3 or 4 of your starting 5 at any given time are poor defenders.
The show and recover tactic was glaring tonight, and it has been in many games this year. Nash would get a step on Ivey, Bogut would show, Nash drops off to Amare, no weak side help comes = dunk or layup.

[REDDzone]

-= original quote snipped =-



Or perhaps on the gm who gave LK players who can not fight through or go over screens. The goal of pick and rolls is to create mismatches. Everyone knows that and thus know that not allowing the screen to create the mismatch takes away the efficacy of the offensive tactic. However, some offensive talent make that very difficult and some defensive talent make it impossible. Put the two together and you will have effective pick and rolls. I am sure that LK would prefer not to switch or show and recover, but those options are really not available with the defensive talent he has been given. He did not chose that defensive talent.

Its not even switch on a pick and roll though, its switch on EVERYTHING, regardless of the offensive set.

Having Yi guard Nash on the 3 point line 5+ times tonight and Ivey guarding Amare iso in the post 2+ times tonight was a little ridiculous.

[WEFFPIM]

Yep we looked really impressive and I think having a big defense minded guard at the point guard position means more than many think. We still have some kinks but I think we're better with a guy like Ivey starting (not necessarily with him) than with Mo.

Oh...my...God...

See, the game I watched consisted of the Bucks' "big defense minded guard" getting lost on high screens, get burned on penetration, and an overall lack of an ability to see. But I guess next time I will watch a Bucks game while I repeatedly pound my skull in a concrete floor and I may get the same observation as yours here.

No offense.

[DH34Phan]

-= original quote snipped =-
No offense.

That post just shows how some fans (CBQ and europa in particular) have a huge bias against Mo, while they are willing to watch Redd and his 15 million dollar contract shoot 19 times a game while shooting 44%.

Redd and his 15 million dollar/year contract can be used to easily replace him, and get other players to round out a roster built around Mo/Yi/Bogut.

Mo is pretty good value for 8 million a year, while Redd is overpaid by at least 5 million a year, and that number goes up as the years go on.

I would like to see the whole back court blown up, but if I had to choose one, I would stick with Mo. Give Mo Michael Redd's role on this team, and he would be averaging 20-6-6, while providing equally poor defense, for 7 million a year less.