I think there is something to this, but to play Devil's Advocate, you could also argue that shooting 3's instead of pounding it inside tires us out less, leaving more energy for defense. The degree to which we hound for turnovers and run the break would seem to indicate that we don't expend our energy (or the other team's energy) in the traditional manner.
Absolutely. But it also gives the opposing team the advantage, as their players have the better build - the tougher, stronger players. The sad part is, we often work really hard to get a shot we could have got with 20 seconds on the SC too.
I pointed this out as a weakness, but made the point that it may hit us less than it would most teams if we admit that our offensive rebounding sucks anyway. And the fact that our "power" forwards tend to lurk at the 3 point line is a counterpoint to this, because while we don't pull all of their big men out of the paint, we probably pull one out. Or get open 3's from Al/Barnes.
Athleticism never effects the game more than in rebounding... its like a giant rock paper scissors game... some strength beats quickness, some quickness beats position, some position beats strength... since we don't get good position due to our offense and all we have is quickness, it results in very few OREB... (dont even get me started on the defensive end)
I'm not sure what to make of this. I know what we do now is a problem; when we want to run clock, we switch to a standard half court offense and look completely lost. That can't be good. One alternative which seems terrifying is that we should just admit what we are and keep playing the same way, shooting 3's slightly more efficiently than our 2's. You point out later that when we get our 2's well, it opens up 3's. Perhaps the middle ground is just to consciously shift towards endeavoring to get the 2's that make us shoot 49%. Rather than pounding the ball, doing Harry High School (as Muss used to call it), or otherwise running clock but scoring 0 points.
Nellie force feeds it to Jack and Baron... Monta's the "captain" in transition, and thats about all... truth be told, Monta should be the closer, the go to guy. When he takes matters into his own hands, under control, great things happen. But much like every game, Monta's job is to bring the ball up, pass to Biedrins with the instant pass to Jackson, iso to Baron, wait, watch, repeat...
My point on the 3s part is that we do it backwards... we shoot 3s to open up easy layups, when every other team does the opposite.. our team is such a streaky team, it would make sense to try and penetrate with our good guards (Baron/Tay) when the team goes cold from the perimeter. Instead, Baron and Jax begin their chuckfest... Regardless of Reg Season W/L, its not effective.
That's hardly fair to Mr. Beane, as it ignores one very real axis in the math he's doing. I'm not sure he would do things the way he does if he could spend at will. He's trying to work with what he's got by being creative/contrarian. I think that isn't that different than what Nellie does. I think sometimes Nellie outthinks himself, but I don't think he's just a complete idiot. The one thing people consistently say about Nellie is he makes the most of what he's got. I really don't see anything in this team to convince me otherwise. We may not win a title with him running this team, probably won't, but I have trouble believing we'd be doing better if we brought in a more conventional coach.
For all the credit Beane gets, his ideas dont do any better than treading water, or are just smoke and mirrors. No other team will place so much importance on one aspect of the game every offseason... which is exactly Beane's strategy. Find underrated stats and maximize potential. Beane's real credit is that he knows when to sell high, not unlike Nellie. But no rings... do I think Billy Beane would win a championship with the Sox and Yanks budget? Absolutely - but honestly, very few GMs in the league wouldn't. Would he win with a middle market team? I'd guess not.
And the last comment:
The one thing people consistently say about Nellie is he makes the most of what he's got.
God that irritates me... he really doesn't. He gets to as far as his idea will get him... he maximizes his own idea. Are Wright and POB really so pathetic right now that Croshere and Mbenga were needed? Is putting Barnes at PF/C instead of giving Wright a chance to contribute the best we can do? Or is it his undying love affair with the 3 ball and the confident players who love to chuck it? Most have decided to just accept that Wright and POB aren't ready, and that POB is a bust... I havent seen enough of POB to make a solid judgement, but Wright is being absolutely screwed by not even getting rotational minutes... yes he's skinny, but he had to deal with big people @ UNC too... and he was a pretty damn good defender there and a great rebounder.
I'm an optimist... I believe there's a way to get the "negative" posters what they want and still have a winning team, and in fact, a better team... maybe plugging Wright in costs us 2 games or so. Maybe that even costs us the playoffs this season - who knows. But maybe getting Wright some experience makes him useful, and fresh-legged, for the playoffs. A hustling, long, inside PF for the stretch run that can rebound, and tip, as good as our current C. Someone who we could switch w/ Biedrins, and play Biedrins' role w/rebounding and defense, w/Al sliding to C. We remain a running team, and keep a somewhat strong rebounder in the game...
