Stotts offense. What it IS and what it is NOT

[Sigra]

Against Nuggets we played Stotts offense again. And I like it. It is fourt game in the row with Stotts offense and it is clear how better our offense is when we play that way. We scored 107 points against Hornets, 103 points against Pistons, 100 points against Pistons and 115 points against Nuggets. In 7 games before that we scored 100+ points only 1 (one) time.

Now I believe my source completly. She told me that at that meeting Bucks decided to change their offense back to Stotts offense. I saw it right away against Hornets (and I posted about that) and I see it since then. She was right.

A lot of people still don't see that because they have wrong opinion about what Stotts offense is. I want to make it very clear.

Stotts offense is NOT run and gun offense.
Stotts offense is NOT 3 point shooting offense.
Stotts offense is NOT "never pass to Bogut" offense.

Stotts offense is offense where one of guards (mostly Mo or Redd) get ball and then works eather ISO or use screens. That is simple offense made for simple guards as they don't have to think much when they play it. They can "just play" and have green light to shoot as soon as they see basket.

Bogut's role in that offense is to set screens at high post and then eather role to the basket (after that he eather gets ball or goes for offansive rebound) or gets ball in high post and pass from there. It doesn't mean that he never gets ball in low post but it does hapen rarely (2 or 3 times at game). He still get shots but he doesn't get low post touches that he was geting in January.

In January he was playing mostly at low post but he didn't shot much more than what he shot now because, although offense did started with him, his role was to draw double team and then pass it out. We also saw a lot of fronting as a defansive strategy to stop Bogut in January.

Stats will tell you that he shoot now as much as he was shooting in January but in January he was geting more low post touches and offense was starting with him. Now he still shoot but after pick and roll and after offansive rebounds mostly.

We tried runing offense through Bogut. It didn't work because in that offense our guards (our most paid players) didn't play in rythm and that offense was really not good fit for them. I am happy that we now play much better and more interesting basketball. This team can make playoffs with this offense. Stay tuned.

[midranger]

Sigra's sig back to Mo and Redd.

Your flip flopping is legendary.

But I agree. You have to play to your team's strengths. I'll fully admit, I saw that green grass on the other side, but apparently it's only lush one month per year.

[Sigra]

Sigra's sig back to Mo and Redd.

Your flip flopping is legendary.

Don't get me wrong. I would trade Mo and Redd for backcourt defenders who hit open shots. That would be my priority if I am Bucks GM. I would build around Bogut and I would run slow half court basketball with each offense starting with Bogut. BUT IF MO AND REDD ARE IN THIS TEAM THEN I WANT TO RUN STOTTS OFFENSE.

It is not flopping. Before trade deadline I did and will always talk against Mo and Redd in hope that Bucks trade one or both of them. But now deadline passed. We still have both of them and there is no doubt that if you have that backcourt then you should play Stotts offense.

So AGAIN I still want Mo and Redd out of town and I still want to play offense from January. But if Mo and Redd are in town then I want to play Stotts offense.

And if you want to keep both of them long term then I STILL want to trade Bogut for some guy who can hit jumper while still playing defense. So no flopping at all. High consistancy actually but most of you read my opinions without context.

[midranger]

Sigra, I've seen you bandwagon and then sell out every single player on this team (including Mo and Redd) at least 7 times.

It's cool. I do it too, but you are certainly John Kerry-esque.

[Sigra]

You are right of course. I wanted to trade all of our players many times. Always in context though.

When I felt that we are stuck with Mo and Redd then I wanted to trade Bogut because he is not good fit for them. When I felt that Bucks want to build around Bogut then I wanted to trade Mo and Redd as they are not good fit for him.

Now, Bogut looks happy even with this limited role (which is strange as he was not happy with that under Stotts). If he can really be happy with this long term than we don't have to trade any of them honestly. We can just focus on our contract problems (Simmons and Gadz) and on our rookie problem (how to find promised minutes to such a bad player)

[Jollay]

Terry Stotts' offense failed to maximize the offensive potential of a rookie Andrew Bogut and Jamaal Magloire, who is I believe would average 15-18 ppg if utilized properly on offense or in fact was presently on an NBA roster.

Seriously, I had to argue against this line of reasoning. Seriously.

Also I had to point out that Stotts' sets had a novel concept called "options" where the players had multiple choices what to do, to include throwing the ball to the post.

But what's done is done. It's a shame, if Bogut could board as well as he does now, things could have been alot different with a smaller, running team, which Harris could and should have been aiming for all along.

Shouldn't of made trades to help Bogut in year one like with Magloire. Shoulda made up the team to compliment what Bogut coulda and is starting to be in year 3.

It takes patience and continuity.

[THE DINJ]

Seriously, I had to argue against this line of reasoning. Seriously.

Seriously?

Terry Stotts' offense failed to maximize the offensive potential of a rookie Andrew Bogut and Jamaal Magloire, who is I believe would average 15-18 ppg if utilized properly on offense or in fact was presently on an NBA roster.

Magloire was a black hole on offense when we had him. Did you watch the Bucks that year? The fact that he just was waived outright doesn't help your case much. Also, other teams knew to foul him when he caught the ball underneath (which was a risky enough pass by itself, with his being butterfingers like Gadzuric) knowing that he'd make at most 1 of 2 FTs. I won't disagree with you about Bogut being underutilized but we "shouldn't of" fed him the ball on every play either. He was a rookie.

There's no doubt we've gone back to a Stotts-ish offense.

[midranger]

Sarcasm missed.

[jerrod]

cv can't get any sig love sigra?

what's the deal?

[Sigra]

cv can't get any sig love sigra?

what's the deal?

I wanted to put him insteed of Yi but I can't find that Mo's picture anymore. If I just use that one from current sig than it will lose quality a lot. I am working on that.

[jerrod]

-= original quote snipped =-



I wanted to put him insteed of Yi but I can't find that Mo's picture anymore. If I just use that one from current sig than it will lose quality a lot. I am working on that.

cool

[paulpressey25]

I think Ilhan does a good job of summing up the Stotts offense.....Mo and Redd look for their shot and once they have it, they take it. That is what is consistent with what Epi's relayed to us....have the guys who shoot the highest percentage be the ones shooting.

The only problem with this is that Mo and Redd are both beyond awful at defense, and while good offensively, they aren't in a top tier class where they can regularly take on physical defenders and torch them. We saw that last year when we won but one game against the teams in our division. You just can't build a team around these two guys......you can build a team that will occasionaly get some impressive wins against less physical western conference teams, but that is it.

[Sigra]

I think Ilhan does a good job of summing up the Stotts offense.....Mo and Redd look for their shot and once they have it, they take it. That is what is consistent with what Epi's relayed to us....have the guys who shoot the highest percentage be the ones shooting.

The only problem with this is that Mo and Redd are both beyond awful at defense, and while good offensively, they aren't in a top tier class where they can regularly take on physical defenders and torch them. We saw that last year when we won but one game against the teams in our division. You just can't build a team around these two guys......you can build a team that will occasionaly get some impressive wins against less physical western conference teams, but that is it.

Read my 2nd post in this thread PP. You are right of course and that is the reason why I want to trade them. But if they are here then I want to play Stotts offense as that is clearly better than alternative.

[th87]

This isn't flip-flopping.

There's nuance involved. It turned out that Mo and Redd couldn't play the Spurs way with the extra pass and solid fundamentals. It took a while to figure that out.

Given what we know now, the best offense for the Bucks at the moment is to go back to the Stotts-offense. Unfortunately, the ceiling for this offense is a one-and-done playoff appearance.

Larry K. tried to raise the ceiling (by implementing playing the "right" way), but the team ultimately proved to be unable to. Therefore, the Stotts offense is the best we can do with what we have. Maybe Stotts knew this all along.

This still means that Redd and/or Mo has to go for us to have hope of being a contender. Nothing has changed on the front.

[th87]

-= original quote snipped =-



Read my 2nd post in this thread PP. You are right of course and that is the reason why I want to trade them. But if they are here then I want to play Stotts offense as that is clearly better than alternative.

Sigra, is this the same source that told you that Redd is a bad tipper at restaurants?

[WRau1]

-= original quote snipped =-



Sigra, is this the same source that told you that Redd is a bad tipper at restaurants?

I must've missed that post but I know for a fact that Redd, at least once, tipped very well at the Maggiano's in Mayfair. The only "knock" I heard was that he asked the workers if they could get him a private table because he doesn't like signing autographs when eating with his family, which I think is understandable.

[th87]

-= original quote snipped =-



I must've missed that post but I know for a fact that Redd, at least once, tipped very well at the Maggiano's in Mayfair. The only "knock" I heard was that he asked the workers if they could get him a private table because he doesn't like signing autographs when eating with his family, which I think is understandable.

This was back in the day at Jsonline. Maybe like 2004ish. I didn't read the posts that closely enough to figure out whether it was a joke or not.

But it is understandable to want privacy. It must get annoying for celebrities.

[Sigra]

-= original quote snipped =-



Sigra, is this the same source that told you that Redd is a bad tipper at restaurants?

Nope.

[energee]

-= original quote snipped =-
Sigra, is this the same source that told you that Redd is a bad tipper at restaurants?

I actually heard that too a few years back regarding a place where some of the players used to eat near the Cousins center. It is since closed. Of course it is all hearsay.
Not that it was excusable then, I'm guessing it would be a terrible PR move if he did it now when with his new contract he makes more in a single game than 99% of the fans do in one year.

[YiOF]

Does this mean Larry K completely give up? Wasn't he suppose to lead the team to a different direction? Stotts would probably run stotts offense better, but that lead the Bucks to no where. it is comical that east is so bad that Bucks is still very much alive in the playoff picture, don't know it means bucks should go back to old ways trying to make the play offs and get knocked out in the first round by Boston.