Positionless Basketball

[NuggetsWY]

No doubt "positionless" goes back to Riley's statement that he'd love a team of 5 6'9" players so they could switch on every play on defense (said when asked about Magic playing PG. There are few players that can actually, legitimately play all five positions on defense against virtually anybody plus being able to play low-post against bigs and be a serious threat from long-range plus handles, passing, etc. We get that, no doubt.

But isn't "positionless" actually more like what a few teams run; 3 or 4 or maybe 5 guys on the court that bring the ball up even on a fast break? Multiple guys that can start an offense? Teams that switch players on virtually every pick on defense? Teams where rebounds show up from all 5 slots? Isn't that "positionless".

Obviously the Nuggets do not play that way. On offense, it seemed everyone hesitated to dribble and found a way to get the ball to Nelson. It wasn't a total-thing, but it was often. Of course not as often as Westbrook & Harden brought the ball up court. That's the way a lot of teams do it - it's the traditional way.

I guess I'm asking; is "positionless" more about the players' abilities or the team's philosophy?

[skywalker33]

Regardless, there just are enough Magic Johnsons in the world to do this

[The Rebel]

Karl often talked about position less basketball, but I have never been a true believer in it. If you really look at the way the team ran after the Melo years I think is about the closest I have seen since the showtime Lakers outside of the current Warriors roster, and even then Lawson was a PG and we had bigs that played like bigs. The warriors run something similar but the centers and Curry do not fit into that scheme as well, but with Bogut they were damn close.

The 57 win Karl team (when they were all healthy) was close mostly due to the versatility of Gallo, Chandler, and Iggy. Koufos and Faried were also underrated passers, and Koufos had a good enough mid range game while Faried having a good enough face up game to take advantage of mismatches on offense. The issue was on the defensive end where Faried and Koufos did not have the speed to keep up with guards, and Lawson was way to small to guard forwards and centers in the low post, so Karl used the ball hawk defense, with the SGs and SF switching often onto the mismatches and playing man defense, Koufos and Mozgov trying to guard the lane, and Lawson and Faried playing the ball hawks. That is the primary reason the team fell apart without Gallo and with Faried hobbled in the playoffs, Fournier and Brewer just were not good enough man defenders, Fournier needed the ball in his hands too much, and Brewer had very limited passing and ball handling ability. Faried just was not as quick to get to the ball, and McGee was not good enough away from the basket. The whole system fell apart due to not having enough of those versatile players at SG and forward.

The issue with it is that not only is it hard finding guys with the size and speed to guard all opponents and with all around offensive games that work well together. You need guys that are comfortable playing on or off the ball at anytime and comfortable guarding in the low post and the perimeter. It is hard to find guys like that at all, but damn near impossible to load up a roster with guys with that type of game. If you could get the roster mix just right, I think it can easily be a contender, after all look at the warriors. However the crazy thing is that there is only two GMs that have been able to build that type of team, West built the showtime Lakers and is a very influential consultant with the Warriors, and Ujiri who built the team to Karl's specifications but did not have a chance to get the mix totally right before he headed to Toronto and Karl got fired.

I do think that the Nuggets came into the season planning to run everything through the PG, the offensive coordinator ran that type of offense with the Rockets, and I really do not believe they had any idea what they had in Jokic or Nurkic. The issue with that system is you need plenty of outside shooting with guys who are comfortable playing only off the ball as spot up shooters. Gallo and Chandler are not comfortable playing off the ball that much, and the best shot creator on the roster is Jokic.

If you believe that Murray and Harris have the chance to be special, and that the ability to close games that Murray showed was not a fluke, than the right offense for this team is a motion offense. With Jokic the primary ball handler, Murray the PG and secondary ball handler, and Harris moving off the ball. Your forwards have to be guys who move well without the ball and are comfortable playing that way. With the way Faried moves so well without the ball and his offensive rebounding he is not a bad fit on offense, especially if he could spend the summer working on that jumpshot that disappeared while Shaw was here. As crazy as it sounds Gallo and Chandler are both too talented and are terrible fits with that style of offense. We need a Peja type guy while Chandler and Gallo would both prefer to have the ball in their hands a much higher percentage that there is room for. We do not need 20 ppg scorers at the forward slots, we need spot up shooters or guys who are happy moving without the ball all the time, that is the reason I like Ingles and dekker they are cheap enough contracts and are capable and happy playing that role.

Defensively it is much harder. Harris is just too small to switch onto bigger forwards and centers, the PGs outside of Nelson are not strong enough to switch out on bigs, and Faried still is not big enough to guard centers and not fast enough to guard small guys on the perimeter. Jokic is not a shot blocker. The only answer can be to find defenders at both forward slots. You need guys who are either very versatile at SF and PF or a shot blocker at PF and a versatile defender at SF. Otherwise this team will continue to struggle on the defensive end regardless of the system they run.

[NuggetsWY]

I agree with Rebel's analysis - I'm OK with a PG run offense, with the right PG. It's a little more complicated with Jokic running the high post much of the time; but with a PG that can also do some spot-up shooting, I think it'd work well. Either Murray or Mudiay could fill that role IMO. What I'd like to see is a little less "look for the PG to bring the ball up". Not sure if Harris can baffle a double-team in the backcourt, but he can handle the ball fine for normal situations. Gallinari & Chandler have also done it fairly well. But it would be nice to have forward that could handle the ball as well as Harris does.

"Positionless" is unique to a small handful of players and I get tired of hearing some people drone on about it. To focus on "positionless" is a wrong emphasis IMO. When we draft, no doubt we'd love to get a guy that can shoot 3s and block shots and run the point and play lockdown defense. what we need to look for though, is a nice PF or SF that has some agility and shooting. Most of the rest can be developed.

[kinggnik87]

Positionless basketball is very similar to the original Total Football tactical theory mentioned by the great Johan Cruyff. It got me excited for a while (I'm a football fan) when Karl mentioned it, but after a few years watching basketball that I realize, it is not yet possible to be adopted by the majority of teams. Golden State is the closest due to their players.

Both sports are so different. Like what both of you mentioned, requires similar players in all 5 positions. A possible way of building it is to recruit players who have the height of 6'6 - 7', while having the ability and willingness to play off ball, and are also good defenders with speed and length who can guard different sizes... This sounds impossible already.

But if somehow a team can assemble such players, it is possible for said team to reach the Top 3 position due to the difficulty in guarding them. More so if the said team has a center who can pass the ball and dribbles at the same time...

Hey, that sounds like Nugget/Jokic already.