The Importance of Center Play

[YogurtProducer]

This is extremely sss (45 total mins) but looking at REB% of our "centerless" line ups:

FVV/GTJ/SB/OG/PS: 39.3%
FVV/GTJ/SB/OG/CB: 27.3%
FVV/GTJ/DB/SB/OG: 23.1%
FVV/GTJ/SM/OG/PS: 42.9%

I don't think it's conjecture to suggest we struggle to rebound playing small. Increased injury risk over the course of the season would be a logical threat here too. The question is what are we gaining by doing this? The answer might just be keeping our main guys happy which isn't nothing.

Here are our best line ups so far by NRTG sorted by most mins played.

FVV/GTJ/SB/OG/PA: +10.4
FVV/GTJ/SM/OG/KB: +23.8
FVV/DB/OG/CB/KB: +73.2
DB/GTJ/OG/CB/KB: +7.0
FVV/DB/SM/SB/KB: +32.7

All of our best line ups so far have a big.

Here are our main small line ups so far by NRTG sorted by most mins played.

FVV/GTJ/SB/OG/PS: -9.4
FVV/GTJ/SB/OG/CB: +34.7
FVV/GTJ/DB/SB/OG: -66.7
FVV/GTJ/SM/OG/PS: +14.3

So the small line ups are kind of a mixed bag. We need more mins to say anything meaningful but there might be merit to us playing "big" more often.

Why only post the "good" big lineups but not the bad?

What about the 3rd most used lineup which is FVV/GTJ/Svi/OG/Precious which is -21.0 in 34 minutes?
Or the 4th most used lineup which is FVV/GTJ/OG/Barnes/Birch which is -21.9 in 27 minutes? (and our pre-Siakam SL)

Those two lineups account for 61 minutes which would be more than the 3rd-5th lineups you posted (41 total minutes). Just completely cherrypicked and misleading.

And then your small-ball lineups have a total of 46 minutes played (including 5 and 4 minutes on the last two...).

The REAL small-ball lineup anyone cares about (OG/Barnes/Siakam without Birch/Ach) has a total of 27 minutes, a -9.4 rating, and has had the pleasure of playing the Nets and Celtics, and also has the pleasure of sporting a 22% 3pt percentage (obvious SSS issue), and they actually have a 107DRTG.

How did the small lineup (Siakam+Anunoby, no Baynes/Len/Birch) fare in 2020-21? REALLY **** GOOD
Lowry/FVV/Powell/OG/Siakam - 106 minutes, +13.4NRTG (way smaller lineup than our current team)
Lowry/FVV/OG/Siakam/Boucher - 69 minutes, +3.4NRTG
Flynn/GTJ/OG/Siakam/Boucher - 51 minutes, +18.7NRG
And then a bunch more lineups of varying success,
-23.9NRTG
+45.9NRTG
-23.5NRTG
+43.4NRTG
-43.6NRTG
+28.7NRTG
+45.8NRTG
+50.0NRTG

So really - our problem never has, and never will be, the smallness of our team. It is the lack of shot creator and scorer - THAT IS IT.

[Kurtz]

The one thing Tor-Raps hasn't mentioned that I think does serve his point is that if you have OG/Spicy/Barnes having to guard/box out the other team's C for large stretches of the game, it will wear them down towards the end of the game and through the course of the season.

Morey tried this experiment in Houston when he traded away Clint and sent down Hartenstein and they basically just had PJ Tucker as their C. It seemed to work for a while, but towards the end of the season and into the playoffs they seemed spent and getting their ass kicked inside (maybe my memory is faulty, correct me if stats say otherwise).

They lost to the NBA champion Lakers with a team with Westbrook who was terrible. They lost 3-4 to one of the GOAT teams (GSW).

The Houston experiment "failed" the same way The Process "failed" in the sense that it 100% did not fail.

You're proving my point. They lost 3-4 to the Warriors when they had Capella down the middle. Then they tried the all-small lineup and got destroyed by the Lakers in the first round.

Not sure what Hinkie's process has to do with it, but so far that has also clearly been a failure, although Colangelo gets an assist there.

[YogurtProducer]

6'11, 280 Drummond had 4 points on 2/8 shooting in 30 minutes and was a minus against Precious tonight.

Now Imagine if Siakam was starting at center. Do we win this game? Not unless Siakam goes 7-8 from 3.

Siakam does not go 1-10 from the field most likely either and TBH abuses Drummond on the other end... just like he did in Tampa where Drummond went 19/11 and Siakam went 39/13/4

[Kurtz]

The one thing Tor-Raps hasn't mentioned that I think does serve his point is that if you have OG/Spicy/Barnes having to guard/box out the other team's C for large stretches of the game, it will wear them down towards the end of the game and through the course of the season.

Morey tried this experiment in Houston when he traded away Clint and sent down Hartenstein and they basically just had PJ Tucker as their C. It seemed to work for a while, but towards the end of the season and into the playoffs they seemed spent and getting their ass kicked inside (maybe my memory is faulty, correct me if stats say otherwise).

Nah that was all James Harden completely choking

Harden put up 29/7/5 on 50% FG shooting against LA. Are you sure you're not thinking about his choke job in game 7 against GSW?

[YogurtProducer]

The one thing Tor-Raps hasn't mentioned that I think does serve his point is that if you have OG/Spicy/Barnes having to guard/box out the other team's C for large stretches of the game, it will wear them down towards the end of the game and through the course of the season.

Morey tried this experiment in Houston when he traded away Clint and sent down Hartenstein and they basically just had PJ Tucker as their C. It seemed to work for a while, but towards the end of the season and into the playoffs they seemed spent and getting their ass kicked inside (maybe my memory is faulty, correct me if stats say otherwise).

They lost to the NBA champion Lakers with a team with Westbrook who was terrible. They lost 3-4 to one of the GOAT teams (GSW).

The Houston experiment "failed" the same way The Process "failed" in the sense that it 100% did not fail.

You're proving my point. They lost 3-4 to the Warriors when they had Capella down the middle. The next year they tried the all-small lineup and got destroyed by the Lakers in the first round.

Not sure what Hinkie's process has to do with it, but so far that has also clearly been a failure, although Colangelo gets an assist there.

Capela was 6th on that team in minutes played in that series. The Rockets were small for a SIGNFICANT chunk of that series

They also lost in the 2nd round, not the first, and you are a fool if you think the Westbrook Rockets could even hold a candle to the CP3 Rockets. That was a MASSIVE downgrade.

And The Process was not a failure lmao. They have completely rebuilt from the ground up and have been a contending team for years now and likely will be for a decade. Just because it does not equal a championship does not mean it was a failure and should never be tried again. Because by that logic, using a traditional center and not using the process fails 29 times a season. Just a ridiculous threshold to have.

[YogurtProducer]

Wtf. I have to wonder how you watch that game, where they play the same size centre as we do, and this is what people complain about.

Pretty easy to see we didn't shoot well, turned it over too much and our bench was absolute garbage. Even with the first two we might even have found a way to win if the bench didn't just completely stink.

I'm wondering what the hell you're watching if you think Williams and Horford are the same size as Siakam and Barnes. It was clear as hell that they totally dominated us inside with their size. Williams had several putbacks and offensive rebounds where he didn't even have to jump.

Oh and newsflash, the things you said we didn't do well, we haven't done well practically all season. We've had our rebounding and defense allow us to take several more shots per game than the opposing teams. This is what has kept us in games.

So please actually watch the games before you accuse others of not doing so. Or maybe you just struggle to understand basketball...

This post is just foolish. Both Horford and Timelord are 6'-9. Both Siakam and Achiuwa are 6-8 or 9 with a longer standing reach. Barnes and OG are also plenty big enough and long enough for those two. But if your going to mention height and weight I'm going to tell you that is archaic and just awful.

Beyond Birch (6-9') or the available options, your entire plan involves employing a big centre and dropping him and getting burned in the PNR which is pure stupid and sets us back 5 years.

And yeah... the entire idea is defence, a team built on defence and turnovers and taking more **** shots, if you haven't caught on yet. And you don't know **** about defence and that's not what lost us the game.

People do not understand that while giving up rebounds is not preferable, giving up open shots and being roasted in the PnR and teams scoring and there not even being a rebound chance is even worse.

[VanWest82]

Why only post the "good" big lineups but not the bad?

What about the 3rd most used lineup which is FVV/GTJ/Svi/OG/Precious which is -21.0 in 34 minutes?
Or the 4th most used lineup which is FVV/GTJ/OG/Barnes/Birch which is -21.9 in 27 minutes? (and our pre-Siakam SL)

Those two lineups account for 61 minutes which would be more than the 3rd-5th lineups you posted (41 total minutes). Just completely cherrypicked and misleading.

No it's not. I posted our "best" line ups and noted that they all contained a big. I never said anything about us not also having bad big line ups. I also said we needed more data and that there MIGHT BE merit playing big more often.

How did the small lineup (Siakam+Anunoby, no Baynes/Len/Birch) fare in 2020-21? REALLY **** GOOD

Spoiler:

Lowry/FVV/Powell/OG/Siakam - 106 minutes, +13.4NRTG (way smaller lineup than our current team)
Lowry/FVV/OG/Siakam/Boucher - 69 minutes, +3.4NRTG
Flynn/GTJ/OG/Siakam/Boucher - 51 minutes, +18.7NRG
And then a bunch more lineups of varying success,
-23.9NRTG
+45.9NRTG
-23.5NRTG
+43.4NRTG
-43.6NRTG
+28.7NRTG
+45.8NRTG
+50.0NRTG

So really - our problem never has, and never will be, the smallness of our team. It is the lack of shot creator and scorer - THAT IS IT.

Many of those line ups included Lowry and/or Norm. Of course it's going to look better when you play superior players. And the smallness of our team was an issue in lots of match ups last year. Funny how we were on a 60 win pace in 19/20 without a "shot creator and scorer."

[Kurtz]

They lost to the NBA champion Lakers with a team with Westbrook who was terrible. They lost 3-4 to one of the GOAT teams (GSW).

The Houston experiment "failed" the same way The Process "failed" in the sense that it 100% did not fail.

You're proving my point. They lost 3-4 to the Warriors when they had Capella down the middle. The next year they tried the all-small lineup and got destroyed by the Lakers in the first round.

Not sure what Hinkie's process has to do with it, but so far that has also clearly been a failure, although Colangelo gets an assist there.

Capela was 6th on that team in minutes played in that series. The Rockets were small for a SIGNFICANT chunk of that series

They also lost in the 2nd round, not the first, and you are a fool if you think the Westbrook Rockets could even hold a candle to the CP3 Rockets. That was a MASSIVE downgrade.

And The Process was not a failure lmao. They have completely rebuilt from the ground up and have been a contending team for years now and likely will be for a decade. Just because it does not equal a championship does not mean it was a failure and should never be tried again. Because by that logic, using a traditional center and not using the process fails 29 times a season. Just a ridiculous threshold to have.

Oh yeah, they did squeak by a rebuilding OKC team in the first round...but I don't think that serves your point. And obviously Paul is better than Westbrook, but Houston was without Paul for the last 2 games of the GSW series, which, I would argue, is the reason they ultimately lost. Also Clint played 29 mpg in that series and averaged a double double - no need to try to diminish that.

I'm not sure why you keep brining up the Process, but you have to be an absolute moron to think that Embiid will hold up for anywhere close to a decade. Philly has a small window, perhaps they'll succeed within it, but so far, they've failed...that's hardly debatable. Again though, I'm not sure what that has to do with anything being discussed here. Philly does not play small ball. Hell, the entire reason Philly gave us the toughest challenge in 2019 was because they were so big - and we had to play Gasol and Ibaka together for long stretches to survive them.

[KrazyP]

If you go small ball, the guys you use upfront do need to have an extremely high IQ and deliver good screens. If screens are late, too soon, wrong angle, not long enough, it can completely bog an offense down. Screens are massively important up top running pick and rolls but also off the ball when shooters are simply trying to get open.

Marc Gasol was close to washed when the Raps acquired him but he made a massive impact to the flow of the teams offense by simply knowing when to do what. Long term, the team might not need a traditional C but they certainly do need one capable of performing basic C duties.

Posters referencing the Rockets as a success of small ball are overlooking the fact that Harden was a generational offensive talent that could carry an entire offense on his own. The Raps dont have such a player and in the absense of such a player, 100% small ball likely wont work effectively.

[Kurtz]

Posters referencing the Rockets as a success of small ball are overlooking the fact that Harden was a generational offensive talent that could carry an entire offense on his own. The Raps dont have such a player and in the absense of such a player, 100% small ball likely wont work effectively.

Houston's small ball was a failure, ultimately. If you look at the recent winners, they were all huge up front. Bucks with Giannis and Lopez, Lakers with Dwight, AD, Lebron, us with Gasol, Serge, Kawhi, Spicy. Even the Warriors super-teams were big up front.

[KrazyP]

Posters referencing the Rockets as a success of small ball are overlooking the fact that Harden was a generational offensive talent that could carry an entire offense on his own. The Raps dont have such a player and in the absense of such a player, 100% small ball likely wont work effectively.

Houston's small ball was a failure, ultimately. If you look at the recent winners, they were all huge up front. Bucks with Giannis and Lopez, Lakers with Dwight, AD, Lebron, us with Gasol, Serge, Kawhi, Spicy. Even the Warriors super-teams were big up front.

I agree,....the point i was trying to make was to those who think the Rockets small ball was a success, they also need to factor in that Harden was a unique generational talent that could carry an entire offense on his own. Small ball doesnt quite work in the absense of such a player.

[links135]

6'11, 280 Drummond had 4 points on 2/8 shooting in 30 minutes and was a minus against Precious tonight.

Now Imagine if Siakam was starting at center. Do we win this game? Not unless Siakam goes 7-8 from 3.

Siakam does not go 1-10 from the field most likely either and TBH abuses Drummond on the other end... just like he did in Tampa where Drummond went 19/11 and Siakam went 39/13/4

Ok. When Siakam starts showing he can rebound against big centers and playing defence against them, let me know.

And in Tampa..... you mean against the Lakers? Or Cleveland who managed to finish with such a bad record they had a pick higher than us?

[OakleyDokely]

Among C's, Precious ranks:

6th Defensive Rebounding %
8th Total Rebounding %

[GLF]

Even though I don't believe we need that 7 foot centre or that traditional C, I do agree that the small ball lineup everyone thought was gonna be so good hasn't. We definitely need a C in our lineups. Khem is very important to our team. VERY important. So I don't think we need a traditional big body C but I do think having a good C like Khem is necessary. Precious would have been fine if he weren't this raw. If he was playing well offensively he would have been a great backup for Khem because believe it or not he's actually been good defensively. An example of how the small ball lineups don't work in our system is last night when we took out Precious and went small down the stretch Philly started making a comeback. The moment we brought Precious back in this stabalized a bit and we took back the lead and won. We rebound better and we protect the paint better when we play either Precious or Birch.

[GLF]

Among C's, Precious ranks:

6th Defensive Rebounding %
8th Total Rebounding %

Precious is a great rebounder and our best rebounder. Scottie may grab more rebounds than him at times and may even average more but Scottie plays way more minutes than Precious. Rebounding percentage wise Precious is our best. And he's been decent defensively. It's literally just on the offensive side he's been atrocious.

[WaltFrazier]

6'11, 280 Drummond had 4 points on 2/8 shooting in 30 minutes and was a minus against Precious tonight.

Now Imagine if Siakam was starting at center. Do we win this game? Not unless Siakam goes 7-8 from 3.

Or OG or Barnes playing Drummond all night. Conversely if Birch had played we'd have done even better.

Drummond did have an impact though. Didn't score well but 12 rebounds, protected the rim, several blocks. He occupied the paint and made the Raptors account for and double him in the paint, and was a constant threat to get offensive boards and putbacks

[vini_vidi_vici]

Drummond was 1/4 with 0 ASTs and 0 Blks, when not matched up with Precious.

[Basketball_Jones]

Among C's, Precious ranks:

6th Defensive Rebounding %
8th Total Rebounding %

Damn I see why Nurse believes in him and plays him, aside from development reasons.

[vini_vidi_vici]

Among C's, Precious ranks:

6th Defensive Rebounding %
8th Total Rebounding %

Damn I see why Nurse believes in him and plays him, aside from development reasons.

Want another reason??




Thats insane PnR numbers.

AMong guys who have faced >= 4 FGAs at the rim (Rim Protection).


The guy has been arguably the best big defender in the L.

[vini_vidi_vici]

You know whats funny about these threads, is how the narrative changes over time.

It used to be we cant have 6'9 guys as bigs (thus the 7 footer thread/arguments), now its okay to have them, its just we have play one of Precious/Birch.