PDA

View Full Version : To Small Ball or To Not Small Ball



SenorSpur
12-10-2007, 03:38 AM
Since the Spurs next game is against Golden State and Pop's old buddy Nellie, I wanted to share this. It's a column that discusses Los Angeles Fakers coach, Phil Jackson's take on the matchup problems that, Warriors coach, Don Nelson has traditionally thrown out at the competition. The most recent of which was Sunday night in L.A.

Coincidentally, this took me back to the questions that arose when Pop chose to "go small" versus the Mavs in the 2006 WCSF.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/dailydime?page=dime-071210

LOS ANGELES -- Any time Don Nelson is involved, the subject always comes around to matchups.

But when it comes to the Lakers and the Golden State Warriors, the most important matchup centers on Nelson himself, and his ongoing drubbing at the hands of Phil Jackson.

It's a statistical trend that's almost becoming a law of nature, a dominance reinforced by the Lakers' 123-113 victory at Staples Center.

When Nelson was in Dallas, Jackson's Lakers were 15-5 against Nelson's Mavericks. Since Jackson returned to the Lakers in 2005 after a year away from the team he launched a winning streak against the Golden State Warriors that has now reached nine consecutive games, including the last five over Nellie-coached clubs.

It's the record dating to last season that's probably the most relevant because the two teams are so closely aligned. Both teams were 42-40 last season.

They each were 11-8 heading into Sunday's fist meeting of the season, an interesting test for two teams that figure to be fighting for the bottom four playoff spots in the Western Conference. The Lakers and Warriors have their plusses and minuses, but when it comes to facing each other head-on Jackson gives the Lakers an advantage. That's because he doesn't fall for Nelson's mind games.

"Over the years having coached against Nelson, there's always the mismatch that he always tries to throw," Jackson said.

"There's always the idea that he wants to go smaller and smaller to get you to match up with his smaller players and I've tried to resist that over the years as I've coached against him. A lot of coaches get caught in that and there's a web that you get caught in. Eventually you're playing out there with five little guys and your offense suffers because of it."

He could have taken a swipe at another coaching rival by adding that Pat Riley fell for it on Friday night. Riles sat Shaquille O'Neal and Alonzo Mourning in the fourth quarter at Golden State, even though both had helped the Heat build an 18-point lead. Miami went small, playing right into Golden State's hands, and the Warriors dropped 38 points in the fourth quarter to steal a victory.

Jackson has always looked down on Nelson's gimmicky lineups. After his Chicago Bulls beat Nelson's Warriors in a 1994 game, Jackson was asked his opinion of Nellie's matchups. Jackson said: "What about when he had [5-foot-7] 'Mister' Jennings on [6-foot-7] Scottie Pippen? I liked that matchup."

So Jackson once again stayed firm in his resolve Sunday. He sent his message to Nelson from the outset: have some of Andrew Bynum. Bynum had 20 points and 11 rebounds and blocked five shots.

"Andrew set up the whole game because of his presence in the low post," Lakers guard Derek Fisher said. The Lakers made 53 percent of their shots, including 44 percent of their 3-pointers. Bynum collected lobs and alley-oops for easy baskets. He protected the hoop from driving Warriors.

So when when the Warriors went with a lineup that had 6-foot-9 Al Harrington as their tallest player, Jackson stuck with Bynum or Ronny Turiaf.

"Even [if] it's just to spite the other coach, he's not going to take the guy out just for matchup situation," Fisher said. "The advantage is the bigger guy. As well as Andrew's playing, why take him out of the game? Make them adjust to him."

Yes, Jackson was the one forcing Nelson to make the adjustments and get out of character, including a start of rarely-used Patrick O'Bryant at the beginning of the third quarter. O'Bryant had both of his shot attempts blocked. Bynum got a dunk-and-one at the other end and O'Bryant got the hook after only 74 seconds -- enough time for the Lakers to expand a one-point halftime lead to nine.

"It was a mistake, wasn't it?" Nelson said. "We thought we'd give him a chance and try to go with a little length against them, and you saw what I saw."

JPB
12-10-2007, 04:29 AM
Small ball didn't win anything the last 10 years.

ata
12-10-2007, 05:10 AM
Fuck small ball.

If small ball would work, no BB player would be taller than 5'10"

mystargtr34
12-10-2007, 06:58 AM
I just dont like the idea of Oberto on Harrington

TDMVPDPOY
12-10-2007, 07:37 AM
SMALLBALL fuckd us up in 05/06

pop shouldve just stick to his odd big lineup that has gotten us wins

ArgSpursFan.
12-10-2007, 07:42 AM
smallball all day,and good transition D to shut down the Warriors.
1-TP
2-Manu
3-Bowen
4-Finley/Barry/Horry
5-Duncan/Oberto

m33p0
12-10-2007, 07:56 AM
small ball is a myth. don't believe the hype.

m33p0
12-10-2007, 07:59 AM
smallball all day,and good transition D to shut down the Warriors.
1-TP
2-Manu
3-Bowen
4-Finley/Barry/Horry
5-Duncan/Oberto


barry/finley/bowen at small forward, duncan at power forward and elson at center. we get to play big and fast at the same time.

ArgSpursFan.
12-10-2007, 08:13 AM
barry/finley/bowen at small forward, duncan at power forward and elson at center. we get to play big and fast at the same time.

true. but the spurs don't really need to be fast,they just need to matchup better to stop them on D,and them play slow paced as always,and getting good transition D.
Another lineup to matchup better the Warroirs would be
Tony PG
Manu SG
Bowen SF
Horry PF
Duncan C

m33p0
12-10-2007, 08:22 AM
better to have opponents to adjust to us instead of us to them.

ArgSpursFan.
12-10-2007, 08:26 AM
better to have opponents to adjust to us instead of us to them.

of course,I mean to have Horry at PF and Duncan at C aint really an adjustment.
But I'm pretty sure Pop will go with the flow as the game goes by,like he always does.

Bruno
12-10-2007, 09:00 AM
Spurs have played more small ball this year than ever. It could be because of a combination of matchups and Horry injured or it could be because Pop has decided to play more small this year. We will see if in 20 games, Spurs still played that much small ball.
Spurs have also do a quite good job at rebounding the ball when they went small. Future will tell if it is a fluke or not.

m33p0
12-10-2007, 09:48 AM
of course,I mean to have Horry at PF and Duncan at C aint really an adjustment.
But I'm pretty sure Pop will go with the flow as the game goes by,like he always does.


hmm... you're right about that. and like bruno said, its not a stretch for the spurs to play small. bring them on! :clap

Obstructed_View
12-10-2007, 05:35 PM
Small ball is typically an attempt to outscore teams rather than play defense. The Spurs typically win with defense. Smallball is a great gimmick to win a regular season game for favorable matchups, but defense wins in the playoffs. Spurs smallball couldn't defend in '06 and should have been abandoned.

ArgSpursFan.
12-10-2007, 05:43 PM
Small ball is typically an attempt to outscore teams rather than play defense. The Spurs typically win with defense. Smallball is a great gimmick to win a regular season game for favorable matchups, but defense wins in the playoffs. Spurs smallball couldn't defend in '06 and should have been abandoned.

thatīs true,and itīs been the spurs philosophy since Pop took over.
But,how can you Defende a team with 4 fast perimetrals and 1 interior player if you only have 3 perimetrals and 2 interior guys?
that was my point actually,I don't know how elson or Oberto could guard a faster perimetral player.
the only thing that I can think of is to play zone D,with 3 perimetrals and 2 interior players vs a smallball type of team.

Obstructed_View
12-10-2007, 05:59 PM
thatīs true,and itīs been the spurs philosophy since Pop took over.
But,how can you Defende a team with 4 fast perimetrals and 1 interior player if you only have 3 perimetrals and 2 interior guys?
that was my point actually,I don't know how elson or Oberto could guard a faster perimetral player.
In my opinion you don't put someone smaller in to chase him around. As a defender, you know where the basket is. It's not a mystery as to where the other team wants to go. The Spurs haven't exacly had smaller guys with quick feet or defensive pedigrees to substitute for centers, so it's not really an advantage having Finley playing defense in place of Oberto. You've got a better chance of teaching Elson consistent team defense, slight though it may be, than you do of teaching Finley or Barry to be quick.

Another concept that keeps getting missed in this discussion is that the better team usually does what they do and it's the other team's responsibility to try to stop it. If you sacrifice your team's strength, team defense, in order to try to get a favorable matchup against a team you should beat then you've lost most of the battle before tip-off. While it's not always the case, the Spurs are going to be the better team the vast majority of the time. They don't lose 4 out of 7 to anyone playing the way they play, particularly a team with four small guys shooting jumpers. This current team is pretty versatile, but even if they were one dimensional, that one dimension is defense, and it's a bitch for just about any opponent.

What you do in the situation you mentioned is to exploit the mismatch when it's in your favor and play your team defense. In that case you are daring the other team's worst outside shooters to beat you with jumpers that aren't in rhythm. If you have your team defenders then they take away all the high percentage shots. You might lose the occasional game that way if someone gets hot. But when you sub smaller guys there are no shot blockers to guard the lane, and the teams starts penetrating, which leads to layups, free throw attempts, or kickouts to open shooters. You'll lose a seven game series doing that.

ArgSpursFan.
12-10-2007, 06:09 PM
great post,I have to say.And I agree 100 % with it.
I just hope they donīt get hot if we allow them to shoot the ball from the perimeter,I mean:the more shots they attempt, the more chances theīve got to get hot with the jumper.
Coze we all know what the Spurs are gonna get in the Offensive end,itīs just a matter of getting stops whatīs gonna make it or break it. As usual D will win games and championships.

Obstructed_View
12-11-2007, 01:10 AM
great post,I have to say.And I agree 100 % with it.
I just hope they donīt get hot if we allow them to shoot the ball from the perimeter,I mean:the more shots they attempt, the more chances theīve got to get hot with the jumper.
Coze we all know what the Spurs are gonna get in the Offensive end,itīs just a matter of getting stops whatīs gonna make it or break it. As usual D will win games and championships.
It's all about percentages. A guy can get hot shooting jumpers but he's not going to shoot as high a percentage as when he's shooting layups, and a guy's more likely to shoot for his average the more shots he takes. That's why interior defense is king. Look at the Mavericks this year. Whether or not they hit their jumpshots determines if they win. Like Barkley says, defense don't take a night off. I remember the Spurs losing a playoff game to the Suns when Amare hit a three off the glass to tie it in regulation. That doesn't mean Amare should be shooting threes, and it doesn't mean the Spurs didn't win the series.

BeerIsGood!
12-11-2007, 01:45 AM
It's all matchups. If you have a big man who can dominate down low to take over a game (TD) and have the ball handling and discipline with the ball to not turn it over creating easy fast break points then you can beat the Warriors. There is a reason why the Spurs absolutely ruined the Warriors last season, even when the Warriors were at their best near the end of the regular season. The Spurs match up better against the Warriors than they do against just about any other team in the NBA.

Small ball isn't evil if used in moderation to create matchup advantages. The problem with Nelly is that he lives and dies by it, where as Pop has the ability to use it when he deems advantagous. The big difference is he can also match up well with bigger lineups. I've been impressed with the willingness and ability of the Spurs to adapt their lineup and style of play to create matchup advantages against just about every team they could possibly face.

Obstructed_View
12-11-2007, 01:48 AM
Small ball isn't evil if used in moderation to create matchup advantages. The problem with Nelly is that he lives and dies by it, where as Pop has the ability to use it when he deems advantagous.
Except for the time that Pop chose to live and die by it. They died.

BeerIsGood!
12-11-2007, 01:54 AM
Except for the time that Pop chose to live and die by it. They died.

I think he learned from it. I HOPE he learned from it.

Judging by last season I think Pop wants to become efficient at using both styles. When they used it in '06 they hadn't worked on it all season and were obviously lost defensively with those lineups. That's probably why Pop has used it at times during the regular season last year, and even more so this year - with pretty good results so far.

Obstructed_View
12-11-2007, 01:59 AM
I think he learned from it. I HOPE he learned from it.

Judging by last season I think Pop wants to become efficient at using both styles. When they used it in '06 they hadn't worked on it all season and were obviously lost defensively with those lineups. That's probably why Pop has used it at times during the regular season last year, and even more so this year - with pretty good results so far.
I agree, and I'm just as hopeful. They started to figure out how to play at the end of that series, and it was brilliantly used in spots last year, while still over-done on occasion. I still think some of that playoff lineup had to do with Pop being angry at his centers, and that potential stubbornness scares the shit out of me.

peskypesky
12-11-2007, 09:32 AM
Small ball?
I have two words for you: George Mikan

peskypesky
12-11-2007, 09:36 AM
thatīs true,and itīs been the spurs philosophy since Pop took over.
But,how can you Defende a team with 4 fast perimetrals and 1 interior player if you only have 3 perimetrals and 2 interior guys?
that was my point actually,I don't know how elson or Oberto could guard a faster perimetral player.
the only thing that I can think of is to play zone D,with 3 perimetrals and 2 interior players vs a smallball type of team.

Heck, why stop with just 4 perimeter players? Why not go with 5? I can't wait to see an NBA team with 5 guards ripping up the league.

ArgSpursFan.
12-11-2007, 09:37 AM
All I have to say for this game(and the Suns game)
TRANSITION DEFENSE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

m33p0
12-11-2007, 09:52 AM
All I have to say for this game(and the Suns game)
TRANSITION DEFENSE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Don't worry about it. For years, the Spurs have been one of the best in defending the perimeter and the fastbreak. Spurs have to play to their strengths and force the opponent to adjust. Tim Duncan is gonna have a Ditka game. I can feel it in my water. :spin